Should we run a jerk next time?

[Cutlerzzz]

Am I the only one fustrated at how polite Ron is sometimes? I think needs to be more assertive. Cain told several bold faced lies to Paul in front of millions of people, then accused Ron of being the inaccurate one, and Ron did not say anything. Could you imagine Cain telling that kind of lie to Schiff, for example?

At the same time, some people are attracted by what a nice guy he is, but Paul just let this go. He could have made this the most heated part of the debate had he just come out and said that Cain is lying.

Could you imagine Schiff, Woods, or a handfull of other Austrian's that predicted the crisis years in advance going up against Cain, that buffoon that claimed everything was ok weeks before the crash and even mocked those that were right? Paul is WAY too modest, and it is getting him killed. Paul should ask Cain if he feels embarrassed for being so wrong. He should then have asked him why he sided with Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Nancy Pelosi, and Ben Bernanke when it matters most, and supported the bailouts, QE, and a stimulus package, and why he not only supported those measures, but declared that any one who disagrees with him is an ignorant free market idealouge.

I love Ron, don't get me wrong, but does anyone else think that in 2016 we should run the kind of brash, tough guy, loud mouth, that most of the American people seem to want?

[muh_roads]

Watching Schiff at the congressional hearing made me realize how much I'd love to see him up there debating these half-wits. Ron is just too mild-mannered. I agree. While I will always like Ron, we need someone who represents the anger this movement has.

[pcosmar]

I don't really expect to be voting in 2016.
And I couldn't even stand to watch much of that shit.
The GOP is seriously disgusting me, and I wish Ron would distance himself from it.
It taints him.

[KCIndy]

I think - at least, I *hope* that most viewers will see through Cain's BS and will respect RP the more for being polite.



Of course, it really would be fun to see RP challenge Cain to a duel at dawn! ;)

[Feeding the Abscess]

Benton and crew should get over themselves and just bring Tom Woods into the campaign to handle the press releases/interviews. Dude is an absolute bulldog.

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Moderators would cut Congressman Paul's mic as soon as he tried to take more time.

[MikeStanart]

Rand

[Gumba of Liberty]

Dr. Paul, for better or for worse, is attempting to be the adult and the gentlemen in the debates. His style may not convert current Neo-Conservatives and militarists but when the Revolution in fully underway it will help the cause more than it hurt. But damn, I would love to see some more libertarian moxie.

[Schiff_FTW]

Yes, of course you are right. I don't think Ron really wants to be President. It seems like he is running another educational campaign.

I mean, who does this 'polite' thing work for, older people? Certainly not if you're going by the poll numbers.

[klamath]

I only add to this thread because I think it does get back to the campaign. Yes RP needs to step up and interject where he feels passionate. A leader does not sit in the corner and let the other candidate and media moderators run roughshod over you. All RP has to do if they call him on interjecting, is to recite the number of minutes and questions he gets compared to others. Stand up for himself and show that he has the passion and it will not hurt him with voters looking for a leader of these United States of America.

[Gumba of Liberty]

"Truth must be promoted, organized, and fought for as against error. Even if we can hold the faith that truth, unaided by strategy or tactics, will win out in the long run, it is unfortunately an excruciatingly long run in which all too many of us – certainly including Mises – will be dead. Yet, Menger adopted the ruinous strategic view that "there is only one sure method for the final victory of a scientific idea, by letting every contrary proposition run a free and full course." - Rothbard on Mises

[BuddyRey]

Next time, I seriously want to draft Tom Woods.

[Seraphim]

I agree with those that said Schiff is a big answer to this concern. Ron Paul needs to choose a Schiff type personality (if not Schiff himself!!!) to run along side him.

[Cutlerzzz]

Next time, I seriously want to draft Tom Woods.Anarchist for president!

I would be up for it though. Woods is the greatest speaker in the Liberty movement, by a solid margin IMO. He is possibly the smartest as well. He really is the jack of all trades. They could ask him about economics (and any sub catergory of it), economic history, the constitution, constitutional history, the history of the United States in general, foreign policy, the history of the world, philosophy, anything. I really think that they could ask Woods about any topic at any time, and he would be able to respond immediately, and present the truth in a favorable way.

[cindy25]

the brash type might appear to be popular but they don't win nominations (Rudy, Dean)

but the VP nominee must be an SOB (Nixon in 52/56, Agnew).

[Feeding the Abscess]

Anarchist for president!

I would be up for it though. Woods is the greatest speaker in the Liberty movement, by a solid margin IMO. He is possibly the smartest as well. He really is the jack of all trades. They could ask him about economics (and any sub catergory of it), economic history, the constitution, constitutional history, the history of the United States in general, foreign policy, the history of the world, philosophy, anything. I really think that they could ask Woods about any topic at any time, and he would be able to respond immediately, and present the truth in a favorable way.

Benton and crew (I say this because Woods doesn't specify exactly who won't let him near the campaign, only saying "the staff will have nothing to do with me") are the reason Woods isn't officially batting for Ron in press releases and interviews.

For shame.

[A. Havnes]

Benton and crew (I say this because Woods doesn't specify exactly who won't let him near the campaign, only saying "the staff will have nothing to do with me") are the reason Woods isn't officially batting for Ron in press releases and interviews.

For shame.

Why in the world not? Woods is a great ally in the battle for liberty, and to keep him away from the campaign is a huge mistake. He's a very outspoken person, and isn't afraid to take the bull by the horns.

On the note of Peter Schiff, he's excellent on the economy, but kind of weak on foreign policy. Typing that makes me feel like all the neocons I talk to who tell me the same thing about Ron Paul, but that's truly how I feel about him. I'm an avid fan, but I don't think he's the leader that the US needs right now, especially seeing as how I don't think you can be fiscally conservative and still support Bush's foreign policy. If he's changed his mind since, please correct me.

What we need isn't a jerk per say, but someone with a bit of an edge to him or her. I personally admire and respect Ron Paul for his restraint, but he really should have called Cain out. You can, I believe, call someone out and still show that person the utmost respect - it's the sign of a good leader. Now, in Republican debates, most of the candidates try and call each other out through means of aggression and humiliation, which I am staunchly against, and I find to be reflective of how one would deal with the rest of his cabinet and the world in general; a lack of diplomacy there would be. But, yes, if Ron Paul is a blunt force instead of a sharp edge, he'll never be able to even politely and sincerely slice away at his opponent's political philosophies, just batter at it meanwhile the media tries to slice him up.

No, right now I think Ron Paul's problem isn't his lack of soundbyte information (when did we as a nation become so anti-intellectual?), but that he has no presence. Mild-mannered and polite, he's my idea of a true human being, but he also lacks an air of authority.

[acptulsa]

Has anyone else noticed that our greatest strength is that our candidate cannot be attacked? Ignored, yes, but there's just no grounds for attacking him. Given that they'll cut his mike and ignore him in the post debate analysis and call it journalism, I wonder how much worse off we'd be if they could actually attack him and make something stick?

[Romulus]

Intelligence, humility and integrity is just completely lost on the masses. I'm having a hard time accepting that truth.

[Revolution9]

Why in the world not?

Woods doing an interview and backslapping it up with Stephan Molynieux (sp?) is pure poison to the national campaign. That is my guess. He doesn't know who to hold hands with.

Rev9

[Revolution9]

Has anyone else noticed that our greatest strength is that our candidate cannot be attacked? Ignored, yes, but there's just no grounds for attacking him. Given that they'll cut his mike and ignore him in the post debate analysis and call it journalism, I wonder how much worse off we'd be if they could actually attack him and make something stick?

Yes. I notice this. To take it further I also notice that as each candidate is given time to speak they sink their candidateship...except Ron. It is divine comedy.

Rev9

[specsaregood]

Yes, of course you are right. I don't think Ron really wants to be President. It seems like he is running another educational campaign.
I mean, who does this 'polite' thing work for, older people? Certainly not if you're going by the poll numbers.

Well doing the Schiff thing didn't exactly work out in that Senate race either.

[steph3n]

Woods doing an interview and backslapping it up with Stephan Molynieux (sp?) is pure poison to the national campaign. That is my guess. He doesn't know who to hold hands with.

Rev9

This is in some ways, at least in RP's past, his biggest issue as well, he let people run away with his name in a way that has tarnished him, and we've not seen the end of it if he has any primary success, it will be brought out again and again by the media till whomever it is stands up.

[Shane Harris]

yes. part of me wishes really wants to see schiff run for president in 2016. when it comes to an icon for this movement no doubt ron is our leader, but schiff is a really fiesty, intelligent, witty debater who i much prefer watching on stage than ron. rons great but he never manages to say what we all want him to say. he never can manage to bring out the "i told you so and i did this and no one else did and you and you and you said this and were wrong" like a peter schiff or tom woods can do. hes too nice. sure maybe we dont trust schiff as much but honestly id rather see him in the race than rand even. or at least as much.

[Shane Harris]

Am I the only one fustrated at how polite Ron is sometimes? I think needs to be more assertive. Cain told several bold faced lies to Paul in front of millions of people, then accused Ron of being the inaccurate one, and Ron did not say anything. Could you imagine Cain telling that kind of lie to Schiff, for example?

At the same time, some people are attracted by what a nice guy he is, but Paul just let this go. He could have made this the most heated part of the debate had he just come out and said that Cain is lying.

Could you imagine Schiff, Woods, or a handfull of other Austrian's that predicted the crisis years in advance going up against Cain, that buffoon that claimed everything was ok weeks before the crash and even mocked those that were right? Paul is WAY too modest, and it is getting him killed. Paul should ask Cain if he feels embarrassed for being so wrong. He should then have asked him why he sided with Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Nancy Pelosi, and Ben Bernanke when it matters most, and supported the bailouts, QE, and a stimulus package, and why he not only supported those measures, but declared that any one who disagrees with him is an ignorant free market idealouge.

I love Ron, don't get me wrong, but does anyone else think that in 2016 we should run the kind of brash, tough guy, loud mouth, that most of the American people seem to want?

in short. yes. i completely agree with everything you posted.

[Tinnuhana]

Isn't there supposed to be a wall of separation between the campaign and the superPAC? But that aside, sometimes Tom gets into the ad hominem mode, which might be a bit too edgy for Ron's liking, at least as a direct part of the campaign.
But this is at least the 2nd time that Ron has taken what could be seen as a negative and really gotten a boost from it (psychological if nothing else). I didn't see the debate (during my work day); so did any of the other candidates ask him a question?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Woods doing an interview and backslapping it up with Stephan Molynieux (sp?) is pure poison to the national campaign. That is my guess. He doesn't know who to hold hands with.

Rev9

Schiff has been on Molyneux's program as well.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Why in the world not? Woods is a great ally in the battle for liberty, and to keep him away from the campaign is a huge mistake. He's a very outspoken person, and isn't afraid to take the bull by the horns.

On the note of Peter Schiff, he's excellent on the economy, but kind of weak on foreign policy. Typing that makes me feel like all the neocons I talk to who tell me the same thing about Ron Paul, but that's truly how I feel about him. I'm an avid fan, but I don't think he's the leader that the US needs right now, especially seeing as how I don't think you can be fiscally conservative and still support Bush's foreign policy. If he's changed his mind since, please correct me.

What we need isn't a jerk per say, but someone with a bit of an edge to him or her. I personally admire and respect Ron Paul for his restraint, but he really should have called Cain out. You can, I believe, call someone out and still show that person the utmost respect - it's the sign of a good leader. Now, in Republican debates, most of the candidates try and call each other out through means of aggression and humiliation, which I am staunchly against, and I find to be reflective of how one would deal with the rest of his cabinet and the world in general; a lack of diplomacy there would be. But, yes, if Ron Paul is a blunt force instead of a sharp edge, he'll never be able to even politely and sincerely slice away at his opponent's political philosophies, just batter at it meanwhile the media tries to slice him up.

No, right now I think Ron Paul's problem isn't his lack of soundbyte information (when did we as a nation become so anti-intellectual?), but that he has no presence. Mild-mannered and polite, he's my idea of a true human being, but he also lacks an air of authority.

Schiff more or less like Rand on foreign policy. Not exactly neocon, but not Ron, either.

[Philhelm]

Put me up there. I'd give the U.S. a show that they've never seen before.

[fatjohn]

Intelligence, humility and integrity is just completely lost on the masses. I'm having a hard time accepting that truth.

Hey, this is how we roll nowadays. Rolling, rolling, rolling downhill.

[John F Kennedy III]

We should run Rand after Ron serves two terms :)

[heavenlyboy34]

Woods doing an interview and backslapping it up with Stephan Molynieux (sp?) is pure poison to the national campaign. That is my guess. He doesn't know who to hold hands with.

Rev9
And Ron has pretty close ties with Lew Rockwell (another known anarchist). (Lew helped with the '08 campaign too, IIRC.) So? I highly doubt it would taint the campaign.

[Kylie]

Put me up there. I'd give the U.S. a show that they've never seen before.


Oh yeah. Better get the censors on their game.

:D

[Feeding the Abscess]

And Ron has pretty close ties with Lew Rockwell (another known anarchist). (Lew helped with the '08 campaign too, IIRC.) So? I highly doubt it would taint the campaign.

Rockwell was Ron's chief of staff in Congress, no less, before Ron left in '84. Ron was also good friends and political allies with MURRAY ROTHBARD.

It's why I simply don't understand Benton and crew shunning Tom Woods. Any downside associated with bringing Woods to the campaign would not harm it anymore than what Ron Paul has done or said in his public life.