What Will Happen If Ron Paul Wins?

[Krieglord]

I havent really been following the USA political scene so im not exactly sure of Ron Pauls policies but im just wondering what exactly would happen if he were to win the presidency?

Please no biased answers

[Armenum]

Israeli and Jewish lobbies would be out of work

[panzer 4]

well i thought he wanted to severely limit the power of the banks... something which has not been tried since JFK

[Muizer]

well i thought he wanted to severely limit the power of the banks... something which has not been tried since JFK

I don't see how a libertarian would go about that tbh. What's to stand against corporate power, if not the government?

[Fernandez_1492]

well i thought he wanted to severely limit the power of the banks... something which has not been tried since JFK

And what happened to JFK? He was a.threat to the corruption. Eisenhouer and jfk both warned us about politicians. Ron Paul is also a threat to the establishment.he doesnt play along to get aling. He can not be corputed, he doesnt care what pople think of him, he hasnt cared since he became a congress man. very consistent and honet man.

[Enemy of the State]

[xcorps]

He can't win Krieglord. He can't even win the nomination. IF he somehow managed to win the GOP nomination, Obama would smash him.

[Enemy of the State]

That's not what the polls say. He has an appeal to independents and progressives Obama needs to win.

[Nevins]

That's not what the polls say. He has an appeal to independents and progressives Obama needs to win.

What polls are you referring to? Paul is performing fairly well in Iowa, but that is an anomaly. He is behind Romney in every other state, and has roughly half his support in the RCP polling average at the national level. Take into account that his numbers have been more or less constant for months now, its still unlikely that he will experience the kind of upswing that he needs to win. The moderate social conservative vote has been trying to find someone besides Romney to elect, hence the popularity spikes of Bachmann, Cain and now Gingrich. If conservatives truly looked at Paul as a viable alternative to Romney, you would think that he would have been able to capitalize on the Cain implosion. He didn't.

From an article on the Washington Times:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Yet Mr. Paul is also an ideologue. This is his fatal weakness. Ideology trumps reality. He denies that Iran is bent on getting the bomb. In fact, he often sounds like Tehran’s public-relations agent, defending the mullahs’ quest to acquire nuclear weapons. He refuses to recognize the existence of radical Islam and the mortal threat it poses to the West. He lionizes anti-American, anti-war websites such as the odious WikiLeaks. He will not stand up to China’s predatory trade practices, blindly adhering to free-trade nostrums. His support for homosexual rights and the legalization of drugs, including cocaine and heroine, represents an assault upon traditional America. His libertine libertarianism would lead to a more permissive society and widespread drug use, especially among youth. Indeed, Mr. Paul appeals to many young voters: He combines the principles of Steve Jobs with Charlie Sheen, the economic individualist and the moral hedonist.

Mr. Paul’s anarcho-capitalism is too radical and too naive and deviates too much from Reaganite conservatism to capture the GOP nomination. Yet he has the potential to command 10 percent of the electorate - not enough to win, but enough to be a spoiler. He repeatedly has refused to shut the door on a possible third-party run. In 1988, he was the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee. The party would take him back in a heartbeat.

Paul has been able to hang out on the periphery so far. If he was to ever have a 1 on 1 debate with Obama all of this would come to the forefront, and its not what American conservatives want to hear. Not to mention that Obama would tear him apart when it comes to FP.

[molonthegreat]

Paul has been able to hang out on the periphery so far. If he was to ever have a 1 on 1 debate with Obama all of this would come to the forefront, and its not what American conservatives want to hear. Not to mention that Obama would tear him apart when it comes to FP.

Really? It seems that most conservatives in the US would most for almost anyone to get rid off Obama and as for the foreign policy I can't agree that Obama would tear him apart since there are many Americans that are tired of the wars, warmongering and constant interventionism. As for what would happen if Ron Paul wins America would get a much better foreign policy that wouldn't alienate a large part of the world but for his internal policies he would have some trouble getting his ideas through.

[YuriVII]

If Ron Paul wins the Presidency he will be assassinated.

[Nevins]

Really? It seems that most conservatives in the US would most for almost anyone to get rid off Obama

I'm a conservative in America and I would vote for Obama before I voted for Paul. My father, far more to the right of me, just wouldn't vote at all. I'd have to dig more into demographics to see national trends.

and as for the foreign policy I can't agree that Obama would tear him apart since there are many Americans that are tired of the wars, warmongering and constant interventionism.

Thats not what polls say, and I can't imagine that the Americans who support a lesser role of America want the radical change that Paul is staunchly in favor of. Even independents favor a leading/major role for the US at 62%. Additionally, 6 in 10 Americans view Iran as a critical threat (with only 8 percent saying not important) and Ron Paul's answer is going to be don't worry about it? How is that going to fly? Paul's weakness is that he is not saying "we should invade less people" which is what Americans could get behind, he is saying "lets withdraw from everywhere". Thats going to get spun by the Obama campaign real hard.

As for what would happen if Ron Paul wins America would get a much better foreign policy that wouldn't alienate a large part of the world but for his internal policies he would have some trouble getting his ideas through.

Incredibly debatable. There is a difference between a more pragmatic FP and Ron's extremism.

If Ron Paul wins the Presidency he will be assassinated.

No, he won't.

[Thorn777]

Really? It seems that most conservatives in the US would most for almost anyone to get rid off Obama and as for the foreign policy I can't agree that Obama would tear him apart since there are many Americans that are tired of the wars, warmongering and constant interventionism. As for what would happen if Ron Paul wins America would get a much better foreign policy that wouldn't alienate a large part of the world but for his internal policies he would have some trouble getting his ideas through.

Those wars are about preserving USA's "free-market" hegemonic status on this planet. Without those wars and its scare the system wont function. The $ reserve status would be in danger and thus many things dear to USA, and the elites in other countries might go their own route again apart from the "free-trade" bribe and pay offs, that proved to be not only massively lucrative for the USA-Optimates but also a way to keep the 3% growth paradigm going for a while after the stagflation of the 70's.

Neo-liberalism needs its standing army.

[xcorps]

That's not what the polls say. He has an appeal to independents and progressives Obama needs to win.

Polls aren't taking into account the billion dollar campaign that Obama is going to run. Polls aren't taking into account the more controversial positions and statements that Paul has made that will surely alienate moderate voters. (We deserved 9/11? Really, Ron?)

[molonthegreat]

Polls aren't taking into account the billion dollar campaign that Obama is going to run. Polls aren't taking into account the more controversial positions and statements that Paul has made that will surely alienate moderate voters. (We deserved 9/11? Really, Ron?)

You think Al-Qaeda attacked because they hated your freedom?

[Nevins]

You think Al-Qaeda attacked because they hated your freedom?

Believing they did it simply because there were US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia is equally silly. When you have a traditional, religious culture being integrated into a worldwide, liberal marketplace and then compound that with a youth bulge you see the growth of modern Islamic terrorism.

[Gaidin]

Polls aren't taking into account the billion dollar campaign that Obama is going to run. Polls aren't taking into account the more controversial positions and statements that Paul has made that will surely alienate moderate voters. (We deserved 9/11? Really, Ron?)

To add, polls are also not taking into account that Ron Paul has never been a front runner and never had a trial by fire of other candidates well and truly picking apart his policies or pointing out his faults or where he has gone wrong in his career.

[xcorps]

To add, polls are also not taking into account that Ron Paul has never been a front runner and never had a trial by fire of other candidates well and truly picking apart his policies or pointing out his faults or where he has gone wrong in his career.

Exactly. Any candidate in a presidential election would make Paul unelectable, much less one that has a good personal appeal, an efficient and effective campaign, and a billion dollars to spend.

You think Al-Qaeda attacked because they hated your freedom?

That's an entirely different conversation that I'm not going to address here. The motivations of low life, murdering, psychopaths don't really have much of an impact on presidential elections.

When did he say we "deserved 9/11"?

He didn't use those exact words, but if you think that any message other than that will be broadcast a hundred times a day on every television channel in the United States for 9 months will be presented, you are naive. It doesn't matter what he actually said and if what he said is actually correct or not. What the American people will hear over and over and over again is that Ron Paul said that the people in the WTC got what they deserved. And that message WILL have an impact.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-a...w=1920&bih=889

[Fernandez_1492]

He can't win Krieglord. He can't even win the nomination. IF he somehow managed to win the GOP nomination, Obama would smash him.

In the real world where everyone would be awake to whats really going on, Ron would tear up Obama. But since its a corrputed world or system, obama might win.

He was a physician. So at least he's a scientifically aware politician. But he loses major points for thinking that women shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves whether they should get abortions.

Show proof that he says that about women. He is the biggest pro liberty guy, why would he deny woemn their liberties.and.freedom to choose what they want. I think ir wrong on ur statement.

[xcorps]

In the real world where everyone would be awake to whats really going on, Ron would tear up Obama. But since its a corrputed world or system, obama might win.

Read the article in poet #121 by George Will. That's a very clear, very precise accounting of what would really go on. There is no "might". Obama will filet Ron Paul like a 6lb largemouth bass.