For me to vote for Romney he would have to agree to a full audit of the FED and start the return of our country to a debt free monetary system. A full repeal of the patriot act, Obama care and certain parts of the NDAA. As well as ending federal involvement in issues that should be decided by the states.
There are many many other things i disagree with him on, including foreign policy. But if he did these things, i could vote for him...provided it came on a Romney/Paul ticket
He has a lot of support but I think it's clear that the good doctor cannot convince any majority of Republican voters to support him.
But if Paul was Treasury Sec or Chairman of the Fed, he would have a lot more direct authority over issues that are important to him.
My two cents on this.
He has done better then 3rd during this nomination. But we have discussed how his placing in these "straw polls" really does not matter. We are not a democracy.
But i retract what i said, if Romney appoints Paul to chairman of the FED. I might could vote for him. He could effectively enact a large majority of his policies via his position at the FED. I still worry about personal liberties under a Romney presidency. Remember he supported all aspects of the NDAA. Im more concerned about our own government then i am about countries like Iran.
Though as ive said before, this race is far from over. And right now the only person within striking distance of Romney once delegates are considered is Paul.
I don't think a contested convention is good for anybody and I think if we head to Tampa in August with no one single candidate having enough delegates to secure this thing, that gives Obama a huge advantage.
Romney though, is really not all that different from the other candidates or even Obama for that matter. They agree on most issues except Obama care. Romney thinks it should be done at a state level and Obama at a federal. Other then that, there are effectively the same person.
Romney has no chance against Obama on his own. And i dont think he will come far enough to get the 20-25% of republicans and the majority of independents that are currently supporting Paul. If Paul agrees to to a cabinet position under Romney with his current positions on issues, he will lose a large portion of his support.
I cant see it happening.
"The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."
Ron Paul when he was on The Tonight Show last December. Leno asked him to give opinions on the other candidates. Paul was pretty rough on a few of them, but not so mean on Romney. Hmmmm.
Why are we arguing about this ?
And to address your question. His positions have not changed at all. Something you would know if you watched the debate instead of arguing about content you did not see. Oddly enough the other candidates are sounding more and more like Paul and even agreeing with him often during the debates.
I'm watching the debate now. I'll give my opinions, after I watch it!
My raw unedited notes from the debate:
- Wow, Gingrich promises $2.50/gal gasoline in the first minute of the debate. He better hope if he's elected president that it hits that mark.
- I want to punch Santorum in the mouth.
- Santorum defending earmarks and pork spending. How does anybody vote for this joker?
- Wow, what a bitch fight this is between these four goofs.
- I liked everybody's answers on the contraceptive/ObamaCare issue.
- Everybody is doing good except Santorum.
- Paul sounded weak on the issue of Iran.
- I like Ron Paul telling CNN's John King "no, I get one minute, not a moment John." LOL.
- LOL at Santorum lecturing the auidence. "Politics is a team sport, folks." Lecture the crowd, that'll get the votes, Santorum.
My scorecard of the performance
Romney: A- Defended his positions well, defended against the flip flopping allegations, and never really let Santorum go on the offensive against him.
Paul: B I like everything he's saying, mostly. Comes off weak on Iran. But, he still has an inability to explain his policy opinions in a way the Republican voters or even most Americans can digest.
Gingrich: C Another good performance debate from Gingrich. Too bad he's talking out of both sides of his mouth. I don't know how he can say he supports all this oil and nautral gas production in the United States when just a few years ago he was a green energy wind and solar guy. His promise of $2.50/gal gas under a Gingrich presidency is the kind of promise that comes back to bite politicans in the ass. "Read my lips, no new taxes", anybody?
Santorum: D- Looked like an idiot, spend the whole time defending earmarks, government pork and goverment waste. He couldn't make anything stick against Romney and Paul played him, too. How did this clown win all those states back to back?
I agree with most of your observations.
I wish i could run up on stage sometimes and explain things for Paul. Its frustrating to hear him espouse the correct positions. But not be able to explain it in a way that the average voter will understand.
Doug Wead addresses the Romney/Paul alliance. Says there isnt one. Short video 4 min long.