Paul has been elected to federal office many times. There is no question he can win a federal election. Palin has never won a federal election.
Uh, the numbers I’ve seen state that the Medicare fund covering hospitalization costs should be solvent until 2017. And Social Security is expected to be solvent until 2037. Costs will need to be cut and benefits reduced or delayed to keep these programs solvent. But it’s silly to suggest that we’ve got to come with 107 trillion dollars, or zillion quadloos or whatever to maintain them. And voters will not conclude that eliminating these programs is the solution.
Here’s my version of the Paulist Timeline, which assumes the first two elements of Galileo’s March To The Throne come true:
-
Rand wins May 18.
-
Ron wins VVS straw poll September 19.
-
Rand loses in November.
-
Despite winning his own race, Ron Paul’s presidential poll numbers decline because voters confuse him with Rand and conclude he’s finished with politics.
-
Ron and the other G.O.P. candidates raise money.
-
More bizarre statements by Ron are unearthed; supporters claim media plot.
-
Ron comes in third in a small state 2012 primary; supporters declare a steamroller effect.
-
Ron winds up with an average of 4% of the popular vote in the primaries. To the consternation of his supporters, the G.O.P. convention picks someone else as its nominee.
-
Obama is re-elected.
-
The Ron Paul 2016 campaign begins fundraising; sets sights on Poweshiek County Fair Straw Poll.
-
Paul supporters declare inevitable victory.
And to jrodefeld - I think it’s nice that you’re up on the Federalist Papers and Constitution and all. Acting as if your candidate is specifically named in these documents as the savior of America strikes me as a pathetic strategy. The activists who go on and on about the Foundations Of Liberty tend in my experience to be far right, Libertarian, separatist, racist (or all of these simultaneously) and to go in for camouflage gear and End Times theology. It’s not a very good basis on which to win majority popular support.
Building a true third party means hard work. There’s no alternative candidate in sight who’ll make one spring into being and then sweep to victory.
Sarah Palin got more votes in her 2006 election than Ron Paul got in his 2008 election.
BOOYA!!!
Really. Yet oddly enough, here I am using my First Amendment right to speak my mind on the Internet without a government censor waiting to pounce on me.
More importantly; the “true meaning of the Constitution” isn’t a synonym for “agrees with Galileo Galilei”.
In what ways, exactly?
Nonsense as far as the first point; whether you like it or not the Constitution is still taken seriously. As for the founding fathers, they are 200 year dead genocidal slaverowners; I certainly hope their opinions don’t predict how we behave. Among other things, Obama wouldn’t be allowed to vote, much less be President; and would quite possibly be a slave.
He’s won elections in individual districts in Texas. He gets around 100,000 votes in each general election. That’s pretty similar to the number of people who voted for her in 2006 in Alaska, as Ravenman said. In 2008 she was part of a presidential ticket that got almost 60 million votes, and for a lot of people, she was the main attraction. Do you not see the difference in scale there? 60 million vs. 100,000? She doesn’t have to introduce or explain herself to any voter in the country. That is a huge advantage. Few people know who Ron Paul is, and a lot of those who do are under the impression he’s got some weird ideas and a cult of people following him online. She does have to prove to voters that she isn’t a total moron, which is still a significant task. And I don’t think she’ll be able to do it, because she is a total moron. But since she has the name recognition, inspires passion in a lot of people and can raise the money, she’ll have a chance to try.
Dude, it’s clear that Palin sucks as a candidate. But just because Palin sucks that doesn’t mean Paul doesn’t also suck. Both can suck at the same time.
The Ron Paul/Sarah Palin candidacy of 2012! It’s sucktastic!!
Palin is spending money like a drunken sailor and doesn’t make as much as Paul. Show me some hard facts. Her PAC is raising less than expected because the big GOP donors are not on board.
Romney has a leveraged position in Clear Channel Radio, which may be going bankrupt. Even without that, Paul can raise more money than Romney.
If Rand doesn’t win, you are right, Ron won’t win, and won’t even run.
I find myself getting sidetracked every time there is a mention of Rand. I think, Rand Rover is running for office?!? 
The Founding Fathers never sold whites off to slavery in Africa, unlike the black warlords of Africa who sold their own people to Europeans. So if you are going to play the race card, it won’t work.
Palin did get an entire state to vote in favor of her when she won the governorship of Alaska. Ron Paul’s has never been successful on anything outside the 22nd/14th district in Texas. When he tried for a state-wide run for a senate seat he lost in the primary. I’m not sure how you can extrapolate that into potential for success on a national level when the only time he reached outside his district he was shot down.
If Rand can win, Ron can win.
:o
Of course not, it’s a synonym for “agrees with Ron Paul”. Duh.
I see. Buying someone of a different race is much better than selling someone of your own race.
Which Ron Paul newsletter can this gem of libertarian thought be found in?
He’s not playing the race card. He’s playing the “Founding Fathers weren’t right about a lot of things” card.
Tell me why I shouldn’t believe that Randal Paul’s U.S. Senate race will have absolutely no bearing on an attempt by Ronald Paul to become president.
The Africans sold their own people into slavery.
Well, Paul is the, “only person able to speak intelligently about the Constitution.”
You’d think in that case he’d make a better Supreme Court Justice than president. Those bums on the bench have been doing nothing but purposefully not following the Constitution this entire time. Just because they hate America. And freedom. And probably apple pie.
So we have gone from the OP of “Best candidate” to it’s within the realm of theoretical possibility? Just because anyone can have the job doesn’t mean anyone should have the job, you know?
The Founding Fathers opposed slavery, they banned it in the Northwest territory.
Okay, so we shouldn’t ask any slave-dealing Africans from the 18th century to interpret our Constitution. Have we handled that matter then?