Post subject: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 2:26 am
Johnny Guitar
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:27 pm Posts: 270 Location: Newport Beach, Ca. Gender: Male
I keep seeing him pop up on MSNBC just OWNING Keith Overbite and his huge-government rhetoric.
I never really thought Ron Paul would have a legit chance to be the candidate for the right wingers, but man, Republicans and their party are so centric and weak and 'big government' that I think Paul will really turn on those who oppose these sickly huge programs that are being ushered in quicker than the Baltimore Colts could move to Indy. I think a lot of people are gonna vote with their wallet in 2012.
Let's note that Obama won for mainly 2 reasons: Hatred for Bush, and history-in-the-making skin colorism. His views are now shocking America and the centrists and independents.
I am a Ron Paul supporter. I think Libertarianism is the real freedom party.
That's my 2 cents. Let the fudge now be thrown at me.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 12:17 pm
Supersonic
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:09 pm Posts: 10839 Location: metro west, mass Gender: Male
punkdavid wrote:
Clearly the path back to power for the GOP is to turn right.
I find this interesting, mainly because folks tend to view the libertarian party as the second coming of the right wing. The way I see it, libertarianism emphasizes our individual liberties and free market economics more than a set of concrete conservative policies. A good example of the former is gay marriage, in which conservatives tend to oppose, but libertarians stress freedom on an individual level, making sexual orientation, skin color, and gender, redundant. Economically speaking, libertarians are market experts, and understand that government is, by default, inefficient.
I could go on for hours about the differences, but there's no denying the mass awakening due to the drastic events we've witnessed within the past decade. Those that are sick of corrupt Washington politics are now looking for real answers and long-term efficient change, and will quickly find them in libertarianism, certainly not the right.
_________________ "There are two ways to enslave and conquer a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt." -John Adams
Last edited by Sunny on Wed May 20, 2009 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
10 Ways to Save the Republican Party by mikeplugh [Subscribe] Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 07:59:29 PM MST
3. Embrace the libertarians
As the GOP brand sees itself increasingly tarnished, the libertarian wing of American political thought is filling in the gaps. Not every libertarian is a Republican, but the overlap is significant enough to merit attention. When the McCain/Palin ticket was made official, the sloganeering suggested that we'd begun to see a move from East Coast elite governance, and the rise of the West had been realized at long last. Nevermind that John McCain has been in Washington for nearly 30 years, and Sarah Palin is an incompetent dunderhead. The shadow convention held by Ron Paul in Minneapolis drew tens of thousands of supporters, but received almost no media coverage. The strength of his support, and the support for Bob Barr, tells us something.
We've learned that the small government sentiment that dominates Western State politics is real, and is increasingly appealing to a large number of American citizens who distrust government. Who can blame them when Washington has proved time and again to be a train wreck of idiocy, corruption, and partisan ugliness? The vein is their to tap. Finding the populist voice through the libertarian sensibility is a winning proposition for a party slipping further into irrelevance. The past has caught up to the GOP, and the future looks rather bleak. A new brand of populism through libertarianism might just do the trick.
_________________ Paul McCartney told me to never drop names.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 12:48 pm
statistically insignificant
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:19 pm Posts: 25134
Oceans wrote:
Let's note that Obama won for mainly 2 reasons: Hatred for Bush, and history-in-the-making skin colorism.
obama didn't win because of bush hatred. obama won because he ran a brilliantly attractive, measured, and consistent campaign. he was (correctly) perceived to be the more competent candidate, exactly the breath of fresh air the electorate was seeking after eight years of staggering incompetence. it wasn't hatred for bush that helped propel obama to victory, it was the extreme dissatisfaction with his failed policies.
don't kid yourself; the past election was an electoral sea change, and it will take more than the inevitable failure of obama's economic policies for people to vote for the next staggeringly incompetent knob the RNC manages to push down the throats of americans.
Oceans wrote:
His views are now shocking *rural America and the centrists and independents rightwing mouthpieces to whom they listen.
FTFY
Oceans wrote:
I am a Ron Paul supporter. I think Libertarianism is the real freedom party.
as do i. but i'm also not under any delusions that a ron paul campaign (or that of any libertarian, really) has any shot at garnering mainstream appeal. it's called rational ignorance for a reason.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 12:49 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
If it were for President of the internet... I think he might have a chance.
I think it should have been obvious even to Republicans that a Bush White House was a bad idea even in 2000.
I find it kind of hilarious that they don't look around and go... fuck... this is the best we can do really?
And then Ron Paul comes around and actually espouses some conservative ideas... and they don't let him in the debate and try and make him look like a raving lunatic.
Kind of the same screw job Ralph Nader got when the Democrats had thier own issues with crappy canidates.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 1:08 pm
statistically insignificant
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:19 pm Posts: 25134
punkdavid wrote:
Clearly the path back to power for the GOP is to turn right.
another name for a democrat who understands economics is "libertarian."
bart d. wrote:
thodoks, do you see what kind of company you keep?
wait, you mean to tell me you're not a libertarian, bart? unpossible.
it's funny. i used to frequent libertarian websites and blogs much more than i do now. the rhetoric they employ is just over-the-top, and it projects an arrogance and closed mindedness that's off-putting to me, so i can imagine how mainstream voters would certainly at their message. i understand that in order to garner support they need to differentiate themselves somehow from the establishment right, but not at the cost of turning off moderate, intelligent, and open-minded liberals and conservatives alike. i've always felt like the best course for the libertarian party is to court moderate leftists, people who already embrace social freedoms and social libertarianism. more often than not, these people acknowledge their deficiency of economic knowledge, and are logical and rational enough to eventually embrace the libertarian position on the low-hanging fruit of the economic tree (sound money, free trade, pro-immigrant, low taxes, etc), if not necessarily the extremes that i would prefer.
so yeah, doctrinaire Daily Kos'ers and Freepers don't anything on the libertarian base. a little self-awareness goes a long way, and i've started to realize that tempering the libertarian message (or at least hammering home their position on the most resonant issues), as distasteful as it may be to the base, is probably in the long-term interest of the party.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 1:24 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:48 pm Posts: 4320 Location: Philadelphia, PA
thodoks wrote:
i used to frequent libertarian websites and blogs much more than i do now. the rhetoric they employ is just over-the-top, and it projects an arrogance and closed mindedness that's off-putting to me, so i can imagine how mainstream voters would certainly at their message. i understand that in order to garner support they need to differentiate themselves somehow from the establishment right, but not at the cost of turning off moderate, intelligent, and open-minded liberals and conservatives alike. i've always felt like the best course for the libertarian party is to court moderate leftists, people who already embrace social freedoms and social libertarianism. more often than not, these people acknowledge their deficiency of economic knowledge, and are logical and rational enough to eventually embrace the libertarian position on the low-hanging fruit of the economic tree (sound money, free trade, pro-immigrant, low taxes, etc), if not necessarily the extremes that i would prefer.
I read through Cato's conference debating whether libertarianism is perhaps liberal, perhaps progressive, perhaps radical. It is in no way conservative in the Becker/Posner/Friedrich Hayek sense.
I've read a lot of their economic material, and here (as you might expect I would think) is the basic weakness. They don't do the numbers. If they have a logical throughline, it doesn't matter that the numbers don't add up, the explanation remains valid (to them). It's kind of an Aristotelian way of looking at economics. The thought experiment is more valuable than the data.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 2:08 pm
statistically insignificant
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:19 pm Posts: 25134
SLH916 wrote:
thodoks wrote:
i used to frequent libertarian websites and blogs much more than i do now. the rhetoric they employ is just over-the-top, and it projects an arrogance and closed mindedness that's off-putting to me, so i can imagine how mainstream voters would certainly at their message. i understand that in order to garner support they need to differentiate themselves somehow from the establishment right, but not at the cost of turning off moderate, intelligent, and open-minded liberals and conservatives alike. i've always felt like the best course for the libertarian party is to court moderate leftists, people who already embrace social freedoms and social libertarianism. more often than not, these people acknowledge their deficiency of economic knowledge, and are logical and rational enough to eventually embrace the libertarian position on the low-hanging fruit of the economic tree (sound money, free trade, pro-immigrant, low taxes, etc), if not necessarily the extremes that i would prefer.
I read through Cato's conference debating whether libertarianism is perhaps liberal, perhaps progressive, perhaps radical. It is in no way conservative in the Becker/Posner/Friedrich Hayek sense.
I've read a lot of their economic material, and here (as you might expect I would think) is the basic weakness. They don't do the numbers. If they have a logical throughline, it doesn't matter that the numbers don't add up, the explanation remains valid (to them). It's kind of an Aristotelian way of looking at economics. The thought experiment is more valuable than the data.
it boggles the mind that someone as intelligent as you can look around, see the difference between countries that have, generally, embraced free markets and capitalism, and those that opted for a more state-centered course and still conclude that "the numbers don't add up," that capitalism is somehow a deficient means to improve the material well-being of individuals.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 2:40 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:48 pm Posts: 4320 Location: Philadelphia, PA
thodoks wrote:
it boggles the mind that someone as intelligent as you can look around, see the difference between countries that have, generally, embraced free markets and capitalism, and those that opted for a more state-centered course and still conclude that "the numbers don't add up," that capitalism is somehow a deficient means to improve the material well-being of individuals.
Well, the numbers don't add up when it comes to Cato's economic positions. And I have nothing against capitalism. Why on earth would you think that? I also have nothing against free markets. I've given you no reason to believe that. I do, however, believe that markets can't be free if all participants don't have access to information. And if some participants are prevented from using their resources to best advantage by the actions of other players on the field. You seem to have a belief that all markets are essentially the English thread market of the early 1800s. That simply isn't true. The Invisible Hand of Adam Smith has been replaced by The Visible Hand of Alfred Chandler in a great number of sectors.
Now which unsuccessful state-centered countries are you talking about? Sweden? Germany? Switzerland? Japan? Do you really want to argue that these are not essentially capitalist countries?
thodoks wrote:
stupefying.
Perhaps you are stupefied because you haven't really looked at the reasons why I believe the things that I do. I, on the other hand, have read tirelessly from the works of the Austrian economists, and you know what, there was some fantastic and even revelatory thought going on there at one time. They seem however to have been frightened and retreated from the radical implications of their own research, namely that market outcomes will not necessarily be optimal. The belief that central banking is the reason for this fails to take into account the fact that business cycles predate central banking. Voxeu has an analysis of the financial crisis of 1215, including a very familiar credit crunch.
If you're trying to insult me. It simply won't work. But it was a nice try.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 2:44 pm
Force of Nature
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:10 am Posts: 952
thodoks wrote:
SLH916 wrote:
thodoks wrote:
i used to frequent libertarian websites and blogs much more than i do now. the rhetoric they employ is just over-the-top, and it projects an arrogance and closed mindedness that's off-putting to me, so i can imagine how mainstream voters would certainly at their message. i understand that in order to garner support they need to differentiate themselves somehow from the establishment right, but not at the cost of turning off moderate, intelligent, and open-minded liberals and conservatives alike. i've always felt like the best course for the libertarian party is to court moderate leftists, people who already embrace social freedoms and social libertarianism. more often than not, these people acknowledge their deficiency of economic knowledge, and are logical and rational enough to eventually embrace the libertarian position on the low-hanging fruit of the economic tree (sound money, free trade, pro-immigrant, low taxes, etc), if not necessarily the extremes that i would prefer.
I read through Cato's conference debating whether libertarianism is perhaps liberal, perhaps progressive, perhaps radical. It is in no way conservative in the Becker/Posner/Friedrich Hayek sense.
I've read a lot of their economic material, and here (as you might expect I would think) is the basic weakness. They don't do the numbers. If they have a logical throughline, it doesn't matter that the numbers don't add up, the explanation remains valid (to them). It's kind of an Aristotelian way of looking at economics. The thought experiment is more valuable than the data.
it boggles the mind that someone as intelligent as you can look around, see the difference between countries that have, generally, embraced free markets and capitalism, and those that opted for a more state-centered course and still conclude that "the numbers don't add up," that capitalism is somehow a deficient means to improve the material well-being of individuals.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 3:16 pm
Got Some
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:07 pm Posts: 1787
Quote:
another name for a democrat who understands economics is "libertarian."
I dig this line. However, it does seem like this new disenfranchised-Republican version threatens to redefine the way that most people perceive libertarianism.
_________________ This year's hallway bounty: tampon dipped in ketchup, mouthguard, one sock, severed teddy bear head, pregnancy test, gym bag containing unwashed gym clothes and a half-eaten sandwich
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 3:19 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm Posts: 9282 Location: Atlanta Gender: Male
McParadigmatWork wrote:
Quote:
another name for a democrat who understands economics is "libertarian."
I dig this line. However, it does seem like this new disenfranchised-Republican version threatens to redefine the way that most people perceive libertarianism.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 3:24 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:48 pm Posts: 4320 Location: Philadelphia, PA
McParadigmatWork wrote:
Quote:
another name for a democrat who understands economics is "libertarian."
I dig this line. However, it does seem like this new disenfranchised-Republican version threatens to redefine the way that most people perceive libertarianism.
Where on earth did you see that?
A democrat who understands economics is NEVER called a libertarian. They're always called Keynesians whether they are or not. Just as Republicans are always called Monetarists whether they are or not.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 3:27 pm
statistically insignificant
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:19 pm Posts: 25134
SLH916 wrote:
Well, the numbers don't add up when it comes to Cato's economic positions. And I have nothing against capitalism. Why on earth would you think that?
because i misunderstood what you were saying.
SLH916 wrote:
I also have nothing against free markets. I've given you no reason to believe that. I do, however, believe that markets can't be free if all participants don't have access to information. And if some participants are prevented from using their resources to best advantage by the actions of other players on the field. You seem to have a belief that all markets are essentially the English thread market of the early 1800s. That simply isn't true. The Invisible Hand of Adam Smith has been replaced by The Visible Hand of Alfred Chandler in a great number of sectors.
fair enough. i clearly jumped to a conclusion i shouldn't have. my bad.
SLH916 wrote:
Now which unsuccessful state-centered countries are you talking about? Sweden? Germany? Switzerland? Japan? Do you really want to argue that these are not essentially capitalist countries?
no, not at all. in fact, that's why i added the modifier "generally" in the previous post.
SLH916 wrote:
Perhaps you are stupefied because you haven't really looked at the reasons why I believe the things that I do. I, on the other hand, have read tirelessly from the works of the Austrian economists, and you know what, there was some fantastic and even revelatory thought going on there at one time. They seem however to have been frightened and retreated from the radical implications of their own research, namely that market outcomes will not necessarily be optimal. The belief that central banking is the reason for this fails to take into account the fact that business cycles predate central banking. Voxeu has an analysis of the financial crisis of 1215, including a very familiar credit crunch.
i don't think that's fair. first of all, reading doesn't equal understanding. i've read about string theory, but i couldn't for the life of me grasp, let alone cogently explain, what the fuck brian greene is talking about. second, i'm certainly willing to acknowledge that not all market outcomes are optimal. maybe i've done a poor job articulating it, but that has never been my position. my position is that, given some less-than-optimal market outcome, it is NOT the case that the government is always able to materially improve said outcome. and to the extent that some gov't policy or action produces an observable and quantifiable positive somewhere, it's usually the case that the same policy or action also produces a less-observable and unquantifiable negative elsewhere. third, i'm usually pretty consistent in stating that the peanut butter to central banking's jelly is fractional-reserve banking. the business cycle is more or less coordinated by the interest rate, and to the extent that any entity, public or private, is able to artificially influence its fluctuation, economic disruptions are inevitable. prior to central banking, it was individual banks and citizens who acted as central banks do today. and just as it should have been the aim to undermine such practices in the thirteenth century, so too should it be the aim to undermine such practices in the twenty-first century regardless of the individual, firm, or institution engaging in such behavior. what is bad for the goose is also bad for the gander.
i'm guilty of getting wrapped around the axle in regards to economic minutia. and i'm coming to realize that the cost of that is forsaking debate on broader and more relevant issues.
SLH916 wrote:
If you're trying to insult me. It simply won't work. But it was a nice try.
i'm not trying to insult you at all. again, it was a misunderstanding.
Post subject: Re: Ron Paul keeps looking better every day.
Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 3:30 pm
statistically insignificant
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:19 pm Posts: 25134
McParadigmatWork wrote:
Quote:
another name for a democrat who understands economics is "libertarian."
I dig this line. However, it does seem like this new disenfranchised-Republican version threatens to redefine the way that most people perceive libertarianism.
see the tea party thread, and my objection to the logic of said tea partiers.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum