PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul & The Third Party



Warham
10-10-2007, 08:37 AM
There is zero chance that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination or, after he loses, become a major leader in the Republican party. His constituency consists mainly of libertarian types who are either not Republicans or have not felt at home in the Republican party for quite some time.

And unlike Dean, I think it is pretty unlikely that Paul will endorse the eventual Republican nominee. In fact, I suspect Republican party officials are a little worried about Paul's plans for the general election. Though Paul has so far disclaimed any intention of running as a third party candidate, I think he would have little trouble securing the nomination of various third parties (like the Constitution Party) that will have a spot on the ballot in most states. If Paul can raise his profile enough to secure himself a place in general election debates (as Ross Perot did in 1992), he may well be tempted to accept a third party nomination.

Paul is much more like Ross Perot or Ralph Nader than Howard Dean. His support comes from people who are fed up with the two major parties and don't feel represented by either of them. Those who want to see a Republican in the White House come 2009 should be very careful how they treat Ron Paul and his supporters. He has the potential to become a very effective spoiler in the general election.

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/10/ron-paul-is-not-republican-howard-dean.html

Warham
10-10-2007, 08:46 AM
Some Ron Paul statistics from another fellow's comment on that blog:


Sorry, fringe candidates don't rank 5th in fundraising out of 11 candidates, 1st in volunteers, 3rd in cash on hand, 1st in straw polls, 1st in the size of crowds drawn, and 1st in grassroots activism.

LoungeMachine
10-10-2007, 11:34 AM
Ron Paul stated quite CLEARLY on Air America 2 days ago that under NO circumstances would he even CONSIDER a run as a third-party candidate.

Aint gonnna happen.

:gulp:

Warham
10-10-2007, 12:05 PM
He won't do it, because he knows he'd have less of a chance than he has now.

I'm not as pessimistic as the author though. I actually think he's got more support than the media and polls suggest.

LoungeMachine
10-10-2007, 12:09 PM
Ron Paul is intelligent, thought=provoking, reasonable, level-headed, with great ideas and convictions.....

Which means he has ZERO chance of ever being nominated.

:gulp:

Warham
10-10-2007, 12:17 PM
Arrrgggghhhhh!

LoungeMachine
10-10-2007, 12:32 PM
It's the state of our elections, bro...

The simple answer is this:

PUBLIC FINANCING OF ALL ELECTIONS.

No more special interests
No more lobbyists
No more quid pro quo


It would cost the avg taxpayer $5 a year

All TV / Radio licensees would be REQUIRED to donate time.


In THAT scenario, Ron Paul would be the R nominee......

:gulp:

Warham
10-10-2007, 01:05 PM
I like that idea.

Would every nominee get the same amount of cash?

LoungeMachine
10-10-2007, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by WAR
I like that idea.

Would every nominee get the same amount of cash?

Absolutely

Level playing field.

Much like a referendum, get a certain amount of signatures, gets you on the list.