PDA

View Full Version : Speaker of the House...Ron Paul?



Elwar
09-13-2010, 09:28 AM
Would Ron Paul have more influence as Speaker of the House than as president?

Would it be easier to urge our Congressmen to vote for Ron Paul as speaker?

Just wonderin...
jake
09-13-2010, 09:32 AM
I'd say no. but it would be a nice plan B.
erowe1
09-13-2010, 10:31 AM
Would it be easier to urge our Congressmen to vote for Ron Paul as speaker?


No. As bad as his odds are of winning the nomination for president, it would still be easier for him to get votes from the 10 million or so ordinary people he'd need in Republican primaries than it would be for him to get them from the 110 or so Republican representatives he'd need to become Speaker.
Cowlesy
09-13-2010, 10:42 AM
No. As bad as his odds are of winning the nomination for president, it would still be easier for him to get votes from the 10 million or so ordinary people he'd need in Republican primaries than it would be for him to get them from the 110 or so Republican representatives he'd need to become Speaker.

Agree. The ego-freaks/ladder-climbers in the Republican Party would never ever let Ron be Speaker. He should run the House Financial Services Committee but they won't let him do that either (if when the (R)'s win the House in November, he still won't be Chair).
Krugerrand
09-13-2010, 10:56 AM
Would the position even suit him well? Speaker of the House seems like a position best suited for a person of little principle and maximum negotiation skills.
Revontulet
09-13-2010, 11:08 AM
If a lot of libertarian oriented Republicans got into the House, then this would be a useful position. If he was Speaker and the rest of the GOP House delegation were neo-cons then it would be a waste.
Legend1104
09-13-2010, 11:27 AM
as president he could veto the budget and all unconstitutional bills.
bwlibertyman
09-13-2010, 12:19 PM
I agree that he would be able to do more as president. From what I've seen the Speaker is more of a figure head. The Speaker has one vote just like all the other ones. I think the only other benefit besides the publicity would be that the Speaker is 3rd in line to be president.
Promontorium
09-13-2010, 12:22 PM
If Dr. Paul had a chance of becoming Speaker, we wouldn't need him.
specsaregood
09-13-2010, 12:23 PM
He should run the House Financial Services Committee but they won't let him do that either (if when the (R)'s win the House in November, he still won't be Chair).

Who will have the seniority to do it instead of him? IIRC he is the ranking member.
Revontulet
09-13-2010, 12:26 PM
If he was Speaker he might be able to sway the debate more towards his agenda, but that's about it. Also as someone here already said, the GOP hierarchy would never let him become Speaker.
nate895
09-13-2010, 01:31 PM
I agree that he would be able to do more as president. From what I've seen the Speaker is more of a figure head. The Speaker has one vote just like all the other ones. I think the only other benefit besides the publicity would be that the Speaker is 3rd in line to be president.

Actually, the Speaker determines whether a bill will even be heard on the House floor, unless the bill has enough co-sponsors to override and force a vote, which rarely happens. His power as Speaker would be on par with the Presidency if he exercised the office's authority with regularity.