Would you vote for Ron Paul if Romney was the VP

[cindy25]

since there is so much Romney Rand the reverse should also be considered.

[jsem]

Yes. Not the other way around though, Ron as VP wouldn't have too much influence. Mitt wouldn't has VP unless Ron were to die and Mitt took over, but that'd be unlikely.

[CaptUSA]

Absolutely. In fact, I've been saying I think this is a plausible outcome.

The VP is pretty much a non-factor is governing. It's simply a political choice. Therefore, you'd want someone that the public can "see" as President. And since Romney can totally bend his positions to whatever the President wants, he seems like the perfect choice.

[nasaal]

Romney/Paul couldn't get elected. Paul can't play the game and would call out Romney whenever Iran or Israel was mentioned. Paul/Romney would work because Romney can play the game and adjust his "positions" to Paul's

[bbwarfield]

interesting enough.... Mitt would be powerless cause he doesn't understand what a VP is.... while Rand would run the Senate with an iron fist

[matt0611]

Yes, I'd take Paul / Romney over Obama / Biden with no hesitation.

[Ranger29860]

That would mean Romney would be one heart attack or bullet away from president. I would not support that.

[The Gold Standard]

I would vote for it, but I would hope Ron hires a robust, private security team to protect him at all times.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

It would be interesting to see a master at deception Mitt Romney start talking like Ron Paul. . .

We should get used to slick politicians parroting our message because that is what's to come.

[pauladin]

I voted no. That would be a Jesus/Satan ticket as far as I'm concerned. I know that's a black-and-white view but I just don't want Romney that close to the presidency when we will have a 77 year old man who will be (let's be honest) at risk of assassination.

[wowrevolution]

No, because this would be signing a death warrant.
I would rather have Doug Wead.

[noxnoctum]

No way I'd vote for that.

[rachmiel]

Not so fast. Mitt would be one bullet away from the Oval Office... and even if his millions wouldn't take care of that for him, he's personally shot small varmints more than two times before... :eek:

[sailingaway]

I would, but I would worry for Ron's health. Reagan took Rockefeller Republican HW Bush, and he got shot :p

[blazeKing]

He wouldn't last the first year with Romney as VP they'd blast him or give him a heart attack inducing poison.

[sailingaway]

Not so fast. Mitt would be one bullet away from the Oval Office... and even if his millions wouldn't take care of that for him, he's personally shot small varmints more than two times before... :eek:

and you think he hit them?

[bbwarfield]

I would vote for it, but I would hope Ron hires a robust, private security team to protect him at all times. all with medical backgrounds

[jkob]

If Ron was the top of the ticket, yes...

'But I'd be scared as hell for Ron.

[ctiger2]

yes #duh

[braane]

I don't believe Ron would have Romney as VP. To answer the question, though, I would definitely vote for it. It would be a chance to prove how mainstream the ideas we preach can be, and I would be hard pressed to vote against that.

[Jack Bauer]

I voted no. That would be a Jesus/Satan ticket as far as I'm concerned. I know that's a black-and-white view but I just don't want Romney that close to the presidency when we will have a 77 year old man who will be (let's be honest) at risk of assassination.

^^
THIS

My answer is a

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HVa2upHVLBo/Tv7AZF_AOuI/AAAAAAAABIM/bX4P9T_YeWY/s1600/tn-memes-no-face-of-course-not.jpg

I dont think Ron will sell out.

[angelatc]

Voted "I'd think about it." I blogged about it, (http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2012/01/what-about-this-rand-paul-on-the-romney-ticket.html)and one of the comments made a pretty persuasive case against it:
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2012/01/what-about-this-rand-paul-on-the-romney-ticket.html#comment-6a00d83452719d69e20167607c4099970b



1) All vice presidents still have "ceremonial" offices in the Senate. Lyndon Johnson (maybe Hubert Humphrey) was the last one to really use it in a meaningful way (Agnew may have tried)--and having been Majority Leader, Johnson KNEW how to use it.

2) The problem with the Rand VP option is several-fold:

a) it would implicitly require Ron to endorse Romney, instead of keeping his mouth shut, or endorsing Johnson. If he does that, does he lose credibility with his supporters, who then say "oh, so it was just about politics, not really about making change"?

b) Rand could be shut out of decisionmaking just like Truman was (assuming a Romney win)--not even knowing that we had an atomic bomb or how WWII was being waged, or what discussions had been had with Churchill and Stalin....

c)if Romney loses, then Rand is in the position of having been part of that losing ticket. I didn't do a comprehensive historical search, and I may have missed someone, but I can only find one example, from either party, in the last 100+ years where a VP candidate on a losing ticket has later gotten his party's Presidential nomination...Bob Dole, who was the VP candidate in 1976 for Ford, and who (20 years later!) got the presidential nomination in '96(but of course didn't win). That's not to say that it's impossible, but I'm not sure that being on the losing ticket is necessarily the way to get yourself elected to the top spot 4 years later...Even assuming Romney could win, Vice Presidents only get to do as much as the President will let them (related to "b", above). Before signaling that there might even be an interest in being considered, I think the Pauls need to sit down and discuss how much of a risk they'd be willing to take that Romney would give Rand significant responsibility, and whether it's worth giving up a prominent place in the Senate.

Personally, if deals are going to be made, I'd hold out for naming Ron to the Cabinet--maybe Secretary of the Treasury...

[Mini-Me]

I voted no. That would be a Jesus/Satan ticket as far as I'm concerned. I know that's a black-and-white view but I just don't want Romney that close to the presidency when we will have a 77 year old man who will be (let's be honest) at risk of assassination.

Exactly. I might vote for such a ticket in dire straights, but it will THANKFULLY NEVER HAPPEN. Ron Paul would be an IDIOT to make Romney his VP.

[MarcosP]

Ron/ Romney, is better than Romney/Ron(orRand) or not Ron at all. The President has all the power, the vice presidency has no influence. Hell yes I'd vote for that. Not to, would be stupid. Our goal is Ron Paul is President, period. What he can do for the cause of liberty from the pulpit is exponential.

[Rincewind]

Yes, absolutely.

I suppose Romney wouldn't be that bad a choice, in the broadens-the-base sense. I've been saying for a while that Paul's best chance in the general election may be to choose a relatively moderate Republican VP, because it would attract a different type of independent voter than Paul is currently attracting.

[muh_roads]

This is a stupid hypothetical. A more likely scenario is Romney asking Paul to be his VP to try and appease our growing numbers...

If Paul won the nomination why would he pick Romney? lol

[pauladin]

If Paul won the nomination why would he pick Romney? lol

I think this scenario is hypothetical only in a convention-compromise sense. I hear that Reagan didn't want G.H.W. Bush as veep but took him as a compromise. Is that true?

[RDM]

That would mean Romney would be one heart attack or bullet away from president. I would not support that.

This is my reason also why I voted NO.

[Captain Shays]

It's a death sentence for Ron Paul so my answer would be NO

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

The chances may be high that Paul would get into a "plane accident" before his first day in office, then we would have indirectly elected Romney as Pres. For that reason, I answered NO. I need to be okay with whoever the VP is too before casting my vote.

The likes of Romney can't come anywhere near that office with my help.

[milo10]

I am just enough of a cospiratorialist to be concerned about this. But that aside, I'd say yes.

[rideurlightning]

Of course I would.

[shooter_tx]

I would vote for Ron Paul if Hannibal Lecter was filling the Veep slot.

I would vote for Ron Paul if Zombie Jeffrey Dahmer was filling the Veep slot.

The potential for good (w/ Ron as POTUS) outweighs the potential for bad (with Mutt as VPOTUS).


ETA: And I hate (hate hate hate!) Romney.

[Brick-in-the-Wall]

Be careful what you wish for.

I've heard some say Reagan was like Paul but making Bush 41 his VP caused the neo-cons to get into his administration and pull his strings on several issues.

[affa]

do we really need posts about this every day? the establishment is floating this compromise to us now because we're doing so well and are trying to suss out a compromise. why in the world would we put ourselves in a position where the second in line is an establishment hack?

[OrbitzXT]

I voted no. That would be a Jesus/Satan ticket as far as I'm concerned. I know that's a black-and-white view but I just don't want Romney that close to the presidency when we will have a 77 year old man who will be (let's be honest) at risk of assassination.

I agree with this. It's hard to vote without knowing what the alternative is. So if I say no to Ron/Mittens...what's that mean? Someone besides Ron is the nominee? Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have very little in common policy wise, integrity and personality. The only state I think Mittens would help win is Massachusetts, if they even win there. Otherwise I think he's a liability. Sarah Palin I think scared away a lot of independents who were genuinely afraid that if something happened to McCain because of his age we'd be stuck with her. We'd have the same issue here considering Ron Paul is 76. Yes, he's in great shape and amazing health and I hope to God he lives to be 100+ but who knows.

I'm not one of those "Ron Paul or none" guys on this board, I considered myself a Democrat mostly because of social issues and voted for Obama in 2008. If Ron isn't the nominee I will vote for Obama again. But to ultimately answer the question, yes I would vote for Ron Paul with a Mittens as VP over Obama, because even if something God forbid were to happen, a couple years with Ron Paul as president is better than 4 years of anyone else.

[TheDuke]

When Ron is the nominee, the GOP will push very hard to get an establishement guy in as the VP. Probably not Romney.

Over Obama, anytime

[parocks]

Not so fast. Mitt would be one bullet away from the Oval Office... and even if his millions wouldn't take care of that for him, he's personally shot small varmints more than two times before... :eek:

The question isn't "do you prefer Romney"? The question is, if that was the ticket, would you vote for it?

No one here should say "no, I won't vote for Ron Paul because of who the VP is".

My preference for VP would be a solid conservative.

I also think the VP spot should be Rand more than Ron, unless the Presidential nominee really is seen as lacking experience. If the Presidential Nominee was Sarah Palin, Ron Paul should be the VP Nominee. In almost any other case, Rand should be the VP nominee.

[NYgs23]

I'd risk it. It's a better shot at liberty Obama four more years. He'd have to live in a concrete bunker in an "undisclosed location" though, with a taste tester for his food. Though he'd probably have to do that anyway. Along with his entire family.

[parocks]

Be careful what you wish for.

I've heard some say Reagan was like Paul but making Bush 41 his VP caused the neo-cons to get into his administration and pull his strings on several issues.

No one is saying that we want Romney as VP. We would vote for Paul/Anybody. But it's up to Paul to make that VP pick. If there's a brokered convention, deals like that can get struck.

[brushfire]

No - that would defy what Ron Paul is all about. If I wanted a flip flopper, I'd vote Mitt for president.

[affa]

The question isn't "do you prefer Romney"? The question is, if that was the ticket, would you vote for it?

No one here should say "no, I won't vote for Ron Paul because of who the VP is".


No. Everyone here should say 'no'. This push for a Romney/Paul, Paul/Romney and Romney/Rand ticket is NOT coming from us. It is not coming from the campaign. The meme is coming from the establishment itself as it tries to do damage control over losing such massive mindshare to Ron Paul. They are floundering around, trying to figure out how to proceed.

Pushing forward the Paul/Romney meme to us, and trying to see if we'd go for it, is establishment politicking at its best.

If we are to the point that we are seriously discussing a Paul/Romney ticket, then we MUST recognize that we have the power in our hands to allow Ron Paul to choose his own running mate, rather than allowing the Establishment to choose one for him/us. I will not vote for a ticket involving Romney, period.

[jolynna]

I feel dirty. I voted yes.

Romney is the epitome of oiliness and makes my skin crawl, but Kennedy wasn't fond of Johnson.

[Mini-Me]

I feel dirty. I voted yes.

Romney is the epitome of oiliness and makes my skin crawl, but Kennedy wasn't fond of Johnson.

Kennedy was also assassinated, and Johnson became President as a result.

[gb13]

I'd vote for Ron regardless of his VP pick. I just hope he has excellent security if he chooses to give an establishment darling the nod.

[speciallyblend]

yes

[Danny Molina]

Maybe but closer to no. I don't want to see Ron assassinated.

[acptulsa]

I would. Then I would beg Ron Paul to demand that I be hired by the Secret Service and assigned to him. Then I would hope and pray I was paranoid enough at all times.


No - that would defy what Ron Paul is all about. If I wanted a flip flopper, I'd vote Mitt for president.

You act like the veep actually does something.

The vote in the Senate just isn't tied all that often.

[gb13]

No. Everyone here should say 'no'. This push for a Romney/Paul, Paul/Romney and Romney/Rand ticket is NOT coming from us. It is not coming from the campaign. The meme is coming from the establishment itself as it tries to do damage control over losing such massive mindshare to Ron Paul. They are floundering around, trying to figure out how to proceed.

Pushing forward the Paul/Romney meme to us, and trying to see if we'd go for it, is establishment politicking at its best.

If we are to the point that we are seriously discussing a Paul/Romney ticket, then we MUST recognize that we have the power in our hands to allow Ron Paul to choose his own running mate, rather than allowing the Establishment to choose one for him/us. I will not vote for a ticket involving Romney, period.

I don't think you can dismiss such a notion as simply "establishment politicking". Clearly someone such as the OP, who has been on these boards since '07 and has 3,000 posts under their belt, is not likely an establishment hack. This is a genuine question based in pragmatism, even if it's misguided. It would not even be close to the ideal scenario, but it is not out of the realm of possibility.

That said, I do not believe that Ron would ever choose Mitt, but if he did, I would still vote for him. Like I said, I just hope he hires amazing security, if that ends up being the case.

[kuckfeynes]

No. Principle. And even why do this to ourselves? This is about as likely as Iran nuking Israel.

[sailingaway]

Voted "I'd think about it." I blogged about it, (http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2012/01/what-about-this-rand-paul-on-the-romney-ticket.html)and one of the comments made a pretty persuasive case against it:
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2012/01/what-about-this-rand-paul-on-the-romney-ticket.html#comment-6a00d83452719d69e20167607c4099970b

Rand is not the topic, Ron as Pres and Romney as VP is the topic

[Cyberbrain]

No One But Paul, no matter who's VP. But I expect Ron would never do it.

[tremendoustie]

Won't happen -- but I would vote for that ticket.

[affa]

I don't think you can dismiss such a notion as simply "establishment politicking". Clearly someone such as the OP, who has been on these boards since '07 and has 3,000 posts under their belt, is not likely an establishment hack. This is a genuine question based in pragmatism, even if it's misguided. It would not even be close to the ideal scenario, but it is not out of the realm of possibility.

That said, I do not believe that Ron would ever choose Mitt, but if he did, I would still vote for him. Like I said, I just hope he hires amazing security, if that ends up being the case.

No, you misunderstand. I am not saying anyone that posts this question is establishment. I am saying the meme was created by the establishment, and started showing up in various establishment media sources. That is where the meme is coming from, and as memes do, it spreads, and so people here start talking about it. Some here are plants, I'm sure. Others are full on Ron Paul supporters who are sincerely curious.

This is an extremely common, and extremely well known, manipulation tactic. It's often called 'floating an idea'. It's a common method of vetting options on controversial subjects. You have a few outlier articles float an idea, like a Paul/Romney ticket, or a Romney/Rand ticket, and you gauge reception to the idea. It's such a odd concept, that people start talking about it. Wondering about it. Discussing it. It's like a seed; you plant the idea, and watch it spread. And suddenly a ridiculous concept, like Paul actually accepting Romney as VP, become an option on the table, which is the goal of floating an idea. And here we are, discussing the ultimate compromise, putting Romney in second in line, and acting like it's a good thing despite obvious examples in history, like Kennedy, as to why this is an absolutely unacceptable option.

It's really no different than how you spread any meme -- like how articles and comment sections commonly refer to Paul supporters as being rude, or young, or druggies. Common sense and even a bit of reading of comment sections disprove this; it is the anti-Paul commenters that hurl insults, and most Paul respondents write eloquent rebuttals, or simply 'Ron Paul 2012!'. Yet, this meme that we're rude sticks... even in the face of empirical evidence that anyone can find in the comment section to any article.

[CaptainAmerica]

You guys are completely STUPID to history.

JFK >LBJ

thats all I have to say for you dimwits who voted yes.

[Giuliani was there on 911]

absolutely. It's a ticket I'd like to see.

[tennman]

I sure would! Paul could fix a lot of crap before Romney got the coat tail nominee status. Plus Paul could be a mentor to Romney (like Yoda) and could convert him to the ways of the Jedi...I mean liberty.

[Miss Annie]

You guys are completely STUPID to history.

JFK >LBJ

thats all I have to say for you dimwits who voted yes.

THIS! That was the first thing that came to my mind! Who was the last pres that tried to end the fed? Too many similarities in that hypothetical scenario!

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Duh of course

[Xenophage]

Would you vote for Jefferson/Hitler?

[Miss Annie]

Would you vote for Jefferson/Hitler?

Great analogy! :)

[Moo2400]

I would still vote for Ron Paul is Romney was his running mate, but I'd do it with some regrets because you know it wouldn't be long before he's assassinated before he could get a lot done. The best one could hope for in that event is Ron Paul achieving a popularity on the level JFK did, good enough so that his son could surge to the White House easily later on and without an establishment VP to finish what his father started.

[CaptainAmerica]

Would you vote for Jefferson/Hitler?

^Is this one of the few guys who actually sees it for what it really is? WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT

[Sola_Fide]

Logistically, I don't know how it would work.

Romney would have to actually somewhat understand liberty in order to defend Ron's positions in the public realm....and I just don't see that kind of humility coming from Mitt.

[Rincewind]

FWIW, for those of you who are voting no because of speculating on assassination possibilities, you're still essentially saying you'd rather have Obama than Paul - it's not like it's a foregone conclusion he'd be assassinated.

Personally, I'd rather vote for Paul and take the risk that he'll get offed, than just resign myself to 4 more years of Obama.

[Miss Annie]

It's honestly kind of like mixing oil and water. I can't see Dr Paul going that direction. It seems like it would go against everything he believes in. That is NOT the Dr Paul I know and love. Very bizarre speculation.

[parocks]

No. Everyone here should say 'no'. This push for a Romney/Paul, Paul/Romney and Romney/Rand ticket is NOT coming from us. It is not coming from the campaign. The meme is coming from the establishment itself as it tries to do damage control over losing such massive mindshare to Ron Paul. They are floundering around, trying to figure out how to proceed.

Pushing forward the Paul/Romney meme to us, and trying to see if we'd go for it, is establishment politicking at its best.

If we are to the point that we are seriously discussing a Paul/Romney ticket, then we MUST recognize that we have the power in our hands to allow Ron Paul to choose his own running mate, rather than allowing the Establishment to choose one for him/us. I will not vote for a ticket involving Romney, period.

NO ONE BUT PAUL, AND EVEN THEN, MAYBE NOT

[parocks]

I sure would! Paul could fix a lot of crap before Romney got the coat tail nominee status. Plus Paul could be a mentor to Romney (like Yoda) and could convert him to the ways of the Jedi...I mean liberty.

You'd be voting for Ron Paul.

Not Romney.

Ron Paul would be the one who picked Romney.

Are you and anyone else distrusting the judgment of Ron Paul?

It seems that you are.

[69360]

Yes I would, but I would be very worried about Ron's well being. It's a rather large assassination risk.

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

You'd be voting for Ron Paul.

Not Romney.

Ron Paul would be the one who picked Romney.

Are you and anyone else distrusting the judgment of Ron Paul?

It seems that you are.

If anything incapacitates the President from fullfiling his duties, the VP takes over. It happens too. Voters better make sure that they are okay with the VP becoming President as well before they vote.

Romney is a part of the "fear monger, strip away your rights, war propaganda, make the military and corporate welfare system rich" machine.

I wouldn't go near that ticket with 10,000 foot pole, nor, let my love for Paul and his message dupe me into getting Romney into the Presidency if something were to happen to Paul.

[pen_thief]

That would mean Romney would be one heart attack or bullet away from president. I would not support that.

^This

[michaelwise]

This ticket puts a bullseye on Ron Paul's head. It's like an invitation to assassinate Dr Paul and he would be dead the first month he takes office.

[Mini-Me]

FWIW, for those of you who are voting no because of speculating on assassination possibilities, you're still essentially saying you'd rather have Obama than Paul - it's not like it's a foregone conclusion he'd be assassinated.

Personally, I'd rather vote for Paul and take the risk that he'll get offed, than just resign myself to 4 more years of Obama.

This logic is sound. When the election is Paul (Hitler as VP) vs. Stalin (Pol-Pot as VP), and one of the tickets will win, you might as well go with Paul and pray he lives. However, it's an outrageous mistake to consider Romney as a possible VP choice in the first place. Secretary of State, MAYBE, if he were forced to use his charisma to promote Ron Paul's foreign policy. That's the only "deal" that doesn't mark Paul for death.

I agree with affa that we need to stop paying attention to this meme. Ron Paul isn't stupid enough to pick Romney as a VP, and the establishment is floating these questions because it helps them get a better idea of how to play the game against us. I say, screw them. NOBP, and Romney will not be offered VP.

[anaconda]

This scenario really bothers me. This might provide an assassination incentive to some very evil people. Dr. Paul needs a liberty VP. Unless it's some brokered convention deal then I guess we have to accept it.

Update: Oops..sorry..I didn't read the whole thread..the assassination concerns have already been mentioned..

[Muttley]

It wouldn't ever happen, so this is a silly ass post. You guys can't honestly believe that Ron would even ponder for a second of having this assclown in his administration.

[CaptainAmerica]

If you really think a Ron/Romney ticket was worth a vote you don't know history.

Why would you place Ron Paul in immediate danger?You already know who the establishment wants as president.

[TheOnlyJustCause4505]

I cant believe how many of you are voting yes. Ron would never see the WH.

It would never happen anyways.

[CaptainAmerica]

I cant believe how many of you are voting yes. Ron would never see the WH.

It would never happen anyways. They are ignorant to history.We would have an LBJ 2.0

[69360]

It wouldn't ever happen, so this is a silly ass post. You guys can't honestly believe that Ron would even ponder for a second of having this assclown in his administration.

In the event of a brokered convention, he might not have a choice.

Lets face reality here too, Ron and Romney are both deferring to each other regularly and not attacking each other. A deal could happen.

[smartguy911]

Don't feel comfy with Mittens as Vice at all.

[CaptainAmerica]

In the event of a brokered convention, he might not have a choice.

Lets face reality here too, Ron and Romney are both deferring to each other regularly and not attacking each other. A deal could happen. Romney is a chump and he's in deep with Goldman Sachs and the monopoly bankers at the top. Ron will not choose Romney.

[TheOnlyJustCause4505]

Don't feel comfy with Mittens as Vice at all.

I dont feel very comfortable with Paul's safety right now, let alone with Mitt as his VP.

[69360]

Romney is a chump and he's in deep with Goldman Sachs and the monopoly bankers at the top. Ron will not choose Romney.

History doesn't always agree with you.

Reagan chose HW Bush and there are plenty of other examples.

If this goes to the convention, it's entirely possible Ron and mittens will be on the ticket in either order.

[affa]

This is such a patently absurd proposition.

Even if Ron Paul avoids getting assassinated, where does that leave us in 2016? Romney will run for Prez, and we're right back to square one.

No.

It saddens me that some of you are arguing for a Paul/Romney ticket so ardently. Why the hell would we push for that when we can get something so much better?

Repeatedly bringing up this proposition is going to fracture OUR BASE. Divide and conquer, as they say. If we get Paul/Romney, it's because you let it happen, and actually recommended it. Gross.

[MartinVanBuren]

EDIT: No I wouldn't. Ron has agreed to wait until he's won the nomination until he makes his VP pick, right? At that point, you want the best campaigner.

My picks:
Hon. Andrew Napolitano
Sen. Jim DeMint (!!!!!)
Hon. Stephen Breyer
Rep. Dennis Kucinnich

[Bodhi]

Silly poll really, won't bother to vote because there is no way RP would have Romney as his VP.

[MartinVanBuren]

Silly poll really, won't bother to vote because there is no way RP would have Romney as his VP.

Oh wait....This^

[Luieburger]

As long as Ron is the president, I don't care who is VP.