PDA

View Full Version : Convince me that a brokered convention is the best scenario...




Starks
02-05-2008, 09:21 PM
As a opposed 3rd party run.

tarabyte
02-05-2008, 09:22 PM
Seeing as he actually ran under the Libertarian ticket already, I'd say he has good reason to do this rather than run as Libertarian again.

diesirae
02-05-2008, 09:23 PM
Paul has said repeatedly that he will not run 3rd party. Why would he lie to us like that?

literatim
02-05-2008, 09:26 PM
3rd party runs are basically impossible. I had a long discussion with the chairman of the Ohio Constitution Party and he told me that the Libertarian Party spent years and a small fortune getting 60,000 signatures to get their candidate on the Ohio ballot and then the Ohio governor basically threw them all out and denied them anyway and they had to spend another small fortune taking them to court to contest them over it.

Brokered convention is the only way we will win this. We have an absolute ton of state delegates in Oklahoma simply because no one else wanted the spots. They are bound to the primary winner, but become unbound in a brokered convention.

josh24601
02-05-2008, 09:27 PM
He doesn't want to.

You can go ahead if you want to, but Ron Paul does not want to.

OddballAZ
02-05-2008, 09:32 PM
Dr. Paul has never said he "won't run as 3rd party". He always said he "has no intention of running 3rd party". When cornered by the media he has always said he can't say 100% that he won't run as 3rd party. He gives it a very slim chance. The door has always been open. This is what a smart person does when he's fighting for his liberty and for the liberty of the future generations of his countrymen.

If the Dems choose Hillary and the Republicrats finish their transformation into America's 2nd Liberal party by nominating Juan McCain then Ron Paul will have a good shot at running 3rd party. Many Dems don't like Hillary, but won't vote for a Republican, so they will vote for Ron Paul. Any REAL Republican or Conservative won't vote for Juan McCain, and sure as hell won't vote for Hillary. They have no choice. They will have to give up their dreams of a Utopian Iraq and save America instead by voting for Ron Paul.

Paul needs to run as 3rd party.

Churchill2004
02-05-2008, 09:32 PM
Paul has not said he wouldn't run third party, and there's no reason he can't do both. Being the Libertarian nominee wouldn't make him lose his GOP delegates.

Any comparison between a Paul 2008 Libertarian run and his 1988 run is laughably absurd.

literatim
02-05-2008, 09:37 PM
Paul has not said he wouldn't run third party, and there's no reason he can't do both. Being the Libertarian nominee wouldn't make him lose his GOP delegates.

Any comparison between a Paul 2008 Libertarian run and his 1988 run is laughably absurd.

When he drops out, his delegates become unbound; they cannot vote for him if he is not running.

If he goes 3rd party, he has to leave the Republican Party which means he will lose his House seat.

Vet_from_cali
02-05-2008, 09:39 PM
Thats Even If We Have A Brokered Convention, Mccain Is Owning Tonight

OWNINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

AND HE IS THE LAST ONE ID LIKE TO HAVE AS THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION

akalucas
02-05-2008, 09:39 PM
i dont think he will run 3rd party but i think he will endorse someone from 3rd party to carry on the torch. Maybe even run as vp.

scooter
02-05-2008, 09:40 PM
When he drops out, his delegates become unbound; they cannot vote for him if he is not running.

If he goes 3rd party, he has to leave the Republican Party which means he will lose his House seat.

He has to run for Congress again this year anyway. He doesn't HAVE to run again as a Republican.

Also, why do people think that it has to be brokered convention vs. 3rd party? He can go to the convention and if nothing comes of it, still run in the general election. It's not like he has to quit halfway through.

If he does run outside of the Republitard party, I'd like to see it just be an independent bid. I don't care much for the capital "L" Libertarians.

Lord Abaddon
02-05-2008, 09:41 PM
So just to be clear, ALL the delegates are unbound in a brokered convention? So then any of them could vote for Dr. Paul if they wanted to? Please explain further....I think we could all use a boost possibly by now.

Starks
02-05-2008, 09:42 PM
i dont think he will run 3rd party but i think he will endorse someone from 3rd party to carry on the torch. Maybe even run as vp.

If Ron runs as a VP to McRombee, many people will ensure that the presidential line of succession is put to good use. I do not advocate this scary thought.

Lord Abaddon
02-05-2008, 09:42 PM
Thats Even If We Have A Brokered Convention, Mccain Is Owning Tonight

OWNINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

AND HE IS THE LAST ONE ID LIKE TO HAVE AS THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION

Actually Romney just caught up leading in five states, Huckabee in six, and McCain in seven. So it isn't all McCain so far!

blakjak
02-05-2008, 09:43 PM
This is really a moot point. McCain is on pace to win outright with delegate counts - meaning no brokered convention.

celticsman7
02-05-2008, 09:44 PM
Unless we get our hands on the election process (i.e. by having major posititons in corporations, government and the GOP Party) we'll never stop the vote and media fraud that comes with a 3rd part run.

blakjak
02-05-2008, 09:45 PM
Actually Romney just caught up leading in five states, Huckabee in six, and McCain in seven. So it isn't all McCain so far!

Yes, but McCain is getting the "winner-take-all" states.

Vet_from_cali
02-05-2008, 09:47 PM
Actually Romney just caught up leading in five states, Huckabee in six, and McCain in seven. So it isn't all McCain so far!

where you getting this from

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
02-05-2008, 09:47 PM
The misinformation in this thread is simply amazing.

Ronin
02-05-2008, 09:48 PM
Don't forget this. We have to win 5 states to be eligible in the convention.

(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a majority of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.

fedup100
02-05-2008, 09:48 PM
When he drops out, his delegates become unbound; they cannot vote for him if he is not running.

If he goes 3rd party, he has to leave the Republican Party which means he will lose his House seat.

This is not true and that scenario was discussed on AJ with Lew Moore I believe it was Lew, or Jesse. Anyway, he said his wife will run in his place should he go 3rd party. I say third party. Even with a brokered convention, he will not have enough votes or delegates. I say third party, screw the republican party all the way to the wall and possible win the white house in the process.

Churchill2004
02-05-2008, 09:49 PM
Paul doesn't have to officially drop out and lose his delegates to run Libertarian (As an aside, please refer to the party correctly, not "independent" or generic "third party"), nor does he have to give up his Republican house seat. He can be the Libertarian nominee and a registered Republican.

Goldwater Conservative
02-05-2008, 10:48 PM
In my experience, the best way to convert people to supporting Paul is to talk to them on a personal level, dispel misconceptions, and explain to them how Paul is and always has been a true conservative. It's next to impossible to do that nationally, but if Paul has 100 delegates at the convention and it's brokered, each of them could sway 11 non-Paul delegates, probably in small groups, thereby getting him 1200 total and putting him over the top.

Vet_from_cali
02-05-2008, 10:53 PM
so which 5 states are we going to win to participate in the convention?

Drknows
02-05-2008, 10:54 PM
Don't forget this. We have to win 5 states to be eligible in the convention.

(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a majority of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.

What he said.

a brokered convention is less likely than a 3rd party run.

Pauls' Revere
02-05-2008, 10:56 PM
We go for a brokered convention as RP said he estimated it would come to that in his posts.

noztnac
02-05-2008, 11:02 PM
In this election there is no advantage to having Republican next to your name. I say run Libertarian and try to get backing from Unity, Constitution, and Reform Parties. He can point to evidence of voter fraud as his reason for leaving. That will call today's results into question. The added bonus of running third party is that in guarantees we will keep war monger McCain out of the whitehouse. And it will prove to Republicans that if they screw the conservative base they only screw themselves.

Goldwater Conservative
02-05-2008, 11:03 PM
so which 5 states are we going to win to participate in the convention?

Our best bet now is for all but one of the other candidates to drop out so we can snatch some late-season states when many people aren't paying attention anymore, given that there'd then be a presumptive nominee. There are still 15-20 states left, which means the clock is running out on that possibility.

Pauls' Revere
02-05-2008, 11:04 PM
In a battle with British forces and his ship sinking beneath him, out-gunned, and out-numbered, the British Commander requested a full surrender from Captian Jones. His reply?

I HAVE NOT YET BEGUN TO FIGHT!
Captian John Paul Jones won the battle sinking the enemy man-o-war!

Never give up the ship!

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:06 PM
SPREAD IT FAR AND WIDE (iNDY run bomb) - www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com: (http://www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com/) http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=113132


Keep dreaming! Unfortunately we do not have enough money for a 3rd party candidacy :(

Perot only spent 65 million--look on wikipedia. What cost $65,000,000 in 1990 would cost $107,402,877.98 in 2007. source: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi

We would need probably 100,000,000

That is doable, especially considering this very limited anecdotal evidence...


my dad said he'd donate another 500 to Paul (IF he announces 3rd party) (he donated 200 on Dec. 16th--but that was when it seemed like he REALLY could maybe, possibly win the Nom. I would donate 500 the day he declares (even though it will hurt financially), whereas I can't afford to give anymore (I gave just over a 1,100 in Q4 to the cause--so shut up) for his Republican run; and gramps would probably wager another 1776.00

The 2nd and 3rd tier, broader-base of supporters aren't (many or most of them) going to donate MORE--if they already have once--because TO THEM it is obvious or at least nearly certain that he's not going to get the Nom from the Republican party (I'm not saying I believe that--but they DO). However, they would be very willing and enthusiastic about supporting him in an iNDEPENDENT run.

blakjak
02-05-2008, 11:12 PM
Independent and Third Party are being used interchangeably in this thread. What's the advantages/disadvantages of each?

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:15 PM
Independent and Third Party are being used interchangeably in this thread. What's the advantages/disadvantages of each?

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.

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:17 PM
Paul has said repeatedly that he will not run 3rd party. Why would he lie to us like that?

No he hasn't!

He is absolutely right--and honest--to say that he "has no intention of going iNDEPENDENT or Third Party" because, right now (at least before today's results), his only intention is to win the Republican nomination. He 100% fully intends (or intended) to wholeheartedly run and try his best to win as a Republican while he is running as such, and he says so. He has NEVER, EVER said "I will not run iNDY". He has never, ever said "I will never run iNDY". But IF it becomes clear he cannot win the nomination, then he can go independent.

I would be very, very, very sad if he didn't go iNDY. He could win it, especially against Hillary (and she seems like the chosen one (it's all about the superdelegates).

Actually, I will say this... If it appears that the GOP will be utterly, hopelessly lost, as in completely abandoning constitutional and conservative ideals like protection of civil liberties, small, limited government, national sovereignty, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, then maybe Ron Paul and his 10% base that exists now should all sign up under the banner of a new coalition, maybe it could be a party, maybe call it the Conservative Party. That way we go into the contest for the General election with some orginization--and if it catches on maybe it could beat down the Republican Party that so many conservatives are fed up with. Also, any Ron Paul Republicans could join the Conservative Party (or whatever it is) and could run for Congress and state seats under its banner in the upcoming election, especially if they don't make it in their primaries.

We could create "the Conservative party" with our email, fundraising, and canvassing lists--and, of course, with our delegate lists. Although I still don't know if that would be better than iNDY. The reason I say that is because we might alienate the Libertarians and Constitution party folks, whereas we wouldn't if we went iNDY--but they are only like 4% of the voting public if that. "Conservative Party" (or another name possibly) would get us the Buchananites and many others I'm sure.

We WILL win iNDY.

Goldwater Conservative
02-05-2008, 11:21 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.

I agree that even if he decided to this he should do it as an independent, because people can't point to a party label and jump to conclusions. They have to actually read and know his platform to criticize it, and it'd be him as an individual human being leading a movement of similarly-minded but also individual human beings.

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:23 PM
200,000 precinct captains, infomercials, and a 25 million dollar Independence Day money bomb!

Nobody is going to stop canvassing--no matter what. But almost everyone is hoping that if it becomes clear that he obviously can't get the Nom., he will go iNDY.

All I hear is yelling, and all I see is willful blindness, from the anti-iNDY folks.

Keep yelling. We however are hopeful for a Ron Paul whitehouse. We don't care if it is w/ out the GOP.

IF he doesn't do well enough in the next month or two, and then makes the calculated decision to run iNDY, and then declares say in March, and starts campaigning and runs a couple infomercials to pique some interest (emphasised because it's the most essential part), we could pick one perfect day, and make sure to have two months to plan it--and do everything in our power to make it better and bigger than the Tea Party. Independence Day would make so much sense--the country could declare it's independence from the parties, the special interests and lobbyists, the IRS, the Bankers, the Bush war and the Bush and McCain shamnesty, and the tax and spend Democrats--and we'd have 3 or however many months to prepare for it and drum up support. We could set a goal of 25 million in one day, and hope to shatter it. And then Ron Paul would have July, August, September, and October to spend it and raise more all along--while all along, for those 4 plus months, we could fill every precinct captain position and canvass and call every house--while Iraq continues exploding and the economy collapses.

akalucas
02-05-2008, 11:24 PM
If Ron runs as a VP to McRombee, many people will ensure that the presidential line of succession is put to good use. I do not advocate this scary thought.

sorry, i meant vp to a 3rd party

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starks http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1190465#post1190465)
If Ron runs as a VP to McRombee, many people will ensure that the presidential line of succession is put to good use. I do not advocate this scary thought.

sorry, i meant vp to a 3rd party
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1192613)

Nobody would do that. Nobody would even think about doing that. STFU

mkeller
02-05-2008, 11:36 PM
I think that iNDEPENDENT (just out of curiosity - why are we capitalizing it like that?) would be the way to go, if he loses the GOP nomination.

Libertarian would absolutely not be a good idea. If it's us, iNDEPENDENT, against McCain and Hillary, nearly all of Huckabee's supporters would vote for us (even if they think we're the lesser of three evils). However, conservative Christian folks are very biased against Libertarians. They don't understand them, and think that all they stand for is free drugs and sex. As a friend of my mom's said "I don't think I've ever heard anything good about a Libertarian." So we'd have to fight that mentality, too.

So I say - iNDEPENDENT - but only if we can't make the GOP nomination!

Paul4Prez
02-05-2008, 11:40 PM
A brokered convention is pointless now. It's time to drop out, and consider a third party run.

colecrowe
02-05-2008, 11:48 PM
The ratio of new donors to repeat donors (about 40% and INCREASING) means that his support is growing and growing. But, more importantly, I think it means that people are less and less willing to give more if they've already given once, twice, or five times (like myself, my father, grandfather, and army buddies)--unless he is going to go iNDY. I just can't afford it. But I could make myself afford another 500 or even way more if he went iNDY because I know he could win! (don't give me crap--I gave over $1,000 in Q4, as well as about 20-30 hours of canvassing and calling--I know not enough time, but I would do 3 times that when he declared iNDY because I have a much less demanding schedule now)

mketcher
02-05-2008, 11:59 PM
He has to run for Congress again this year anyway. He doesn't HAVE to run again as a Republican.

Also, why do people think that it has to be brokered convention vs. 3rd party? He can go to the convention and if nothing comes of it, still run in the general election. It's not like he has to quit halfway through.

If he does run outside of the Republitard party, I'd like to see it just be an independent bid. I don't care much for the capital "L" Libertarians.

He has to make a decision on a 3rd Party bid soon -- if he waits until the convention, it'll be too late. He'll probably go to the convention, if it looks like it'll be brokered. If within the next month or so it looks like McCain will be a shoo-in at the convention, then he'll probably go Third Party.

grizzums
02-06-2008, 12:04 AM
He has to make a decision on a 3rd Party bid soon -- if he waits until the convention, it'll be too late. He'll probably go to the convention, if it looks like it'll be brokered. If within the next month or so it looks like McCain will be a shoo-in at the convention, then he'll probably go Third Party.

Well, I can safely say...if donations dry up....Paul will be forced to call it quits, so please continue to DONATE.

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 12:10 AM
Well, I can safely say...if donations dry up....Paul will be forced to call it quits, so please continue to DONATE.

http://www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com/

my dad said he'd donate another 500 to Paul (IF he announces 3rd party) (he donated 200 on Dec. 16th--but that was when it seemed like he REALLY could maybe, possibly win the Nom. I would donate 500 the day he declares (even though it will hurt financially), whereas I can't afford to give anymore (I gave just over a 1,100 in Q4 to the cause--so shut up) for his Republican run; and gramps would probably wager another 1776.00

The 2nd and 3rd tier, broader-base of supporters aren't (many or most of them) going to donate MORE--if they already have once--because TO THEM it is obvious or at least nearly certain that he's not going to get the Nom from the Republican party (I'm not saying I believe that--but they DO). However, they would be very willing and enthusiastic about supporting him in an iNDEPENDENT run.

grizzums
02-06-2008, 12:20 AM
http://www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com/

my dad said he'd donate another 500 to Paul (IF he announces 3rd party) (he donated 200 on Dec. 16th--but that was when it seemed like he REALLY could maybe, possibly win the Nom. I would donate 500 the day he declares (even though it will hurt financially), whereas I can't afford to give anymore (I gave just over a 1,100 in Q4 to the cause--so shut up) for his Republican run; and gramps would probably wager another 1776.00

The 2nd and 3rd tier, broader-base of supporters aren't (many or most of them) going to donate MORE--if they already have once--because TO THEM it is obvious or at least nearly certain that he's not going to get the Nom from the Republican party (I'm not saying I believe that--but they DO). However, they would be very willing and enthusiastic about supporting him in an iNDEPENDENT run.

Personally, I am completely torn on whether he should continue to work towards a brokered convention or shift gears into a 3rd party/ Indy run. I just do not want to see him hang it up. I am starting to believe that the Huck and McCain camps are working together and they have both got real bad blood going between them and Mitt....this could work to our advantage in a brokered scenario if Romney calls it quits soon. I know he announced he was still in, but I think Cali hurt him BIG TIME. I also think he's got to be a little embarrassed at this point with the amount of money he has spent.....and the media on his side. I don't know where his delegates would turn in that case, but I suspect that some may come to Paul because Paul finished 2nd to Romney in certain states (ME, NV, MT, AL? etc) plus I think they may not want to go to Mccain because of that bad blood and they may feel "blackballed" and may swing to Paul....???

Regardless, I'd just like to see an email from Paul clarifying or reaffirming his intentions from here on forward.

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 12:34 AM
www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com (http://www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com/) <--pledge here.


Face it, the GOP has rejected us. There is no plausible path to the nomination after today, none. The next stage in our ideological struggle to save this country is to undertake an Independent run for the White House. I realize there are a lot of naysayers on this issue. Some people think it's insanely hard to do and that it cannot be done. I submit the following points to argue otherwise. If you agree, please help me spread word about the site and make sure to signup today. :D


Ballot Signatures:
We need to gather about 800,000 signatures nationwide to get on the ballots. We have a wonderful precinct captain system to help accomplish this, and I've read reports that to hire collectors to do the job would cost about 3 million dollars. It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that we cannot collect these signatures.

Sore Loser Laws:
Only four states in the country present possible issues with Sore Loser laws: Texas, Ohio, South Dakota, and Mississippi. There may be legal grounds to dispute these laws. More information here (http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/01/12/sore-loser-laws-dont-generally-apply-to-presidential-candidates/) and here (http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/20/do-sore-loser-laws-apply-to-presidential-candidates/)

Votes:
Polling done by Rasmussen a week ago showed that Ron Paul would garner between 7-11% of the vote in four-way matchups that included Bloomberg, Paul, and the GOP/Dem nominees. More info here. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/will_michael_bloomberg_ron_paul_run_third_party_ca mpaigns_in_2008)

Debates:
Perot got in them before, no reason we cant pull it off as well. If the polling above is true, then the media might actually let us in. Double digit support is the key, and it looks like we might be able to manage that.

A New Era:
We've learned some important lessons and made some mistakes, but the campaign activities have improved at the official level, and the grassroots got their much needed wakeup call that our attention starved methods are not very effective. We still have powerful weapons at our disposal, namely the 24 hour news cycle, new media, high name recognition, record high voter dissatisfaction, etc... Most importantly, we have the winning message and the dedication to spread it. Educating people takes time, we shouldn't give up yet.

..

mketcher
02-06-2008, 12:47 AM
In a brokered convention, anything could happen. There have been very few of them. At two of the brokered conventions -- the Democratic convention in 1968 and Garfield at the Republican convention in whatever year that was -- people who weren't even running for president earlier in the year got nominated. Why? Because they were the only candidates everyone could agree on.

The Republican convention is 7 months away. That's an eternity in politics. During the last 7 months Guiliani went from front-runner to obscurity, McCain went from has-been to front-runner. Thompson, the great hope of the neocons went nowhere. Anything can happen over the next 7 months.

That means we have 7 months to continue raising money, getting the message out, gaining endorsements, and gaining convention delegates. In the next 7 months, Dr. Paul will have a best-selling book debut. There will be 7 more months of endless war and economic rot -- problems to which only Dr. Paul has any realistic answers. There will be relentless attacks on McCain, who everyone will be gunning for, because he's the front-runner.

At the convention, the party's conservatives won't support either McCain or Huckabee (except for a portion of the evangelicals, who think falsely think Huckabee is one of them). The evangelicals won't support Romney, because he's a Mormon and evangelicals view Mormons as a cult. Nor will they support McCain. So, you have a real stalemate.

Ron Paul has appeal to a significant portion of evangelicals. He also has significant appeal to the party's conservatives. The only sticking point is the war, which in another 7 months more and more people will be tired of, especially when they start realizing that the country's economic problems are directly tied to war spending.

So, Dr. Paul will go to the convention with some clout. He will be given a speaking slot, where his views will be heard by millions of ordinary Americans, perhaps for the first time. There will be over 100,000-plus Ron Paul supporters surrounding the convention center. They will far outnumber the supporters of the other candidates. In addition, there will also be thousands of anti-war protestors. It'll be like the chaos of the 1968 Democratic convention, although hopefully it won't be as violent. Amidst this chaos, Dr. Paul could emerge as the one candidate who can appeal to all the various factions in the party: anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-regulation, pro-Constitution, etc.

Also, people want change, as can be seen by the popularity of Obama. Ron Paul is the only Republican who offers any real policy change.

In addition, there are wild cards. McCain (or one of the other candidates) could be assassinated. Or he could have health problems. He doesn't really look healthy to me, with that puffy face. Any one of these could change the dynamics of the presidential race immediately, with unpredictable results. Or McCain's widely-reputed bad temper could flare up, making him suddenly look less presidential. Or there could be revelations of past malfeasance (I'm sure McCain has plenty of skeletons in his closet). Dr. Paul could be will-positioned to take advantage of any unforseen changes in the status quo and capitalize on them.

Don't lose heart yet. A lot can happen in the next seven months, especially if McCain isn't a clear-cut winning when the smoke clears Wednesday morning.

mketcher
02-06-2008, 12:48 AM
In a brokered convention, anything could happen. There have been very few of them. At two of the brokered conventions -- the Democratic convention in 1968 and Garfield at the Republican convention in whatever year that was -- people who weren't even running for president earlier in the year got nominated. Why? Because they were the only candidates everyone could agree on.

The Republican convention is 7 months away. That's an eternity in politics. During the last 7 months Guiliani went from front-runner to obscurity, McCain went from has-been to front-runner. Thompson, the great hope of the neocons went nowhere. Anything can happen over the next 7 months.

That means we have 7 months to continue raising money, getting the message out, gaining endorsements, and gaining convention delegates. In the next 7 months, Dr. Paul will have a best-selling book debut. There will be 7 more months of endless war and economic rot -- problems to which only Dr. Paul has any realistic answers. There will be relentless attacks on McCain, who everyone will be gunning for, because he's the front-runner.

At the convention, the party's conservatives won't support either McCain or Huckabee (except for a portion of the evangelicals, who think falsely think Huckabee is one of them). The evangelicals won't support Romney, because he's a Mormon and evangelicals view Mormons as a cult. Nor will they support McCain. So, you have a real stalemate.

Ron Paul has appeal to a significant portion of evangelicals. He also has significant appeal to the party's conservatives. The only sticking point is the war, which in another 7 months more and more people will be tired of, especially when they start realizing that the country's economic problems are directly tied to war spending.

So, Dr. Paul will go to the convention with some clout. He will be given a speaking slot, where his views will be heard by millions of ordinary Americans, perhaps for the first time. There will be over 100,000-plus Ron Paul supporters surrounding the convention center. They will far outnumber the supporters of the other candidates. In addition, there will also be thousands of anti-war protestors. It'll be like the chaos of the 1968 Democratic convention, although hopefully it won't be as violent. Amidst this chaos, Dr. Paul could emerge as the one candidate who can appeal to all the various factions in the party: anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-regulation, pro-Constitution, etc.

Also, people want change, as can be seen by the popularity of Obama. Ron Paul is the only Republican who offers any real policy change.

In addition, there are wild cards. McCain (or one of the other candidates) could be assassinated. Or he could have health problems. He doesn't really look healthy to me, with that puffy face. Any one of these could change the dynamics of the presidential race immediately, with unpredictable results. Or McCain's widely-reputed bad temper could flare up, making him suddenly look less presidential. Or there could be revelations of past malfeasance (I'm sure McCain has plenty of skeletons in his closet). Dr. Paul could be will-positioned to take advantage of any unforseen changes in the status quo and capitalize on them.

Don't lose heart yet. A lot can happen in the next seven months, especially if McCain isn't a clear-cut winning when the smoke clears Wednesday morning