10 Reasons Why Ron Paul Should be Vice President

USA ELECTION POLLS.COM ^ | 16 AUGUST 2007 | AP

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

10 Reasons Why Ron Paul Should be Vice President

August 16, 2007

If Ron Paul fails to win the Republican nomination, it may seem absurd to consider Ron Paul as the vice presidential running mate to any of the other Republican presidential candidates. But before you think so, we have brainstormed this here at our office and found that Ron Paul would make the best choice for Vice President.

The major item of concern in choosing a vice presidential running mate is to select someone that can help you win and to find someone whose strength is your weakness. In 2004, John Kerry chose John Edwards to help him carry the south (that did not happen). In 2000, George W. Bush who lacked foreign policy experience chose Dick Cheney. In 1996, an old and tired Bob Dole chose former football player Jack Kemp.

There is very little evidence to suggest that a Vice President will help you win the nomination. Edwards did not help Kerry carry the south. Bush won by the slimmest of margins in Florida but that was not attributed to Dick Cheney, and Bob Dole still seemed old despite Jack Kemp being on his ticket.

The reality is that Ron Paul could change all of that if he was second in line to a Rudy Giuliani or a Mitt Romney, etc... And here is our reasons for saying so.

1. Ron Paul has the largest online army of every presidential candidate in either party and choosing him as your running mate would allow you to tap into that. Imagine all the free bloggers and YouTube videos posted for you.
2. Ron Paul has the largest grassroots organization through meetup of all the candidates and they will invariably support you for free as they are doing for Ron Paul right now.
3. Imagine all the money that can be saved from having a free online presence and an already established grassroots organization. Use that money to win the battleground states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
4. Ron Paul's antiwar message resonates with the majority of voters and has been able to attract Independents and Democrats into the party.
5. Ron Paul still has the visions of Ronald Reagan: small government, less taxes, etc... and falls in line with true conservatism.
6. Republican voters will not care that you selected Ron Paul as a running mate and not vote for you but you may sway other voters to come into the big tent.

7. By selecting Ron Paul as a vice presidential running mate, you will keep him from running as an Independent third party candidate that spoils a close race against the eventual Democratic nominee. There have been many instances of libertarians running for office and spoiling a win for the Republican party in an attempt to move the party platform.
8. Ron Paul can be no worse than Dick Cheney.
9. Disinterested voters for the cause of liberty who have been fed up with the process are choosing to support Ron Paul and will be excited with Ron Paul on your ticket. Nobody ever got excited about John Edwards, Dick Cheney, or Jack Kemp the way they would with Ron Paul.
10. Young voters, 18-29, make up approximately 17% of the voters in a presidential election. They tend to support the third party candidate at a rate of 2:1 and they favor the Democratic candidate over any other demographic. Look at Ralph Nader and John Kerry voters in 2004. Ron Paul will be able to cause a shift in the young voters. Causing a shift in young voters would have its greatest impact if voter turnout was increased which would be likely to happen.

So it is our contention that if Ron Paul does not win the presidential nomination, the eventual winner whether it is Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Fred Thompson, or Mitt Romney; they should select Ron Paul for the maximum likelihood of winning.

[ari-freedom]

yes but he would abolish that position

[x]

What Eugene McCarthy said about Walter Mondale: "He has the soul of a Vice President."

One witty Freeper made the excellent suggestion of making Paul ambassador to Nauru. Sounds about right.

Nauru is 8 square miles in area and has no army. They say it's slowly sinking into the Pacific. Sounds about right.

[ejonesie22]

I stand humbled at your your awesome reply. Job very well done...

[Ditter]

I really take exception to your #8. I think Dick Cheney is fantastic and he could do a superb job in any office.

In trying to kick Dick Cheney you make yourself look stupid.

[org.whodat]

Hate to tell you Pissant, but being an attorney is not a requirement.

[pissant]

You forgot “I’m just a country doctor”

[Psycho_Bunny]

The one reason he shouldn’t be Vice President is that he’d be a heart beat away from being President.

[ejonesie22]

Don’t get crazy on us now Crazy...

[pissant]

Probably not, but I’m guessing its commonplace.

[cripplecreek]

I kind of wondered if being an attorney was a requirement.

[mathluv]

One reason he should NEVER be Pres or VP - he is a nut!!!!!!!

[HereInTheHeartland]

” He’s not going to win anyway....right?”

No. But people are free to support him. It’s just distracting when a small number of people try to spin his popularity so much.

[peyton randolph]

One witty Freeper made the excellent suggestion of making Paul ambassador to Nauru.

---

Paul is actually more suited to be King of Sealand.

[conserveababe]

Posting something in support of your candidate is one thing. Posting something in support of your candidate and then pinging your buddies to gang up on anyone who disagrees with the candidate is a whole different story. That’s what got the Rudy Boosters in trouble. The Paul boosters should learn from that example.

[crazyhorse691]

Fred and Ron? Now THAT’s absurd.

---

No, absurd would be Rudy/John...anything with a Ron in it would be a last ditch effort.

[SouthJrzReaganite18]

By selecting Ron Paul as a vice presidential running mate, you will keep him from running as an Independent third party candidate that spoils a close race against the eventual Democratic nominee. There have been many instances of libertarians running for office and spoiling a win for the Republican party in an attempt to move the party platform.

I have thought about this, and wouldn't Ron Paul probably pull more away from the democrat candidate then the republican? Assuming Hillary wins, Ron Paul is the only legitimate antiwar vote and thus many young people and far left would be a fan (they would also be bigger fans of his libertarian views on social issues as they relate to government interference). I don't think a republican gets hurt by adding another antiwar candidate.

[toddlintown]

Do you Paulbots ever give up?

If the VP thing doesn’t work out, how about dog catcher?

[fight_truth_decay]

A Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Experiment

Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Experiment, Part II: The Sequel

[conserveababe]

The far left are not fans of libertarianism. Libertarians oppose welfare, gun control, affirmative action, and federal funding of the arts - all liberal sacred cows.

You give the far left too much credit.

[jwh_Denver]

Now that’s some major brain trust thinking.