Let's assume Ron Paul became president for one second...

H

HardYoungBlack

Banned
Jan 18, 2012
51
2
0
Btw he has my vote and I tell all my friends about him to the point where they are sick of me haha.

Even if he got in, I don't see how effective he could be considering a lot of what he wants to pass would have to go through a corrupt congress/senate. The entire system needs an overhaul and honestly it takes a lot more than a president to do that. I hate to admit it but I think he'd be a lame duck for the most part.

Thoughts?
 


(1) If Ron Paul, the most revolutionary candidate in U.S. history, gets elected, it indicates a massive shift in public opinion. Politicians are known for moving with the wind. Congress will be in a mood to work with someone who did the seemingly impossible.

(2) He can pardon huge numbers of people, thereby effectively repealing unjust, unconstitutional laws.

(3) He can tell the country the truth for four years, both about foreign policy and the economy. He can spend four years encouraging people to study Austrian economics. That is more important than all the legislation in the world.

(4) By executive order he can repeal all the bad executive orders.

(5) He can refuse to send troops around the world without the consent of Congress. This kind of constitutional deference to Congress has not been seen in generations.

That’s what occurs to me offhand.

UPDATE: A reader reminds me: think of all the vetoes!
Click to expand...
Could a President Ron Paul Accomplish Anything? | Texas GOP Vote
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVTXbARGXso]Hacking Democracy - Full Length - YouTube[/ame]
 
I think he could have an affect. People would probably hate it. He could in theory gridlock the system by veto'ing every bill that crosses his desk.
 
I mean politics is a game of compromise for the most part isn't it? Sure he could veto a lot but on the other hand working with members to pass a few bills, etc... would probably be the better strategy.

Or at least work with them on domestic issues. Btw dreamcache really good post, thanks.
 
The benefit isn't progressive, it's regressive.

There mountains of laws and regulations he'll nullify ... who gives a fuck if congress makes progress writing new laws, ideologically I wish for gridlock in DC.
 
HardYoungBlack said:
I mean politics is a game of compromise for the most part isn't it? Sure he could veto a lot but on the other hand working with members to pass a few bills, etc... would probably be the better strategy.

Or at least work with them on domestic issues. Btw dreamcache really good post, thanks.
Click to expand...

The whole point is that there is no compromise. Any frivolous spending leading to a more bloated government = veto.
 
Sometimes I think that what Ron Paul is doing now is more sustainable than anything he could do as a president. He's slowly changing the thoughts of not just the USA but the world - how many times have we seen folks not even in USA support him?

I think he might get the Kennedy treatment if he ever lands in office, the powers that be already know how dangerous he is to their establishment.
 
No more illegal immigrants... demand for gas prices will go down. Crime will be reduced. More jobs will be given to legal citizens, I could go on...
 
I agree with Andrew, people like Ron Paul often end up dead in this country, unfortunately. I think at this point they are trying to just let nature takes its course with him, as he is not getting any younger.

Something tells me if Ron Paul was a young guy running right now he would end up in some type of weird "accident" lol
 
Dresden14 said:
No more illegal immigrants... demand for gas prices will go down. Crime will be reduced. More jobs will be given to legal citizens, I could go on...
Click to expand...

The surge in illegal immigrants is very much due to the minimum wage laws and the unwillingness of Americans to take low-paying jobs.

In fact, these illegal immigrants are probably taking jobs that would otherwise be shipped overseas. This keeps money and capital in the U.S., instead of shipping it out.

Illegal immigrants aren't taking away any jobs worth complaining about.

Would I prefer these immigrants be legal citizens? I don't think it makes much of a difference, especially considering their incomes are probably below the poverty line, so it's not like they would contribute to the tax burden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vhaeos
Falian said:
In fact, these illegal immigrants are probably taking jobs that would otherwise be shipped overseas. This keeps money and capital in the U.S., instead of shipping it out.

Illegal immigrants aren't taking away any jobs worth complaining about.
Click to expand...

Very true. If there were not immigrants doing some jobs for insanely low wages, the cost for that specific job would rise to the point were some US citizens would be willing to do it, by then, bearing in mind this is an unregulated economy for basic products, many of these goods could very well be imported for a more convenient price.
 
First and Foremost, Paul WOULD have the power to repeal the troops immediately, and not start any new wars for his entire term.

A lot of people hear the 'cut 1 Trillion in the first year" quote and assume there is some qualifier like "if congress allows me to do so." -That simply isn't true. The Commander in Chief gets to say who the enemy is and ever since WWII was done, the commander in chief has been the only american to start any wars... Money from those wars came from congress later, but the order of this relationship stands. Paul can and will cut that 1 trillion easily.

cheshire said:
I think he could have an affect. People would probably hate it. He could in theory gridlock the system by veto'ing every bill that crosses his desk.
Click to expand...
He's telegraphed his moves for 30 freaking years now. Every last legislator would know exactly what he would and would not support, and bills would be CREATED appropriately. It's just silly to think that any work would grind to a halt... It would in fact enable real work to begin!

HardYoungBlack said:
I mean politics is a game of compromise for the most part isn't it?
Click to expand...
You only think this because the propaganda has existed for it since before you were born. Paul wouldn't compromise on his libertarian beliefs. He might throw a bone or two their way when it's not something that is not related to the constitution. (If such a thing exists?)

Hale.Pane said:
No hate but things will probably stay the same. History repeating itself.
Click to expand...
I see someone here hasn't researched Paul's voting record very well.

Or did you mean the election will go the same way for Paul as it did in 2008?
 
tumblr_lydctyzsVb1qz5ew6o1_500.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom