Ron Paul: I Have Not Decided If I'll vote Romney

[twomp]

Ron Paul, who is still technically running for the Republican nomination, says he has not decided whether or not he'll vote for Mitt Romney.

"I have not made a decision," Paul told Fox Business Network's Liz Claman and David Asman.

Yet another Yahoo article, they must be having a slow news day. Any Ron Paul news is good for me so not complaining here.

http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-not-decided-ill-vote-romney-220843599--abc-news-politics.html

[Agorism]

Na he won't vote for Romney. He has to stay neutral until the convention though.

[BuddyRey]

C'mon Ron, just tell 'em Hell no!

[RickyJ]

I guess it depends on who the VP is going to be. If he or his son is the VP then he will probably vote for him, if not then he won't.

[liveandletlive]

I guess it depends on who the VP is going to be. If he or his son is the VP then he will probably vote for him, if not then he won't.

agree, it would kill him among supporters, but blood is thicker than water

[sailingaway]

agree, it would kill him among supporters, but blood is thicker than water

I'd vote for Ron if Ron were VP but that doesn't apply to Rand. Ron has a 30 year record I feel I'd be an idiot not to want in front of a mic.

Ron's vote is Ron's business, and they should quit bugging him about it. Endorsements are public, votes are private.

[Lightweis]

Well if he says no, they will probably try to stop him from speaking at the convention!

[sailingaway]

Well if he says no, they will probably try to stop him from speaking at the convention!

there might actually be something about it in the rules. A lot of party rules of various states say you have to agree to vote for the nominee to be a delegate, I wouldn't put it past the RNC not to have something in there. I DO know if he endorses anyone of any other party he can't be put into nomination, at least, I am pretty sure I read that in the rules, right along with not being put into nomination if he 'participates in the nomination of any other party'.... can't imagine whom they might have been thinking of when they added that one...

[Brett85]

Well if he says no, they will probably try to stop him from speaking at the convention!

They won't let him speak at the convention unless he actually pledges to support the GOP nominee before then.

[erowe1]

The object is to draw concessions out of Romney. You don't do that by saying that nothing he could do would ever win over your support.

[sailingaway]

They won't let him speak at the convention unless he actually pledges to support the GOP nominee before then.

Despite the media meme, Ron has AT LEAST the majority of 5 states: NV, LA, IA, ME and MN. Romney may cheat to peel off delegates somewhere, but as of now, Ron has a RIGHT to speak if his states nominate him from the floor, as I see it.

[Lightweis]

I get to sit down with Ron Paul on Tuesday. I will ask him what he wants us to do!

[sailingaway]

I get to sit down with Ron Paul on Tuesday. I will ask him what he wants us to do!

I predict what he will say:

"People should do whatever they want to do!"

However, that's terrific you get to sit down with Ron. Is it that Virginia fundraiser for Bills?

[MelissaCato]

Ron Paul 2012 !!

[romancito]

Romney is going to say that Ron Paul is in the habit of postponing simple straightforward decisions.

[ClydeCoulter]

Despite the media meme, Ron has AT LEAST the majority of 5 states: NV, LA, IA, ME and MN. Romney may cheat to peel off delegates somewhere, but as of now, Ron has a RIGHT to speak if his states nominate him from the floor, as I see it.

Hmmm, I'm seeing the same thing :)

[MJU1983]

Maybe he should sit down with Sean Hannity?


LOL

[TheTexan]

I won't rule it out, but I have no plans on voting for Romney at this time

[iamse7en]

I'd vote for Ron if Ron were VP but that doesn't apply to Rand. Ron has a 30 year record I feel I'd be an idiot not to want in front of a mic.

I'm with you on this... Ron as VP is the ONLY way I'd vote for Romney.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Paul made it clear he wouldn't be endorsing Romney.


While Paul is still a candidate, he announced in May that he would stop campaigning in new states, and his supporters have fallen short of reaching the delegate threshold necessary to make him eligible for the GOP presidential nomination at the party's national convention in Tampa...

This is obviously a bullshit story uninterested in the truth.

[alucard13mmfmj]

the article is still on yahoo front page. i saw it late last night/early morning.

weird.

[jolynna]

If Ron Paul believes in what he has been preaching his whole career, voting for Romney shouldn't even be a consideration.

imo

[sailingaway]

If Ron Paul believes in what he has been preaching his whole career, voting for Romney shouldn't even be a consideration.

imo

He doesn't speak in absolutes. He never said he wouldn't go third party, either.

[parocks]

The object is to draw concessions out of Romney. You don't do that by saying that nothing he could do would ever win over your support.

The same is true with Ron Paul supporters. If Ron Paul supporters say that they won't vote for Romney, then Romney won't give Ron Paul supporters anything.

[erowe1]

If Ron Paul believes in what he has been preaching his whole career, voting for Romney shouldn't even be a consideration.

imo

What's the point of something not being a consideration? Even if something would be wrong to do, that doesn't make the mere considering of it wrong.

[jclay2]

The same is true with Ron Paul supporters. If Ron Paul supporters say that they won't vote for Romney, then Romney won't give Ron Paul supporters anything.

Why on earth would you want to do a deal with the very people that have brought this country down for the last 100 years? Do you realize, any deal will be broken and make paul supporters look like fools once the smoke clears. If you dance with the devil, don't come crying when you get burned.

I for one am very saddened by the whole compromise line that many in the movement have taken to. No good will come from it.

[erowe1]

Why on earth would you want to do a deal with the very people that have brought this country down for the last 100 years? Do you realize, any deal will be broken and make paul supporters look like fools once the smoke clears. If you dance with the devil, don't come crying when you get burned.

I for one am very saddened by the whole compromise line that many in the movement have taken to. No good will come from it.

Who said anything about a deal or compromising anything?

[dannno]

The object is to draw concessions out of Romney. You don't do that by saying that nothing he could do would ever win over your support.

+rep

[jolynna]

What's the point of something not being a consideration? Even if something would be wrong to do, that doesn't make the mere considering of it wrong.

EVEN "considering" exterminating other human beings without cause is, in my opinion, REALLY, REALLY wrong. What Obama has done & Romney proposes doing are no different than Hitler sending people to the "showers".

Over a million Iraqis and thousands of "our own" were SLAUGHTERED in Iraq. FOR NO REASON. NONE. We are still doing it in Afghanistan to prop up the corrupt and evil Karzai (for strategical position, oil contracts and oil lines and corporate interests). We are doing it in Yemen & Pakistan. American soldiers with missing arms and legs are being evacuated from military "pods" in Africa where "locals" are becoming "collateral damage" because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. All of the PROCEEDING, Romney not only EMBRACES, he has critiqued Obama for being such a SISSY.

Romney also not only STARTED the spy centers that have spread out all over the U.S., he OWNS spy centers. He's made no bones about wanting to turn the U.S. into MORE of a police state...read Romney's White Papers which advocates taking away people's legal right to privacy, their homes, property, trials and gives the government the authority to detain anyone forever.

YES...considering what Ron Paul has been preaching, Ron Paul shouldn't have to give even a SECOND of consideration to whether or not to vote for Mitt Romney. Any more than Ron Paul would consider voting for Obama.

His skin should be crawling and he should be ill over even the thought.

In my opinion.

(P.S. Do a search here under my user name if you doubt any of the accusations I've made against Romney. I've posted links here to Romney's "White Pages", a racist blueprint to how Romney intends for America to dominate the world. And to articles from Romney's own op-eds and to the New York Times and Wall Street Journal and Washington Post verifying Romney's advocacy toward "spying", his eavesdropping & warrantless searches, executive orders and power-grabbing while governor of Massachusetts and Romney's founding and owning "spy centers". )

[NIU Students for Liberty]

What is there to consider (for Paul and especially his supporters) when we know full well what a Romney administration would do this country?

[sailingaway]

What is there to consider (for Paul and especially his supporters) when we know full well what a Romney administration would do this country?

Why should Ron show his hand before it is most strategically optimal to do so?

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Why should Ron show his hand before it is most strategically optimal to do so?

What does he realistically expect to come out of this? I know where you stand on the VP slot (I disagree with your position) but other than that, Romney will not come through on anything that Paul is pushing for (ending the wars, audit the Fed, civil liberties, etc).

[sailingaway]

Ron has a bunch of delegates going up before credentials committee.

I don't know that is it, but I also know I don't know everything.

I seriously doubt it would change his vote, but not committing might have him in a better place than committing for all I know.

[jolynna]

And NOBODY can say Romney is a fiscal conservative either. He set records for spending grabbing for federal dollars while governor of Massachusetts. And bragged about how he did it while in charge of the Olympics.

Romney ALSO intends to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR MORE on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION, Obama has budgeted for 2013.

Why is there for Ron Paul to "think about" when Romney has SAID the above?

My own opinion.

[sailingaway]

And NOBODY can say Romney is a fiscal conservative either. He set records for spending grabbing for federal dollars while governor of Massachusetts. And bragged about how he did it while in charge of the Olympics.

Romney ALSO intends to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR MORE on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION, Obama has budgeted for 2013.

Why is there for Ron Paul to "think about" when Romney has SAID the above?

My own opinion.

There might be consequences to coming out against Romney. He might want to save it for bigger impact at a later date with more media presence. Whatever.

[erowe1]

EVEN "considering" exterminating other human beings without cause is, in my opinion, REALLY, REALLY wrong.

Even if the result of your considerations is that you decide not to do it because it would be wrong?

Why do you think that?

[erowe1]

What is there to consider (for Paul and especially his supporters) when we know full well what a Romney administration would do this country?

How do you know what a Romney administration would do if you've never given it any consideration?

[jolynna]

But, although the TRILLION EXTRA DOLLARS per year, for foreign adventurism and domestic spying is bad, as I have said in post after post after post, it is the part about "exterminating other human beings" for NO CAUSE where anyone and everyone HAS TO draw the line.

I feel like one of the German townspeople watching the Jews being led to the camps. The direction Obama and Romney are taking us is WRONG. It is unacceptable. It is immoral. We should be objecting to what BOTH of these men are proposing with all that we have. NOT talking about which of them is worse.

In my opinion.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

How do you know what a Romney administration would do if you've never given it any consideration?

I can look at his track record and the fact that he is lining up former Bush henchmen to work in his administration.

[erowe1]

And NOBODY can say Romney is a fiscal conservative either. He set records for spending grabbing for federal dollars while governor of Massachusetts. And bragged about how he did it while in charge of the Olympics.

Romney ALSO intends to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR MORE on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION, Obama has budgeted for 2013.

Why is there for Ron Paul to "think about" when Romney has SAID the above?

My own opinion.

It's not just about thinking about anything. It's also about putting Romney in the position of having to care what we think.

I plan not to vote for Romney. But I don't see any point in saying 4 months ahead of time that there are no circumstances in which I would and nothing he could do to change my mind.

[Unknown.User]

..

[erowe1]

I can look at his track record and the fact that he is lining up former Bush henchmen to work in his administration.

What?!

How dare you think about Romney's track record and the fact that he's lining up former Bush henchmen! He doesn't warrant that consideration from you!

[erowe1]

Would have been a great opportunity for Ron to mention:

1. Not Opposed To Raising Federal Gas Tax To Force Auto Markets Hand Towards Hybrids.
(The Boston Globe , 1/6/03)
2. Massively Expanded Biometric Databases While Governor and Supports A National ID Card
(The Boston Globe , 11/12/03)
3. Supports The Bombing of Iran and Drone Strikes WHILE Acknowledging That The Prospect of War HURTS THE ECONOMY
(Times-Union, Feb 25th, 2003)
4. Supports The Use of Waterboarding and Other Questionable Interrogation Techniques That John McCain said were Inhumane
(East Valley Tribune, 11/14/06)
5. Supported Massive Hikes on Gun Fees While Governor Viewing It As An Acceptable Way To Balance The Budget
(Telegram & Gazette, 7/29/03)

Why would it have been a great opportunity to mention those things?

[NIU Students for Liberty]

What?!

How dare you think about Romney's track record and the fact that he's lining up former Bush henchmen! He doesn't warrant that consideration from you!

Consideration for voting for him is what I was referring to.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Why would it have been a great opportunity to mention those things?

Perhaps to rally delegates to nominate Paul on the floor of the convention so he can get his speech that Romney is already denying.

[erowe1]

Consideration for voting for him is what I was referring to.

Me too. I assumed you mention those things because they are reasons not to vote for him.

[erowe1]

Perhaps to rally delegates to nominate Paul on the floor of the convention so he can get his speech that Romney is already denying.

I don't know if RP wants his delegates to do that or not. But if he does, he has better ways of communicating that to them than on national TV.

[Unknown.User]

..

[erowe1]

So that it becomes clear he should not be the republican nominee.
It's too late for that. The primaries are all over.

[Unknown.User]

..

[jolynna]

How do you know what a Romney administration would do if you've never given it any consideration?

Maybe because Romney has been writing editorials for over a decade justifying torture and doing away with liberties. And because he wrote a 42 page paper that is an outline for American domination over the world (for "their" own good...the foreign masses aren't "exceptional"), preventive war (gotta get Iran before they get us) and turning the U.S. into a police state.

Plus hiring a "torture expert", Cofer Black, as an adviser, says everything.

Just my opinion.

[jolynna]

Romney ALSO said he was going to spend almost a TRILLION DOLLARS MORE a year on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION Obama has budgeted for 2012 because Obama doesn't believe in "military strength" enough.

Romney, himself, said it. It is in his paper. He's on lots of videos saying it. Guess he is proud of how he is going to spend ALL of the $2.7 dollars the U.S. nets annually in federal inome taxes.

Just my opinion.

[sailingaway]

I don't see anyone arguing anyone should vote for Romney. Some of us just don't think Ron should necessarily jump to their whistle when asked.

[erowe1]

And NOBODY can say Romney is a fiscal conservative either. He set records for spending grabbing for federal dollars while governor of Massachusetts. And bragged about how he did it while in charge of the Olympics.

Romney ALSO intends to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR MORE on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION, Obama has budgeted for 2013.

Why is there for Ron Paul to "think about" when Romney has SAID the above?

My own opinion.


Maybe because Romney has been writing editorials for over a decade justifying torture and doing away with liberties. And because he wrote a 42 page paper that is an outline for American domination over the world (for "their" own good...the foreign masses aren't "exceptional"), preventive war (gotta get Iran before they get us) and turning the U.S. into a police state.

Plus hiring a "torture expert", Cofer Black, as an adviser, says everything.

Just my opinion.


Romney ALSO said he was going to spend almost a TRILLION DOLLARS MORE a year on foreign adventurism and domestic spying than the $1.7 TRILLION Obama was spending because Obama didn't believe in "exceptionalism".

Romney, himself, said it. It is in his paper. He's on lots of videos saying it. Guess he is proud of how he is going to spend ALL of the $2.7 dollars the U.S. nets in federal inome taxes. Don't know what we are going to do about infastructure. But the military industrial complex will be able to make LOTS of weapons to sell to our enemies.

Just my opinion.

I had to go back and reread these to make sure you weren't copying and pasting yourself.

There's no need to make the case against Romney. I don't see anybody here saying to vote for him.

I just don't understand the mindset behind saying that's it's not good enough for Ron Paul simply not to support Romney, but that he also has to come out and make some kind of absolute statement that under no circumstances would he ever support Romney no matter what he did. What could he possibly accomplish by saying that?

[jolynna]

Even if the result of your considerations is that you decide not to do it because it would be wrong?

Why do you think that?

I don't have to think about whether or not exterminating people without cause is wrong. Ever.

I know with every fiber of my being it is.

[jolynna]

I don't think there is MUCH OF ANYTHING, Romney has to offer Ron Paul that would be worth Ron Paul sacrificing his integrity for.

As far as I'm concerned anything that hints that Romney "isn't that bad" is lying.

To LIE, for a 15 minute speech?

If Santorum had won, would people be saying Ron Paul should hold back on saying he wouldn't vote for Santorum? Would people be suggesting Rand should be Santorum's VP?

Ron Paul wasn't afraid to NOT endorse McCain. He wasn't afraid to say he wasn't voting for McCain.

Telling the truth doesn't solve every problem, but, it is a start.

In my opinion.

[sailingaway]

I don't think there is MUCH OF ANYTHING, Romney has to offer Ron Paul that would be worth Ron Paul sacrificing his integrity for.

As far as I'm concerned anything that hints that Romney "isn't that bad" is lying.

To LIE, for a 15 minute speech?

If Santorum had won, would people be saying Ron Paul should hold back on saying he wouldn't vote for Santorum? Would people be suggesting Rand should be Santorum's VP?

Ron Paul wasn't afraid to NOT endorse McCain. He wasn't afraid to say he wasn't voting for McCain.

Telling the truth doesn't solve every problem, but, it is a start.

In my opinion.

Picking your own time to say something isn't a crime.

[jolynna]

Picking your own time to say something isn't a crime.

IF, Ron Paul in any way hints that Romney isn't that bad, I think he is lying.

A 15 minute speech that contains appeasement (and/or reconciliation) would turn my stomach.

The Ron Paul that gave the speeches that won me over, can't "join-up" or even appear to "join-up" with a "wanna-be" war criminal and builder of a police state.

Just saying. And, as always, my opinion.

[sailingaway]

IF, Ron Paul in any way hints that Romney isn't that bad, I think he is lying.

A 15 minute speech that contains appeasement would turn my stomach.

Just saying.

Has Ron ever done that? He'll say he's a family man, that they get along, but that they have nothing in common in policy. He has said there MIGHT be some marginal difference in taxes between Romney and Obama but that's about it.

Why do you think he would change?

Don't you get it that if Ron were willing to put in any appeasement he wouldn't have a 15 minute limit? THAT would get prime time. It is because he is insisting on HIS UNEDITED speech that the issues arise.

[erowe1]

If Santorum had won, would people be saying Ron Paul should hold back on saying he wouldn't vote for Santorum? Would people be suggesting Rand should be Santorum's VP?

Of course. Why would we not say those things?

[erowe1]

I don't think there is MUCH OF ANYTHING, Romney has to offer Ron Paul that would be worth Ron Paul sacrificing his integrity for.

1) Why did you include the words "much of"?
2) Who said anything about Ron Paul sacrificing his integrity?

[TheTexan]

Not that any of this is in the realm of possibility in the first place, but simply being on the ticket as VP by itself is not a sacrifice of integrity.

[pacelli]

Quit splitting hairs.

Ron is the commander in chief. Ron says, I follow.

Pretty simple. Delegates???? Stand up when he tells you to do so.

The man gets his fucking speech without any bullshit from the neocon/Obamney-camp.

Period.

[Txrose4ever]

There might be consequences to coming out against Romney. He might want to save it for bigger impact at a later date with more media presence. Whatever.

It keeps it more interesting for him to withhold his position on this. I know he has indicated he has no interest in running third party....... I hope he does. He has not definitely ruled it out either. My guess is, if he doesn't run Independent, he will endorse Gary Johnson.

[puppetmaster]

I believe that he will be voting for the nominee.....and that will not be mittens

[jolynna]

1) Why did you include the words "much of"?
2) Who said anything about Ron Paul sacrificing his integrity?

Doing anything to cause someone to cast a vote for Romney, considering that Romney is a "wanna-be" war criminal and and endorses turning the U.S. into a police state (even OWNING "spy centers") is a sacrifice of integrity.

Think of all the veterans and active duty military (who put themselves at risk) who gave their time and money because they have SEEN FOR THEMSELVES how wrong it is to OCCUPY other countries...what does it say to them if Ron Paul gives ANY hint of a nod of approval in Romney's direction?

In my opinion.

[sailingaway]

Ron hasn't. Why do you think he will?

[TheTexan]

Doing anything to cause someone to cast a vote for Romney

Pointing out the infinite failures of Obama causes people to cast a vote for Romney, should we not do that either?

People are responsible for their own actions. It's not Ron's fault if people would vote for Romney solely because they share a ticket

[jolynna]

What does it say to the mother of a fallen soldier, a soldier that was slaughtered away from his home in a foreign country, FOR NO GOOD REASON, if Ron Paul's we're all "on the same team" kind of speech gets Romney an extra VOTE?

I am NOT going to encourage ANYONE to be a part of ANYTHING that leads to MORE senseless and needless deaths.

As someone here said a day ago, "You lie down with dogs. You get fleas." Romney and his crowd are crawling with cooties. No good can come from ANY association with them.

In my opinion.

[TheTexan]

if Ron Paul's we're all "on the same team" kind of speech gets Romney an extra VOTE?

What are you talking about I'm just talking about sharing a ticket.

In the infinitely improbable scenario Ron was offered VP, and did accept, he'd probably spend as much time pointing out Romney's failures as Obama... and this is exactly why Romney would never offer it to him....

[jolynna]

What are you talking about I'm just talking about sharing a ticket.

In the infinitely improbable scenario Ron was offered VP, and did accept, he'd probably spend as much time pointing out Romney's failures as Obama... and this is exactly why Romney would never offer it to him....

Being on the SAME ticket as Romney MIGHT get Romney some EXTRA VOTES.

I DON'T want Ron Paul to help Romney get votes ANY MORE than I want Ron Paul to HELP OBAMA GET VOTES.

I don't care if there ARE NO OTHER CHOICES. I refuse to be a part of the senseless murder of "our own" OR exterminating people who have DONE US NO HARM and with whom we are NOT AT WAR. And since Obama AND Romney have told us IN ADVANCE that that is what they intend to DO...voting for those men is becoming an accomplice.

If I were in Germany during W.W.II, I HOPE I'd be hiding Jews, not turning them in for some "good citizen" badge. I hope that I wouldn't have voted for Hitler because everybody was saying if I didn't Germany would be taken over by Communism. Yep...back then people voted for Hitler because Hitler was raising the nasty spector of communism and socialism. Sound familiar???

Obama, Bush, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Poi, Ismail Enver ALL are (in my opinion) war criminals. Yet, Romney says Obama is TOO WIMPY and NOT TOUGH ENOUGH ON Muslims...Never mind that Obama has killed LOTS AND LOTS OF MUSLIMS...and the Arabs voted Obama the MOST HATED AMERICAn EVER...EVEN MORE HATED THAN BUSH. Romney has spent the past decade writing about how he is going to expand the secret prisons, the virtues of torture and he's also MADE MONEY selling and building spy centers...(kind of like Chertoff with his TSA machines. Fearmongering and the "War on Terror" has been great for anyone partnering with domestic spy and weaponry corporate investors.)

Considering "what" Romney is, being on the same ticket with him or garnishing a single vote for Romney should make anyone's skin crawl.

In my opinion.

[sailingaway]

Well, having Ron Paul in office critiquing Romney's policies and resigning with media coverage if Romney invades Iran is worth a few votes imho. I think that would be great, and Obama and Romney are equally bad, so I'd vote for Ron.

But I completely understand your thinking. I just don't want Ron to retire with no one nearly as good on the horizon, imho.

It isn't going to happen, though. We all know Romney, or at least the money behind Romney, would rather have Romney lose. Obama gives them what they want too.

[Liberty74]

There is something going on between Ron and Romney as I have always stated. It started with Ron never attacking Mitt once during 21 debates yet attacked Newt in lowa knocking him out there as well as going after Santorum a few times near the end for the sucker punches. Hence, Santorum's belief there is a deal.

If Ron doesn't know by now if he is voting for Romney, he is holding out for good news whatever that might be to say YES.

[sailingaway]

There is something going on between Ron and Romney as I have always stated. It started with Ron never attacking Mitt once during 21 debates yet attacked Newt in lowa knocking him out there as well as going after Santorum a few times near the end for the sucker punches. Hence, Santorum's belief there is a deal.

If Ron doesn't know by now if he is voting for Romney, he is holding out for good news whatever that might be to say YES.

I disagree with you on the first part and hope you are wrong on the second. I think people in the campaign and Rand want him to endorse Romney. I sure don't.

[trey4sports]

I disagree with you on the first part and hope you are wrong on the second. I think people in the campaign and Rand want him to endorse Romney. I sure don't.

AMEN to that! I genuinely don't think there is a deal but i also am sure Rand has been asking him to endorse. Rand knows (at least he thinks he knows) that if Ron endorses then that will make his life a lot easier in '16.

[sailingaway]

AMEN to that! I genuinely don't think there is a deal but i also am sure Rand has been asking him to endorse. Rand knows (at least he thinks he knows) that if Ron endorses then that will make his life a lot easier in '16.

He's wrong. It will just mean there won't be much movement left by 2016, imho.

At least not in the sense that Rand can tap into it.

We are drawn to proven adherence to principles as moths to a flame and if you turn the light off....

[Veteran Citizen]

Time will tell. Wait for it before you get wound up about it. Speculation is just speculation.