The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Ron Paul supporters should not vote for Mitt Romney, but should write in Ron Paul!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/5/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,068 times Debate No: 26933
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




Make your argument in the first round, we haven't much time.
Last Minute! I realize there are a LOT of Ron Paul supporters out there, some of whom I have talked to are planning on writing him in.
At the time I am typing this,
38% of people who voted in the poll on, are voting for the man,
30% Gary Johnson,
19% Mitt Romney,
7% Barack Obama,
4% won't vote,
and approx. 3% combined Virgil Goode, Jill Stein, and other.
As someone who was never a Mitt Romney fan during the primaries, but is a supporter now, this distresses me.
My arguments:
1.)Even though Ron Paul never endorsed anyone that I've heard, he is no longer running as of August. He is hardly seen in the big national polls. The vast majority of people will vote for the two main candidates.
2.)The major Libertarian view of smaller government is far more compatible with someone like Mitt Romney who would either shrink the size of government, or at least not grow it as much as Barack Obama.
3.)If you are a Libertarian who desires the seemingly ineffective War on Drugs to end, Romney may seem to be a poor choice, but only one major candidate would have any probability of shrinking the size of bureaucracies involved.
4.)The same argument, but even stronger, applies to taxes.
5.)Barack Obama has not slowed unwarranted wire taps, at all. There's at least a chance with Romney.
Last two points:
6.)If you throw away a potential vote for Romney on Ron Paul in this election, the rest of us trying to get Barack Obama out, and want to be effective at it, will be very vexed with you, and campaigning to Republicans and other conservatives will be more problematic for you in 2016.
7.)It is only logical to save your efforts to elect Ron Paul in the primaries, when more Americans will be willing to pay attention and take him seriously. That's when out-layer candidates have the best chance to become main-stream. Not during a major 2-way election.


I thank my opponent for starting this debate.
I have already voted and I voted for Romney myself, I supported Santorum in the Primaries, but I am sympathetic to Ron Paul supporters and respect the reasons behind there views and ideals.
So understand the weight that gives to my argument when I am someone who by all rights has every reason to want to manipulate the Ron Paul supporters into voting for my candidate Mitt Romney to get him elected, but instead am telling you to go ahead and write him in or vote Gary Johnson.

My opponent is advocating the concept of trying to vote for a winner. But this is detrimental of the very concept behind our voting system. It is only moral to vote for the candidate you think best fit for the job and if you think that is Ron Paul or Gary Jonson or Virgil Goode, even if the polls, and history in general, show they have no real chance of winning, you should still cast your vote for them. It"s the whole reason we vote. To show your voice of support behind the man you think is best fit.

Now to address the problem that your libertarian candidate realistically will not win this election or probably the next either; the solution to that is not just wait for him to run again in the GOP primaries to vote for him. The solution is to vote right now, show the media and the world right now that you are hear and your kind is growing. Each election cycle you see the libertarian type support for Ron Paul grow just a little. You need to get out there and preach and lobby your ideals to get more followers and more grassroots support to make Ron Paul a viable candidate next time
Right NOW, this election, is going to be your only real good chance to show the amount of support there is for Ron Paul to the world. If you want to increase your numbers, part of doing that is going to require you not give in and hide them during elections like this one. You know how some people only show up at church at Christmas and Easter? Well its like that with politics, there are a lot who just pay attention to what"s going on when a presidential election is happening every 4 years. If you waste this opportunity your not going to get one like it for 4 more years.
As for the threat that Obama might get elected if you don"t back Romney, well as I understand it from most of the Ron Paul supporters I have talked to you don"t see a significant difference between Romney and Obama anyway.
So in short a summary
1)Morality dictates vote your conscious. If you think Ron Paul is the best man for the job, than that is rightfully were your vote should be placed.
2)The real solution for your views getting backed by a candidate is not settling for the republican close to them, but to preach and lobby them like crazy to get more supporters to back the candidate who actually does hold them next election.
3)This is the best chance in 4 years to show the statistical growth in libertarian ideals as a constituent demographic to appeal to
4)So Romney"s a little bit better than Obama, its not that significant to your perspective wants.
5)Oh yeah, one more thing; Romney is going to win weather you vote for him or not, I know there"s a lot of you but its not going to be that close to where we neeed you that bad to swing the election.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you, and good arguments.

The people who only pay attention at the end of the presidential campaign are not the ones that need to be impressed right now. Creating an environment most conducive to smaller government should be the goal. Ron Paul switched to the Republican Party because it has more in common with his ideals than the Democrats, and is currently more effective in elections than the Libertarian Party. The Primaries are where Paul gained the most support. It waned only after the field was significantly narrowed, but he was surprisingly effective at influencing the discussion toward fiscal conservatism, and even appreciated for doing so by conservative commentators.
The point is, you don't have to go along with the flow, but do use it to your advantage. In tommorrow's primary, pragmatism today will win Libertarians more respect and converts if they haven't spoiled the last election.

I half agree with my opponent on voting one's conscience. There is quite a bit of difference between the 2 candidates right now, enough that most people could make a clear decision who was better. I am not a Libertarian, but the only issue that both Romney and Obama really seem to agree on that a Libertarian might hate, is that global military presence is acceptable on some level. If that is a huge concern for a Libertarian, I would understand a write-in or Gary Johnson. However, global over-reach is not the major spending and credibility problem we face. It's over spending on the larger social programs, and the massive borrowing and stifling of the economy.

While I share my opponent's hope in what the results will be, I don't want to make an assumption, I want to make certain. If a Libertarian is really concerned about liberty, Romney is the only safe bet right now, even if I don't like him nearly as much as some of the others.


To conclude this debate I’d like to highlight a few things.

First off my opponent began with discounting the use in getting the worlds attention this presidential election cycle, but then proceeded to talk up the good Ron Paul has done in the primaries by ‘adding to the discussion”

Well that’s exactly what my case about national media attention is about. If there was a significant amount of write-in votes for Ron Paul, this would add to the national discussion, it would echo around the media news tv shows, the radio programs, books that the pundits write, ect.

Second off, my opponent says he “half-way” agreed with me on my point about the morality of needed to vote your conscious. Well that “half-way” agreement is a lot more like a “full-way” concession when its not actual given a rebuttal against it. and my opponent did not rebut my point about morality in placing your vote with the person who think the best. He just proceeded to speak about differences in the Republican and Demarcate platforms from the Libertarian. But this does not relate to the issue I brought up specifically. Even if Republican conservative principles work better for a libertarian’s key issues of interest, if the Libertarian is the best candidate you find best able to do the job, then that is were your conscious lies with and so your vote should. To vote for anyone else would be a lie.

Disagree with that if you like, but in this debate without rebuttal my case about morally voting your conscious stands and so you should vote Pro!

Also while my opponent makes it out to seem like the only difference is foreign policy, libertarians defer from republicans on near all social issues. So its more than just a few issues they are unsatisfied with from both parties, its just the one my opponent brought is an issue there unsatisfied with both parties at the same time

So as I see it my summary points 1) 2) 3) and 4) all still stand although I drop five after much results have already come in, this race shall be close.

I thank my opponent for this short debate.

Debate Round No. 2
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Skynet 3 years ago
Don't let it bother you too much. Not everyone can be the top 20 most watched debaters. Most of my debates, and everyone else's go unnoticed. The best one I ever had as far as audience was Nuclear weapons are here to stay.
Posted by Marauder 3 years ago
this is depressing. finally get an opponent who finish's the debate and it goes to the front page and no one votes on it. :(

well for what its worth I enjoyed this debate with you, even if none have enjoyed reading it.
Posted by Skynet 3 years ago
Sorry AlwaysMoreThanMe, I didn't check your age. I guess you have LOTS of time to be relevant.
Posted by Shifter 3 years ago
Write in's are a waste of time. Even though you are making a stand and putting in your opinion, there are 2,000 people just doing what you are, each for some other person or thing. Your just wasting your vote, when you could be using it wisely.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago
I can't vote.

Also, my state's going to Obama anyway, so if I could vote it would definitely be for Gary Johnson.
Posted by Skynet 3 years ago
I hope you haven't voted yet, the same argument against Ron Paul applies to Gary Johnson. There's still time to be relevant.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago
Gary Johnson 2012.
No votes have been placed for this debate.