Even though I agreed with much of what Ron Paul had to say, all I could ever think is 'this isn't my guy' for president -too odd a demeanor/un-electable- not to mention foreign policy positions that were appalling to a peace-through-strength Republican like myself, particularly statements made re. Iran and Israel.
But lo-and-behold, now we have fervent offspring Rand Paul who -while libertarian in his views- apparently saw wisdom in distancing himself from his father's take re. the volatile Muddled East.. and that's when I started listening to him.
Maybe I've changed in my hawkishness too- I'd rather have not been involved in Libya at all -don't want to empower jihadists in Syria- and find it pointless to back wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that I supported all the way when we're just going to hand them over to Iran or the Taliban at the end anyway.
Sooo, looking at the handy chart I found at the Libertarian Party (who I don't advocate as viable in 2016, even Rand Paul prefers working to take-over the Republican party to a 3rd-party challenge for practical reasons) you might find it useful to see right where the lines are drawn, as well as where you yourself stand as a whole in today's turbulent political cauldron...
(click to embiggen)
(click to embiggen)
I don't know how 'socially tolerant' I am, but if putting social issues on the back burner to ensure fiscal crises remain front+center from now through 2016, so be it. Note that the 'libertarian' overlap below appears to be a potentially appealing package as far as winning elections go...
