Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've read a lot of Ron Paul posts that focus on what a great man he is. His ideas are extolled as well, but there seems to be more praise for the man himself. Many phrases like "Ron Paul is the only one who gets it!", "Ron Paul is the only honest politician!", "Ron Paul hasn't sold out!" etc. But if Ron Paul is such a rare breed of politician, what comes after his time passes? What other politicians live up to such standards that are ascribed to Paul?
Ron Paul will be 76 years old this August. He won't be around forever. If he is such a rarity, if he became president, who would carry on his ideas after him? If he's so different, wouldn't things revert to "politics as usual" with the next president?
The thought process is that a successful Ron Paul presidency would open up the doors for more libertarian minded politicians. A strong libertarian presidency would have huge affects in shifting public opinion. It's more than just Ron Paul the man. It's his ideas that are the most important.
There always has been and likely will be just a few standout politicians who truly want what's best for the american people and the country. Bernie Sanders is pretty much the only other one in congress right now but with politicians often rotating in congress every two years there is likely going to be a whole new group of people who still care about this great country and not just themselves and their corporate masters.
The thought process is that a successful Ron Paul presidency would open up the doors for more libertarian minded politicians. A strong libertarian presidency would have huge affects in shifting public opinion. It's more than just Ron Paul the man. It's his ideas that are the most important.
But do you really think that a significant amount of change can be affected by one president, especially when the changes themselves (inherent in Ron Paul's ideas) are so significant? As we see today and in the past, many of a president's plans, preferences, political philosophies, etc, never get realized. If a Ron Paul presidency were "just ok", or even good, but didn't heroically save America (despite what some fans seem to think would happen), are there any following him that would continue his ideas?
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,878,581 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbobobbo
I've read a lot of Ron Paul posts that focus on what a great man he is. His ideas are extolled as well, but there seems to be more praise for the man himself. Many phrases like "Ron Paul is the only one who gets it!", "Ron Paul is the only honest politician!", "Ron Paul hasn't sold out!" etc. But if Ron Paul is such a rare breed of politician, what comes after his time passes? What other politicians live up to such standards that are ascribed to Paul?
Ron Paul will be 76 years old this August. He won't be around forever. If he is such a rarity, if he became president, who would carry on his ideas after him? If he's so different, wouldn't things revert to "politics as usual" with the next president?
Ron Paul has already had a dramatic impact on American Politics and whether he is elected or not, he has already set a precedence for what comes after his time passes.
Our current two party system is typically Reagan Democrats (Republicans (neocons)) and Progressive Democrats (Democrats(liberal)). Basically socially conservative Democrats and socially progressive Democrats. Ron Paul has re-introduced traditional conservatism back in to the Republican Party (fiscal responsibility dovetailed with libertarian values which harken back to a constitutional basis)
This has resonated with a large cross section of the American population who have either felt uneasy with their current party or worse, disenfranchised. This spark amongst the populace is the revolution, not the man himself. I mean no disrespect to Ron Paul and think he would agree with me, he is constantly reminding people that "we" are the revolution.
We will see how far his ideas spread and how strongly they take hold among the populace. The personal virtues of the man have always been rare if not completely absent in politicians, but is these virtues that provided a platform of trust and credibility for his ideas to be accepted in spite of strong opposition from both parties and the mainstream media.
Because of Ron Paul the conversation has changed. And that change in the conversation as well as more public awareness of the shenanigans of government is Ron Pauls real legacy and the answer to what comes after is "it is up to us".
But do you really think that a significant amount of change can be affected by one president, especially when the changes themselves (inherent in Ron Paul's ideas) are so significant? As we see today and in the past, many of a president's plans, preferences, political philosophies, etc, never get realized. If a Ron Paul presidency were "just ok", or even good, but didn't heroically save America (despite what some fans seem to think would happen), are there any following him that would continue his ideas?
I think the difference is that Ron Paul's voting record is the same as his rhetoric. This is unique in that the vast majority of presidential candidates ran on platforms different from their track record. Examples are people like McCain and Romney running on conservative platforms when their track record has been the almost opposite. My point is Ron Paul has already proven he isn't pandering to get elected. If elected he would actually try to accomplish or set us in the direction of accomplishing what he thinks needs to be done.
A Ron Paul presidency would represent a shift in what is popular political thought. Meaning a number of his ideas would be realized. No he can't accomplish everything in 4-8 years, but it would put us in the right direction. However, deciding not to vote for Ron Paul because one fears it could all be undone after his presidency is a bit silly.
How about his son, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky. I think he is following in his Father's footsteps quite well, despite how giant those footprints are!
How about his son, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky. I think he is following in his Father's footsteps quite well, despite how giant those footprints are!
The verdict is still out on Rand. I like him and I think he has made excellent stands on the Patriot Act, Libya and the Debt Ceiling. I'm still interested to see how consistent his voting record stays over the next few years. He's a little more political than Ron Paul....which is a good thing if he can keep it in check, but a bad thing if ends up being too pragmatic at the expense of his ideology.
How about his son, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky. I think he is following in his Father's footsteps quite well, despite how giant those footprints are!
Ron is a respectable libertarian, Rand is a tea party hack that has for the most part just trying to make a name from himself and causing waves to use as fodder for a 2016 run.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
