Without marketing dollars which he sorely lacked, Ron Paul didn’t stand a chance at becoming U.S. president. But you can’t deny his message, which is the federal government has grossly overextended itself leading to a decrease in privacy, liberty, security, and economic stability.
Smaller government and fiscal responsibility, please. Please — it’s the only way we can get back on track, like putting an oxygen mask on yourself before helping others.
On this, a near-deciding Super Tuesday in American politics, Freakonomics author Stephen J. Dubner reminds us that statistically, your vote is rarely a deciding factor in an election. I’m posting this to feel good about myself for not voting today, especially after sending a fiscally conservative Ron Paul a coupla benjis in contributions which weren’t enough.
See also: My homeland is in a world of hurt | The silver lining of mainstream POTUS candidates
If I had it my way, I’d elect Ron Paul as president of the United States, because the most important issue in my mind is avoiding U.S. bankruptcy (which is coming). The only way to do that is by being fiscally conservative — something Paul excels at (in theory).
While President Bush may be conservative in his beliefs, I’m told he has spent more tax dollars (and borrowed more money) than any other U.S. president. That’s not conservative. So whomever gets the nomination next November, it’s likely they’ll be more responsible with foreign credit cards than Bush has been. That’s a good thing, whatever their larger political beliefs may be.
Libertarian underdog Ron Paul raised more than $4.2 million yesterday — the greatest single day fund raising amount of any Republican so far and third only to Clinton and Obama this year. The Associated Press tells why: “Paul advocates limited government and low taxes like other Republicans, but he stands alone as the only GOP presidential candidate opposed to the Iraq war. He also has opposed Bush administration security measures that he says encroach on civil liberties.”
As the voting season slowly heats up, I (an unaffiliated, apathetic voter) would like to know:
Why/why not in the comments, please.
Our executive branch of the federal government has failed us. Our legislative and judicial branches aren’t much better, though their added checks and balances make them less susceptible to corruption than our most popular branch of government, the one the POTUS oversees.
From my cursory vantage, here are some of the issues that concern me most, both from political and economical perspectives: Continue reading…