Why is it that the so people who like Ron Paul will vote for a Democrat if he doesn't get the nomination?

Question

I know this isn't true across the bored but I know several people who like Ron Paul but say they will vote for a Democrat to be President if Ron Paul does not get the nomination.

Can you get any more polar opposite?

Ron Paul = small, small, small government
Democrats = big, bigger, bigger government

The support or nonsupport of the war should not be the central issue. Every single Democrat has not vowed to be out of Iraq by the end of their term. I would like to see more discussion on counter terrorism strategy and securing Iraq strategy rather then do you support or not support. If a Democrat goes into office we will have a full force in Iraq for at least a year.

So what will the Democrats and/or Republicans do in order for us to be more successful in Iraq? (even if we are "pulling out")

And what will the Democrats and/or Republicans do in order to better protect Americans from terrorism?

Independent minds want to know!

***UPDATE***
Please note I did not say anything about Republicans being small government.

Answer 1

It is because the Republicans are no different than the democrats.

The Government has grown more in the last 8 years than in any presidents term ever, including Democrats like Carter and Clinton.

Republican politicians claim they are for smaller government, but in reality show they are not. Unfortunately their voter base doesn't see the need to explore what really happens when republicans are in office.

I say this as a former conservative republican, that is now socially liberal and fiscally conservative. There is no place for people like me in the republican party anymore, Ron Paul makes allot of sense, but cannot win the nomination because he doesn't play by the rules.

Answer 2

They are all (except Ron Paul) for bigger government.
That is very odd statement to make about the war, too. Why shouldn't the war be a central issue in our decisions? Just because it's not the most important issue to you? Also, you make some odd statements. First you say no Democrat has vowed to be out of Iraq by the end of their first term. Then you say if a Democrat is elected we will have a "full force" in Iraq for at least a year. Wrong on both counts.
I don't really care who you vote for, I'd just like people to have good information and base their decision on that, not base it on what I think are the most important issues and what I think others said about those issues.
Keep in mind, also, that Ron Paul is a Libertarian. He is simply running on the Republican ticket because you basically have to in order to garner any support (unless you are a billionaire like Perot). Most people in this country do not fit on just one side or the other. Very few are simply Republicans or strictly Democrats. Our cuntry is not divided by lines of all red states and all blue states.

Answer 3

I don't know, I still feel trapped by voting for the 2 party system. Ron Paul is a big step for me, and the only time I have really felt confident in my choice.

However, that being said, Republicans do not stand for anything that they used to stand for. The closest person to Ron's stance would probably be Fred Thompson (issue to issue). Huckabee is soft on Illegals, and demented on war - although I think I trust him 2nd to Ron Paul.

I would much rather have an end to pre-emptive war, and a reversal of some nearly dictatorial powers established in the office of president. If I have to hold my nose, and open my wallet for universal Healthcare, I would. If I have to see my fellow Americans suffer a little with stupid spending on welfare programs, I will (I already have no problems with paying for people that truly need help, or cannot work). I'm really torn about the illegal issue vs the war, and not sure which way I would vote.

The democrats that most Ron Paul supporters would likely avoid, would be Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards (although Obama is a close 2nd). You don't really have much choice if Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are gone. In orders of magnitude less, I would then vote for Huckabee and then Biden - possibly vice versa.

Answer 4

In all seriousness, I think it is *mainly* a backlash from the current president. I think that many people who would otherwise vote republican are so disillusioned and/or disgusted that they feel that they have to either vote for a very 'different' republican or vote for a democrat.

In addition to that, I don't think it's escape everyone's notice (though it has for some) that under Clinton, we had a budget surplus, and under Bush, we have this ginormous defecit. I mean, that's what republicans really want, fiscally speaking, right? Is to keep spending in check and balance the budget (and who could blame them?). The problem with neo-conservatism (not traditional conservatism) is that it accomplishes exactly the opposite. It's almost like miraculous how badly it's gone --- we've gotten less 'stuff' --- services, etc --- but our debt has grown unbelievably. I think some people are thinking back to the Clinton years and thinking --- wait, we had more 'stuff' AND a surplus. I think people feel that unless they vote for a republican who REALLY has different ideas about spending, they're going to get what they got this time: Someone who promises small government and then causes the defecit to grow and grow. People feel lied to, I think.

So, that's part of it --- but I think disgust with the administration and with the war, etc, etc, etc is probably the biggest thing. You know how stuff like that can be --- people 'overcorrect' when they get especially fed up. (Though --- hey, I'm happy for them to do so. I'm a democrat, and this gives us more of a chance! :) )

Answer 5

I think a lot of the democratic support for Paul is based on his opposition to the war, and his relatively liberal social policies. These are the big issues for dems. People are not necessarily voting on the size of the government, they are voting on a few specific areas, and this is why a lot support Paul.

Answer 6

If you think Republicans will win back Congress, a Democratic president makes some sense from a divided government perspective: that's the best I've got.

I'm just going to write his name in next November. Wasted vote my eye.

Answer 7

Republicans talk about small government, but their track reecord is quite the opposite. You haven't paid much attention the Bush's speding record, have you? And Republican's wilingness to take away privacy rights and other freedoms is as big-government as you can get.