Why does it seem like there's no decent competition on the right for the election, and when there is, no one cares?

Ron Paul is the biggest threat to everything I think is important. I’m glad he’s not a serious contender.

@tom_g I’m not his biggest fan, but I meant he seems the most logical and level headed. For example, during the debates he actually answered questions with more detail instead of talking points.

@Blackberry – I agree. He’s articulate in explaining how he’d like to create a society run by unaccountable private tyrannies.

The really good politicians can do more for this country as a Senator, Congressman or Governor. The Reps are merely putting up candidates that are all that is needed to defeat Obama.

I suspect that Ron Paul will ultimately wind up running as a 3rd party candidate.

Unfortunately, I think that will wind up having the effect of siphoning off votes that would otherwise go to the Republicans.

Because a significant part of the right actually think those candidates are good. I like Ron Paul, because I think he is honest and not controlled by the party, and I am interested on his view of things, but he is too extreme for me. The Republicans are horrible to him in general. I have seen other candidates snicker and roll their eyes while Ron Paul had the floor, I find it rude. Mr. Paul is not a stupid man to be brushed aside in such a way.

My example of a good candidate in the reoublican party would be someone more moderate on social issues, and fiscally conservative, but not extreme, not someone who uses bad math. The candidates people are rallying around in the Republican party are extreme right on social issues, drive me crazy. It must drive the half of the Republicans in the party crazy also, who support gay marriage, and many times choice, and gays in the military, and wanting a realistic answer to paying down our debt, etc. Several Republicans have defected the party, my dad is one, because the evangelical Christian base beca,e so powerful in the Republican party, and as those Republicans like my dad defect, the percentages of the right wingers in the Republican party goes up.

Look at the northeast Republicans, many times they are socially liberal-moderate. They also tend to be more logical regarding fiscal issues. They also are Jewish and Catholic typically. Gay marriage passed in NY having some Republican state senators voting for the bill.

Mitt Romney was an independent years back. He was prochoice politically, and he brought universal health care to his state as governor. When he began to run for president his positions changed. Too bad. He had to pay to the right I guess. The problem is leaning right wing will get you the nomination, gets you through the primaries, but can screw the candidate in the national election, they have to work hard to pedal sideways towards the middle to attract the independent voters.

For the record, this is who I’d prefer to see appear as a sane alternative.

@tom_g – All I have to say is YIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At least more of you radically left leaning are owning up to being socialists these days, and I can respect that.

@YoBob Well the problem is, we have to hide our beliefs in socialism from fear of ostricization (is that a word lol?). I’m not a total socialist of course, but it makes sense that a country could have a mix of both and still operate effectively, right?

@Blackberry – Erm… no, (IMHO) definitely not right.

Is that to say that I don’t believe that there are some basic social services we should expect our government to administer? Of course not, don’t be ridiculous. However, for the most part I put more faith in the ingenuity of the individuals driven by the desire to build a better mouse trap than I do great hulking organizations run by bureaucrats whose only motivation is to get re-elected during the next cycle.

@YoBob Lol….Ok :(

Many of you are familiar with the Citizens United ruling which says that corporations are people. Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders have a lot in common. One of those thing is their belief that corporations are NOT people. The media is owned by a handful of corporations. Why would any corporate owned media give support to a candidate who is for taking “rights” away from them? It goes against their own best interest.
Jon Stewart did a piece on how the media has been completely ignoring Ron Paul. He said they have been doing it for weeks. In reality, they have been doing it for years and not just to him, but to any candidate who may be against the status quo.
We were taught about propaganda in school, but most of us were told that “it can’t happen here,” when that is so far from the truth and it couldn’t be any more obvious right now. It is called TV programming for a reason. It is programming us. Input/output.

@Tom_g

Do you ever listen to Thom Hartmann? He has Bernie on for an hour taking phone calls every Friday. I like Senator Sanders. Although I don’t agree with all of his solutions, he points out the real problems, which is the first step to solving them.

You are so right. It is very strange indeed.

“Ron Paul is kinda like Jesus: he seems nice, no one listens to him, and you’d like to see his followers eaten by lions.”
—Wonderella (via Twitter)

“Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood.”
—H. L. Mencken

As a left libertarian, I find Ron Paul to be half-brilliant and half-mad. But it must be admitted that he has an ability many politicians lack: he can make people actually think about ideas rather than merely react to sound bites. Most candidates just want to get a “yeah, that’s right!” out of people. Ron Paul goes for the “hey, I hadn’t thought of that.” He is not unique in this regard, but he is part of a rare breed. And I think Americans get excited when someone treats them as intelligent beings capable of rational thought rather than idiots to be herded into the voting booth. The fear about Ron Paul, then, is that he might actually do something. With regard to some issues, I share that fear. With regard to others, I wish we could just get on with it already.

@YoBob; the real problem is that people get so afraid of the word “socialism” because it sounds like communism” and some people are to stupid to know the difference. In a civilized society, some socialism is necessary (and important to “Promote the general welfare”) or you would have anarchy.

@tom_g, I don’t particularly like Ron Paul, but I’d rather have him as president than Perry or Bachmann. I mean, Perry and Bachmann also seem to have anarchistic views of the role of the federal government in terms of economic regulation. But unlike Paul they have extremely creepy Christian militant overtones to their domestic and foreign policy. I’m not sure Paul is entirely sane, but at least he is honest and self-consistent; his Randian-style cult frightens me much less than the cultishness of Perry and Bachmann.

@YoBob, the problem is that many corporations are also “hulking organizations run by bureaucrats.” And while their motivations are worse than wanting to get re-elected in a democracy; they just want to maximize profits.

So I’m not sure why you have more faith in them than in the government; seems like both have an important place and both have strengths and weaknesses.

@Qingu – Well, it seems to me that free enterprise model has given us the highest level of prosperity ever known in the history of the world whereas government has, in general, just given us more government.

@YoBob, it seems to me that free enterprise has given 400 households the highest level of prosperity ever known in the history of the world, and the rest of us are just fucked.

@Qingu ; we don’t often agree, because you can sometimes be an “evangelical athiest,” but I couldn’t agree with you more. I don’t think the answer lies in a government OR business soloution. There is enough blame to go around. The real answer lies in a third way. I doubt we would agree on what that is though :-)

Ron Paul was lurking somewhere in the background during the last election too. I don’t get it especially because he seems pretty popular on the internet.

I think the popularity of the loonies has to do with how much media attention the tea party is getting these days. I truly hope they don’t have a shot at beating Obama. Bachmann or Perry as president is pretty much unthinkable.

If the tea party really were only about fiscal issues and unconcerned with social issues (like they say) then I would think Ron Paul would be their man. Wasn’t Rand Paul their man in the Senate race?

@YoBob, our prosperity grew the fastest during the 50’s and 60’s when “free enterprise” was more strongly curtailed by massive government spending and labor unions. As you say in your next response, there are problems with both free enterprise and government. Spouting pablums about either does nothing towards solving or mitigating those problems.

I don’t want to jinx it, but a lot of folks made the same assumption about George W.

@nikipedia – Aside from my less than flattering opinions of anything Michael Moore has to say, I don’t really have a problem with some folks getting filthy stinking rich. They are simply a shining testament to the fact that it can be done. As for the rest of us being “just fucked”, that is totally ridiculous. Never in history has the standard of living for the average person been higher.

@Qingu – Not sure where you get the idea that free enterprise was more strongly curtailed by massive government spending and labor unions during the 50’s and 60’s. Sure, the post WWII era was a boom time for labor unions, but only because the laborer was a hot commodity during that time period (thanks to a booming economic market driven by free enterprise), and thus the labor unions had a bit more leverage. As for massive government spending, I would like to see a comparison of that spending vs our current outflow.

@YoBob, you’re right; I don’t know why I wrote what I wrote. I was thinking of high taxes, not spending.

I do think you’d have a hard time arguing that private corporations are much better at technological innovation than DARPA and NASA. There are also certain industries, notably health care and insurance, for which the profit motive does not well serve.

@Qingu – Sure, there are a few things for which the profit motive does not work well. But, the funding and prioritization of those things must be viewed in light of the larger economic picture. Heck, I would love to have a mansion, a shiny new sports car, and a yacht. However, the reality of my income only allows for a modest home in the burbs, a used car, and an occasional trip to the lake.

Our federal government needs to live within it’s means.

I agree. And it’s easily within our means to provide health care, social security, and education to all our citizens (not exactly frivolous luxuries, those).

Or at least it was during the Clinton years, before the Bush tax cuts.

@YoBob. some people would just love to get the medical treatment they need so they don’t die. That’s where “socialism” might do a better service than private industry, when they’re is an extra “cost” layer that needs to make a profit for its share holders called “Insurance.” Life and death should not be a for profit venture.

@Judi – I would far rather see our federal government take the insurance racket industry to task than tell a medical professional that he/she must work for the state at a pay scale set by bureaucratic bean counters rather than being able to hang out their shingle in a free marketplace.

So it sounds like you support Obamacare more than the single-pay systems in other countries (which, of course, feature well-paid doctors)?

Are you also opposed to telling law enforcement professionals that they must work for the state at a pay scale set by bureaucratic bean counters?

@Qingu – The problem with “Obamacare” is that not only does it not fix anything, the big centerpiece is that it makes it mandatory that one purchase insurance (whether one can afford it or not) from the very insurance companies that, IMHO, are closer to the root cause of the problem than are doctors.

Law enforcement professionals do not attend 4 years of college, followed by 4 years of med school, followed by a couple of years of residency in order to gain the knowledge required for the adequate practice of their profession. Further, there are plenty of private security companies that value that skill set in their employees.

@YoBob, the law includes subsidies for those who can’t afford it.

And whether or not people purchase insurance, providing health care in this country is mandatory and the costs must be paid by someone. If you don’t have insurance and you show up at an emergency room, they must help you. But who pays?

And many countries with socialized medicine also have private practice available, analogous to your private sec. firms.

@Qingu And many of those countries are starting to feel the pinch of single-payer financially, along with frustration from many doctors that they cannot make as much as they should.

Scrap Obamacare, and maybe both sides can create a true healthcare reform plan that can really save money with the added benefit of screwing insurance companies.

@cletrans2col, those countries pay less than half as much for health care that we do.

And I’d love to hear your idea for “true healthcare reform.” Unfortunately all I ever hear from Republicans is “tort reform,” “sell across state lines,” and ”“Obamacare is evil.” Maybe you have some better ideas?

@cletrans2col . . . if you can find a way to make republicans and democrats truly work together to reach a common goal that is good for everyone, well, i think we may be able to find you some work down around the gaza strip as well.

@cletrans2col “tort reform,” “sell across state lines,” and ”“Obamacare is evil”

Sounds good to me.

@Blackberry I do not get why people perpetuate this idea that Obama will win in a landslide. The economy has not improved under his Administration, he hasn’t done anything to control the debt, and we lost our AAA rating under his watch, among other things. This will not be easy for him, no matter who the GOP nominates.

To the OQ, libertarian Republicans don’t get much traction in the GOP because many of them aren’t biblethumpers and unfortunately that is who you need to pander to in order to get the nomination.

his approval ratings are at an all time low as well.

@Qingu England Germany Taiwan

These are just a few of the countries that have single payer and some of the problems that they incurred.

@cletrans2col, that’s not a plan. Tort reform would yield a fraction of the cost savings required to make our system sustainable. Selling across state lines would lead to a race to the bottom like the credit card companies all moving to Delaware. And neither of these solutions would do a single thing to cover the 50 million Americans who were uninsured before Obamacare.

Do you have any serious solutions?

…

And are you seriously trying to pin the AAA thing on Obama? Standards and Poor explicitly said it was because of political gridlock and the use of default as a “hostage.” Mitch McConnell bragged about how well the hostage-taking worked as a negotiating tactic. They also cited the $$$ as not being as high as what they wanted, which is exactly what Obama was proposing before the Republicans walked away from the negotiating table. Are you actually trying to argue that Obama is somehow at fault for this or are you just spouting partisan talking points?

…

I fail to see what your point is about those countries. Nearly every country is enacting austerity measures and slashing their spending. We are also slashing spending on Medicare and Medicaid. How is that a response to anything I said, and what exactly do you think it proves? Are you actually trying to argue that our health care system is better than single-payer when ours costs more than 2x as much and is hated much more by the population it serves?

@YoBob ; The insurance companies already tell doctors how much they can charge. (They also are the true death panels, but that’s another discussion.) I think it would be to their (doctors) advantage to take payment from someone who’s mission is “To provide for the general welfare” than it would be from someone who’s mission is to make a profit.

Ron Paul’s economic views are quite interesting, but his seperationist ideas are stupid to the point of being destructive to the World!

@Judi – “I think it would be to their (doctors) advantage to take payment from someone who’s mission is “To provide for the general welfare” than it would be from someone who’s mission is to make a profit”

I agree with you in principal. However, things that often sound good from an ideological perspective often don’t work out so nicely in the real world. There is one small but rather important issue to consider. In the case of insurance companies it is the doctors who have voluntarily signed up to participate as a provider whereas under a federal run plan such choice does not really exist. It becomes a case of as a medical professional you are not allowed to deny service and some bureaucratic committee gets to decide what to pay you for it.

@YoBob I don’t think anyone is arguing for a single-payer only system; many countries have associated private medical industries alongside the government-run one.

And I find your opposition to “bureaucracy” incredibly selective. HMO’s are massive bureaucracies that also deny medical professionals choice. The difference between an insurance industry bureaucracy and a government bureaucracy is that the government bereaucracies are generally about twice as efficient and don’t reward bureaucrats who deny sick people care.

@YoBob, did you actually read the link? I also am not a big fan of Michael Moore, however, I do take analyses from PolitiFact very seriously, as they were awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 2009 for distinguished reporting.

Our standard of living is very high, but it is threatened by the significant income inequality problems in the US. You do not have to take my word for it. Alan Greenspan has said, “The income gap between the rich and the rest of the US population has become so wide, and is growing so fast, that it might eventually threaten the stability of democratic capitalism itself.”

By any measure of income inequality, the United States performs poorly (considering how much wealth the country as a whole has). Here is one list that ranks us 27th in the world, and here we are 39th—from the bottom.

Over 40 million people, or 15% of Americans are on food stamps. Less than a quarter of Americans have six months’ worth of emergency savings. Unemployment is currently greater than 9% and does not seem to be improving much.

I think it is accurate to say that a lot of us are pretty fucked.