Ron Paul: “I haven’t decided” whether I’ll support Mitt Romney if he’s the nominee

posted at 8:12 pm on April 2, 2012 by Tina Korbe

For all the talk of an alliance between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, the Texas Congressman doesn’t sound particularly sold on the presumptive frontrunner. On two occasions this weekend, Paul expressed his hesitancy toward the former Massachusetts governor. CNSNews.com reports:

On Monday, asked if he could support the Republican nominee, whoever it may be – Paul told WMAL radio in Washington, “I haven’t decided.” …

“Which Republican other than myself would look into the Federal Reserve?” Paul asked.

Appearing Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Paul told host Bob Schieffer something similar when Schieffer asked if Paul would support Romney.

“Well, I–I haven’t made that decision yet. I’m still campaigning,” Paul said.

Schieffer repeated, “You haven’t made the decision on whether you would support Mitt Romney if he gets the nomination?”

“No, I have not,” Paul responded. …

Paul also insisted that he has no plans to run as a third party candidate. And he said he finds it hard to imagine himself as Romney’s running mate.

This is consistent with Ron Paul’s presentation of himself in the primaries up to this point, and it’s even consistent with the theory that he’s refraining from attacking Romney because he doesn’t want to hurt his son Rand Paul’s chances within the GOP. Paul prides himself on his unconventional views, on his role outside the Republican mainstream as the leader of his own movement, the Ron Paul revolution. He doesn’t need to endorse Mitt Romney or overtly support him in any way to maintain friendly ties with the Romneys and so ensure that a GOP nominee or President Romney would look favorably on the junior senator from Kentucky. Instead, he just needs to avoid outright attacks, which he has primarily done. Meanwhile, neither the Romneys nor the Pauls are reserved about the friendship that has grown up among them as a result of the primary process. In the same CBS interview, Paul admitted he likes Mitt Romney as a person. “I find him a dignified person,” Paul said, in what was obviously high praise for the man he says he still might not support as the nominee.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Then get the Fluke out of the party eyebrows!

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Is Ron still around?

Electrongod on April 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Paul is commited to supporting the nominee who ever it turns out to be… OK, I’s going to be Romney.

BobScuba on April 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

I find it hard to imagine him as a VP too!

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 8:15 PM

A Herr Doktor Ron Gerbils thread?
Cool!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Meanwhile, neither the Romneys nor the Pauls are reserved about the friendship that has grown up among them as a result of the primary process.

Perhaps Mitt can accompany Ron Paul on his $500 dinner date with Don Black.

ebrown2 on April 2, 2012 at 8:17 PM

These freaking idiots need to stop their childish, egocentric behavior and go after Obama. If they blow this again, the Republican Party should be trashed and never again allowed to field a national candidate. This is disgusting.

rplat on April 2, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Ron does admire Obama’s Israel policy. If Israel gets nuked, Obama promises to send some beautiful flowers to the memorial service.

RBMN on April 2, 2012 at 8:22 PM

*ACK* Ron Paul! Initiate N00ZLETTR sequence! Man the earmark non-sequitur torpedoes!

DO NOT INTERACT WITH ACTUAL RON PAUL VIEWS. EVADE AND DISTRACT AT ALL COSTS. AD-HOMINEMTOPIA OR BUST!

thirtyandseven on April 2, 2012 at 8:22 PM

Of course he is going to say he “hasn’t decided”, he’s still trying to run himself. But he will support Romney in the general because I just can’t see him supporting Obama and if you aren’t behind Romney, you are behind Obama.

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 8:23 PM

“I find him a dignified person,” Paul said

Translation: His hair looks even better with tin foil!

Valkyriepundit on April 2, 2012 at 8:23 PM

We have to get the anti-American Marxist out of office. Mittens isn’t my choice, but he’s less worse than Dear Liar.

rbj on April 2, 2012 at 8:23 PM

What does that mean? A Paul endorsement of Obama? Wouldn’t that mess with the minds of the idiots who support this moron!

Bottom line. No legitimate candidate for any office from dog catcher to President of the United States wants the endorsement of Ron Paul.

Happy Nomad on April 2, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Don’t support him, Ron. He’s going to be a disaster.

rickv404 on April 2, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Paul is commited to supporting the nominee who ever it turns out to be… OK, I’s going to be Romney.

BobScuba on April 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

While RONPAUL 2012 should be committed, he is committed to his son.

He will support the nominee.

cozmo on April 2, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Ron Paul goes by the Golden Rule. Whoever owns the most gold gets his endorsement.

So it’ll be Romney.

SlaveDog on April 2, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Thank you, Dr Paul.

Rusty Allen on April 2, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Whatever shreds of respect that remain in me for Ron Paul will be obliterated if he really gets behind the engineer of what ObamaCare was based on.

MadisonConservative on April 2, 2012 at 8:29 PM

On the one hand, it would be nice for him to refuse to support that fiberal fool on general principle…

But on the other, Ron’s been sticking to his principles for decades, but it’s gotten him a lot of derision from the knuckledragging contingent and not much else. At this stage, what’s the point?

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Could someone PLEASE get this guy on a shuffleboard cruise to nowhere and *off* TV?

I mean, doesnt LaRouche need someone for mixed doubles in Boca?

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Ron Paul cannot endorse anyone until after the convention. If he does his donations will dry up. He is set to retire and wants some spending money.

Fallon on April 2, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Sure thing./

Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Paul will not endorse Romney. Kinda obvious.

Endorsement of Romney = endorsement of Obama. Same dudes.

Lord on April 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

MadisonConservative on April 2, 2012 at 8:29 PM

I can’t say I’d be too proud of him either…

But be honest: what good can he possibly do by denouncing him at this point? Are conservatives suddenly going to pull a 180 and give him the nomination at the 11th hour and 59th minute?

Endorsing that flip-flopping scum won’t be his finest hour, but his alternative is to say “naughty, naughty Mittens” (which won’t do jack sh!t) and get a pat on the head from the people who’ve been flinging poo since 2000.

Endorsement or no, Romney’s gonna get this anyway unless he keels over from a heart attack or something.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM

if you aren’t behind Romney, you are behind Obama.

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Totally bogus. I will no accept responsibility when this tool goes down in totally foreseeable flames.

alwaysfiredup on April 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Are conservatives suddenly going to pull a 180 and give him the nomination at the 11th hour and 59th minute?

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM

You know that’s their dream, right?

cozmo on April 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Lord on April 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Supporting Ron Paul=supporting Don Black. Same dudes.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 2, 2012 at 8:38 PM

“Which Republican other than myself would look into the Federal Reserve?” Paul asked.

That’s an easy one, Governor Rick Perry.

Dr Evil on April 2, 2012 at 8:39 PM

You know that’s their dream, right?

cozmo on April 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Hardly. Conservatives are dreaming of a cross between Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbleaugh, and George Patton. Ron Paul has economic sense but openly defies the Permawar Brigade, and is thus to be shunned.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Paul’s withholding his support for an offer from Mittens for either himself or his son. Possibly a cabinet position or something of the sort. I’d rather keep Rand in the Senate though, he can keep the other Kentuckian in line.

Professor de la Paz on April 2, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Ron Paul….the Ever So Wise!
(sarc).

canopfor on April 2, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Last primary, Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Enough said.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Translation: we haven’t finalized a deal yet.

Mr. Arkadin on April 2, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Last primary, Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Enough said.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

As opposed to what, supporting the self-destructive McLame and his snowbilly sidekick? Don’t even try to blame the clusterfark of 2008 on Ron Paul.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:47 PM

You better support the nominee or Rand can kiss any Republican support goodbye. You’re not dealing with just one campaign here, Gram’Paw, you’re dealing with the general nominee and your own son’s campaign. Unless you think supporting another campaign has “foreign policy implications?”
.
It’s just stupid to act like this when so much is at stake. I think he will come around but what does he want in return (which would be a very cynical way to behave).

ExpressoBold on April 2, 2012 at 8:49 PM

I totally agree w/ Ron Paul here, Mitt stinks to high heaven, his campaign team is incompetent and that’s on a good day.

He has embarrassed the Republican party every step of the way. His lack of Ideas is just sad, because either they think we are stupid or they are just that stupid. a Floor fight sounds great right now.

boogaleesnots on April 2, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Paul plays the pawns.

It’s his only way to continue being interviewed.

Tension.

profitsbeard on April 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

As opposed to what, supporting the self-destructive McLame and his snowbilly sidekick? Don’t even try to blame the clusterfark of 2008 on Ron Paul.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:47 PM

In every way McCain and Palin are infinitely better than those two insane leftists.

Ron Paul abandoned his much vaunted principles, solely because he’s a sore loser.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Heres the Audio,at the 5:55 Mark!
—————-

LISTEN: GOPers Gingrich And Paul Talk To Mornings On The Mall
*************************************************************
(Audio-8:38)

http://www.wmal.com/Article.asp?id=2426925

canopfor on April 2, 2012 at 9:00 PM

In every way McCain and Palin are infinitely better than those two insane leftists.

Ron Paul abandoned his much vaunted principles, solely because he’s a sore loser.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Lolno. McCain is a worthless old fart who would have been equally bad as Obama and Palin has a room temperature IQ.

Lord on April 2, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Last primary, Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Enough said.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

That’s an effin’ lie. Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin. Please check your sources and apologize.

Archivarix on April 2, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Yeah, right.

Philly on April 2, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Doesn’t really matter much. Paul trying to play Kingmaker is about as motivating as listening to Carter talk about who *he* pick to run, if asked.

Paul, you’re 15 minutes have been up 15 election cycles ago.

If you care about the country as much as you claim (and that i will take with a grain of salt and a shot of tequila) stop carrying the Dems water and either nut up or…please dear Lord…shut up.

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 9:14 PM

In every way McCain and Palin are infinitely better than those two insane leftists.

Ron Paul abandoned his much vaunted principles, solely because he’s a sore loser.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

iirc he endorsed all third party candidates in general, with his specific support going to Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.

thirtyandseven on April 2, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Last primary, Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Enough said.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

LOL ok.

Then get the Fluke out of the party eyebrows!

KOOLAID2 on April 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Is he somehow effecting this race?

Notorious GOP on April 2, 2012 at 9:18 PM

In every way McCain and Palin are infinitely better than those two insane leftists.

Ron Paul abandoned his much vaunted principles, solely because he’s a sore loser.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Bullsh!t. McLame, a decorated war veteran, embarrassed himself in front of the nation by not even TRYING to fight Obumbles, and Palin was still a political unknown with a pretty face and a bucketfull of conservative talking points.

Ron Paul abandoned Dumb and Dumber because they’d basically handed the Kenyan Klown the election on a silver platter. It is YOU who are the sore loser, in addition to being a complete idiot.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 9:20 PM

If he can’t decide between obama and Romney, how can he possibly be qualified to make the day to day decisions that come with public office? If he’s decided but just doesn’t want to say, he should say that. This answer makes him look like an idiot.

Ronnie on April 2, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Endorsing that flip-flopping scum won’t be his finest hour…

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Far from it. If he actually gives his weight to a socialist flip-flopping empty suit, he’ll destroy his reputation for nothing. He’s already announced that this campaign would be his final political act. He gains nothing by sacrificing his principles just to promote party unity. If his son shares those principles, he won’t want his dad to back that idiot either.

MadisonConservative on April 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

If he can’t decide between obama and Romney, how can he possibly be qualified to make the day to day decisions that come with public office? If he’s decided but just doesn’t want to say, he should say that. This answer makes him look like an idiot.

Ronnie on April 2, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Why does he have to decide between O and R?

Notorious GOP on April 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Paul prides himself on his unconventional views

Tina thinks the Constitution is unconventional.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Far from it. If he actually gives his weight to a socialist flip-flopping empty suit, he’ll destroy his reputation for nothing. He’s already announced that this campaign would be his final political act. He gains nothing by sacrificing his principles just to promote party unity. If his son shares those principles, he won’t want his dad to back that idiot either.

MadisonConservative on April 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Jumping jackrabbits on pogo sticks, how could I have forgotten that? You are absolutely right. Gah, my brain is being overcrowded with these networking classes.

*gives self slap on hand for having an Alzheimer’s moment*

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Last primary, Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Enough said.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

The full story is that Paul endorsed ALL of the third party candidates because they were excluded from the debates. He believes that Americans should hear all views when it comes to candidates instead of allowing the media and the two major parties to control what we can hear. He did not endorse their policies.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Well, an endorsement from a racist, Jew hating, conspiracy theorist isn’t exactly a good thing.

Now if Romney was running for the leader of the Neo-Nazis then an endorsement from Paul would be desirable.

I think Ron Paul is saving his endorsement for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Best thing that could happen is if Ron Paul supporters don’t vote, because they are all former Obama supporters anyway.

The Notorious G.O.P on April 2, 2012 at 9:29 PM

The Notorious G.O.P on April 2, 2012 at 9:29 PM

You need better bait.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

You need better bait.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

He needs a lot of things.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Well not as bait, but since there are so many die hard Paul fans here…

Can any of you explain why he’s never been able to crack over what 20% of the electorate in *any* election cycle when he’s run for President?

I mean, since he’s so popular and all. Thinking back as far as I can remember, I can’t recall a Paul/Carter or a Paul/Clinton or even a Paul/Reagan Mexican standoff…or an I missing a point in history?

And a follow-up…is the Republican party was such a bunch of empty no-nothings, why didn’t he stay *out* of the Party altogether? Bernie Sanders left his party, and IIRC so did Liberman…

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Can any of you explain why he’s never been able to crack over what 20% of the electorate in *any* election cycle when he’s run for President?

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Because people are sheep, and the Constitution is sadly not popular, even among so-called conservatives.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Ron Paul: “I haven’t decided”

That’s nice, you creepy little ventriloquist’s dummy.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Because people are sheep, and the Constitution is sadly not popular, even among so-called conservatives.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:52 PM

What a stupid statement. Try “sadly, not learned or understood” — PARTICULARLY on the Left.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM

It sounds to me Paul is handling himself the right way. Just as long as he does nothing to hurt our party’s nominee, I will be content to let Ron Paul be Ron Paul.

thuja on April 2, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Can any of you explain why he’s never been able to crack over what 20% of the electorate in *any* election cycle when he’s run for President?

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Because the electorate is too God-blessed stupid to pick something besides being beaten up by a thug with a sledgehammer (the Demoncrats) and being beaten up by a thug with bare hands (the Repubs).

If America STILL can’t pick someone who at least isn’t TRYING to beat her up, there is nothing any politician can do to save her.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Because people are sheep, and the Constitution is sadly not popular, even among so-called conservatives.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Wow.

Condescension & Arrogance.

That’s why Rep. Paul…soon to be Mr. Paul, none too soon…won’t get support other than the political wanna-be’s.

You want support, try not to insult everyone that may not agree down the line.

I care about the Constitution, but I won’t support him, even if his ideas about fiscal responsibilities are sound because of attitude like that…

That and because he thinks building a Tree Fort and stocking it with Gold and his newsletters will keep the Russians, Irianins, Chinese, NoKs, etc at bay.

Plus you really haven’t answer my question (but then again)…if we’re such sheep, why is he still in the damn party…and Congress for that matter…30 years and the best he can do is say “You don’t care as much as I do”?

Really?

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

What a stupid statement. Try “sadly, not learned or understood” — PARTICULARLY on the Left.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 9:59 PM

It is a 100% accurate and truthful statement.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Because the electorate is too God-blessed stupid to pick something besides being beaten up by a thug with a sledgehammer (the Demoncrats) and being beaten up by a thug with bare hands (the Repubs).

Your answer is a little less insulting (my POV, no one elses) but let me ask in that vein then.

Paul was, for the most part, a part of the GOP party…if he didn’t like how the party was lead, what did *he* do to change the Leadership? How many times did he run for the RNCC chairmanship…did he even have the *conviction* to give up his Rep. seat and go for it that way?

He had 30+ :bleep:ing years to do something to get his message out and the best he could do was the fringe groups…

If America STILL can’t pick someone who at least isn’t TRYING to beat her up, there is nothing any politician can do to save her.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 10:01 PM

BS. What he wants (and his supporters too) is for him to be recognized as the Savior of the Republic…well, it’s not handed out just because you think it is. He needs to fight.

To paraphrase Harold Smith…America is worth a career. How much of his career is he willing to give? Nothing. he made his pile so he’s gonna bail, and let his son take up the family business…(whom, BTW i don’t have anything bad to say about).

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Nothing. he made his pile so he’s gonna bail,

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM

More like he’s way too old and frail. But you knew that.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 10:14 PM

More like he’s way too old and frail. But you knew that.

MelonCollie on April 2, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Yet, he stayed in Congress all these years.

But it doesn’t change my point: He jumped back n forth from Libertarian party to the GOP and back…hell I don’t for sure *which* one he is in now.

And not trying to be mean, MC, you really didn’t answer anything i wrote above either…If he ran for GOP Leadership, along with the campaigning, are you saying he wouldn’t or couldn’t have won, especially if his message was so spot on?

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:26 PM

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Are you seriously asking why the establishment wouldn’t embrace him and his message?

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:30 PM

“I find him a dignified person,” Paul said, in what was obviously high praise for the man he says he still might not support as the nominee.

Goes a long way sometimes…

JohnGalt23 on April 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM

LOL. Any of the other three would be excoriated for saying this, and Santorum was iirc.

alwaysfiredup on April 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Are you seriously asking why the establishment wouldn’t embrace him and his message?

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:30 PM

No. I’m seriously asking why he couldn’t change more minds, thus questioning his overall effectiveness.

Especially since I’ve been told ad-nauseum that he’s the best and brightest thing for the Party since the light bulb.

People can change their minds if you present the argument correctly…that’s why Reagan was effect…and frankly, Paul ain’t no Reagan.

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Why does he have to decide between O and R?

Notorious GOP on April 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

He doesn’t. And that is what frightens some around here.

JohnGalt23 on April 2, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Who is this Ron Paul?

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

It sounds to me Paul is handling himself the right way. Just as long as he does nothing to hurt our party’s nominee, I will be content to let Ron Paul be Ron Paul.

thuja on April 2, 2012 at 10:00 PM

BOO!

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 10:46 PM

It is a 100% accurate and truthful statement.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Well, yeah, if you don’t know s**t.

minnesoter on April 2, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Who is this Ron Paul?

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

I think your screen name says it all…lmao

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Spin it however you want.

The truth is, Ron Paul did in fact endorse two ultra radical leftists, over the legitimate nominee of his party.

The truth is, Ron Paul does not have any principles whatsoever, not the “liberty” he likes to talk about so much, nor that once valued one of loyalty.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Spin it however you want.

The truth is, Ron Paul did in fact endorse two ultra radical leftists, over the legitimate nominee of his party.

The truth is, Ron Paul does not have any principles whatsoever, not the “liberty” he likes to talk about so much, nor that once valued one of loyalty.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 10:53 PM

It isn’t spin. By leaving out parts of the story and trying to paint it as something it wasn’t means you are the one engaging in spin.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Who is this Ron Paul?

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

I think your screen name says it all…lmao

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Thank you. You know, the Saturday before the Ohio primary (I live in Dayton), Romney came to the area for a campaign event so I decided to go check things out. After it was over, there was some Ron Paul literature on my windshield. I looked at it and had to laugh out loud. The big selling point on this literature was that he supported tradional marrige. A social issue. This about a week after he criticized Santorum saying social issues were a “loser”. I already dislike his foreign policy. Now I find he’s a big hypocrite.

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Bitter Clinger on April 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM

For me the foreign policy was a *big* issues. Anyone willing to flush our longtime allies down the drink for the sake of expediency wont be seeing my help anytime soon.

OTOH, i already stated and will again: IF he changed on that I probably would be more open to hearing him out on *certain* other issues.

As a Conservative, we could probably agree on most of his railing against the Fed (the return to Gold standard, that requires a lot more debate), and probably a few others, but frankly, again, I’ve heard better arguments made by other candidates, past and present.

BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 11:09 PM

By leaving out parts of the story and trying to paint it as something it wasn’t means you are the one engaging in spin.

Dante on April 2, 2012 at 10:55 PM

By trying to paint it as “he just endorsed all 3rd parties” and leaving out the fact that those third parties included ultra radical leftists – you are spinning like crazy.

The devil, as they say – is in the details.

Rebar on April 2, 2012 at 11:22 PM

crosspatch on April 2, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Don’t forget, he endorsed Chuck Baldwin in ’08.

In my opinion, he won’t endorse Romney if he becomes the nominee, unless the other parties nominate complete trash like the LP and Bob Barr in ’08.

But, if he does endorse Romney, what will Paul supporters do? I can’t picture myself voting for Romney even if Paul endorses him. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

gyrmnix on April 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Of course he’ll support Romney or whomever the Republican nominee is.

Just like he did in ’08.

Wait…

catmman on April 2, 2012 at 11:53 PM

commenters , you realize that Ron Paul is the only candidate with a true fiscal conservative policy of small government yet you still caricature him as a lunatic , that shows how far left the conservatives has gone…

you don’t know what small gvt means anymore , welcome to Europe.

sun on April 3, 2012 at 3:03 AM

He doesn’t endorse Romney outright but every single comment he ever makes ensures that he not only keeps the bridge to endorsing/joining/dealing with Romney open, he keeps it perfectly paved. It’s always a variant of the following: I respect Romney, he is a good guy, he has a good executive style, but I won’t endorse him because of our policy differences, though if he could adjust himself that could change.

If he made a promise to endorse, he would lose bargaining power. Romney may very well need Ron Paul to counter Santorum + Newt, or even to avoid an uncertain convention vote. If the first convention vote fails, many pledged delegates are liberated and then it becomes an all-out brawl. Romney may very well make a deal with Paul to seal it before the convention.

Really they just treat each other like gentlemen in a contest with two savages in the ring (Mr. Team-Playa and Dr. Moon-Base).

ebrawer on April 3, 2012 at 7:12 AM

Ron,hon, you couldn’t have been more supportive already if you’d kissed his rump in the debates.

mozalf on April 3, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Expect this lunatic to declare himself the only person capable of beating Obama, run as a 3rd party candidate and ensure Obama is returned to office.

People can go down to Lake Jackson, TX and thank him properly.

insidiator on April 3, 2012 at 10:21 AM

If they blow this again, the Republican Party should be trashed and never again allowed to field a national candidate. This is disgusting.

rplat on April 2, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Don’t you mean if you blow it? By nominating a center-left, big government statist to run against a far-left, big government statist? So we can have both major parties be big government, statist parties? The only difference being how far to the left of center of American politics they are? You’re right. There isn’t much point in such a Republican Party.

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 11:05 AM

People can go down to Lake Jackson, TX and thank him properly.

insidiator on April 3, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Where can I go to thank the big government statists who are giving me Romney as the “only viable” alternative to Obama?

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Where can I go to thank the big government statists who are giving me Romney as the “only viable” alternative to Obama?

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Knock on the door of someone with a ‘Ron Paul’ yard sign and thank one of his supporters in person.

No matter what he says (no one’s words are cheaper than Ron Pauls’) RP’s ‘strategy’ has been nothing but setting picks for the liberal Romney…

shinty on April 3, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Where can I go to thank the big government statists who are giving me Romney as the “only viable” alternative to Obama?

besser tot als rot on April 3, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Start with the rolls of registered Republicans. They’re the ones voting in the primaries and caucuses.

Dante on April 3, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Start with the rolls of registered Republicans. They’re the ones voting in the primaries and caucuses.

At the caucus I attended Santorum had the most supporters, but Paul’s people aligned to give the day to the liberal Romney.

That caucus day was quite an experience. Looking around the room, it was easy to tell that most folks there were taxpaying working people with families. Then there were the Paul supporters, mostly college kids hoping for legalized cannabis.

The winner that day was not Ron Paul, but Romney the lib.

shinty on April 3, 2012 at 4:42 PM