Voting for VP... why?

Hmm... this was posted without me doing it.

Anyway, my point was that, if you were thinking that you'd support the Republican Party,based on the Libertarian VP choice of Paul Ryan, why would you support a candidate who was NOT a libertarian?

Paul Ryan as VP means nothing. If you support him, why would you not insist on him being the candidate, rather than Romney, who clearly does not support Libertarian doctrines?

Originally posted by adjensen

Vincent Price?
Vermicelli Pasta?

EDIT: OK, I'll read the fixed post now.


EDIT 2: Great post. VP is an important title, but incidental to the election for President.

reply to post by adjensen

Libertarian VP choice of Paul Ryan,

Ummm. Do you even know who this man is ? He's not a Libertarian ? Where do you people get your info ?

No wonder we're all messed up.

reply to post by skepticconwatcher


Geez, I don't know, maybe because he's claimed Randianism as being his basis for a long time?

Or maybe this: Ron Paul Supporters See Libertarian Opportunity in Paul Ryan as VP

That would be my second clue.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by skepticconwatcher

 

Geez, I don't know, maybe because he's claimed Randianism as being his basis for a long time?

Or maybe this: Ron Paul Supporters See Libertarian Opportunity in Paul Ryan as VP

That would be my second clue.

Well then that tells me there's a whole lot of ignorant people out there so I guess there needs to be an educating of the public about this phony like there was with Romney. So many non searching sheep out there wouldn't know a fraud if it bit them on the butt. Just believe everything someone says because they said so. I hate people like that worse than I hate politicians.

reply to post by adjensen


Maybe the supporters would be happy having their pick in second place which in itself is juvenile but hey thats the public for ya with that being said Romney would pull in more independent voters by choosing that type of running mate.

Actually, I would have much preferred Ryan as the #1....by what I know of him so far, and that isn't complete in my mind by any stretch yet. What I see looks good though...

Having said that, well... It's kinda late now. He's the VP pick and that's all he can be. Ever can be. At least for this election. Heck, he's supposed to be some economic guru or some such thing. At least I keep reading that.

Gooood. The budget as it sits says we have a few years left..IF that....and their own words and numbers all but say it. I hope he's every bit as good as people say because I doubt even that is enough. It's worth a try though. Heck.. bailing with a bucket on the Titanic was worth a try too, I imagine. What is there to lose when it's sinking and there is nothing in the world to change that?

Vice Presidents mean nothing.

Some famous VP's................

Thomas Jefferson was a VP

Teddy Roosevelt was a VP

Truman was a VP

Nixon was a VP

Johnson (both) was a VP

Ford was a VP

Rockefeller was a VP

Bush (41) was a VP

Al Gore was a VP

Dick Cheney was a VP

Joe Biden is a VP

The only two on the list that "means nothing" is Gore and Biden

Last time I saw Paul Ryan on C-SPAN he was doing good work. I don't remember if it was about smaller government or more about less spending, but I think he is VP to stop him.

I was listening to Robin Ramsay's book "Who Shot JFK". One of the congressional probes into the assasination ended when the leader was offered the vice-presidency.

BTW Did you know Gaeton Fonzi (Same as "Happy Days" Fonzi?) was the only person assigned by the goverment to investigate the JFK assasination as a murder-- without assuming Oswald did it.