If Ron Paul was running in 2016 where would he be?

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Where would he be?

[This account no longer in use.]

I'd assume that Rand Paul would not run against Ron. Ron Paul probably has more name recognition and likability than his son, and he doesn't have anybody truly running against him in the Republitarian wing of the party, so I'd imagine he'd take a good amount of the non-Christian-conservative supporters of Ted Cruz, as well as the Rand Paul supporters. Therefore, I'd go with 10-12%, higher in Iowa and New Hampshire.

[tpfkaw]

1-5%; he'd maybe be doing a hair better than Rand but Trump and Sanders would still have taken the lion's share of his support, and his age would've really started to be very hard to overcome (both in terms of it being an argument against him, and not having the ability to campaign as actively).

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Probably 7-10% around that

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

Rand's gonna be out by Florida. He seems so miserable running for President. He'll give it one more go and pass the torch to Amash.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

[Pyro]

Probably around 5-7%.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

[Asian Nazi]

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

I think your mistake is assuming that most of Ron Paul's supporters were actual lolbertarians as opposed to just random crazies/anti-establishment types.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

Because not everyone that supported Ron was a libertarian. The libertarian base is small. That doesn't change the fact that libertarians still overwhelmingly support Rand. This is why he gets standing ovations at places like YAL and SFL which are the biggest liberty tents and encompass the movement overwhelmingly. It gets old to repeat this to people that think libertarians have randomly jumped ship and somehow Ron would magically be close to double digits right now in a diluted election.

...and hence why the liberty movement is doomed to fail. The libertarians refuse to accept that other people (social conservative types, paleocons, etc) are part of the tent too. We can build a grand coalition around Cruz that could easily last long enough for a Rand Paul or Justin Amash to take it to it's full potential, but the purism that is innate to libertarians keeps getting in the way.

[Cruzcrew]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

Because not everyone that supported Ron was a libertarian. The libertarian base is small. That doesn't change the fact that libertarians still overwhelmingly support Rand. This is why he gets standing ovations at places like YAL and SFL which are the biggest liberty tents and encompass the movement overwhelmingly. It gets old to repeat this to people that think libertarians have randomly jumped ship and somehow Ron would magically be close to double digits right now in a diluted election.

...and hence why the liberty movement is doomed to fail. The libertarians refuse to accept that other people (social conservative types, paleocons, etc) are part of the tent too. We can build a grand coalition around Cruz that could easily last long enough for a Rand Paul or Justin Amash to take it to it's full potential, but the purism that is innate to libertarians keeps getting in the way.

Only if

[Phony Moderate]

The basis of the Paulmania of 2008/2012 was the authoritarianism of the Dubya administration. Memories of that administration are now fading into history and while Obama hasn't exactly been a libertarian president he hasn't cracked down on civil liberties to the same extent and with the same malice that the preceding administration did.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Permanently estranged from Rand, I'd think.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

Because not everyone that supported Ron was a libertarian. The libertarian base is small. That doesn't change the fact that libertarians still overwhelmingly support Rand. This is why he gets standing ovations at places like YAL and SFL which are the biggest liberty tents and encompass the movement overwhelmingly. It gets old to repeat this to people that think libertarians have randomly jumped ship and somehow Ron would magically be close to double digits right now in a diluted election.

...and hence why the liberty movement is doomed to fail. The libertarians refuse to accept that other people (social conservative types, paleocons, etc) are part of the tent too. We can build a grand coalition around Cruz that could easily last long enough for a Rand Paul or Justin Amash to take it to it's full potential, but the purism that is innate to libertarians keeps getting in the way.

Lol at it being about purism. Cruz is a flipflopping prick. You picked a terrible example. additionally, this was tried with Buchanan and many times in the 60s to 70s and always failed

And Senator Iran Letter isn't a flip-flopper?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

Because not everyone that supported Ron was a libertarian. The libertarian base is small. That doesn't change the fact that libertarians still overwhelmingly support Rand. This is why he gets standing ovations at places like YAL and SFL which are the biggest liberty tents and encompass the movement overwhelmingly. It gets old to repeat this to people that think libertarians have randomly jumped ship and somehow Ron would magically be close to double digits right now in a diluted election.

...and hence why the liberty movement is doomed to fail. The libertarians refuse to accept that other people (social conservative types, paleocons, etc) are part of the tent too. We can build a grand coalition around Cruz that could easily last long enough for a Rand Paul or Justin Amash to take it to it's full potential, but the purism that is innate to libertarians keeps getting in the way.

Lol at it being about purism. Cruz is a flipflopping prick. You picked a terrible example. additionally, this was tried with Buchanan and many times in the 60s to 70s and always failed

And Senator Iran Letter isn't a flip-flopper?

No.

Convincing argument bro.

[Kingpoleon]

Probably 7-10% around that

Yeah, I'd guess at 8% (ahead of Jeb!) because the Paulite base is more loyal to him than Rand. I'd say Paulites are about 10% of the GOP electorate (I have no proof, just a guess), so I would say that fewer Paulites would peel off for Cruz like I did due to their personal loyalty.

I'm one of the roughly 20-30% of Paulites that are still with Rand and not veer off towards Cruz, though if Rand drops out before Florida, I'll vote for Cruz.

90 percent of the libertarian base still supports Rand lol

Way to admit your own irrelevance.

I don't even know what that means.

If 90% of libertarian Republicans are backing Rand, why is Rand at 2% in the polls. That means that libertarian Republicans no long exist. And seeing that Papa Paul performed moderately well in 2012, I refuse to believe that they are such a tiny sliver. Libertarians are not even close to backing Rand by 90%. Maybe 50% of them are.

Because not everyone that supported Ron was a libertarian. The libertarian base is small. That doesn't change the fact that libertarians still overwhelmingly support Rand. This is why he gets standing ovations at places like YAL and SFL which are the biggest liberty tents and encompass the movement overwhelmingly. It gets old to repeat this to people that think libertarians have randomly jumped ship and somehow Ron would magically be close to double digits right now in a diluted election.

...and hence why the liberty movement is doomed to fail. The libertarians refuse to accept that other people (social conservative types, paleocons, etc) are part of the tent too. We can build a grand coalition around Cruz that could easily last long enough for a Rand Paul or Justin Amash to take it to it's full potential, but the purism that is innate to libertarians keeps getting in the way.

If you want a Rand coalition, go with paleocons, libertarians, and Christie/Kasich-moderates. Otherwise, you have people like Cruz cracking down on everything but "drug war so important" that you can't. Rand Paul is a compromise. Jeff Flake or Brian Sandoval would be better for attracting moderates and then paleocons on foreign policy.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

He'd be around 5%.  There's alot of things I like about Ron Paul, but his views on 9/11 disqualify him from the White House.