Serious and Realistic Ron Paul Vice Presidential Candidate Discussion

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

I know this whole thing is way off in the future, but it is never too early to talk about it.

A VP choice can make or break a general election campaign. They need to agree with the Presidential nominee on most issues, but not necessarily all of them. They need to solidify/fire up the base and/or expand the base. A minority would expand the base. A VP could give a territorial advantage. The VP needs to be someone that people can trust in the event they are forced into the office of the President.

There are some people that I think can automatically be eliminated from discussion: Dennis Kucinich, Jesse Ventura, Walter Williams, Peter Schiff, Alex Jones, John Stossel, Ralph Nader, Mike Gravel, Tom Woods, Adam Kokesh, Lou Dobbs, Lew Rockwell Cynthia McKinney, and Rand Paul. Media personalities would not be trusted. Neither would conspiracy theorists, economists, and anti-war and Fed(but socialist) liberals. Rand would be great, but Ron will not pick his own son.

Here are some realistic possibilities:
Luis Fortuno
Jim DeMint
Mike Lee
Nikki Haley
Susana Martinez
Pat Buchanan
Marco Rubio
Michele Bachmann
Gary Johnson
Barry Goldwater Jr.
Andrew Napolitano
Bobby Jindal
Bob Barr
Walter B. Jones
Jeff Flake
Herman Cain
Mitch Daniels
Dick Armey
Tom Tancredo

Anybody else that would make some sense?

Who do you prefer?

[trey4sports]

some good suggestions there. I like #1

[Original_Intent]

Of your list, the ones that jump out at me are Demint, Lee, Napolitano. Bachmann would be a good choice as far as helping get elected in the general, but not so good to step in as President if needed.

[TRIGRHAPPY]

Andrew Napolitano or Rand Paul would be my first choices....in that order. (I do prefer keeping ole Rand in the Senate if possible...i know i know, a tie would do it too). My only problem with Andrew Napolitano is that we're going to run into the whole "who is going to be VP" debate again once President Paul appoints Andrew Napolitano to the supreme court.

Anyone who voted against ALL the bailouts, including TARP, voted against the Patriot Act, Obamacare, Cap & Trade, and voted against going into Iraq.

If we REALLY wanted to suck in a lot of votes, former Democratic Rep Gene Taylor would be a good "cross the isle" getter.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

some good suggestions there. I like #1

Agreed. An actual conservative, smart, Latino, and a D.C. outsider.

[Anti Federalist]

Andrew Nap.

Second Choice?

Jesse V.

LoL

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Andrew Napolitano or Rand Paul would be my first choices....in that order. (I do prefer keeping ole Rand in the Senate if possible...i know i know, a tie would do it too). My only problem with Andrew Napolitano is that we're going to run into the whole "who is going to be VP" debate again once President Paul appoints Andrew Napolitano to the supreme court.

Yeah, and I think Andrew might scare away some voters who might not trust a circuit judge to step in as President.

I would make him attorney general, and when a supreme court spot opens up I would put him there.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Of your list, the ones that jump out at me are Demint, Lee, Napolitano. Bachmann would be a good choice as far as helping get elected in the general, but not so good to step in as President if needed.

I like DeMint a lot. Yes, he doesn't completely agree with Paul on policy, but he is not exactly a Wilson/Teddy type guy either. He is a fiscal conservative and agree with Paul on the Fed.

Lee would be good, but might be a little inexperienced and we need him in Congress.

Agreed, Bachmann might drive away voters in the general.

[LibertyEagle]

Of your list, the ones that jump out at me are Demint, Lee, Napolitano. Bachmann would be a good choice as far as helping get elected in the general, but not so good to step in as President if needed.

Yeah, these are exactly the same ones I picked out.

I tend to lean more towards Demint. Mainly because I think he would bring in more people, while not also scaring the crap out of me. :p

Lee is too unknown and Napolitano needs to be in the Supreme Court.

[Qdog]

1. Rand Paul
2. Jesse Ventura

[MelissaCato]

I picked Barry Goldwater Jr. because Rand Paul wasn't on there and Napolitano (now that I think about it) should be in the cabinet.

[wannaberocker]

I go with Michelle Bachmann. I think she brings all the social conservatives under the Ron Paul ticket. She is also brings a similar economic outlook and she brings in alot of energy for the GOP base.

[AFPVet]

I go with Michelle Bachmann. I think she brings all the social conservatives under the Ron Paul ticket. She is also brings a similar economic outlook and she brings in alot of energy for the GOP base.

After the Iowa Straw Poll, this could be a serious possibility. Many newspapers are already gossiping about a Paul/Bachmann ticket.

[libertyfanatic]

As much as I hate Bachmann, I think having her as VP could help us win. I would love to have either Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura but I think Ventura being an atheist would hurt us badly and Gary isn't very popular.

[ifthenwouldi]

I wonder if Bachmann would consider it.

[LibertyEagle]

I picked Barry Goldwater Jr. because Rand Paul wasn't on there and Napolitano (now that I think about it) should be in the cabinet.

He's like 73 years old. Considering Ron's age, we probably need someone younger.

[LibertyEagle]

I wonder if Bachmann would consider it.

Not while she has a chance to win.

[Theocrat]

I think Dr. Chuck Baldwin would be a great VP for Ron Paul because of three main reasons:

Dr. Baldwin was endorsed for President by Ron in the 2008 General Election, and Dr. Baldwin has endorsed Ron in this election. They are pretty good friends, and Dr. Baldwin has written many articles over the years adoring Ron's stance on the issues. He has worked for many years to get many Christians (which are a big voting bloc in the GOP) to support Ron, as well.
Dr. Baldwin is a strict constitutionalist like Ron, especially being a member of the Constitution Party. His allegiance to the Constitution and the principles of limited government would not be questioned. Their stances on the issues are pretty much identical, from abortion to ending the Fed to bringing the troops home.
Dr. Baldwin, as Ron's VP, would really set a great precedent for other third party candidates to run in state and federal races, and it would open competition in political races because Ron and Chuck would work to make the laws for third parties easier and balanced, if only on the federal level.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

He's like 73 years old. Considering Ron's age, we probably need someone younger.

True.

I included him and Pat Buchanan because despite their age, they agree with Ron Paul on most of the issues and have come out in support for him.

[moderate libertarian]

Wrong time and overly pressumptious to have public debates on this at this time, secure the nomination first.

Almost half of the names on the proposed list are neocon pimps and crooks.

[Jingles]

I'd personally either say Gary Johnson or Judge Andrew Napolitano. I don't want anyone with views that are all too different from Ron Paul. IF we get the nomination I don't think we have to work on trying to sure up the social conservative vote. We then already have a hold of the Republican party (they are in the position of vote for us or Obama wins. THEY HAVE TO VOTE FOR US!). I think Gary Johnson more or less because he can help then sure up independents and take in more disaffected democrats.

I don't think we should go with Bachmann at all (I don't think Ron would pick her either. They are a bit too different). I think we would suffer from her as VP more than it help. It would kind of be like 2008 when McCain suffered from Palin (We can't have a VP that is so polar i.e. you either love him/her or hate/her. I think they need to be able to appeal in some manner across the board with our VP choice. We get the Republican vote by default with the "Anyone But Obama" sentiment).

But regardless, IMAGINE the Judge debating Joe Biden. That would be awesome/hilarious.

[realtonygoodwin]

What about Bob McDonnell?

[erowe1]

We need more of these VP polls.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

As much as I hate Bachmann, I think having her as VP could help us win. I would love to have either Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura but I think Ventura being an atheist would hurt us badly and Gary isn't very popular.

A 911 conspiracy theorist would kill any campaign. I would be upset with him.

Despite cutting taxes, he isn't really conservative. Left the Reform Party because he thought Pat Buchanan was an "an anti-abortion extremist and unrealistic isolationist"

http://www.ontheissues.org/jesse_ventura.htm

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

What about Bob McDonnell?

http://civicforumpac.com/bob-mcdonnell-on-rick-perrys-potential-presidential-bid/

[IndianaPolitico]

Mike Lee.

Sen. Lee is young, well liked in the Tea Party, he will help with the Mormon vote, and he is a Senator.

[puppetmaster]

rand

[Alex540]

Ken Cuccinelli

[Zatch]

Col. Douglas MacGregor or Luis Fortuno

[BuddyRey]

Tom Woods would be my number-one choice, followed by Gary Johnson and Luis Fortuno.

[wannaberocker]

As much as I hate Bachmann, I think having her as VP could help us win. I would love to have either Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura but I think Ventura being an atheist would hurt us badly and Gary isn't very popular.

Didnt Ventura say that 9/11 was an inside job? Anyone who says such a thing will never ever win the election. So i think Ventura would be an absolute suicide call if they pick him as VP.

[ClayTrainor]

Mary Ruwart

[pcosmar]

Other-Please specify

Ron Paul's choice. When he makes that choice and makes it public.

this has been debated and re-debated for 4 years. I'm sure Ron has given it considerable consideration.

Our picks are irrelevant.
It will be announced after he has the nomination. lets get that done first.

[ProBlue33]

If this goes to convention and only the combination of Bachman & Paul delegates can beat Perry, then really you have no choice, do you?

[emazur]

I think we need someone who will counter the idiotic notion that Ron Paul is too 'liberal' in order to satisfy the pig headed conservative base. I like Gary Johnson but he doesn't fit that bill. Rand Paul does but he's not listed here and I don't think Ron would pick him anyway. Pat Buchanan fits the bill and I like him though there are some problems. Walter Williams would have been good except he's no spring chicken. Judge James P. Gray (not listed here) I think would be a great choice - military experience, conservative-turned-libertarian who gives the impression of a conservative, and is less 'radical' than Ron Paul. But I suppose I'll vote for Judge Nap, who has no military experience and is just as radical as Paul but who also seems to be well respected by conservatives.

[Rael]

Sarah Palin

[Brian4Liberty]

This should be a multiple choice poll. And making it private usually generates more responses.

Many good options there.

[JackieDan]

Barry Goldwater jr.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Donald Trump (yeah I know), Newt Gingrich (meh...probably need more age separation), or Jim DeMint. If he wasn't his son I'd be all over Rand Paul.

What about Marco Rubio? I'm not sure about his record but he is backed by the Tea Party (not like that means much).

[foofighter20x]

I voted Nikki Haley for strategic reasons.

1) She's got executive experience that the ticket needs.
2) Being a woman, she'll grab a lot of women voters who really want that glass ceiling broken.
3) We need someone young enough to run for two-terms after a hopefully two term Paul administration.

I will admit her downsides:
1) Her experience as Gov is less than a year.
2) Bigoted Christian conservatives might not like that she was raised Sikh and not Christian, and that despite converting to Christianity she still occasionally attends Sikh services.
3) No one may have dug out all the bones in her political closet yet... So there's that as well.

[RM918]

Sarah Palin

Bachmann has out Palin'd Palin, does she even matter anymore?

[mwkaufman]

Ron isn't going to choose someone that is for the war, for fiat money or not considered pro-life. Rand is the perfect choice to assuage supporter's worries of Ron's advanced age.

[kill the banks]

I still like Tom Woods ... in vp debate he would rule ... fresh clear thinking would articulate to confidence and votes ... Of course , it's v early yet to see as convention could force a vp

[Benjam]

I still like Tom Woods ... in vp debate he would rule ... fresh clear thinking would articulate to confidence and votes ... Of course , it's v early yet to see as convention could force a vp

It would be political suicide to pick Tom Woods, as he is a self-proclaiming anarchist. It's too soon to pick a woman as VP again, and I would not like that, personally. I liked the Chuck Baldwin idea and explanation. However, The Judge seems like a good choice. If we show his record as a judge people will go for him. He is an AMAZING speaker. Ron will NOT run with anyone who does not support his views because that will TRASH his reputation.

On second thought, I might be up for a Chris Wallace VP. ;)

[Sentient Void]

We want to appeal to independents and the left with a Ron Paul ticket. You would already be guaranteed all republican votes with a Ron Paul, or rather with an *anyone* ticket against Obama.

Democrats will vote for RP in the General Election if we have an independent person as VP - we don't want someone like Bachmann, a social con, or anyone else like her (despite what some are saying, this would be a mistake).

Otherwise you will simply alienate potential voters from the independent base and democrats who are sick of Obama, and they might choose them instead.

Think more strategically... a Bachmann VP would be a very poor choice and will only hurt, not help. Remember - republican votes are guaranteed... anyone picked for republican will be voted for against Obama.

[libertyfanatic]

We want to appeal to independents and the left with a Ron Paul ticket. You would already be guaranteed all republican votes with a Ron Paul, or rather with an *anyone* ticket against Obama.

Democrats will vote for RP in the General Election if we have an independent person as VP - we don't want someone like Bachmann, a social con, or anyone else like her (despite what some are saying, this would be a mistake).

Otherwise you will simply alienate potential voters from the independent base and democrats who are sick of Obama, and they might choose them instead.

Think more strategically... a Bachmann VP would be a very poor choice and will only hurt, not help. Remember - republican votes are guaranteed... anyone picked for republican will be voted for against Obama.

I'm not so sure about that. I fear that some neocons will vote for Obama because they know that he'll keep the wars going. I wouldn't even be surprised if some prominent establishment Republicans end up endorsing Obama.

[Sentient Void]

I'm not so sure about that. I fear that some neocons will vote for Obama because they know that he'll keep the wars going. I wouldn't even be surprised if some prominent establishment Republicans end up endorsing Obama.

Well, ok fine, sure - the *hard-line* 'neocons' (very few republicans, ultimately) might not support Paul, but so what? Who cares. They won't be voting for Obama neither - they'll sit voting out if they don't vote for Paul. They hate Obama with a passion (the general neocons in the population, not the professional ones like Kristol, et al).

Let them sit it out. We don't need them, especially if they aren't voting Obama anyways. The vast majority of republicans will 'fall in line' - moreso than usual, due to their absolute hatred for Obama.

[anaconda]

Rand Paul would be the best choice, for a number of reasons.

[Zatch]

I still like Tom Woods ... in vp debate he would rule ... fresh clear thinking would articulate to confidence and votes ... Of course , it's v early yet to see as convention could force a vp

Nothing against Tom Woods but he openly admits to being an anarcho-capitalist. Won't happen.

[Jake Ralston]

I got Noam Chomsky

[Carehn]

I like old Gary Johnson but I don't think Paul would pick someone with his stance on abortion. For me the one issue is not big enough to matter but for Paul and most i think it makes him a no go. Yet thats who I would like to see the most out of the list, Only most on the list would be just fine.

[BuddyRey]

It would be political suicide to pick Tom Woods, as he is a self-proclaiming anarchist.

He's also young, a great speaker, whip-smart (I think he has a PhD), and a New York Times Bestselling Author three or four times over. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound too shabby to me.

[ClayTrainor]

He's also young, a great speaker, whip-smart (I think he has a PhD), and a New York Times Bestselling Author three or four times over. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound too shabby to me.

Not too shabby at all. I think it's essential that if Ron makes it far enough to choose a VP, that he chooses someone with a firm Grasp on how to communicate Austrian Economics and Libertarian Principles. I can't think of anyone better than Tom Woods, with regards to communicating the message.

[Working Poor]

Barry Goldwater jr.

[The Binghamton Patriot]

Buchanan All day everyday.

[WilliamC]

Demint or Rubio or Christie.

He has to pick a more mainstream Republican to keep the base from revolting.

I'd actually say Christie if he would do it 'cause that would be a good geographical mix, Texas/New Jersey.

[trey4sports]

Luis Fortuno - solid choice. Seems to be pro-liberty, and his youth would quell some voters unease about Ron Paul's age.
A

Jim DeMint - solid "traditional conservative" would shore up the GOP base but is old and brings little else to the table. Not to mention his FP and civil liberties positions are not that good.
C+


Mike Lee - solid conservative. Young and articulate but we don't know a whole lot about him. Don't know that he would bring a whole lot to a ticket
B-

Nikki Haley - brings a demographic we NEED, however, her limited record gives us little to on. Would she make a good president if needed? Don't know
C+

Susana Martinez - Who?
??


Pat Buchanan - Washed up. Yesterdays news. Good guy but he brings nothing to a ticket.
C-

Marco Rubio - Not in line with our core beliefs (mine anyway) He would shore up a ticket though.
C


Michele Bachmann - Helps with conservatives, understands the FED but would most certianly alienate the left. Would help with the female vote though.
B


Gary Johnson - great on the issues and would make a great veep/president, but he brings little to a ticket in terms of adding votes.
C


Barry Goldwater Jr. - washed up. The name might carry some weight but hes only a year or two younger than Paul which would not help with the age issue
D


Andrew Napolitano - understands the constitution, and would do great whatever position we needed him in, unfortanetly he is old and most folks have no clue who he is. He also has said some things in regards to 9/11 that could be detrimental in a general election campaign. Even though he is on FOX every once in a while he is not a known figure like Hannity or Bill'O
C+


Bobby Jindal - bad voting record, but would be great for the ticket in terms of age and demographics
C


Bob Barr - holds little water today. Might have been a big name that most conservatives identified with 10 years ago, not today though. Brings nothing to the ticket.
D


Walter B. Jones - great representative and would do well as VP, most foks have no clue who he is. He also doesn't have the baggage that a lot of other well known conservatives do.
C+


Jeff Flake - smart, charismatic, and has a better than average record and understadning of liberty. Again, he is better than average, but is that what we want in a VP pick..? He is somewhat youthful and would help with the age issue. Brings no new demographics aboard though.
B-


Herman Cain - Ex FED gov. as well as a panderer (see stossel) He would help with certain demographics though.
C


Mitch Daniels - don't know much about him. Heard his record is decent.
C


Dick Armey - Not really one of us. Has the same belief set as someone like Bachmann but without the name ID, demographic help, and he was at one time the largest lobbyist in D.C. he would help shore up the GOP base though.
D+


Tom Tancredo - not great on many issues. Little name ID
D

[Aratus]

1.] nikki haley (vast improvement over sanford)
2.] michele bachmann (gop unity)
3.] jim demint (am being geographic)
4.] divine sarah (she boosted mccain in 2oo8)

[trey4sports]

He's also young, a great speaker, whip-smart (I think he has a PhD), and a New York Times Bestselling Author three or four times over. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound too shabby to me.


Then you live in a RPF fantasy world.

he's an anarchist, he would kill anyone's political ticket.

[Aratus]

also, jack hunter could special election run for jim demint's seat
if paul/demint sends obama/biden packing in NOV of 2012---!!!!

[pcosmar]

Has anyone given any consideration that a running mate will be forced on him against his will?

Ronald Reagan did not choose the former CIA Director to be his running mate.
That decision was made by others and forced on him.
He did NOT want Bush.

Could that happen again?
:(

[ClayTrainor]

Has anyone given any consideration that a running mate will be forced on him against his will?

Ronald Reagan did not choose the former CIA Director to be his running mate.
That decision was made by others and forced on him.
He did NOT want Bush.

Could that happen again?
:(

What do you mean by forced?... do you mean something along the lines of...

http://missionzones.org/inc/wp-content/uploads/gunpoint1.jpg

[Sentient Void]

What do you mean by forced?... do you mean something along the lines of...

http://missionzones.org/inc/wp-content/uploads/gunpoint1.jpg

indeed.

How exactly did 'they' 'force' Reagan?

Source?

It would be very difficult for anyone to force RP to do such things.

[AuH20]

What do you mean by forced?... do you mean something along the lines of...

http://missionzones.org/inc/wp-content/uploads/gunpoint1.jpg

David Rockefeller allegedly threatened to thwart potential funding sources for Reagan's campaign. And remember this is the same guy who built J.P. Morgan Chase into an international finance giant.

[Sentient Void]

David Rockefeller allegedly threatening to thwart potential funding sources for Reagan's campaign. And remember this is the same guy who built J.P. Morgan Chase into an international finance giant.

RP would not succumb to such threats.

His campaign is empowered, financed, and supported by pure grassroots spontaneity and the philosophy of liberty. 'They' are powerless against him. You cannot destroy or threaten an idea. RP is just the face for that idea.

[AuH20]

RP would not succumb to such threats.

His campaign is empowered, financed, and supported by pure grassroots spontaneity and the philosophy of liberty. 'They' are powerless against him. You cannot destroy or threaten an idea. RP is just the face for that idea.

Do you think RP could generate close to a billion dollars from the grassroots (Obama closing in on that number), especially in a period of economic uncertainty like this? You need more than the grassroots to win a presidential election unfortunately.

[Slutter McGee]

Wrong time and overly pressumptious to have public debates on this at this time, secure the nomination first.

Almost half of the names on the proposed list are neocon pimps and crooks.

There isn't a single neo-con on the list. Some traditional conservatives and interventionists, but name me the neo-con? We don't know yet if Rubio is one or not.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[The Binghamton Patriot]

There isn't a single neo-con on the list. Some traditional conservatives and interventionists, but name me the neo-con? We don't know yet if Rubio is one or not.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Slutter,

Rubio is a neo con at the core. He is an israel firster, and has publicly come out in favor of supporting israel at all costs.

[Sentient Void]

Do you think RP could generate close to a billion dollars from the grassroots (Obama closing in on that number), especially in a period of economic uncertainty like this? You need more than the grassroots to win a presidential election unfortunately.

We can now thank SuperPACs that this is no longer a problem to generate extraordinary sums of money. There are some very rich RP supporters. RP also has big corporate donors as well.

Will he generate the moneys that Obama will? I don't think so, but I don't think he needs to. Hell, Obama's big establishment and wall street support and donations could be used against him, actually.

Not only that, but instead of just the typical grassroots RP supporters donating, we would then have the republican party and backing of republicans across the US donating as well. people just want to defeat Obama, and republicans want to gain power again.

[Fermli]

neocons make up half of the list. =(

I think Tom woods, an anarcho-capitalist, would be better than a neocon. We have to present the message as something completely different in the general election. If people see a neocon as the VP, it will confuse/dilute RP's message. A neocon VP would be great if they had one for the GOP nomination. Once you obliterate the neocons in the GOP nomination, you no longer need a neocon VP.

[reagle]

Dr Paul / Dr Ruwart

[Slutter McGee]

Slutter,

Rubio is a neo con at the core. He is an israel firster, and has publicly come out in favor of supporting israel at all costs.

Yeah Bing, but that viewpoint, stupid as it is, doesn't make you a neo-con. Some of the more traditional conservatives would be good choices in the right situation. I would be ok with Santorum being his running mate if for some crazy reason it would help him get elected

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[TroySmith]

I think DeMint or Bachmann would both be solid choices that would help ensure RP's election. It would bring the social conservatives and hawks.

I'd personally like to see Judge Nap on the supreme court or as Attorney General.
Peter Schiff/Gary Johnson running the treasury.

DoD and Secretary of State I'm less sure.

[trey4sports]

There isn't a single neo-con on the list. Some traditional conservatives and interventionists, but name me the neo-con? We don't know yet if Rubio is one or not.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Have you ever seen one of Rubio's speeches? He sounds just like William Kristol.


Do you think RP could generate close to a billion dollars from the grassroots (Obama closing in on that number), especially in a period of economic uncertainty like this? You need more than the grassroots to win a presidential election unfortunately.

Doesn't matter if he could or could not, he simply would not sell out. For better or worse


Slutter,

Rubio is a neo con at the core. He is an israel firster, and has publicly come out in favor of supporting israel at all costs.

Bachmann is pretty bad on Israel as well, essentially no difference.


We can now thank SuperPACs that this is no longer a problem to generate extraordinary sums of money. There are some very rich RP supporters. RP also has big corporate donors as well.

Will he generate the moneys that Obama will? I don't think so, but I don't think he needs to. Hell, Obama's big establishment and wall street support and donations could be used against him, actually.

Not only that, but instead of just the typical grassroots RP supporters donating, we would then have the republican party and backing of republicans across the US donating as well. people just want to defeat Obama, and republicans want to gain power again.

That is pure speculation unless you personally know some big donors, and assuming Revolution PAC is going to raise huge money is speculation as well. They have not even reported an fundraising totals yet. In fact, last i saw they had raised like $20K


neocons make up half of the list. =(

I think Tom woods, an anarcho-capitalist, would be better than a neocon. We have to present the message as something completely different in the general election. If people see a neocon as the VP, it will confuse/dilute RP's message. A neocon VP would be great if they had one for the GOP nomination. Once you obliterate the neocons in the GOP nomination, you no longer need a neocon VP.

Would he be better in terms of what he would do? yes. But there is no way in hell Americans would vote for an anarchist. You would have to live in a bubble to believe he has any shred of electability.

[pcosmar]

I would be ok with Santorum being his running mate if for some crazy reason it would help him get elected

:confused:
WTF ?

Why would you support Fascism?
There is nothing "conservative" about Santourm.
I can not for the life of me find anything "republican" about him.

[trey4sports]

I'm not so sure about that. I fear that some neocons will vote for Obama because they know that he'll keep the wars going. I wouldn't even be surprised if some prominent establishment Republicans end up endorsing Obama.

yup.

[BuddyRey]

Then you live in a RPF fantasy world.

he's an anarchist, he would kill anyone's political ticket.

Shouldn't you find the many self-professed foreign interventionists and social engineers suggested as potential VP's just as worthy of rebuke as you seem to find a really principled guy who may or may not be an anarchist? (I've never heard him use that term)

[Jingles]

I've never heard Tom Woods call himself an AnCap, but I have heard him describe himself as a Rothbardian (basically the same thing). Ron Paul worked a lot with Rothbard, the Mises Institute, and such. The Mises Institute openly promotes AnCap views and ideas. I've never heard Ron Paul demonized for it.

[Delivered4000]

Gary Johnson

Here's why:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scngY8lN6Ys



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnkH2mIb2V0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFf4P20cWmU

[Cutlerzzz]

I'd like Johnson, unless he runs for Senate(which would probably be the best scenario).

Whoever Paul would pick needs to be someone much younger than him. He/She must believe in Austrian Economics and be anti-war as well. It would be great to have someone set up to run 2016-2024.

[trey4sports]

Shouldn't you find the many self-professed foreign interventionists and social engineers suggested as potential VP's just as worthy of rebuke as you seem to find a really principled guy who may or may not be an anarchist? (I've never heard him use that term)

no.

It has nothing to do with who i like or not, the point i'm making is that you would have to be detached with reality to think America would elect an anarchist.

[trey4sports]

I've never heard Tom Woods call himself an AnCap, but I have heard him describe himself as a Rothbardian (basically the same thing). Ron Paul worked a lot with Rothbard, the Mises Institute, and such. The Mises Institute openly promotes AnCap views and ideas. I've never heard Ron Paul demonized for it.

there is a screenshot of Woods saying he is an AnCap on Facebook floating around the forum.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Susana Martinez - Who?



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

Not sure what her record his, but she is young, Hispanic, and female.

[Brian4Liberty]

What about Marco Rubio? I'm not sure about his record but he is backed by the Tea Party (not like that means much).

No. Pure establishment puppet there. He was the first to dismiss the Tea Party once he was elected.

[vita3]

An intelligent, honest women below 60 would be great. I don't think she even has to have much political experience.

[Jingles]

An intelligent, honest women below 60 would be great. I don't think she even has to have much political experience.

Karen Kwiatkowski?

[pauliticalfan]

Rand.

[Peace&Freedom]

Jesse V.

Second choice: Nap

Either depends on circumstances. Would Jesse be a veep on a GOP ticket, or only if/when Paul goes 3rd party? Would Nap leave his comfortable job to run with Paul?

[Sentient Void]

Dr Paul / Dr Ruwart

Fvck. I *wish*.

That'd be *my* dream ticket.

Bring out 'The Velvet Hammer'!

[Anarchist]

As much as I hate Bachmann, I think having her as VP could help us win. I would love to have either Gary Johnson or Jesse Ventura but I think Ventura being an atheist would hurt us badly and Gary isn't very popular.

Dr. Paul has already stated that he would not consider Ventura or Johnson

[ClayTrainor]

Fvck. I *wish*.

That'd be *my* dream ticket.

Bring out 'The Velvet Hammer'!

That's my dream ticket as well.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Dr. Paul has already stated that he would not consider Ventura or Johnson

For good reason.

Ventura because he is not conservative and a conspiracy theorist, and Johnson because he is boring and adds nothing.

[BuddyRey]

Fvck. I *wish*.

That'd be *my* dream ticket.

Bring out 'The Velvet Hammer'!

+1! Ruwart would be great. I loved her book.

[Carehn]

I'd like Johnson, unless he runs for Senate(which would probably be the best scenario).

Whoever Paul would pick needs to be someone much younger than him. He/She must believe in Austrian Economics and be anti-war as well. It would be great to have someone set up to run 2016-2024.

hence johnson

[affa]

I would be ok with Santorum being his running mate if for some crazy reason it would help him get elected
Slutter McGee

And if something happened to RP? No, please. IMO, the VP should be there to woo the independents and fed up Dems, and not be so off the wall to repulse the Republican base.

[Peace&Freedom]

For good reason.

Ventura because he is not conservative and a conspiracy theorist, and Johnson because he is boring and adds nothing.

Johnson adds the southwest and is appealing to the CATO/Reason crowd, whose support would be most helpful. A VP doesn't have to be exciting. Ventura resonates with the liberty movement, which is more relevant than being a "conservative" especially if there is a third party run. Nap is brought up just as much as a VP choice even though he has also expressed support for conspiracy on several issues, including 9-11. Paul himself has indicated he avoids 9-11 because he's choosing his battles, not because he doesn't have concerns:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnY9UtuW-hE