Originally Posted by
CDB
Which with all respect, will do absolutely nothing. I've been a libertarian longer than I can remember and a supporter of Paul too, but the bottom line is few people support an agenda of true liberty. The vast majority of people out there have at least 3 or 4 "Holy Cow" exceptions that they want trotted through the door, be it welfare, universal health care, interventionist foreign policy, etc. And they all have a different 3 or 4, and so they all end up going for one of the two major parties out of habit and general agreement anyway. So unless Paul is the Republican nominee, he's never getting elected. All the stoners in the world won't matter unless of course he ran a wedge campaign against the drug war alone. And even then, no federal money for needles or research?! No welfare? No 'free' health care?
The vast majority of people in this world want freedom for themselves and strict controls on their neighbors. I can be trusted, you can't. I can drive without a license, but we have to keep an eye on you and everyone else. I can do drugs responsibly, but everyone else will mess it up. I can determine if my house is safe, but everyone else will build fire traps. I can own a gun responsibly, but everyone else will shoot each other dead over the smallest disagreements. Etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. That's how the majority of the world thinks, few if any people realize liberty for all is the only way to get liberty for yourself, and in all honestly few if any of them want to live in that world because it does require self responsibility and control on a level they may not be comfortable with. So they will always vote to keep a close eye on their neighbor and government boot on his neck and bitch and moan about their neighbor's every attempt to do the same to back to them.
Paul actually supports freedom for everyone, and all the benefits and risks that come with that. America of today isn't looking for that, doesn't want it. It much prefers the empty promises of 'revolutionaries' who claim we can have womb to tomb government provision of damn near everything one could ever want if 'the rich' would only pay their 'fair share', which is never defined except as always being less than they're currently paying whatever that may be. And hell, if like Norway we were sitting on a few hundred billion in oil we might be able to bankroll that for a while. But it's going to take a long time for Americans to realize they can't use the government to steal their way to wealth.
And until that happens it will always just be a tug-o-war between Republicans who think constant bombing of other countries will bring peace of the foreign front, and that constant raping of the poor and middle class will bring prosperity on the home front, or the Democrats who think all we have to do is smile and be more like Europe for our foreign issues to work out, and pursuant to that on the home front that we can tax the living **** out of anyone and everyone who shows the most miniscule signs of being successful as a means of getting richer all around, because all good things flow from a beneficent government.
Of course Rome and the USSR proved both approaches wrong respectively, but people take time to learn I guess.