President Ron Paul in the 90's

Is there anyway that Ron Paul could get elected President in the 90's, either in 92 or 96? What would his chances of been the Republican primaries? Could he beat Bush Sr. for the party nomination in 92?
 
Paul's a weirdo with outdated political views and zero popularity outside of the internet, a few fringe political groups, and his own district, his presidential runs get him publicity and make him look more important than he actually is. If he hadn't consistently ran for president nobody would know about him at all.

His views will make him nothing short of a laughingstock in a campaign and certainly against the moderate Bush Sr.

Edit: Just remembered, also, Paul has some ties with the John Birch Society, if Bush himself doesn't approve of it someone who supports him will leak the story anyway, if that gets out Paul is sunk, well, more so than already.
 
If you butterfly away World War II -- or at least, American involvement in WWII -- and the Cold War, thus keeping American conservatism somewhat closer to his views, it's possible. However, that may butterfly his entry into politics, entirely.
 
Paul's a weirdo with outdated political views and zero popularity outside of the internet, a few fringe political groups, and his own district, his presidential runs get him publicity and make him look more important than he actually is. If he hadn't consistently ran for president nobody would know about him at all.

His views will make him nothing short of a laughingstock in a campaign and certainly against the moderate Bush Sr.

Edit: Just remembered, also, Paul has some ties with the John Birch Society, if Bush himself doesn't approve of it someone who supports him will leak the story anyway, if that gets out Paul is sunk, well, more so than already.

This.

Here's some more information on Paul's connections to the fringe that would kill any election candidate.
 

pnyckqx

Banned
Is there anyway that Ron Paul could get elected President in the 90's, either in 92 or 96? What would his chances of been the Republican primaries? Could he beat Bush Sr. for the party nomination in 92?
Not going to happen in 92. The US had just finished the Persian Gulf War. We did well in what will probably be the last conventional conflict that US forces ever see --and only because Saddam Hussein was a complete ass hat. There is no on going insurgency war with extensive mission creep and growing US casualties. Whatever his faults, Bush41 stuck with the original mission goals as far as the use of force is concerned.

Besides that, Paul is out of office at this time, just came off a Libertarian Party run for President in 88, and is delivering babies again. He has no platform upon which to run.

He doesn't have the financial backing that he enjoyed in his 2008 run and remains in place to this day.

i'd have to think about 1996 for a while and get back to you.
 
Only if you wear enough tin foil and will fall for the usual guilt by casual association smears.
No political bias there [/sarcasm]

Very well, rubbish with a couple of weirdos in his link isn't important, how about his much more fleshed-out ties with the John Birchers, you know, the water fluoridation leads to communism people? That could be a surprisingly relevant issue, the JBS explicitly states that it wants the US out of the United Nations, the recent victory in the Gulf War can get spun as a victory of internationalism (which it easily was), Bush and Paul might not take that fight directly but others will on their behalf.

Also, we still have an elephant in the room, Paul's policies are at best 50 years behind his time and at worst 100. He can only get support from fringe political elements, he's too extreme in his issues to get much support from the establishment (i.e. the people who give him the nomination) on either of the two major parties. His charisma and charm... with a stretch of the imagination and a boatload of luck might secure him a few caucuses in '92 since Bush is as of yet untested as a president anyway. Though Bush has him beat for experience, CIA director versus some doctor/kooky Congressman from Texas? The Paul campaign, if we think of it as a boat, has already sprung some major leaks. Also there's the whole issue of Paul's using steam power while Bush is using good old fashioned petrol.
 
I dunno. Paul just would either piss off or isolate too many people on the left or right. His support base is too isolated. Paleo-conservative libertarianism does not have a wide base of support anywhere enough to make him President.
 
I dunno. Paul just would either piss off or isolate too many people on the left or right. His support base is too isolated. Paleo-conservative libertarianism does not have a wide base of support anywhere enough to make him President.

Yep, combined with all the other stuff we brought up on here, it really is a wonder Paul even decided to run.
 
Concur with drcynic and HeavyWeaponsGuy: Paul has zero chance of becoming President in any election. Not just '92 or '96, but ever. He's way behind the times, and his attitude towards foreign affairs and defense is just plain naive-the "stick our head in the sand and hope the bad guys leave us alone" approach. No thanks.

Paul is probably like Ralph Nader: he knows he'll never be President, but runs anyway. Ego, maybe? Or does he want to steer policy debate his way? Either one...
 
Concur with drcynic and HeavyWeaponsGuy: Paul has zero chance of becoming President in any election. Not just '92 or '96, but ever. He's way behind the times, and his attitude towards foreign affairs and defense is just plain naive-the "stick our head in the sand and hope the bad guys leave us alone" approach. No thanks.

Paul is probably like Ralph Nader: he knows he'll never be President, but runs anyway. Ego, maybe? Or does he want to steer policy debate his way? Either one...

Hello Matt, I recall you from previous Ron Paul related threads where we concurred so nicely on exactly why Mr. Paul is a naive old chap who has a better chance of being elected president of the fictional republic of Libertariana than he does of getting the same position here.

See the sad thing about Paul (and Nader, whose damn fool campaign cost Gore the election in 2000) is that I think they either genuinely think they can be elected (though to be fair Nader is at least more reasonable and has a good record in regards to that landmark expose on automobile safety he did and such) or they run as a purposeful spoiler vote.
 
Either one: or maybe both. From what I recall from last time, Paul really believed that he'd get the nomination at least, even though McCain kept pulling away with the delegate count, and stayed in the primaries even after everyone else quit. He didn't concede the nomination until the day before the convention, IIRC. And I think that if he does run, it'll be the same thing this time around. No chance of winning, but he runs to have a wider platform for his ideas than just his House district. Nader, though, is both an egotist and a spoiler, IMHO. He runs because he does think he'll be elected-though running for the Greens put him into perpetual gadfly status, not to mention his considerable ego.
 
The Vietnam war expands to the US occupation of Cambodgia, while North Vietnam help communists take over Laos, where the US decides to extend its bombings. A Chinese city is bombed while a large-scale offensive is launched against north vietnam, China becomes increasingly involved.

At some point, it comes out Thailand allows US bombers to fly against Laos and North Vietnam. Laos, North Vietnam, China and Myanamar invades Thainland, helped by local communists.
So well, the US extend its engagement into Thailand too, the Chinese becomes fully involved in Vietnam as a consequence, the US begin bombing runs into China itself. The Soviet-Union sends equippement to the Chinese and the US accuse the Soviets of having jets in China that attacks US bombers. Threatening maneuvers in western Germany and the US president not only insisting on the return of east germany to west germany but also German territories seized by the Soviet-Union and Poland leads to an embargo on west Berlin.

In 1973, Nato armies attempts to breake the Berlin blockade with military force, this is a massive failure when the Soviet-Union launch a nuclear retaliation against the attacking armies and nato bases in continental europe. There is a ceasure-fire and west-berlin surrender, Nato and Warsawa pact armies mobilizes, while panic over an eventual global atomic war spreads in the US, which causes an economic crisis of sórt.

In 1975, the Chinese and Vietnamese armies leads a major offensive the US military did not expect them capable off, the US is defeated.

In the 1976 elections, due to the events of previous years, a somewhat isolationist candidate is elected in a landslide. Nato breakes appart a few years later. In the 1980s, West Germany and Japan becomes nuclear powers and an accident involving biological weapons, 10 millions victimes in ther US and 50 millions worldwide.

The biological weapon thing causes a massive disruption of trade, the united states economy have collapsed and becomes innward turned by the late 1980s.
 
Honestly, from what i see here and in other part of internet about Ron Paul, the only possibily he can be president without a massive rewrite of WWII, Vietman war or the happening of WWIII or/and the second great depression is that he is appointed Secretary of Agriculture or Commerce and in a terrorist attack all the President and all the other people up the chain of succession are killed, so now he is sworn president, bar that maybe during the primaries all the candidates except him and Nader are caught in terrible scandal (financial or/and sexual), die in accident or are kindnapped by aliens, so drop out, leaving them as the only contender.
 
Have a life changing moral crisis during a pregnancy he helps along, forcing him to make the choice of killing the child to save the mother's life. This crisis sends him into seclusion, from which he emerges as a moderate with conservative leanings in the manner of old McCain. His charisma and support for woman's rights leads to a shift in dynamic among the Republican Party, allowing him the nomination and subsequent election of President in 1992.
 
So... basically have a ridiculously absurd crisis that bends over backwards in circumstances just to make Ron Paul president or something that fundamentally changes the views and platform of Ron Paul and thus makes him a different person from the one we know?

Yeah Paul isn't one of those great ATL presidents who could've done a few things differently and gotten elected, he just isn't anywhere near that level.
 
So... basically have a ridiculously absurd crisis that bends over backwards in circumstances just to make Ron Paul president or something that fundamentally changes the views and platform of Ron Paul and thus makes him a different person from the one we know?

Yeah Paul isn't one of those great ATL presidents who could've done a few things differently and gotten elected, he just isn't anywhere near that level.


Pretty much. It's like an H.P. Lovecraft presidency, you have to fundamentally change the person for the plausibility to be there and when you do that, it makes the entire thing significantly less interesting.
 
Pretty much. It's like an H.P. Lovecraft presidency, you have to fundamentally change the person for the plausibility to be there and when you do that, it makes the entire thing significantly less interesting.

Exactly, I always thought changing the person defeated the purpose anyway, when we talk about Ron Paul we want to hear about a president abolishing social security and putting us back on a commodity-backed currency, not some GOP establishment flunkie.
 
Only if you wear enough tin foil and will fall for the usual guilt by casual association smears.

Wait...I don't get what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that the only people who wouldn't vote for Paul would be the tinfoil-wearing people who believe in guilt by association?

And these aren't just 'guilt by association' smears, Paul (in one excerpt) expressed at least some belief in the New World Order conspiracy theory to an interviewer from Conspiracy Planet. So...your call if that's a 'guilt by casual association smear' or not.

No political bias there [/sarcasm]

The guy who wrote it (Dave Neiwert) was a reporter in Idaho for years in the 80s & 90s who covered a lot of far-right activity that was going on in the state (and nation, since he was at Waco & Ruby Ridge, apparently), so I think he knows what he's talking about, regardless of his political leanings.
 
Top