The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.
Forums
 »
Economics
 »
Political Theory
 »
Ron Paul speculation question

Thank you for your participation and interest in the Mises Community. This software platform has seen its day, however, and so is now closed. We are redoing our entire site, so look for some exciting developments by the end of the year. Thank you for your support of Austrian economics, liberty, and peace.

Ron Paul speculation question

This post has 23 Replies | 6 Followers

Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,389
Points 21,840
Moderator
Reply
vive la insurrection Posted: Thu, Dec 15 2011 6:33 PM

The thought of RP winning the Republican ticket is honestly inconceivable for me (call me a pessimist).  That said, it must be admitted he is doing well in the polls inspite of the black out and lack of billionaire backings.

Speculative question:

Would the main line Republicans form a third party ticket to face Ron Paul if he won the GOP canidacy?  I would not be surprised if they would.  Going even further with empty speculation, I think it would be kind of funny, that everything they would say negative about RP running on a third party "magically" wouldn't apply if they chose to do it - and no one would notice (like the double standards when the left got pissed at Nader and not at Perot) because that is the nature of the culture.

Speculative pondering #2:

There seems to be something that inherently will break up right wingers, conservatives, and libertarian political blocks in the current system.  I don't think the left wing movements are so willing to fragment and splinter in such a profound way  (at least in the USA).  I would bet a nickle the system / culture is in general more taylored for left wing types - and appeals to more left wing sensibilities and "social signaling". 

Now, point 2 may be stating the very obvious.  But the fact that it is obvious, and it is an irrelevant point  to the culture at large - is the main point to take home

EDIT

"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann

"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence"  - GLS Shackle

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 814
Points 16,290
Reply
No2statism replied on Thu, Dec 15 2011 6:49 PM

The question is a good one. I think they probably wouldn't because they should have the sense to know it will just make an embarrassment out of themselves and that they have more to gain if they throw their support to Obama.

I mean, I can't imagine Sean Hannity/Limbaugh supporting Ron Paul, but Dr. Paul's nomination will force them to recognize that they're not that different from Obama (even if they never admit it) and that will really be one of the best things that will come of Ron Paul's nomination IMO.

We need to keep in mind the Wilsonian roots of neoconservatism. Everyone running for the GOP nom (except Dr. Paul) is a Wilsonian as well as the incumbent Democrat.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Thu, Dec 15 2011 7:46 PM

Nah, no third party. The very thought would boggle their brains. Heck, if that happened that I suppose the libertarian party would become the mainstream rightist group and Reps would be quickly marginalized.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Reply
Clayton replied on Thu, Dec 15 2011 8:06 PM

They've already war-gamed this. What do you think all this hubbub about Donald Trump is really about? Worst-case scenario, if RP get the Republican nomination, they're going to run the Hairpiece - oops, I mean the Donald - as a spoiler.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Thu, Dec 15 2011 8:16 PM

Actually, my sad prediction is that RP support will drop maybe 3% after this debate.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 508
Points 8,570
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 1:17 PM

I think this may have helped wink

(perfect timing, no?)

 

 

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 4:05 PM

Can't forget PPP...and Intrade (which I think you linked the latter in the low content thread, right?)

 

Movin on up elsewhere too...

 

Ron #2 in NH, on His Way to #1

Posted on December 19, 2011 by Lew Rockwell

Latest poll:

Romney 35%
Paul 21%
Gingrich 16%
Huntsman 13%
Bachmann 4%
Perry 2%
Santorum 1%

 

I'm still trying to figure out where all this "unelectable" "no chance" stuff is coming from.

 

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 4:18 PM

If only Paul could get at least half of Huntsman's supporters.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 4:47 PM

Do you support Paul?

Also, I am not sure about comparing RP to a confederate war general :P

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 19,520
Reply
Eric080 replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 4:50 PM

I love the conservative line about how, "reality will force its hand" when it comes to foreign policy.  If only those peace candidates had the information that the public service angel Barack Obama does, he would figure it all out that we really do need to do all of the nasty things we've done in the past.  The funny thing about this hypothesis is that it is completely unfalsifiable.  Because it's "in the interest of our national security," we could never have the access to the facts that they supposedly do.  So technically they could do anything they wanted to if the people didn't analyze the specific instance of behavior for criticism.  I think it's safer to ask questions about our "national security" than it is to assume they are angelic disinterested figures merely looking out for us.

"And it may be said with strict accuracy, that the taste a man may show for absolute government bears an exact ratio to the contempt he may profess for his countrymen." - de Tocqueville
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Mon, Dec 19 2011 7:21 PM

Paul has been important, imho, to beginning to audit the Fed. Plus, remember that the House doesn't have filibuster or he might be using it all the time.

You think Gingrich would limit the size of govt? Nah. Perhaps on the surface, but all the juices would remain there. Bush was supposedly conservative but allowed the bailouts through. Plus, Medicare, wars, etc. You know, you've gotta keep your old people happy. They do, after all, vote for you.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,612
Points 29,515
Reply
Aristophanes replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 3:12 PM

Paul will gain support when Huntsman and Johnson drop out (or move parties)  maybe 3 or 4%

"The Fed does not make predictions. It makes forecasts..." - Mustang19
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 3:43 PM

Johnson I think has already switched to Libertarian. Huntsman won't drop out, imho.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 4:13 PM

Wheylous:
Johnson I think has already switched to Libertarian.

Do you have any proof of this?

You can't just say "oup...nevermind.  I'm Libertarian Party now."  There's kind of this matter of paperwork, and FEC filings.  I'm not so sure how easy it is to just switch parties...although it could be much easier than I think.

I see no mention of this on his website or his campaign page on Wikipedia.  The closest I found is this mention that he'd consider it.

 

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 4:51 PM

If you do a search for "Johnson libertarian switch" you can find some articles, though it appears that he might be slightly reconsidering the decision to switch.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 6:08 PM

Well if you notice, I originally linked to one.  You could have just said "no."

 

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 7:15 PM

There are more recent articles about it... crying

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 7:22 PM

Favorite comment:

"I have to tell you that the Libertarian convention is kind of awesome to watch on CSPAN. It is this amazing mix of Wall Street types, bikers, potheads, professional gamblers, militia types, professors, cowboys- a real freakshow in a lot of ways."

 

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,984
Points 89,720
Reply
Wheylous replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 8:15 PM

JJ, where does that quote come from?

More Johnson evidence:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/20/johnson-to-run-as-libertarian-party-candidate/

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Reply
John James replied on Tue, Dec 20 2011 8:30 PM

In the comments of the previous link you posted, hence "favorite comment", immediately following your post.

The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread
Learn the economics of freedom
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (24 items) | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap