you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What???

Better than what?

She's the best option out there. Sure she has a cult, but who doesn't. Sure they may disagree on economics - ie. Ron Paul has a return to gold standard fantasy - but Gabbard wants to end the wars, thus saving tonnes of blood and gold.

Also, Ron has teased about 9/11 but never really committed to being a truther in any substantial way. Tulsi I'm sure won't go there cuz.

Who would you have him support?

If I lived in the USA I'd still vote Green on principle for party diversity, peace, etc. even if they do believe the Climate Change scam. In Canada I always vote Green or write my local Green folks for their best advice because flawed as they may be, they seem to be the most rational in general.

I'd love to see a Peace-Freedom-Internet-Green Party happen. PFIG!!!

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

She's a CFR member and reeks of deep state. RP should be familiar enough with these mechanics to not endorse her.

Talk is cheap. Obama said he was going to end war too. Maybe this is too conspiratorial for RP. I'd rather see no endorsement.

Yeah I'll probably be voting PFIG too, unless the libertarian party gets it together.

[–]emperormises 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Surface level generally matters more than the truth for these types of things, imo. I would have been a lot more upset about some of the things he had said about Trump pre-election for example if I didn't think they were trying to triangulate (Ron and Rand) him to a better position with a kind of carrot-and-stick approach.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I totally agree it's all superficial theatre.