Who would you rather have as president?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Go.

Easy Paul vote here.

[Maxwell]

eugh ron paul

but yeah ron paul wouldn't be able to get through any bit of his agenda so paul

[Mr. Reactionary]

Easy Paul vote here.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

While Trump has the benefit of pissing off the usual suspects, Ron Paul in general is a more decent politician and a thousand times over a better person. There isn't a question here. Doctor Paul.

[Sunmerican Dream.]

Trump a million times over Ron Paul. #NeverPaul

[anthonyjg]

Paul, I'm not a fan of either of them on economics but at least I can trust Paul more than Trump on civil liberties and foreign policy.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Definitely RON PAUL.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Trump, although I would much prefer a movement conservative like Pence/Walker/Rubio/Cruz/McCrory to either of them.  Protectionism isn't a good thing, but neither is libertarianism.  We need to stick to true conservatism.

[Biden Stans Are Cringelords]

Trump. Paul's views on healthcare are abhorrent.

[RFayette 🇻🇦]

I like Paul a lot - great on foreign policy, a pro-life stalwart, and has impeccable character, so I'd go with him.  But I really hope he wouldn't be able to get his economic agenda through, however.

[Xing]

Guess I have to vote for Paul.

[RI]

Trump, easily.

[Mr. Smith]

Trump by far. 

If the choices are both dogwhistlers tired of neoconservatism, I'd rather have the one not bent on destroying healthcare and going back to the gold standard.

[Enduro]

Paul, hands down.

[Person Man]

I'd even settle for Paul Ryan.

[President Johnson]

Donald John Trump.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Reluctantly, Ron Paul.

[Santander]

Trump, although I would much prefer a movement conservative like Pence/Walker/Rubio/Cruz/McCrory to either of them.  Protectionism isn't a good thing, but neither is libertarianism.  We need to stick to true conservatism.

[DavidB.]

Ron Paul is really the worst, so not a particularly difficult choice. On basically all the issues where I'm worried about Trump, Paul would be even worse and more ideological.

Trump, although I would much prefer a movement conservative like Pence/Walker/Rubio/Cruz/McCrory to either of them.  Protectionism isn't a good thing, but neither is libertarianism.

[bagelman]

Lean Paul. I like his foreign policy, he's less likely (not completely unlikely) to use the presidency to enrich himself, and he has a good shot of just sitting around and not doing anything. I would hope that the Democrats win the midterms and block many of his crazier economic ideas.

[RINO Tom]

Easy Paul vote here.

[Goldwater]

Easy Paul vote here.

[Cashew]

I like Paul a lot - great on foreign policy, a pro-life stalwart, and has impeccable character, so I'd go with him.  But I really hope he wouldn't be able to get his economic agenda through, however.

Yes, character counts... for me at least.

But anyway I would feel great voting for him if I know we would have a Dem congress to block most of his economic policy.

By the way, the guy (Ron Paul) must be apoplectic about how many of his supporters went over to Trump - and early and enthusiastically at that. So much for the "Liberty movement" or w/e.

What a depressing election this must have been for the more principled Paulites - it's been a long time since we've seen a presidential contest in which both major candidates were so poor at concealing their hopes to use the presidency as a vehicle for adding to their already massive personal fortunes. I doubt that Clinton would be openly leaning on world leaders to allow her to open hotels with her name on them in their countries, though.

Yeah this is among the saddest parts of this election for me, to see the psudo-libertarians, and the alternate media at large shill for Trump, and dump all that anti Obama "liberty" rhetoric.

I mean, have you seen how far Alex Jones has fallen?