On the off chance that Ron Paul gets the nod, would Obama

[hedgehog]

defend the war or join with Paul in saying it's time to get out?

[jefferson_dem]

1. If Paul go the nod (which he won't), all Obama would have to do is

defend sane (foreign and domestic) policy. Done. Landslide.

[MessiahRp]

8. I welcome Obama's first attempts at sane foreign and domestic policy.

But frankly keeping three wars going, extending the wiretap programs, not closing Gitmo and giving the GOP everything they want on HCR, Bush Tax Cuts and the Debt deal don't qualify IMO.

Rp

[jefferson_dem]

14. Only on DU would "Democrats" bypass crazy Ron Paul ...

to concoct half-baked smears of the Democratic president.

[vroomvroom]

12. Obama has a domestic policy? I mean, ones that aren't on republican wishlists?

Really? Please...i would love to know.

[jefferson_dem]

13. Ugh...

Transparent.

You're not even trying anymore.

[demdown2earth]

2. Time table already set

I thought President Obama already set a time table for getting us out of Iraq and fortunately Al Queda's recent attacks (which are likely to be an attempt to keep us there) have not succeeded in fooling the President into halting the troop draw-downs. I think the President has handled things as well as possible given the last "president's" incompetent war-mongering.

[hedgehog]

3. I tend to agree with that.

[Ter]

4. His timetables are in name only

He intends for troops to stay there his entire presidency, and will likely expand war elsewhere.

[harun]

6. Depends on your definition of "getting out". Because the getting out

Obama is talking about is not the getting out Ron Paul is talking about.

[phleshdef]

5. Obama would just say we are on our way out, it takes time to do it responsibly and leave it at that.

Even if you don't agree with him and believe that we should just have everyone out by next Friday and not pursue any kind of notion of leaving behind a semi-stable government, thats still what he would say and that would shut the issue down for the most part.

[elleng]

9. I agree, but think he'd explain WHY it takes time to do it responsibly.

If ONLY Paul got it, we could actually have an interesting and informative time.

[emulatorloo]

7. Ron Paul has one or two good positions. The rest of them are batshit crazy

[MessiahRp]

10. True but he could seriously smash Obama with younger voters on those two good positions

The war and civil liberties are going to play a big role to many of the younger voters who saw Obama as something different (and got more of the same). Also don't discredit his attacks on the Fed because there is a LOT of distrust there these days. Will he win? No. But he could cut into Obama's margins in places no other Republican can.

Rp

[nemo137]

16. Any liberal who would vote for Paul based on that is a chucklefuck.

Who thinks that their right to smoke pot, to paraphrase Amanda Marcotte, trumps a woman's right to choose when (or whether, really) to give birth.

And, yeah, I'll bite on the antiwar thing. It is laudable that he's consistent in that, but that doesn't mean he's not a reactionary asshole in all other ways. If you're (the generic you) a single-issue voter and willing to vote for a man who's fondest wish is to recreate the gilded age, then god bless.

[MessiahRp]

20. What you're missing is he's so strong on those couple of issues, it drowns out the rest to some

There are a lot of disillusioned young people who invested a lot of time and hope in Obama only to see him turn into the DLC/Third Way's wet dream. Paul's loud constant drumbeat on the one or two issues he is right on tends to drown out the rest to a lot of people... and when you stack Paul up against Obama on weed or other civil liberties or our military policy, Paul looks fucking golden to a lot of people that have washed their hands with Obama.

That's all I am saying.

If Paul somehow, someway won the Republican primary, he might be the only one with consistency on enough major issues that people care about to do any damage to Obama oncesoever. Not that I'm saying he could beat Obama and his corporate machine at this point.

Rp

[hedgehog]

15. Which puts him one or two good positions ahead of the rest

of the Republican field!

[scheming daemons]

11. If Ron Paul got the GOP nod, Obama would do a happy dance

Because he'd win in a landslide.

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. the most extreme imperialistic party in American history is not going to choose an anti-imperialist

the most extreme militaristic party in American history is not going to nominate someone who is committed to dismantling the military industrial complex

[craigmatic]

18. I doubt wars would be the point of argument. It'd still be economics.

If it were though Obama could just say that he's drawing down in Iraq and that we'll get out of Afganistan because he killed OBL.

[joshcryer]

19. He would agree with Paul but argue that it needs to be a ordered withdrawal.