Prediction: Ron Paul will not run in 2012

[nbhadja]

I am pretty sure he won't run. He will be 77 years old then, and if he won he would be 81 by the end of his first time and 85 by the end of his second term.

Ron knows that if he runs, he will cost the liberty candidate many potential voters simple for the fact that he will be 77 years old and he would never run knowing that.

We may not like it, but a large amount of the shallow sheep voters will NOT vote for a 77 year old man period, no matter who it is.

The media already has enough BS to create in order to attack Ron Paul, I guarantee they would continuously be talking about any potential health issues if RP were to become president because of his age. They would basically write off Ron Paul. The last thing we need is to give them excuses to persuade sheep away from our message.

I am surprised at the number of people here who harp onto Ron Paul as if he is the only liberty lover worth running for president. Ron Paul said himself that the movement is far bigger than one man.

I think he will endorse someone else, maybe Gary Johnson.

[thasre]

Gary Johnson!!!!!

Or Ron Paul... I don't expect him to run again, but I'd still support him.

[Primbs]

Ron's mission is to advance liberty. I think he will because that is the best way to advance liberty.

[rsvforronpaul]

I have been saying the same thing.Sanford is the only potential candidate.
Sanford/Johnson would be amazing.

[MRoCkEd]

I truly hope he does.. but if he doesn't run, I hope it plays out like this:
-Gary Johnson runs with Ron Paul's endorsement. Johnson announces early-on that Ron Paul will be his running mate should he get the nomination
- If Gary Johnson doesn't get the nomination, Jesse Ventura runs as 3rd party.

[BuddyRey]

I am surprised at the number of people here who harp onto Ron Paul as if he is the only liberty lover worth running for president.

True, but unfortunately, I do think it's a pretty narrow field. Can you think of anybody else who has demonstrated such constant ideological consistency over decades in office, and has actually practiced what he or she preached? I can think of only two; Gary Johnson (who, besides his anti-Drug War stance, I don't really know much about) and Dr. Mary Ruwart who is a longtime member of the Libertarian Party and could never make the jump to the GOP and get away with it. Heck, Ron Paul served ten terms in Congress as a Republican, and the media still loved to harp on the one period in his life when he chose, for whatever reason, to try the waters in a different party, despite the fact that many far more prominent (and usually not ideologically but strategically motivated) examples of partisan switchovers are common-place with politicians and are never mentioned (Governor Rick Perry, anyone?).

I don't care if Ron Paul decides to run at 76, 86, or 106. I will vote and campaign for him with all the zeal (if not more) that I had when he ran in '08. He is the only liberty candidate who truly moves me. Amongst a field of imitators, there is, for the time being, only one Dr. Paul.

[Primbs]

Ron's presence at CPAC had the look and feel of a major GOP contender in four years.

He did the best ever in a straw poll without really trying.

Ron had hundreds of volunteers and thousands of supporters at CPAC alone.

If anything he is stronger now than ever before.

His events at CPAC rival every other GOP nominee who has ever been to CPAC.

[Epic]

I like Sanford, but he plays ball with the establishment. As such, say he takes over when the federal budget is 4 trillion. Can you really see him taking a ball and chain to the budget and just obliterating the thing. I could see him maybe holding it even and passing it to his successor about at the same level that it was given to him, which is better than I can say for most. But i think only Ron Paul would really take some important chunks (end the fed, opt out social security, etc.) out of it.

If it were Sanford/RP as vice president I could get on board big time though.

[He Who Pawns]

If the whole economy and the dollar collapse, he might run. He would be the only one around with the answers, and the proven track record of having predicted it all.

[JoshLowry]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.

Please don't make me cringe! It hurts inside!

He does get points for being against the bailouts, don't get me wrong. However I think he is only about halfway to true liberty and constitutional government.

[UtahApocalypse]

I hope he does run.... not because he is the only person that is capable. My fear is that if Ron Paul does not run our vote will be split half a dozen ways. Ron Paul seems to be the only person that we all agree on.

[Conza88]

I am pretty sure he won't run. He will be 77 years old then, and if he won he would be 81 by the end of his first time and 85 by the end of his second term.

Ron knows that if he runs, he will cost the liberty candidate many potential voters simple for the fact that he will be 77 years old and he would never run knowing that.

Reagan was 76 in office. You've got no idea what you're talking about.



We may not like it, but a large amount of the shallow sheep voters will NOT vote for a 77 year old man period, no matter who it is.

He looks 60ish. You exercise more than you do, lol.


The media already has enough BS to create in order to attack Ron Paul, I guarantee they would continuously be talking about any potential health issues if RP were to become president because of his age. They would basically write off Ron Paul. The last thing we need is to give them excuses to persuade sheep away from our message.

Full of crap. They've used up their BS. Health issues? Sorry champ, that's McCain. Maybe you should stop projecting. Ron Paul is healthy as far as I see.


I am surprised at the number of people here who harp onto Ron Paul as if he is the only liberty lover worth running for president. Ron Paul said himself that the movement is far bigger than one man.

I think he will endorse someone else, maybe Gary Johnson.

How I Won in the Election by John Sophocleus (http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/bb05/Sophocleus.mp3)

[brandon]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.


Agreed.

And Johnson is a no name nobody who would end up doing worse than Paul did in 2008.

Paul is the only viable candidate the liberty movement has to run run for president in '12.

[Indy4Chng]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.

Please don't make me cringe! It hurts inside!

He does get points for being against the bailouts, don't get me wrong. However I think he is only about halfway to true liberty and constitutional government.

I hope Sanford runs and wins!!!! :D I will even donate to his campaign and put up yard signs. I may even volunteer. :D:D

[trey4sports]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.

Please don't make me cringe! It hurts inside!

He does get points for being against the bailouts, don't get me wrong. However I think he is only about halfway to true liberty and constitutional government.



QFT!
i cant stand all this BS talk about Sanford. at best hes a Reagan.

Ron Paul is a top-tier 2012 presidential candidate. He has gained a ton of name recognition within the last 2 years, and it is not possible in any way to throw another liberty candidate in the running at this point and expect him to be as successfull as Ron Paul.

Ron Paul 2012

[ClayTrainor]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.

Please don't make me cringe! It hurts inside!

He does get points for being against the bailouts, don't get me wrong. However I think he is only about halfway to true liberty and constitutional government.

I'm with you 100% on this!

[qh4dotcom]

Mike Gravel was 78 when he ran last year...nobody made a big deal out of his age.

[UtahApocalypse]

Mike Gravel was 78 when he ran last year...nobody made a big deal out of his age.

Nobody thought he had a shot in hell.

[zach]

I think he'll do what he feels is best in relation to his age.

We can't decide that.

[BuddyRey]

Until the day I see Sanford call for sound money, an abolition of the Federal Reserve and/or, an end to the War on Drugs I will cringe every time I see someone post in support of him.

Please don't make me cringe! It hurts inside!

He does get points for being against the bailouts, don't get me wrong. However I think he is only about halfway to true liberty and constitutional government.

Quote for TRUTH!!!

[nbhadja]

Reagan was 76 in office. You've got no idea what you're talking about.

Reagen was 69 when he was elected into his 2nd term and 73 years old when he was finished.

Ron Paul is will be 77 years old in 2012 and in 2020 he will be 85 after 2 terms of presidency.

So:

Reagen= 65 -73 years old during presidency
Paul= 77 years old- 85 years old during presidency

Big difference- 12 years.





He looks 60ish. You exercise more than you do, lol.

Nothing will be able to convince the sheep otherwise, 77 years old is 77 years old to them.


Full of crap. They've used up their BS. Health issues? Sorry champ, that's McCain. Maybe you should stop projecting. Ron Paul is healthy as far as I see.

The media is composed of 100% crap. They will never run out of bullshit because they are bullshit. Go ask the sheeple what they think of a 77-85 year old president. It does not matter if RP is 100% healthy, the public still will fear his age.



How I Won in the Election by John Sophocleus (http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/bb05/Sophocleus.mp3)
.........

[trey4sports]

Mike Gravel was 78 when he ran last year...nobody made a big deal out of his age.

Gravel was 78?!
i thought early 60's.... he didnt look 78

[Truth Warrior]

I have better hopes for Ron than that. He's earned it My SWAG is no POTUS run in 2012 for Ron. ;)

[Feelgood]

Pretty accurate prediction, since Ron Paul has already stated he has no intentions of running. :)

[Conza88]

.........

Your empirical analysis is retarded. Your premises are flawed. There is a difference between winning and running (spreading the message)

You would be good to learn the difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_Senators_by_age


"As of January 24, 2009, 1 Senator is in his 90s, 3 are in their 80s, 19 are in their 70s, 36 are in their 60s."

Hence, you are full of it. You completely and dismally missed my point entirely.

Check your premises. I suggest you actually listen to the audio at the end of the post and then you might get a clue. http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/851/tupus9.gif


Mike Gravel was 78 when he ran last year...nobody made a big deal out of his age.


Gravel was 78?!
i thought early 60's.... he didnt look 78

.........

[JoshLowry]

I hope Sanford runs and wins!!!! :D I will even donate to his campaign and put up yard signs. I may even volunteer. :D:D

Ahh! My heart! *head asplodes*

[nbhadja]

Your empirical analysis is retarded. Your premises are flawed. There is a difference between winning and running (spreading the message)

You would be good to learn the difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_Senators_by_age



Hence, you are full of it. You completely and dismally missed my point entirely.

Check your premises. I suggest you actually listen to the audio at the end of the post and then you might get a clue. http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/851/tupus9.gif
.........


You were wrong on the Reagen thing, you told me I was clueless about it yet it was YOU who was 12 years off.

Spreading the message is done by votes primarily. If you only get a small percent of the votes you are not gonna get much coverage and majority of the country (outside of Ron Paul/freedom lovers) will not vote for a 77 year old. It is hard to deny that.

Plus Ron Paul will still campaign for whoever he endorses if he decides to do that.

And senators are a different story. It is not like running for the Republican nomination/president.

The first black senator we had was in 1870. Today we finally got a half black man as president for the 1st time.

We have had women senators since 1932.

Its a different thing in running for the senate.






___

[Conza88]

You were wrong on the Reagen thing, you told me I was clueless about it yet it was YOU who was 12 years off.

Your premise is flawed, and thus so is your conclusion. Your numbers mean nothing. Better luck next time.


Spreading the message is done by votes primarily.

No it's not.


If you only get a small percent of the votes you are not gonna get much coverage and majority of the country (outside of Ron Paul/freedom lovers) will not vote for a 77 year old. It is hard to deny that.

No it's not. You've pulled that conclusion completely out of your ass.

Your only basis is AGE.

YOU go pwned on the age factor, the American people have voted for a fcken 90 year old, 80 year olds and 70 year olds. Your point, again - fails remarkably.


Plus Ron Paul will still campaign for whoever he endorses if he decides to do that.

And senators are a different story. It is not like running for the Republican nomination/president.

Different position, practically exact same process. The differentials are miniscule and to some how contrast them as completely different is idiotic and fallicious. You've merely said so - yet presented no argument.

Go figure. :rolleyes:



The first black senator we had was in 1870. Today we finally got a half black man as president for the 1st time.

We have had women senators since 1932.

What has this got to do with anything? :rolleyes:


Its a different thing in running for the senate.

Still based on the American people voting on AGE. Which is what your whole BS conclusion is based on.

Fail.


___

___

[BlackTerrel]

Running will be good. With all this time to plan now and the Internet taking over even more of the MSM he will get even much more attention in 2012. I don't see the downside...

[Conza88]

Running will be good. With all this time to plan now and the Internet taking over even more of the MSM he will get even much more attention in 2012. I don't see the downside...

He may be running for the President of the North American Union? lol... jks :eek:

[eok321]

I tink we all know by now that ron does'nt play games so when he says running is not part of his intentions at this point i think we have to believe him.

My guess is that he has someone lined up to run with the support of the CFL.

Personally i would prefer Johnson as his track record looks fairly bullet proof and he's a good speaker.

The problem is going to be getting all the Paul supporters to row in behind 1 candidate which will no doubt be impossible.

[trey4sports]

RP needs to run in 2012, he will be a firs tier candidate and the Revolution will be in full swing.

[speciallyblend]

RP needs to run in 2012, he will be a firs tier candidate and the Revolution will be in full swing.

exactly

[PowerOfLiberty]

He ran.

[The Northbreather]

Oh yes he did!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Ron Paul didn't run in 2012, for his House seat.

Amazing predictive powers!