2012: Mitt with Ron/Rand Paul in his administration?

[Avorysuds]

This is more for the Paul fans but I gave 2 options for “non Paul fans,” so read.

I am hearing talk (that does not make it true) that Mitt will be looking to possibly add Ron Paul to his cabinet. I have also heard it might be possible Rand Paul ( Ron Paul’s son) runs as Mitt’s VP. The idea being that Paul has enough delegates (support) making Paul have some leverage at the convention. Mitt (GOP) fears Paul either runs a third party, endorsing someone like Gary Johnson or simply, Paul’s supporters do a write in, any direction it hurts or possibly kills any Republicans hopes of beating Obama.

As far as it goes with Rand being a VP I would think the idea is to pull Tea party support as well as set up Rand as a strong (name recognition) Presidential candidate for later elections.

So the 2 positions I hear for Paul are for Treasury or even head of the FED and one option is to have Rand as VP.

Would you support Mitt if this was the case.

This might be one of the most important issues of 2012 for the Republicans.

 

[Ed Spacer]

Good poll.

 

[Avorysuds]

Good poll.

Thx, I tried to keep it as un bias as possible.

 

[kyzr]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

 

[Avatar4321]

Make him sec of commerce or Treasury.

 

[Avatar4321]

Rand might be good VP choice, but I think he's better in the Senate right now.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

Yes, we need the same people who got us into this mess to get us out.

Regardless, I wouldn't vote for Mitt no matter who he appoints as his Vice President or to his cabinet. The Vice President doesn't really do anything, and Mitt isn't going to change foreign or economic policy regardless of who's in his cabinet. Too many powerful people have too much to lose in that regard.

 

[pixiestick]

I'm never going to vote for Willard, and I don't think RP would ever want to be in his administration.

 

[Avorysuds]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

Yes, we need the same people who got us into this mess to get us out.

Regardless, I wouldn't vote for Mitt no matter who he appoints as his Vice President or to his cabinet. The Vice President doesn't really do anything, and Mitt isn't going to change foreign or economic policy regardless of who's in his cabinet. Too many powerful people have too much to lose in that regard.

I agree for the most part. I said only if Paul was head of the FED because that is the only position he can make any difference in, and it would make one fucking hell of a difference if Paul wanted to do it right.

 

[paulitician]

I like Rand & Ron Paul right where they are. That's where they're most effective. Joining a Romney Administration would be bad for the People they represent. They should just stay right where they are.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

Yes, we need the same people who got us into this mess to get us out.

Regardless, I wouldn't vote for Mitt no matter who he appoints as his Vice President or to his cabinet. The Vice President doesn't really do anything, and Mitt isn't going to change foreign or economic policy regardless of who's in his cabinet. Too many powerful people have too much to lose in that regard.

I agree for the most part. I said only if Paul was head of the FED because that is the only position he can make any difference in, and it would make one fucking hell of a difference if Paul wanted to do it right.

Maybe, but would Romney even announce that during the campaign? And somehow I don't see Mitt Romney appointing Ron Paul as Fed Chairman regardless of how many delegates he has.

 

[imbalance]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

This is the same logic alcoholics employ when you suggest taking them to an AA meeting. Some people just have to hit rock bottom to find truth.

 

[California Girl]

I'd support Rand Paul being included in a Romney Administration. Ron Paul is too old to benefit from the executive experience.... He's never gonna be President but Rand - if he was immersed in the Executive team - would possibly benefit in the future. It might give him a better understanding of the complexities of areas such as international relations - and the Libertarians could benefit from that.

 

[Foxfyre]

I am not a Ron Paul for President fan, and don't want Paul having any significant influence on the Department of Defense or national security. But I greatly admire his fiscal policy and think he or Rand would make anybody a great Treasury Secretary.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Rand - if he was immersed in the Executive team - would possibly benefit in the future. It might give him a better understanding of the complexities of areas such as international relations - and the Libertarians could benefit from that.

Ron and Rand are both naive children when it comes to foreign relations IMO.

 

[Foxfyre]

Rand - if he was immersed in the Executive team - would possibly benefit in the future. It might give him a better understanding of the complexities of areas such as international relations - and the Libertarians could benefit from that.

Ron and Rand are both naive children when it comes to foreign relations IMO.

Yes, I especially would not want Ron Paul to be Secretary of State either. Anybody who thinks Iran or any other radical Muslim theocracy will play nice if we'll just treat them nice is indeed naive.

 

[Avorysuds]

Rand - if he was immersed in the Executive team - would possibly benefit in the future. It might give him a better understanding of the complexities of areas such as international relations - and the Libertarians could benefit from that.

Ron and Rand are both naive children when it comes to foreign relations IMO.

Yes, I especially would not want Ron Paul to be Secretary of State either. Anybody who thinks Iran or any other radical Muslim theocracy will play nice if we'll just treat them nice is indeed naive.

Of course that is not Paul's position, but you knew that...

 

[GuyPinestra]

Ron Paul may be a good pediatrician, but he is not qualified to be at the controls of ANY part of the Federal Government. We need "amateur hour" to be over and the knowledgeable professionals to get us out of this fiscal mess.

This has to be the most uninformed, no, IGNORANT post I've seen in a while. Go crawl back under your rock, fool...

 

[Foxfyre]

Ron and Rand are both naive children when it comes to foreign relations IMO.

Yes, I especially would not want Ron Paul to be Secretary of State either. Anybody who thinks Iran or any other radical Muslim theocracy will play nice if we'll just treat them nice is indeed naive.

Of course that is not Paul's position, but you knew that...

It may not be his official position, but he has certainly said it on more than one occasion. He spent most of the last campaign poo poohing the idea that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon and pointing out that the U.N. had charged Iran with no illegal activity.

Now he suggests that why wouldn't they want one since everybody else has them? He suggests that the reason Iran is so anti-U.S. is because we impose sanctions and won't talk to them. He seems oblivious to the fact that the U.N. itself imposed those sanctions because of the anti-social behavior of Iran and the danger that poses in the eyes of Israel and ALL of Iran's Arab neighbors. And he seems oblivious to the fact that Iran consistently exports and supports terrorism.

He is entitled to his opinions, and I even agree with him here and there, but I don't think he has a clue about how somebody like Ahmadinejad and his cronies think and it is quite naive to believe that somebody with a nuke in those hands would not be a danger to anybody they don't like.

I do not want Ron Paul to have any influence over our national defense, our national security, and I think he would be a terrible Secretary of State.

 

[California Girl]

Rand - if he was immersed in the Executive team - would possibly benefit in the future. It might give him a better understanding of the complexities of areas such as international relations - and the Libertarians could benefit from that.

Ron and Rand are both naive children when it comes to foreign relations IMO.

Yep. That's why I think it would be educational for Rand to be in the Administration... certainly not anywhere near defense or state - but somewhere that will give him an insight into the complexities of the world, and might help the Libertarians to quit being so damned dangerously naive about foreign affairs.