All these comments bemoaning how "crazy" and "extreme" Ron Paul is supposed to be would have gotten under my skin at one time, but now they just amuse me, The enemies of liberty finally see the long-term impact of Ron Paul's campaign on the minds and hearts of Americans and they are going into full-blown panic mode.
Unfortunately - civility and a firm grasp of logic not being most garden-variety statists' strong suit - the only tools left in their arsenal now are sophomoric shaming and social ostracism attempts using flaccid and meaningless buzzwords. "Radical!" "Crazy!" "Extreme!" is the kind of rubbish they bleat about when they can no longer find coherent justifications for their barbarically coercive models of society.
PUBLIC OPINION > A Libertarian Can Be Elected President One Day
SodaHead News
2012/05/16 22:00:00
As with his 1988 and 2008 presidential campaigns, Ron Paul was able to accumulate an enormously active and responsive following this year, but once again, he's wound up a little short. He's run as a third-party libertarian and as a Republican; he's run in good times and bad; he's remained (relatively) honest and incorruptible in the eyes of the public. Still, nothing. If he can't make it to the Oval Office, will a libertarian candidate ever have a shot? We asked the public.
The results were pretty close, but in politics, you don't need much of a margin to win. 53% is more than enough to land the presidency, even if you're Grover Cleveland. If we acted like everything that hasn't happened yet could never happen, humanity would never move forward. Will it happen? Who knows. But the point is, it could. This isn't about whether or not you'd want a libertarian president, but whether or not it would be possible to break the two-party system and elect someone outside of the box. As the Top Comment wrote, "At this point, they can only try to forestall the inevitable. A free and voluntary society is coming."
Libertarians Have Faith
Conservatives were a little more likely than liberals to trust that a libertarian president could win, but they were both unconvinced. Same goes for moderates. The only political demographics that thought it could happen were libertarians (obviously) and political "others." The real kicker was how many voters fell into those categories -- 45% combined.
Smokers Could See It Happening
One thing we've noticed in the past is a correlation between smokers and libertarian thinking. We've suggested that maybe recent proposals threatening to slap graphic warnings on packs, or jack the price of a pack up to $100, are the reason smokers are so like-minded. Here, again, smokers were much more likely than nonsmokers to believe libertarians could take the presidency.
High School Hot Spot
In his books, Ron Paul describes the overwhelming response he's gotten from college students who are frustrated with the rigid two-party political structure, but the breakdown shows that college students are no more likely than anyone else. In fact, high school students were the real supporters here. 84% of high schoolers said it's possible -- almost as much as the libertarians themselves.
If you'd like to vote on this question, dig deeper into the demographics, or engage in existing discussion about the topic, visit our poll about libertarian candidates. We'd love to hear from you!
Big Brother is coming.,
Treaties are formal written agreements specified by the Treaty Clause of the Constitution. The president makes a treaty with foreign powers, but then the proposed treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. For example, President Wilson proposed the Treaty of Versailles after World War I after consulting with allied powers, but this treaty was rejected by the U.S. Senate; as a result, the U.S. subsequently made separate agreements with different nations. While most international law has a broader interpretation of the term treaty, the U.S. sense of the term is more restricted. In Missouri v. Holland, the Supreme Court ruled that the power to make treaties under the U.S. Constitution is a power separate from the other enumerated powers of the federal government, and hence the federal government can use treaties to legislate in areas which would otherwise fall within the exclusive authority of the states.
International law in most nations considers all three of the above agreements as treaties. In most nations, treaty laws s...
Treaties are formal written agreements specified by the Treaty Clause of the Constitution. The president makes a treaty with foreign powers, but then the proposed treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. For example, President Wilson proposed the Treaty of Versailles after World War I after consulting with allied powers, but this treaty was rejected by the U.S. Senate; as a result, the U.S. subsequently made separate agreements with different nations. While most international law has a broader interpretation of the term treaty, the U.S. sense of the term is more restricted. In Missouri v. Holland, the Supreme Court ruled that the power to make treaties under the U.S. Constitution is a power separate from the other enumerated powers of the federal government, and hence the federal government can use treaties to legislate in areas which would otherwise fall within the exclusive authority of the states.
International law in most nations considers all three of the above agreements as treaties. In most nations, treaty laws supersede domestic law. So if there's a conflict between a treaty obligation and a domestic law, then the treaty usually prevails.
NORAD is a Joint US/Canadian Base.
The Commander of NORAD rotates between a US General and a Canadian General.
The German Army also has their Air Defense School in El Paso Texas.
There are elements of friendly foreign military personnel at almost every major military installation in the U.S. In fact, I saw a Singapore Army officer right outside of CIF at Fort Sill.
IN MHAO THERE WERE 2 GREAT MODERN PRESIDENTS. JF KENNEDY AND R. REGAN....... NOW CLINTON, THOUGH VERY INTELLIGENT AND LIKABLE WAS A WORTHLESS, UNETHICAL, IMMORAL, AND CORRUPT HUMAN BEING.
I WOULDN'T LET HIM WALK MY DOG ! BUSH SNR AND JR WERE BOTH CORRUPT AND EVIL, MRS CLINTON IS STILL WICKED, EVIL, AND A HABITUAL LIER, SHE IS AMORALE AND A DANGEROUS PSYCHOPATH JUST THE SAME CREDENTIALS AS OBAMA.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ROMNEY IS A HONEST POLITICIAN, I THINK HE IS A NWO PUPPET. BUT NOT SURE YET. I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CHANGE MY MIND.
THE ONLY CANDIDATE I TRUST TO NOT BE A NWO PUPPET IS RON PAUL AND MAYBE WEST! WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS RUNNING MATES.
He also stated publicly that he thought ICBMs (missiles) could be 'recalled' or aborted.
Where would we be if he thought to pull off such a joke on Brezhnev?
https://www.revolutionpac.com...
Not only that, Ron Paul is not dropping out, CNN blatantly lied to benefit their savoir Jesus Chr... I mean Obama.
http://dailypaulradio.com/rad...
Last but not least, the illegal means which Romney has used to "get more" votes.
http://libertarianreview.us/2...
“One of the great tragedies of human history is the difficulty of escaping from tyranny, since tyrants so ruthlessly maintain their power.”
http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/...
For those who continue to support the status quo, you send a clear message to Washington that our Constitution, it’s Laws, and the value of liberty just doesn’t matter and in return they send another wannabe liar-in-chief for the 2012 election. Is this what you want for America’s future?
Dumbass