Will The 2011 Republican Debates Be Chock Full Of Constitutionalists?

[anaconda]

Just wondering what everyone think. Will the Ron Paul platform be touted by several candidates? i.e. a bit of a consensus on the stage?

[awake]

Just think; take the lying skills of Obama and combine it with the message of Ron Paul, Next thing you know, a fresh pot of political capital to keep the socialist express moving on down the road to serfdom.

[anaconda]

Just think; take the lying skills of Obama and combine it with the message of Ron Paul, Next thing you know, a fresh pot of political capital to keep the socialist express moving on down the road to serfdom.

But the interesting thing is that credibility may be openly challenged and become an issue. If four or five Republican debaters are all trying to be the best looking Tea Partier then Ron can call them out on specifics, specific pledges, and their history of credibility or lack thereof. Could be great theater. Candidates trying to look conservative but still having to compare themselves with Ron.

Credibility may be a new issue with all POTUS debates since Obama promised changed but only has done business as usual.

Plus some of the candidates may be actual hard line conservatives. Possibly even non - interventionist. Michael Steele may have opened that up as a possibility with his recent comments. He may be smarter than we give him credit for...

[anaconda]

bump

[Elwar]

Huckabee will probably be duplicating Ron Paul's message as he started to do during the last election.

[anaconda]

Huckabee will probably be duplicating Ron Paul's message as he started to do during the last election.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the candidates in the Republican debates in 2007-2008 represented the entirety of the candidates? Were there lesser knowns that did not get to debate? I mean, if one of us announces and files the paperwork, do we get to be in the television debates?

[anaconda]

Huckabee will probably be duplicating Ron Paul's message as he started to do during the last election.


Huck was pro kick ass war on terror if I remember correctly. In fact, the only liberty issue I remember him commenting on was that he didn't like the IRS. Did he have other freedom issues to tout?

[jclay2]

Huck was pro kick ass war on terror if I remember correctly. In fact, the only liberty issue I remember him commenting on was that he didn't like the IRS. Did he have other freedom issues to tout?

Tax Hike Mike makes me sick. He was trying to pick up the tea party anti government crowd with is fair tax bs. This was coming from the same guy who increased government spending in his own state at twice the rate of inflation over 8 years. FACEPALM

My prediction is that a republican candidate will emerge who is more conservative than the last election. The mainstream conservatives will tout this guy/girl as the next Reagan and nearly faint in place for this candidate. This said candidate will likely win and continue the same two party paradigm bull crap that we are used to. Even with a serious sovereign financial crisis, I think we are extremely likely to get sold down the river and closer and closer to serfdom. Can you tell I am not an optimist about the future.:(

[Brett]

Lots of people talking the talk, none of them walking the walk unless Johnson or Paul run.

[ClayTrainor]

Huck was pro kick ass war on terror if I remember correctly. In fact, the only liberty issue I remember him commenting on was that he didn't like the IRS. Did he have other freedom issues to tout?

He didn't like the IRS because he wants a "Fair Tax", which has to be one of the biggest oxymorons in the world. :D

[Liberty Star]

It would be a pleasant surprise but negating much of the recent stances won't come easy for lobbies funded candidates.

[anaconda]

Tax Hike Mike makes me sick. He was trying to pick up the tea party anti government crowd with is fair tax bs. This was coming from the same guy who increased government spending in his own state at twice the rate of inflation over 8 years. FACEPALM

My prediction is that a republican candidate will emerge who is more conservative than the last election. The mainstream conservatives will tout this guy/girl as the next Reagan and nearly faint in place for this candidate. This said candidate will likely win and continue the same two party paradigm bull crap that we are used to. Even with a serious sovereign financial crisis, I think we are extremely likely to get sold down the river and closer and closer to serfdom. Can you tell I am not an optimist about the future.:(



Some optimistic things to consider:

1) The libertarian wing of the Republican Party is the most educated political voting block, and the most stubborn. The false conservative of whom you speak may likely fail because our group will vote 3rd Party or stay home. The GOP cannot afford to shoot itself in the foot again.

2) The Republican debates may have a healthy representation of constitutional candidates. Ron will not be alone in the desert. This invites competition for credibility, voting records, and specific policy commitments.

3) Ron may approach this election very differently. He should say that if he does not get the nomination he will likely run as a third party candidate. This will probably sink the GOP as Ron should get at least 8% of the popular vote (and it could be closer to 33% if the right circumstances come to pass by 2012). The threat of him running third party could force many concessions from the GOP.

[american.swan]

Maybe I should run for US President while living in Korea, I have more credibility than those jokers.

[american.swan]

We need signs bombs. "Ron Paul, the credible candidate"

Also, don't be to harsh. The GOP "money" doesn't care if the GOP loses. They have the DNC to play with.

[South Park Fan]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the candidates in the Republican debates in 2007-2008 represented the entirety of the candidates? Were there lesser knowns that did not get to debate? I mean, if one of us announces and files the paperwork, do we get to be in the television debates?

John Cox and other self-funded non-officeholders were excluded despite having filed. I doubt that they would exclude Ron Paul though.

[AlexMerced]

Now if you had people like Gary Johnson, and a panel of true believers in the debates, it'd be the neo-cons on stage looking like fringe candidates, and actually might help redefine the image of the mainstream republican

[Promontorium]

I used to feel like an idiot that these presidential candidates seem to pop up from nowhere, the more I learn about government the more I learn that there are simply too many potential candidates, I can't name all 50 states, mostly because I have doubts that supposed places like Nebraska actually exist. So I damn sure won't know all the governors, or senators, and there's probably no one who knows all the Reps except by using list memorization tactics. But amazingly I can tell you 99% of all candidates will be saying the same tired shit they've been saying. Ron Paul is a freak and in 2011 will still be a freak. The Constitution has become like the bible you can use it to defend your actions, but you'll never succeed by actually using it to guide your actions.

[libertybrewcity]

to put it simply, yes. the 2011 debates will be chock full of "constitutionalists", not constitutionalists. Sadly, we will see Palin, Huckabee, Romney, and maybe Gingrich talk about upholding the Constitution. pathetic bunch they are.