Search found 6 matches
Search found 6 matches • Page 1 of 1
He's quite adamant that he's non-interventionist, not isolationist.SewTexas wrote:he's a nut-job, but he's our (Texas') nut-job. He's very, very insolationist.
I've heard that he's "a loon", but I don't know why. The only "bad" thing I've heard him say is that he's for pressuring North Vietnam to give us the rest of the MIAs back. I suppose that might be a bit conspiracy-ish, but assuming there are any of our soldiers are still in prison over there, I'm for bringing them home. <shrug>texasmusic wrote:What's wrong with Paul?hirundo82 wrote:If the Republicans were to nominate a libertarian-leaning candidate (not Ron Paul) I think they would have a good chance of pulling in many from the civil liberties wing of the Democratic party. Concentrate on ending the wars in the Middle East, ending the drug war, reigning in the civil liberties abuses which have been propogated by both parties since 9/11.loadedliberal wrote:If the Republicans can put up someone who is not insane I might be able to swallow a vote for a (R). i am losing patience with Obama on a daily basis he is not the Obama I voted for in 2008. With little chance of a strong primary challenger myself and (some) others on left may defect for a reasonable republican.
Unfortunately, I don't think such a candidate has much of a chance in the Republican primaries.
I ask because I know a little about him, but from what I hear him say, he has his head on straight.
If that's the worst his critics can come up with, he should win by a landslide.
What do you define as "reasonable"?loadedliberal wrote:With little chance of a strong primary challenger myself and (some) others on left may defect for a reasonable republican.
Ooh... I wonder if he'll pick Rand Paul as his running mate. That right there might let me get my 2012 presidential voting decision over with.Thomas wrote:We may be in luck http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics ... n-20110425