yeah, paul keeps saying he won't run third party. But if he doesn't get the GOP nomination, there will be a pretty sizable write-in campaign for him (whether he wants to or not)
greg | 10.21.07 - 1:22 pm | #

I am pro-choice but do not believe that Roe v Wade is a valid opinion. So I am in that camp of about three people who support abortion rights but do not think that it is a constitutional right. Ergo I am comfortable with Paul's abortion stance despite being pro-choice.

I need to decide which primary to vote in. As a DC resident I am enrolled as a Democrat so that I can actually vote in local elections but need to remember to switch parties to vote for Paul, then switch back again.
Leonardo | 10.21.07 - 1:46 pm | #

I switched to (R) to vote in the primaries in FL, and certainly plan to write-in Paul if he doesn't get the nod. For all the good it will do, the write-ins will at least make a statement.
On Roe v. Wade and Paul's position: I don't think Roe is a valid decision either because the constitution was drafted to affect gubmint activity, not the peoples'. Same idea goes for things like "gay marriage"...not a constitutional question (not a gubmint question at all in fact. It's human rights, not gay, or black, or woman, etc. Why is the gubmint in marriage anyway?). I do see Paul's position as the lesser of evils here, since he's taking the federalism route. At least someone would only have to move to another state vice another country.
Tom
Tom Sullivan | 10.22.07 - 9:07 am | #

Yeah, I wouldn't (and I don't think libertarians should) criticize Paul for his abortion stance or immigration. Put aside the fact that those are his two most mainstream appeals -- which I don't think you should -- you still have a lot of libertarians who feel Roe v Wade was bad case law and set bad precedence and a few that cut the other way from the standard libertarian view of contemporary immigration.

As for immigration….There is a lot to say for Paul's (and it's the same as people like Friedman) opinion that we need to deal with the welfare state before we start welcoming hordes of immigrants, legal or illegal. I might not entirely agree with it, but it makes a lot of sense. I say this understanding full well how repugnant the anti-immigration side is.
Rob | Homepage | 10.22.07 - 10:14 am | #