[No.6]

“I remember when I would come here, and there was a kind of tolerance for wacky libertarian types. Now I see mostly hatred on the Paul threads from a certain FR contingent. It does nothing to make me want to eventually join forces with these people. Maybe we’ll wind up with another party. A small government party seems to be needed, and obviously has a constituency.”

There is an understandable backlash against Paul because of his desire to lose in Iraq (or more tactfully, to take actions that would result in a loss in Iraq).

I agree that the various camps are expressing vitriol; bitter words have passed between supporters of each candidate. Don’t feel left out :)

I disagree that another splinter party is a solution, unless the goal is to watch the Dim-RATs take power in January, 2009. As we’ve seen from the uprisings on immigration and judicial appointments the mainstream GOP has to listen to its voting blocks if they get fired up - but the Dems in charge of Congress due to conservative factionalism do *not*.

[publiusF27]

There is an understandable backlash against Paul because of his desire to lose in Iraq (or more tactfully, to take actions that would result in a loss in Iraq).

Yeah, I don't agree with Paul on Iraq, but I have a feeling that if he did somehow win the election, political realities would intervene. You can't just order hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq and a hundred other countries to come home tomorrow. It's a process, and stuff happens along the way. On the other hand, we can't afford to guarantee the security of S. Korea and Taiwan and Europe and Israel and Japan forever.

I disagree that another splinter party is a solution

Not in 2008, but Paul has energized quite a few college students and exposed them to ideas that might not otherwise gain much exposure, let alone acceptance, on a campus. Those people, and the voting blocs you identified are not going to go away, and will ultimately find representation. You're not a Whig are you? ;-) It can happen.