Ron Paul anti-war sleeper card

[Legend1104]

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/lawmaker-news/160909-ron-pauls-anti-war-sleeper-card


Most political commentators on cable and pundits in the media do fully understand one of the big sleeper issues that could dramatically affect the campaign. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) will probably be the only presidential candidate in either party taking an unequivocal position to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan and engage in a broader withdrawal of our military around the world at a time when voters are tired of war and budgets are strained to crisis levels.


and this:


Will this anti-war position bring in some liberal Democrats and independents to vote for him for the Republican nomination, since there will be no contest on the Democratic side? Some states allow crossover voting, and there will be plenty of time for protest voters to register Republican in states that don't allow crossovers.

I read this article the other day and thought, "Wow. That is a very good point that I have not considered much."

He really will be the only anti-war candidate (besides Johnson). Anyone that is very anti-war as their big issue will only have Ron Paul to turn too. That is also true on Gitmo and any other war related issue. That could bring in more potential support for Ron Paul.

It might be just as, if not more, helpful to work hard at recruiting Dems and Republicans.

[Legend1104]

Ah crap I just realized I put antio in the title. :(

[low preference guy]

Ah crap I just realized I put antio in the title. :(

click on edit, go advanced, and change it.

[specsaregood]

Not only what is in the OP, but he is the only candidate that actually served in our military.
That is right, the only candidate that served in our military is also the only anti-war candidate.

[Legend1104]

click on edit, go advanced, and change it.

Thanks. I never new that.

P.S. I only have 3 more posts to get to 1,000!

[CUnknown]

Many people will chime in and say that Dems are a waste of time trying to convert and that we should focus on likely Republican voters. This is true to a point. We should focus on Republicans, but I really disagree that Dems are a waste of time. I have been working on several of my friends, anyway, and I may have convinced them that in the primary at least, that he is worth their vote (because obviously Obama does not need them in the primary).

The general election will be a much harder sell for liberals, but the primary in open States is really sort of a no-brainer if you want to bring the troops home.

[Bruno]

Great article and as the first commenter mentioned, something we have known but great to see happening. Obama knows he can't talk strongly about pulling the troops out because he already did that and then instead doubled the troops in Afghanistan. No other Republican, besides Gary Johnson, will be saying this, and that could draw a lot of Dems and Independents.

There are some great discussions in the comment section.

[AlexanderY]

Many people will chime in and say that Dems are a waste of time trying to convert and that we should focus on likely Republican voters. This is true to a point. We should focus on Republicans, but I really disagree that Dems are a waste of time. I have been working on several of my friends, anyway, and I may have convinced them that in the primary at least, that he is worth their vote (because obviously Obama does not need them in the primary).

The general election will be a much harder sell for liberals, but the primary in open States is really sort of a no-brainer if you want to bring the troops home.

If I had to choose between Liberals and Conservatives on who is more approachable to discuss Ron Paul's views.

It would probably be liberals.

The only conservatives I've been able to talk too about Paul are militia and conspiracy types, both of which are inclined to lean Ron Paul anyways.

Unfortunately, appealing to liberals is useless for the primaries though.

[Legend1104]

If I had to choose between Liberals and Conservatives on who is more approachable to discuss Ron Paul's views.

It would probably be liberals.

The only conservatives I've been able to talk too about Paul are militia and conspiracy types, both of which are inclined to lean Ron Paul anyways.

Unfortunately, appealing to liberals is useless for the primaries though.

Not in open primary states like mine.

BTW this is my 1,000th post. I have finally reached the big leagues.

[Legend1104]

Bump

[Bruno]

Happy 1000, Legend! :-)

[doodle]

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/lawmaker-news/160909-ron-pauls-anti-war-sleeper-card




and this:



I read this article the other day and thought, "Wow. That is a very good point that I have not considered much."

He really will be the only anti-war candidate (besides Johnson). Anyone that is very anti-war as their big issue will only have Ron Paul to turn too. That is also true on Gitmo and any other war related issue. That could bring in more potential support for Ron Paul.

It might be just as, if not more, helpful to work hard at recruiting Dems and Republicans.

This is important issue and card is potent.

+rep

[tekkierich]

Not in open primary states like mine.

BTW this is my 1,000th post. I have finally reached the big leagues.

Ha! Been working on it for four years myself.

[Carehn]

Bump

Was this post 1000??? "Bump" should not be epic enough for post 1000, but what the hell would i know about that?