Ron Paul presidency more likely if D's to control House and/or Senate in 2011/2012?

[jt8025]

I know this may sound odd at first and partisan but just go with it for a second.

Is it better for Ron Paul's chances at becoming president if the D's keep a small majority in the House and Senate for 2011/2012?

That way all the problems could still be blamed on the Democrat's.

If the R's gain control in Nov. and continue along the same course the pendulum may swing back the D's way in 2012.

Thoughts?

I have a "good" democrat in my district (John Barrow). He voted for some bad things but against some bad things too like Cap and Trade/Obamacare. He also was the first democrat in my state to support HR1207.

[Stary Hickory]

No and that would be a horrible idea because they would stop Ron Paul from getting anything done.

[jt8025]

I meant D's barely control in years 2011 and 2012 but Ron Paul more likely to get nomination in 2012 and possible win presidency AND R's win House and Senate in 2012 instead of 2010.

I am assuming you are talking about Ron Paul getting anything done in the House during 2011/2012 such as Audit the Fed?

It could be that a Ron Paul Audit the Fed passage could be more beneficial than a Ron Paul presidency.

[rich34]

If the R's get control of the house it's going to be possible that Ron's seniority will get him a committee chair. If so I think that will be the best scenario for him getting the nomination.

[heavenlyboy34]

There are a lot more variable than this to consider if you really want to play this game. For example, in bad times, people tend to be in an anti-incumbent mood (whether justified or not) and "throw the bums out". But this is not set in stone. Perhaps we have a poli-sci major in here who can help you more than I can.