PDA

View Full Version : ONLY go 3rd Party IF....




nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 08:36 PM
Her Majesty wins.

If that's the case, you'd have two war mongers running and he could expect to draw AT LEAST 10% in a national election- very likely more- with the possiblity of even winning some electoral votes (NE or ME, which I believe does NOT award winner take all) which would be a first in modern electoral history.

If he won those electoral votes- he could also cut a deal.

For those of you who will respond: "No, we need to win the whole thing!" GET REAL.

We need to get the message out, and this is a great mechanism to do it.

If Obama wins- he should endorse him, stating the GOP is dead and Obama, although he's pro-huge gov't, pro-amnesty, is at least anti-war.

Joe3113
02-05-2008, 08:37 PM
No way.

Obama is from the Brezinski faction. They want war with Russia.

nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 08:38 PM
Obama is practically a Quaker compared to the other candidates. Even AIPAC fears him, which is generally a sign of an open minded foreign policy.

Soccrmastr
02-05-2008, 08:39 PM
Obama is extremely liberal... quite opposite of us.

But anyway its TOO EARLY. About half the states still vote after feb 5th dude!

Soccrmastr
02-05-2008, 08:39 PM
Obama is practically a Quaker compared to the other candidates. Even AIPAC fears him, which is generally a sign of an open minded foreign policy.

What about his speeches at CFR

Anna Karenina
02-05-2008, 08:39 PM
No 3rd party unless RP decides he wants to. Otherwise, its better for him to maintain his seat in Congress and wait for others to join him.

Joby
02-05-2008, 08:41 PM
I agree.

Taking on Hillary would be much easier than Obama.

nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 08:41 PM
so what? he's publicly stated he would open dialogue with ANY nation AND he has opposed the war since the begining.

another novel idea from paul would be to return whatever % of cash he has to supporters, following paying off debts, etc (if anything's left). it would be pennies on the dollar but would be unprecedented and would really show the GOP (and masses) the character of the campaign.

Jeremy
02-05-2008, 08:41 PM
I know, McCain vs. Hillary would be a good thing to go into! We can get Obama supporters and more conservatives backing us

Well if it's Clinton / Obama... that would be nearly impossible for anyone to beat.

nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 08:46 PM
he would also get (some of) the lou dobbs immigration vote, which is significant

CorkyAgain
02-05-2008, 08:47 PM
Don't underestimate Hillary. She made herself sound like an anti-war candidate during her 1:1 debate with Obama.

At this point, I think a third party or independent bid will fail. People will see it as sour grapes -- and that's exactly what it is for a lot of you guys.

Either Dr Paul wins the nomination at a brokered convention or it's over.

Antonius Stone
02-05-2008, 08:47 PM
if we go 3rd party we should pick up kucinich

rg123
02-05-2008, 08:47 PM
Her Majesty wins.

If that's the case, you'd have two war mongers running and he could expect to draw AT LEAST 10% in a national election- very likely more- with the possiblity of even winning some electoral votes (NE or ME, which I believe does NOT award winner take all) which would be a first in modern electoral history.

If he won those electoral votes- he could also cut a deal.

For those of you who will respond: "No, we need to win the whole thing!" GET REAL.

We need to get the message out, and this is a great mechanism to do it.

If Obama wins- he should endorse him, stating the GOP is dead and Obama, although he's pro-huge gov't, pro-amnesty, is at least anti-war.

Obama is not anti-war. Research the votes before you make statements like this.
Go to library of congress and do some research. He has voted to support the war every step of the way "BLOOD IS ON HIS HANDS" He has never voted to restrict Bush's EO orders. He supports the Patriot Act and wants to invade Pakistan. Barack Obama is a War candidate don't belive the HYPE.

RonPauledbyYoutube
02-05-2008, 08:48 PM
Romney, Huckabee, McPain, Billary, Osama, they all have the same agenda with different approaches. Have we not learned yet.I say 3rd Party, regardless.

LastoftheMohicans
02-05-2008, 08:50 PM
No 3rd party unless RP decides he wants to. Otherwise, its better for him to maintain his seat in Congress and wait for others to join him.


Can't Ron Paul run for a third party while at the same time run for Congress as a Republican? I don't think he will have a Democrat opponent. So, if he gets through the primary (I don't know when it is), he is freed up to campaign for President, again.

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 08:51 PM
iNDY not third party. Why is everyone stuck on Third Party? Libertarian = guaranteed no more that 8 or so %. Constitution = maybe 15%. The reasons for both of those results is very obvious if you just look at their wikipedia pages and consider not only their platform, but what people think of them, what comes first to their mind. Granted nobody knows what the Constituiton Party is, but look at the platform. Try getting a Dem with that. And Libertarian means repeal all drug laws, open borders, and abolish social security.

iNDY is perfect for Ron Paul, and perfect for a country that is fed up with parties, special interests, not getting what their promised, etc.

nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 08:57 PM
rg123- you're wrong. he publicly opposed the war when it was unpopular. i agree he has at times authorized funding, he has also made foolish statements about pakistan, etc. but unless RPs adopt the novel, democratic idea of "compromise" we'll be stuck in Gravel territory in perpetuity.

i like RP on a variety of issues, but as we move from primary twd general election time, we have to do what all good campaigns do (assuming we stay in) and broadn the appeal.

how many voters are going to be persuaded by arcane references to federal reserve actions, the CFR, and MSM "conspiracies."

Voters want: a positive message, a fix on the economy, and a new approach to Iraq.

If RP runs 3rd party and offers that he can get more than marginal support and influence the eventual winner, which will not, newsflash, be him.

But he can really move the agenda, and that would be huge.

We're at a precipice now though, cater to the RP supporters who only want the White House, or move forward with the understanding that that's not how American politics (the system) works and try to change the system.

If RP helped Obama win, at the very mimimum, we could try and get that "I'm telling you- he's catching on!" guy an Ambassadorship- which would be F'ING AWESOME. I'd say send him to North Korea as our first ever rep there, and everytime Kim Jong iL asks to meet with him, have him give his line....

DEAR LEADER; I want to discuss bi-lateral trade agreements regarding communications equipment.

THAT GUY: He's catching on, I'm telling you!

DEAR LEADER: Ummm. Okay. How does your country feel about the lifting of sanctions?

THAT GUY: He's catching on, I'm telling you!

RonRules
02-05-2008, 09:01 PM
The main reason we want Obama to lose is that he's got most of the young vote and the yuppie vote. Neither will vote for McCain and Hillary.

I've spoken to a lot of Obama types and they don't mind Ron Paul. The guy is pulling 35% nationwide and these people will need a home.

This won't happen, but imagine this: An Obama/Ron Paul ticket as independent 3rd party.

nicehairmitt
02-05-2008, 09:03 PM
Obama, no matter how this plays out, has a very bright future and would never throw it away on a 3rd party run. let alone w/ RP.

A better match would be RP with Huckabee; we'd have to take the VP slot.

that'll never happen either- Huck's too young and too diff't.

Maybe Ron Paul and that "don't tase me bro!" guy. He'd pull in some votes from the Left.