Gadsden Flag
02-09-2008, 03:32 PM
Please don't flame me or call me a troll for creating this thread. I do not mean this to be a way of stealing votes from Ron Paul, but finding a good candidate with similar beliefs to Paul in the event that he drops out and does not seek a 3rd party run. If this is an inappropriate time or place for posting this, then I have no qualms with removing this thread. But I do think it's a good idea for us to start considering our other options.
Ron Paul may or may not decide to run as a 3rd party candidate. If he does, yes, I'd vote for him. Do I think he should? I'm not sure. We really need people like him in Congress and the Republican challenging him in his district's primary looks like a rather severe neo-con.
So lately, I have begun looking into the Libetarian and Constitution party candidates. Here are three Libertarian party candidates I have looked at. I will try to post more later. If you guys know about other candidates worth considering, please post them in this thread.
George Phillies (http://phillies2008.org/issues)
This guy has advertised on our forum a few times, and has a couple videos on You Tube. He seems to be an athiest and a strong believer in evolution, unlike Ron Paul. His campaign slogan is 'Peace, Liberty, Prosperity' which could easily be RP's slogan as well. If you look at the 'issues' section of his website, most of what he says could also be talking points for Ron Paul. Of course, some things are more important to him, and some less. The biggest difference seems to be that he is pro-choice while Ron Paul is pro-life. But both say that the federal government does not deserve a role in the matter.
He has a Ph.D in Physics from MIT. This is a silly reason to support a candidate, but as a math major I feel he is cut from the same cloth as me, and is probably a very rational person. I like him pretty well from what I have know and I would vote for him over McCain or Obama or Hillary.
Wayne Allen Root (http://www.rootforamerica.com/home/wherestands.php)
This guy seems to be the frontrunner for the Libertarian nomination. His claim to fame is making money on sports betting in Las Vegas. I sometimes listen to Sports Radio and I have often heard his advertisements trying to sell his 'lock of the week' or whatever.
Again, most of his stances on issues are not too different from Ron Paul's. But I don't think he has any political experience at all and he seems to slick to me. It's like Billy Mays running for president or something.
I would not vote for him. While I think gambling should be legal, I don't hold it in very high regard and have a hard time believing that someone who made a fortune selling 'sports picks' could make a good president. I don't think he really has any experience in politics at all.
Christine Smith (http://christinesmithforpresident.com/cblog/index.php)
Christine Smith is a humanitarian activist who is running for the Libertarian nomination. She is also a Ron Paul supporter (http://www.libertarianforpresident.com/RonPaul-Support.php) and talks mentions him here and there on her blog.
As with each of the candidates so far, she takes more or less the same stance on the issues as Ron Paul, with stronger emphasis in some places and weaker in others. The biggest issue for her seems to be ending the Iraq war and ending federal welfare. As 'humanitarian', I suppose she has a good understanding of how the welfare state is really not solving any problems.
Ron Paul may or may not decide to run as a 3rd party candidate. If he does, yes, I'd vote for him. Do I think he should? I'm not sure. We really need people like him in Congress and the Republican challenging him in his district's primary looks like a rather severe neo-con.
So lately, I have begun looking into the Libetarian and Constitution party candidates. Here are three Libertarian party candidates I have looked at. I will try to post more later. If you guys know about other candidates worth considering, please post them in this thread.
George Phillies (http://phillies2008.org/issues)
This guy has advertised on our forum a few times, and has a couple videos on You Tube. He seems to be an athiest and a strong believer in evolution, unlike Ron Paul. His campaign slogan is 'Peace, Liberty, Prosperity' which could easily be RP's slogan as well. If you look at the 'issues' section of his website, most of what he says could also be talking points for Ron Paul. Of course, some things are more important to him, and some less. The biggest difference seems to be that he is pro-choice while Ron Paul is pro-life. But both say that the federal government does not deserve a role in the matter.
He has a Ph.D in Physics from MIT. This is a silly reason to support a candidate, but as a math major I feel he is cut from the same cloth as me, and is probably a very rational person. I like him pretty well from what I have know and I would vote for him over McCain or Obama or Hillary.
Wayne Allen Root (http://www.rootforamerica.com/home/wherestands.php)
This guy seems to be the frontrunner for the Libertarian nomination. His claim to fame is making money on sports betting in Las Vegas. I sometimes listen to Sports Radio and I have often heard his advertisements trying to sell his 'lock of the week' or whatever.
Again, most of his stances on issues are not too different from Ron Paul's. But I don't think he has any political experience at all and he seems to slick to me. It's like Billy Mays running for president or something.
I would not vote for him. While I think gambling should be legal, I don't hold it in very high regard and have a hard time believing that someone who made a fortune selling 'sports picks' could make a good president. I don't think he really has any experience in politics at all.
Christine Smith (http://christinesmithforpresident.com/cblog/index.php)
Christine Smith is a humanitarian activist who is running for the Libertarian nomination. She is also a Ron Paul supporter (http://www.libertarianforpresident.com/RonPaul-Support.php) and talks mentions him here and there on her blog.
As with each of the candidates so far, she takes more or less the same stance on the issues as Ron Paul, with stronger emphasis in some places and weaker in others. The biggest issue for her seems to be ending the Iraq war and ending federal welfare. As 'humanitarian', I suppose she has a good understanding of how the welfare state is really not solving any problems.