[Rainbow Crow]

I'm curious if Libertarians have discussed this at all or not. Ron Paul is into his 70's now and if he runs again after this election cycle, that would mean he'd be in his 80's as a two-term President.

Would the support go to his son, Rand Paul, who would start running for President? You usually need to be a bit more mainstream to hold onto a Senate seat though, so I'm not sure how acceptable a replacement he'd be...

[Daktoria]

Occasionally, something odd happens after an ideologue disappears - the ideology is absorbed among the masses because it doesn't have a target to criticize. It also becomes politically correct to ask for forgiveness from those who can no longer demand damages (similarly to apologizing at a funeral).

Without Ron Paul, I don't expect the Campaign for Liberty to inspire the Tea Party movement much longer either. The country will have to start making choices on an organic level whether it prefers liberty or security more.

[Kman]

I'm curious if Libertarians have discussed this at all or not. Ron Paul is into his 70's now and if he runs again after this election cycle, that would mean he'd be in his 80's as a two-term President.

Would the support go to his son, Rand Paul, who would start running for President? You usually need to be a bit more mainstream to hold onto a Senate seat though, so I'm not sure how acceptable a replacement he'd be...

Some of it might, I am personally not that keen on Rand Paul, he voted for sanctions against Iran and he kisses the butt of the neo-cons far too much for my taste.

Maybe Peter Schiff will get elected (his 2010 senate campaign failed), I would pay good money to see him rip apart the idiots in congress, he is an amazing debater and orator.

No matter what the fact remains that Ron Paul is not the only member on the jedi council, there are plenty of others that match his intellectual power like Lew Rockwell, Thomas Woods or as mentioned earlier Peter Schiff. Whether they can get elected remains to be seen however, nothing is guarenteed when your dealing with boobus americanus.

Overall though I do not worry that much about whether we have one of our guys in Congress, our battle is an intellectual one and that can be won solely via the internet I think.

[mikema63]

theres also rand paul, lots of people think ron is just setting the stage for his kid anyway.

[DudeWhoGetsIt]

Part of the mystique and appeal of Ron Paul is his success in getting elected and re-elected to congress. There are lots of libertarians but none have had his repeated success within the system. The libertarian party has been around and organized and receiving in excess of a million votes for President in every election cycle for decades, but it was the marquee success of Ron Paul that expanded the movement from .5% of the voting population, to roughtly 5% of it.

Ron Paul is a precursor to a potential strategy of the future. He has been allowed to rise and directly criticize the governing structure of the Western military-banking industrial complex because they themselves recognize the value in having an option to recind their international machine with a quickness if it proves necessary. Should international variables change drastically, one can run a thought experiment and imagine, however unlikely, a scenario where the US would have an interest in pulling back it's military and reverting it's currency back to a gold-based system (or some other system of sound money)

So Ron Paul is a hedge by the establishment, an agent of inclusion for the right wing (keeping the whackos inside the tent), and perhaps also a self-driven, irresistable force (or figurehead for a force) for change.

[Eran]

On the topic of libertarian attitudes towards elections, I really enjoyed this post by Don Boudreaux.

His main point is that, over the long run, the political system reflects broad sentiments within society. Ron Paul, in other words, couldn't get elected before libertarianism is much more widespread. If, by some fluke, he did get elected, he wouldn't be able to effectively implement his policies.

Rather than worry about the short-term election of this or that politician, much better to attempt to influence long-term public opinion. If you are successful, the right people will get elected. If you don't, nothing will help.

[Writ_Large]

Rand Paul kisses the butt of the neo-cons far too much for my taste.

Exactly- he's not nearly as much of an ideologue as his father. He's much more of a politician.

Peter Schiff... is an amazing debater and orator.

No matter how much he constantly interrupts and talks over his opponents, it will not improve his poor grasp of even poorer economic theories.

I think that in another twenty years or more we may see a new Ron Paul-like figure rise to prominence. But not before then, because if that were the case, we would likely already know them as up-and-comers.

[Kman]

No matter how much he constantly interrupts and talks over his opponents, it will not improve his poor grasp of even poorer economic theories.

Well he is a bad radio host I will be the first to admit that, in a debate however he is amazing at exposing bad and incoherant theories however, he is very good when the forum is confrontational and he doesnt have to interview people. You should watch some of the videos out there where he debates university professors, people who are Keynesian leaning, he makes them look like total amateurs (the video of him challenging Princeton's Alan Blinder is especially hilarious).

As for his ''poorer economic theories'' I would like to know what your referring too exactly, I havent seen him make any theoretical mistakes yet and I dont think Ron Paul would hire him as an economic advisor if he had a poor grasp of economics.

[tofu2011]

Have you got a link to that Blinder vid? I would like to see it.

[Rich]

And behold you shall see one like unto a son of Rand coming with the clouds of heaven,

[Kman]

Have you got a link to that Blinder vid? I would like to see it.

[youtube]RBzhRZxp-hk[/youtube]

[Will Swanson]

I can say that personally, I will be throwing my support to Gary Johnson.

Rand Paul doesn't have much experience so far, and Gary Johnson has eight years of executive experience.

I think there will be even more Libertarian candidates in the future, once the younger Libertarians are of age to run for office.

[Writ_Large]

In a debate however he is amazing at exposing bad and incoherant theories however, he is very good when the forum is confrontational and he doesnt have to interview people. You should watch some of the videos out there where he debates university professors, people who are Keynesian leaning, he makes them look like total amateurs.

No, I find that he takes no time to think deeply about the other theories, and rather just yells a list of reasons why he is right and you are wrong. Typical Rothbardian.

As for his ''poorer economic theories'' I would like to know what your referring too exactly, I havent seen him make any theoretical mistakes yet and I dont think Ron Paul would hire him as an economic advisor if he had a poor grasp of economics.

Austrian business cycle theory is a superficial explanation of economic downturns, and it becomes more problematic the more I think about it. And it certainly has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

[Nunt]

Austrian business cycle theory is a superficial explanation of economic downturns, and it becomes more problematic the more I think about it. And it certainly has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

Hayek did describe how two ways in which artificial booms can be created. The first (most famous one) is money expansion by governments. The second is monetary expansion by private banks. By changing the reserve ratio private banks can increase the money supply, the increase the amount of loanable funds without a corresponding real increase in savings. The interest rate decreases, but since saving-preferences are unchanged, the natural rate of interest remains unchanged. Thus, people make investment decisions, based on a too low interest rate. They invest too much, fuelling a boom.

[Eran]

it becomes more problematic the more I think about it.

What problems do you see with it?

it certainly has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

The libertarian community is split over the question. We can all agree that central-bank-supported fractional reserve banking is a terrible idea, and naturally leads to instability in the economy.

It is less clear that fractional reserve banking, in the context of a competitive note-creation environment and in the absence of either legal tender laws or central banks is similarly destabilizing.

[slodok]

Ron have track record and reliability and passion,but he is not Libertarian...even most Libertarians and Neocons want to label him that way for different reasons.He is Republican constutionalist.Point is that he is strict folower of law of the land.He is not idealist ,he dont belive in this or that but promote what has been agreed by highest act.He does not discover something new,and he say that openly.He is just extremly straight guy.Why he get popularity is that most of others and us are hypocrites.We like to cherish idea that there is someone else there what we are not,it give us a hope when we fall in moral decadency.I dont think anyone can replace him,and his movement will crack.Bunch of these will go to be leftist,some anarchists,some constitutionalists,some peace cherrry,some republicans etc.USA is psycho political society,and Ron Paul to win need to medicate all psychos.It is imposible task to have what you havent chance to have.

[nucklepunche]

I do think we saw libertarian rhetoric absorbed by the mainstream conservatism which will be the trajectory. There will be purist libertarians but this will no longer be the bulk as it was in the past. Ron Paul's ideas have not taken over conservatism in purity which will upset his hardened fanboys but they have entered conservatism by osmosis.

[Imperial Spaghetti]

http://youtu.be/wY3EQekIIXI
Ron Swanson for president-

[Imperial Spaghetti]

[youtube]wY3EQekIIXI[/youtube]

Yes. NOw I can embed. Ron Swanson for president.

[nucklepunche]

nothing is guarenteed when your dealing with boobus americanus.

Why don't you just admit you are an American? Otherwise why is boobus americanus something you worry about? Also great attempt and being witty. Copying HL Mencken.