Ron Paul does not a popular foreign policy with freepers. I’m not going to argue that.
It could be argued that historically, Republicans, Conservatives were always the ones arguing against foreign policy adventures, but most here are either the newer “conservatives” who got tired of Trotsky, and thought that it would be best for both parties to agree to war all the time.
Or, they’re people who have bought that argument and are either too young to remember that Republicans were always less interventionist than the Democrats, or they’re old, but have forgotten that.
Most of the other attacks on Ron Paul are typically distortions or outright lies.
The most honest attacks on Ron Paul are simply honest attacks on Conservativism.
We have too many people completely dependent on the Federal Government that if we were completely dismantle it, the consequences would not be pretty.
The counter argument to that is simply to argue that it wouldn’t happen, even if Ron Paul was elected.
Ron Reagan wanted cuts, big cuts the way Ron Paul does, and Ron Reagan tried, but it didn’t happen as great as the real Conservatives wanted. Because you can win in a landslide, but you still have to deal with the Dems and the RINOs.
I trust Ron Paul more than anyone to make the cuts. If anyone could at least keep the FedGov from growing, it’d be Ron Paul.
He really wants so much less Fed Gov than anyone else.
Care to defend that statement he made on killing bin Laden? He foolishly thinks we should've worked through the Pakistani government. Paul may be acceptable on some fiscal matters, but on foreign policy he'd be an unmitigated disaster.
I know that this is bizarre but a Trump Paul worldview might be interesting.