GOP debate

[Viking]

Even the people who want to maintain lower taxes also don't want to cut spending.

Ever heard of the Tea Party?

[Valmy]

So how did Ron Paul do?

[11B4V]

I've said it before - I'll repeat it again:  The US will crumble under the weight of its own internal contradictions.  And that schizophrenic fixation about taxation (and state power behind it) among the American Populus is one of the most glaring of those contradictions; in fact I'd wager it's what will drive their republic under.  Mark my word.

G.

Naw, the american public has a severe case of ADHD. The majority of the masses dont give a shit and are lazy. Sorry your prediction is stupid.

[Neil]

Bachmann said 'unconstitutional individual mandate' a lot.  She's terrible.

[Viking]

So how did Ron Paul do?

not very well, his pro-iran stance probably didn't do him any good. He wasn't comfortable and he was nervous and didn't string together too many coherent sentences, probably trying to say too much in the time allowed.

[Princesca]

The problem with Ron Paul is that his ideas are much better explained in his books. He is not a good orator, plain and simple. His voice gets wavery, which makes him look like he has Parkinsons or something, he talks too fast, and trips over his words. That's why RP adherents in the audience still applaud, because they know his positions from having read them. If I only knew about Ron Paul from watching him, I would have written him off as a fringe candidate, as most people do. Reading his books are what helped me to understand his real message.

His point about Iran is not something that I believe most Americans have the logic skills to understand anymore - like how most people can't understand the difference between 'can' and 'should'. He's basically saying that you can't blame a country for wanting nuclear weapons, not that he's going to be jumping for joy if they do, or that he thinks they SHOULD, or that it would be a good thing. It gives that country "street cred" in the international community that you don't get if you don't have them. So why wouldn't they want them? Of course they do. And where do you draw the line about who gets to have them and who doesn't? And why should we, alone, carry the burden of making that decision? If Israel feels Iran is a threat, let them deal with Iran. If the global community feels Iran is a threat, let us all deal with Iran together. He's just arguing that embargoes don't really work as a means of conflict avoidance. And the US should not be acting solely in this, riding in like some B-movie cowboy to police the world. Those military engagements begun in the Bush years, in tandem with entitlement programs, are a big reason why we're in the financial position we're in. Ron Paul goes a step further to add that, if we didn't have fiat currency, we probably wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq. When a nation has to sacrifice to pay for a war, it's far more likely to be either a) done quickly or b) not entered into at all, because only the most noble causes will inspire that kind of prolonged sacrifice.

I haven't thought out my position on this... so I'm not saying I agree or disagree. But this is his philosophy having read both of his "general platform" books.

Of the candidates, Ron Paul remains my favorite for his proven consistency, his economic foresight, limited government philosophy, and his passion for not involving the US in aggressive wars, but I don't think he's electable, and no one else on that stage interests me at all, so I will probably be going third party again this year if those are my choices. 

[11B4V]

The problem with Ron Paul is that his ideas are much better explained in his books. He is not a good orator, plain and simple.

If by some miracle he is the GOP choice, he will never beat Obama with this critical weakness. Obamanation will crush him.

[11B4V]

Besides, I dont see any of those GOP morons challenging the black messiah.

[Viking]

The problem with Ron Paul is that his ideas are much better explained in his books. He is not a good orator, plain and simple.

If by some miracle he is the GOP choice, he will never beat Obama with this critical weakness. Obamanation will crush him.

To be honest none of these Republicans look likely to even trouble Obama very much.

[Neil]

Those military engagements begun in the Bush years... are a big reason why we're in the financial position we're in.

$1.2 trillion over ten years isn't really significant.

Ron Paul goes a step further to add that, if we didn't have fiat currency, we probably wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq. When a nation has to sacrifice to pay for a war, it's far more likely to be either a) done quickly or b) not entered into at all, because only the most noble causes will inspire that kind of prolonged sacrifice.

So wait...  He's putting forward a restricting freedom of action as a positive for the gold standard?  And people listen to this guy?

[Valmy]

So wait...  He's putting forward a restricting freedom of action as a positive for the gold standard?  And people listen to this guy?

In the sense that is forces the government to be more accountable and responsible.  People who like Ron Paul do think that is a positive.

[Warspite]

I don't see how tying your money supply to the output of a few mines in South Africa is making government accountable and responsible.

[Eddie Teach]

To be honest none of these Republicans look likely to even trouble Obama very much.

None of them can beat him. The economy can.

[Valmy]

I don't see how tying your money supply to the output of a few mines in South Africa is making government accountable and responsible.

I think it is the idea that tying the money to something makes governments accountable.

[DGuller]

It ties well to the idea of libertardians that the government that governs best is the government that is bound, gagged, and blindfolded.