I agree with a good amount of what Ron Paul stands for. My only question is how realistic his plans are. He’s not crazy. He knows it would take some time. One of the best questions from the Google crowd (all employees) was which parts of his plan would be addressed first and which would be overall goals for his term in office. He did acknowledge that some of his goals would be difficult to achieve, like the elimination of the IRS and other government institutions.
I don’t think Ron Paul is electable, but I do think his ideas are refreshing. He’s not coming out of left field; he’s been a Congressman for some time. He is a very capable legislator. He’s a Libertarian running on the Republican ticket, which some may say is dishonest, but I see nothing wrong with him trying to get as many votes as possible. He’s playing to win, which is fine.
What I like about Ron Paul, though I can’t say I’d vote for him, is his mentality for small government. He’s very laissez-faire, which makes it really easy to predict what he’ll say about many issues. I like that. You’d think a Google employee would be smarter than this, but one of them asked him about rural pharmacists. It was a loaded question, and he addressed it pretty well by acknowledging how it was loaded, then citing his anti-restriction policy. That takes balls, and it was well played on his part. He’s also remarkably good at citing historical precedents, which I like as a history buff.
I do think Ron Paul would do a fine job as President, since he’s been consistent for years and has “old-time” conservative views. He believes strongly in the Constitution, which is fantastic. Even if he doesn’t win, the fact that he’s getting this kind of attention is good. Fortunately for him, there isn’t a front-runner in the Republican race. If he does well in