Ron Paul as president 2012

pnyckqx

Banned
Kept busy and somewhat satisfied voting "no" on Senate bills, Paul has no time to make a 1988 bridge-burning third party run for the Presidency, avoiding also the OTL era of the worst, racist excesses of his newsletters.
i think you are a bit short sighted here. Paul, being the substantially younger, articulate person who was the OTL Libertarian Party candidate will probably be a mirror image of his son, OTL Senator Rand Paul (R-KY). There are some differences that the elder Paul needs to work on. First, Ron Paul often comes off as a college professor, lecturing a crowd. That works with the college students who are the main body of his present support. But with the general electorate....

Rand on the other hand comes off as the smart neighbor next door. A much broader appeal.

Ron has to learn that lesson fast.

Second, the news letters don't happen ITTL. However, the ghost author of the controversial ones IS known. The fellow has admitted to them. The national media has had this information for a long time, yet prefer making news to reporting it.

1990 Ron wins reelection, again with a closer margin than OTL - but that's still a decent margin. In 1992, he endears himself to a certain part of the GOP electorate with his full-throated support of Pat Buchanan, though to little immediate end - Pat still loses the primary, and Bush the election. Ron Paul still doesn't like the Bushes, and supports the Libertarian Keary Ehlers in 1994. Well and good, but the Libertarian still nets less than 3%. More important, Ann Richards had earlier caught some flack when she was caught calling Paul "some jerk". She watches herself a little closer in '94, and squeaks out a win against George Bush, Jr.
Mary Ruwart would probably be a better candidate for the Libertarians in 92. Better than Andre Marrou and a hell of a lot more photogenic, and becomes a forerunner of Hilary in OTL 2008 (and doesn't sound like a certain former female Republican Governor who ran for VP in 2008);)

i'm certain she'll have some colorful things to say about Clinton, and may actually out poll Ed Clark's 1980 Libertarian run, especially with Ross Perot in the race, then out of the race, then in the race...

With Paul's endorsement, she may become a legitimate national figure...and maybe a future President Paul's FDA chairman supervising the dismantling of the organisation.

Pat's back in 1996! After an embarrassing loss in New Hampshire, and incensed at a quote from Ron Paul about his capabilities, an overzealous Dole topples from the stage at a campaign rally, shattering the septuagenarian's hips. The political wound was equally massive - not only can Dole not campaign, but it reinforces the narrative that he's an old man, too old to handle the rigors of campaigning, let alone the Presidency. With Dole going into full hip replacement surgery, it's an open question of when - or if - he'll be able to return to the campaign. Meanwhile, Pat and Steve Forbes are merrily scooping up delegates, in a true nightmare scenario for the GOP leadership. There's even talk of drafting Colin Powell, but the general is resolute in his denials. Pat edges out Steve, and to paper over the factionalism a mutually acceptable Vice Presidential nominee is chosen: Doctor Senator Ron Paul (OTL both helped Paul win his seat in 1996).
You have an interesting sense of irony seeing as how Paul is presently older than Dole was during his Presidential run...and i think...has two artificial knees.

Is he to become ... Doctor Senator Vice President Ron Paul? No, of course not. Bill Clinton is very popular, and Pat Buchanan is a Nixon apologist who waves a pitchfork at rallies. After a string of headline-grabbing gaffes, Pat goes down in defeat. Ron Paul, in the traditional background role of the VP nom, made less waves, and is inaccurately labelled "the sane one" by the pundits and backroom boys. Paul hangs around in the Senate. The 90s were a growing era of anti-government, black helicopter, rural militia sentiments. These are Ron Paul's people.
No, they're not. Paul has disavowed the conspiracy theories that some of these nut bars come up with. If anything, they're hurting his OTL campaign.

A sitting Senator, former Vice Presidential nominee and with a national base of support? Run Ron Run! Of course he's in in 2000. New Hampshire loves Ron Paul, and he takes that vital early state. Robbed of the boost, McCain remains a weak dark horse. Karl Rove, a campaign strategist who joined Team Paul after being fired from George Bush's 1992 reelection campaign, also puts out some less than entirely factual rumors about McCain. Soon, the gravely voice of Ron Paul's longtime campaign spokesman, Alex Jones, is announcing win after win. And indeed, who else could it be? Alan Keyes? Come on.
Well, Jones certainly resembles a gravel truck. He's another guy who would be improve Paul's OTL support by endorsing somebody else. While Paul is not opposed to going on Jones' show for lack of other media access, there is no way this guy is going to ever be press spokesman. Too many skeletons in his closet.

Karl Rove???? The Dark Lord of the Neocons? Here is the fate of Karl Rove.
;)

Who knows why a Cuban mother decided to delay in her flight to America. Maybe seeing that the next President could be Ron Paul? None can say. Certainly not her, since she drowned off the US coast. The INS deposits her son Elián with his relatives in Florida. The matter somehow becomes national news, and in September the SWAT team storms the Lázaro home. Fortunately, AP photographer Alan Diaz is only winged by the SWAT's bullets as he whips up his camera at the intruders, hoping to score a historic photograph (it could have been a gun - or a rocket launcher!!!). Less fortunately, the hundred-odd people already angrily protesting outside break into a riot. Some two dozen are armed and dangerous (as the INS said OTL - and we must trust them, mustn't we?), and America is treated to morning news coverage featuring a nationally televised firefight as the US government, on orders from the President, tries to kidnap a little boy at gunpoint so they can send him to RED CUBA!

You know who doesn't like communists? Or, for that matter, the government? Ron Paul. The Doctor has a field day with this. Meanwhile, in attempting to distance himself even further from Clinton than OTL - no mean feat - Gore triggers some angry comments from some White House staffers. Obviously, no one is going to tell the national arms of the party and its prominent donors NOT to support Gore, but, well. You know how it is.

Could it be? Does America arise the morning after a long and hard-fought election night to find the television maps painted blood red? It is the dawn not just of a new day, but a new century. A century that will be presided over by DOCTOR PRESIDENT RON PAUL! *thundercrack, neighing of horses, moans of the damned*
Only one problem that i can think of. NONE of the major news media outlets are going to give Paul the time of day if he walked on water, cured AIDS, won the Nobel Prize and the Medal of Honor all in one day. If they do it is to set up an ambush.
 
Last edited:
Paul is speaking at some event in early 2008 that unknown governor Sarah Palin is attending. Suddenly, Palin goes into labor! Paul delivers the baby,on a viral video that hits the internet and mainstream media. Paul is lauded for his "heroics", especially when it comes out that Palin's son Trig would have died without Ron Paul's timely intervention. In interview after interview, Palin tearfully declares that Paul is a hero who saved her son's life, and she becomes a strong supporter of his.

...That's probably not enough to win him the nomination, but combined with him running a more competent campaign, it might have given him a shot. Winning the general would take a lot more work, and the only scenario I could see there would be Edward's somehow getting the nomination. Maybe have more Iowan independets cross over to vote for Paul instead of Obama? As a result, Edwards wins Iowa and becomes the anti Hillary, and eventuatly defeats her. The resulting scandal destroys his campaign, and proablly costs the dems weeks as they struggle to find a new candidate, which would probably be Clinton. In the end, Paul narowly defeats Clinton (Due to the endorsments of the Libertarians, Constitution, and maybe a minority of the Greens) and the nation not wanting to be dominated by two political families. He and vice president Sarah Palin are sworn in.

Even speaking as a fan of his, I suspect Paul would be a one term president who would be very unpopular by the end of his term. He might not even get renominated.
 
Phil Gramm doesn't get thrown off his committee and doesn't switch parties. Either he doesn't run for the Democratic Senate nomination or he does and it turns into a three-way slap-fight between Gramm, Hance, and Doggett. The GOP nomination open, it goes to OTL's second place runner, Dr. Paul (Mosbacher does better in the Gramm gap, but to no avail). It's closer than OTL's 1984 race, but it is Texas during Reagan's blowout reelection year, so Paul pulls through. Kept busy and somewhat satisfied voting "no" on Senate bills, Paul has no time to make a 1988 bridge-burning third party run for the Presidency, avoiding also the OTL era of the worst, racist excesses of his newsletters. 1990 Ron wins reelection, again with a closer margin than OTL - but that's still a decent margin. In 1992, he endears himself to a certain part of the GOP electorate with his full-throated support of Pat Buchanan, though to little immediate end - Pat still loses the primary, and Bush the election. Ron Paul still doesn't like the Bushes, and supports the Libertarian Keary Ehlers in 1994. Well and good, but the Libertarian still nets less than 3%. More important, Ann Richards had earlier caught some flack when she was caught calling Paul "some jerk". She watches herself a little closer in '94, and squeaks out a win against George Bush, Jr.

Pat's back in 1996! After an embarrassing loss in New Hampshire, and incensed at a quote from Ron Paul about his capabilities, an overzealous Dole topples from the stage at a campaign rally, shattering the septuagenarian's hips. The political wound was equally massive - not only can Dole not campaign, but it reinforces the narrative that he's an old man, too old to handle the rigors of campaigning, let alone the Presidency. With Dole going into full hip replacement surgery, it's an open question of when - or if - he'll be able to return to the campaign. Meanwhile, Pat and Steve Forbes are merrily scooping up delegates, in a true nightmare scenario for the GOP leadership. There's even talk of drafting Colin Powell, but the general is resolute in his denials. Pat edges out Steve, and to paper over the factionalism a mutually acceptable Vice Presidential nominee is chosen: Doctor Senator Ron Paul (OTL both helped Paul win his seat in 1996). Is he to become ... Doctor Senator Vice President Ron Paul?

No, of course not. Bill Clinton is very popular, and Pat Buchanan is a Nixon apologist who waves a pitchfork at rallies. After a string of headline-grabbing gaffes, Pat goes down in defeat. Ron Paul, in the traditional background role of the VP nom, made less waves, and is inaccurately labelled "the sane one" by the pundits and backroom boys. Paul hangs around in the Senate. The 90s were a growing era of anti-government, black helicopter, rural militia sentiments. These are Ron Paul's people.

A sitting Senator, former Vice Presidential nominee and with a national base of support? Run Ron Run! Of course he's in in 2000. New Hampshire loves Ron Paul, and he takes that vital early state. Robbed of the boost, McCain remains a weak dark horse. Karl Rove, a campaign strategist who joined Team Paul after being fired from George Bush's 1992 reelection campaign, also puts out some less than entirely factual rumors about McCain. Soon, the gravely voice of Ron Paul's longtime campaign spokesman, Alex Jones, is announcing win after win. And indeed, who else could it be? Alan Keyes? Come on.

Who knows why a Cuban mother decided to delay in her flight to America. Maybe seeing that the next President could be Ron Paul? None can say. Certainly not her, since she drowned off the US coast. The INS deposits her son Elián with his relatives in Florida. The matter somehow becomes national news, and in September the SWAT team storms the Lázaro home. Fortunately, AP photographer Alan Diaz is only winged by the SWAT's bullets as he whips up his camera at the intruders, hoping to score a historic photograph (it could have been a gun - or a rocket launcher!!!). Less fortunately, the hundred-odd people already angrily protesting outside break into a riot. Some two dozen are armed and dangerous (as the INS said OTL - and we must trust them, mustn't we?), and America is treated to morning news coverage featuring a nationally televised firefight as the US government, on orders from the President, tries to kidnap a little boy at gunpoint so they can send him to RED CUBA!

You know who doesn't like communists? Or, for that matter, the government? Ron Paul. The Doctor has a field day with this. Meanwhile, in attempting to distance himself even further from Clinton than OTL - no mean feat - Gore triggers some angry comments from some White House staffers. Obviously, no one is going to tell the national arms of the party and its prominent donors NOT to support Gore, but, well. You know how it is.

Could it be? Does America arise the morning after a long and hard-fought election night to find the television maps painted blood red? It is the dawn not just of a new day, but a new century. A century that will be presided over by DOCTOR PRESIDENT RON PAUL! *thundercrack, neighing of horses, moans of the damned*

:D

Fun, although unfortunately still very ASB. :p
 
Even speaking as a fan of his, I suspect Paul would be a one term president who would be very unpopular by the end of his term. He might not even get renominated.

You don't know that. The democrats could throw up some goddawful candidate against him.

I think he'd be reasonably popular. His pro-legalisation viewpoint gives him a sizeable chunk of the youth vote. Plus, didn't Snoop Dogg endorse him?
 

pnyckqx

Banned
A bit of reality from a Paul supporter

You don't know that. The democrats could throw up some goddawful candidate against him.

I think he'd be reasonably popular. His pro-legalisation viewpoint gives him a sizeable chunk of the youth vote. Plus, didn't Snoop Dogg endorse him?
Have you ever read what Ron Paul's agenda is?

  1. End the Department of Energy
  2. End the Department of Education
  3. End the tax collection department of the IRS
  4. Allowing commodity based currencies to compete against the Federal Reserve
  5. FULL audit the Federal Reserve
  6. IMMEDIATE removal of US forces from foreign lands (Especially the middle East and Afghanistan).
  7. End of US participation in the UN
  8. End of all US Foreign aid.
  9. Reduction of US domestic spending (to include Defense) to FY2000 levels
  10. End Corporate subsidies including agricultural subsidies.
  11. Immediate full Presidential Pardon of Non Violent Drug offenders.
  12. Et Cetera...


We can debate the merits of such things --though not on this particular forum-- but do you HONESTLY see a majority of Congress supporting this agenda where legislation is needed?

i believe it was Bismark who once said that Political deals are like making sausage...you don't really want to know what is in it.

The Washington establishment is heavily entrenched, and Legislatively, Paul cannot succeed without a substantial number of his supporters and ideological 'cousins' elected to Congress. EVEN THEN, they'd have to quickly learn the ropes of a political institution that defies comprehension and logic.

Anybody who is part of the Ron Paul movement who doesn't understand that reform goes beyond one or two Presidents is setting him or herself up for disappointment.


 


We can debate the merits of such things --though not on this particular forum-- but do you HONESTLY see a majority of Congress supporting this agenda where legislation is needed?

i believe it was Bismark who once said that Political deals are like making sausage...you don't really want to know what is in it.

The Washington establishment is heavily entrenched, and Legislatively, Paul cannot succeed without a substantial number of his supporters and ideological 'cousins' elected to Congress. EVEN THEN, they'd have to quickly learn the ropes of a political institution that defies comprehension and logic.

Anybody who is part of the Ron Paul movement who doesn't understand that reform goes beyond one or two Presidents is setting him or herself up for disappointment.


That is why I only asked about the international reaction to Ron Paul withdrawing American troops back to the us and the closure of all bases out side the us.
It is one on the things he can do without asking congress for permission.

American would need new bases in the US to house all the returning troops. This would be popular with congress, they all want a new base in the area.

I am interested in how the media and governments in other countries would reaction to the withdrawal of American troops.

As you say it is hard to see congress supporting his other policies.
 
Last edited:

pnyckqx

Banned
That is why I only asked about the international reaction to Ron Paul withdrawing American troops back to the us and the closure of all bases out side the us.
It is one on the things he can do without asking congress for permission.

American would need new bases in the US to house all the returning troops. This would be popular with congress, they all want a new base in the area.

I am interested in how the media and governments in other countries would reaction to the withdrawal of American troops.

As you say it is hard to see congress supporting his other policies.
The US actually has sufficient basing for troops to be pulled home. Remember, we've mothballed quite a few bases, and the US Army was reduced to 10 active Divisions, and 3 Marine Corps Expeditionary Forces (Divisions + attachments).

i can tell you that other governments would breath a sigh of relief that the US is taking a less active posture in the world.

A lot of terrorist organizations are going to be out of work without US troops around the world to attack.

It would be interesting to have direct talks with the Iranians. Except for some matters over Iraq during the Bush43 Administration, the last direct talks with Iran happened when Jimmy Carter was President.
 
The US actually has sufficient basing for troops to be pulled home. Remember, we've mothballed quite a few bases, and the US Army was reduced to 10 active Divisions, and 3 Marine Corps Expeditionary Forces (Divisions + attachments).

True, but it would be popular in the areas where the bases are reopened.
Military families would be glad to see their relatives home.

i can tell you that other governments would breath a sigh of relief that the US is taking a less active posture in the world.

The Israelis would not like it and the British would have little choice but to pull out their troops.

A lot of terrorist organizations are going to be out of work without US troops around the world to attack.

Looks like they will just have to fight their own governments fight among themselves.

It would be interesting to have direct talks with the Iranians. Except for some matters over Iraq during the Bush43 Administration, the last direct talks with Iran happened when Jimmy Carter was President.

That would be interesting. if America can talk to the North Koreans why not Iran.

At leasts with a Ron Paul president it would be hard for the media to ignore his policies.

if he does badly in the mid terms or fails to get a second term at least people will know what they are rejecting.
 

manav95

Banned
I could see Ron Paul becoming President in 2012 if the Great Recession occurred in Bush's first term. Then he would lose to a Democrat(possibly Kerry), who would probably fail to stop the recession. Ron Paul would build his base for a run in 2008, knowing that he will gain more support for his 2012 run. The 2008 election would most likely fall to a Republican(maybe Mccain), but the nation would still face economic troubles. At this point, Americans are dissatisfied with both parties and are looking for independents and third party candidates. Ron Paul clearly stands above the rest as the Libertarian party nominee. Many Americans are enthusiastic about his radical ideas and disconnection from the Washington mainstream. Also, his base is far stronger than it was in 2008. This only further grows as Americans are disillusioned with the state of the country and are enchanted with Ron Paul. He wins the 2012 election in a landslide.
 

pnyckqx

Banned
True, but it would be popular in the areas where the bases are reopened.
Military families would be glad to see their relatives home.
i haven't kept up on it, but i've heard that some Army Troops are on their seventh combat deployment. Considering that the early tours were 15 months for the Army, that's over seven years away from their families for career soldiers. We're reaching the point where US involvement in the so-called 'war on terror' will be longer than our combat actions in Vietnam.

There's an associated human cost in that. Effects on the families are always under estimated.

Think about the number of damaged men AND women that we're releasing back into society, and expecting to function normally as they retire or ETS.



The Israelis would not like it and the British would have little choice but to pull out their troops.
While neither Ron Paul nor i are isolationists, the man is elected President of the US, not Prime Minister of Israel or the UK. Minding our own business makes good sense. The UK sees economic benefit from not having to pay for the cost of it's deployments. The Israelis have the benefit of NOT having us butt into their business and dictate foreign and internal policy to them, and maybe they have to be a little more careful about who they want to piss off.



Looks like they will just have to fight their own governments fight among themselves.
And the disadvantage is?...



That would be interesting. if America can talk to the North Koreans why not Iran.

At leasts with a Ron Paul president it would be hard for the media to ignore his policies.

if he does badly in the mid terms or fails to get a second term at least people will know what they are rejecting.
i remember during the 2008 election campaign, the Democrats ran with the idea of talking directly to Iran. Of course the Bush43 Administration was already doing that on some levels. What became of it? i don't know. Seemed like a good idea.

A little known fact: Iran lost some of it's citizens working in the US on 9/11, and they weren't happy about it either.

It was a missed opportunity to coordinate with a great intelligence source.
 
And the disadvantage is?...
From an American point of view none.

While neither Ron Paul nor i are isolationists, the man is elected President of the US, not Prime Minister of Israel or the UK. Minding our own business makes good sense. The UK sees economic benefit from not having to pay for the cost of it's deployments. The Israelis have the benefit of NOT having us butt into their business and dictate foreign and internal policy to them, and maybe they have to be a little more careful about who they want to piss off..

Maybe they will have to stop calling the President of America the leader of the free world.

i remember during the 2008 election campaign, the Democrats ran with the idea of talking directly to Iran. Of course the Bush43 Administration was already doing that on some levels. What became of it? i don't know. Seemed like a good idea.

A little known fact: Iran lost some of it's citizens working in the US on 9/11, and they weren't happy about it either.

It was a missed opportunity to coordinate with a great intelligence source.

indeed a missed opportunity.
 
It is the 1000th Year after the Start of the Rule of the Paul. From the All-Seeing Throne in the Middle of Paultropolis he keeps and ever-vigilant watch on his people. We are never alone, the benevolent eye of the Paul sees all, his benevolent hand guiding all, and smiting those who are the true unbelievers of his will. He is the Holy Physician of our Souls, always working to make sure we stay on the path of One-Man Government and Righteous Capital. There is no rule but his; there is no other reign but his. He controls all because he sees and knows all. All time, past, present, and future is folded up before him and laid out as one event. When a child is born the parents must make a pilgrimage to Paultropolis so that a small part of the great Paul's infinite soul may be imbued onto the boy. Woe betide this lands beyond us, such as the Atomic Kingdom of China, that refuse to accept his will, for I know the truth. Paul is in all of us, We are all the Paul, I am the Paul, but most importantly, Our Lord Paul is the Paul.
 
It is the 1000th Year after the Start of the Rule of the Paul. From the All-Seeing Throne in the Middle of Paultropolis he keeps and ever-vigilant watch on his people. We are never alone, the benevolent eye of the Paul sees all, his benevolent hand guiding all, and smiting those who are the true unbelievers of his will. He is the Holy Physician of our Souls, always working to make sure we stay on the path of One-Man Government and Righteous Capital. There is no rule but his; there is no other reign but his. He controls all because he sees and knows all. All time, past, present, and future is folded up before him and laid out as one event. When a child is born the parents must make a pilgrimage to Paultropolis so that a small part of the great Paul's infinite soul may be imbued onto the boy. Woe betide this lands beyond us, such as the Atomic Kingdom of China, that refuse to accept his will, for I know the truth. Paul is in all of us, We are all the Paul, I am the Paul, but most importantly, Our Lord Paul is the Paul.
In-universe campaign add for Doctor God Emperor Ron Paul Atreides

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmYMzxA_U-c
 
But, it's STILL space bat, utterly of course.:p


First, there's no way Paul could've won our Senate seat. Paul, on his actual electoral record, likely would've come LAST, not FIRST. Even if he gets total luck, there's still no way he wins. Certainly, either Gramm OR Doggett would've trivially beat Paul, take your pick who runs. :p

Second, McCain totally would've trounced Paul with one hand held behind his hand, just like last cycle. Last time I checked, there are FIFTY states, not just New Hampshire. And, McCain would've totally been the frontrunner without Shrub - the media ate from his hand. And, you've given nothing remotely like the start Paul'd need to beat Gore; though, even being found with a dead baby might not be enough for PAUL :p

Paul has all the fanaticism of Goldwater, and a positively minus charisma, so he does even worse, of course.

Do remember to check how astonishingly badly Goldwater64 got beat. And, Goldwater at least had some charisma.

It's so hard I'm starting to wonder if even the Space Bats could do it.:cool:
 
First, there's no way Paul could've won our Senate seat. Paul, on his actual electoral record, likely would've come LAST, not FIRST. Even if he gets total luck, there's still no way he wins. Certainly, either Gramm OR Doggett would've trivially beat Paul, take your pick who runs. :p

Second, McCain totally would've trounced Paul with one hand held behind his hand, just like last cycle. Last time I checked, there are FIFTY states, not just New Hampshire. And, McCain would've totally been the frontrunner without Shrub - the media ate from his hand. And, you've given nothing remotely like the start Paul'd need to beat Gore; though, even being found with a dead baby might not be enough for PAUL :p

It's so hard I'm starting to wonder if even the Space Bats could do it.:cool:

The question I asked in the thread is what would be the international reaction to Ron Paul withdrawing Troops world wide, not could he be elected.


Paul has all the fanaticism of Goldwater, and a positively minus charisma, so he does even worse, of course.

I agree he lacks any charisma.
 
Top