Ron Paul - Still hope for a third party run?

[PaleoForPaul]

Even though Ron Paul pretty much never lies when it comes to his politics, I can't help but think if he were thinking about a third party run, he couldn't announce it until after the March 4 election for his congressional seat.

[Jasko]

nope :(

[TheTyke]

Since 3rd partu wins don't happen, there was never hope for anything but drawing out a defeat by a third party run. The system is broken - I was reading the Kentucky Republican Convention Call, and if I read it right, in KY the 2 Parties even elect the ELECTORS.

We have to fix the system before 3rd party candidates will be viable.

[Feelgood]

He is not even remotely considering a third party run. Can we lock this thread now please?

[hueylong]

This is true. He can't say anything freely til March 5th. Once he wins his Republican Primary (there was no Democrat even filed) -- he's free to do as he pleases without losing the House seat.

[Liberté]

Even though Ron Paul pretty much never lies when it comes to his politics, I can't help but think if he were thinking about a third party run, he couldn't announce it until after the March 4 election for his congressional seat.

No, there is not. He would not out and out lie about that.

[clouds]

the only way he would run is if he lost his congressional seat. fat chance

[MN Patriot]

Its pretty obvious the Ron Paul revolution is fizzling out. He won't get the Republican nomination. Sure, there may be a few effects of his campaign run in December and January, and up until Super Tuesday. But the country has all but forgotten him now.

If Ron were to run as a Libertarian, and kept his supporters busy from now until election day, the important issues would be getting addressed. He would still be mentioned in the news as a possible spoiler, and we could shame the Republicans for being such sell-outs.

To all those people who say a third party run is a waste of time, WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW THAT IS WORTH OUR TIME? It is a waste of time to pretend Ron is going to get the nomination for the Republican Party.

I am a precinct delegate and in two weeks I have to go to my local delegate convention, telling the party insiders I support Ron. It will be interesting to see if this does any good.

The two old parties are broken. A new party needs to replace them. It is tough, but a new party of energized outsiders big enough to really change things is sorely needed.

[acptulsa]

He is not even remotely considering a third party run. Can we lock this thread now please?

Why the hell would we lock the thread? Discussion is what this site is all about.

He won't run third party. Fine. We should still get him on the ballot in every state where that's possible--and that's forty-six states, as only four have "sore loser" laws. We don't need his permission, and he doesn't have to run third party--he doesn't have to run in a party at all, nor even run at all.

If we're looking at a brokered convention (and between McCain's eligibility requirements, his questionable dealings and the fact that he hasn't locked up the nomination yet and may not, I believe it more than possible) then having the ballot access in place that will enable us to easily split the conservative vote will be a big bargaining chip for Dr. Paul. Provided, of course, that Dr. Paul didn't ask us to do it, because if he did it would piss the RNC off.

It would amount to us calling the G.O.P.'s bluff. They regularly tell us that we need their powerful asses more than they need us. They may regularly piss on our civil liberties and the Constitution we hold dear, but they're the "conservative" power and don't have to care. We can send the message that we are not only part of the Reagan coalition and they can't win without us, but we can demonstrate that we are the youth and therefore their future, and they can't have a future without us.

It is a way for us to draw a line in the sand. Stop this neocon criminal, immoral bull or split your party and hasten its demise. It is the stand Lincoln took that cause the Republican Party to rise from the ashes of the Whig party in 1860.

Do you want a revolution or not? This is the path. We can try this, we can take up arms and shed blood, or we can roll over and take some more of what they got up our rumps. Make up your minds.

[majinkoola]

I want him to do it, only if Clinton somehow beats Obama. It would be really great if Obama won the pledged delegates but Clinton won the nomination through the superdelegates. Split the party right down the center. The republicans are already split about McCain.

And look where we've gotten from 0% a year ago. Up to about 9%. A poll awhile back showed Paul getting 12% in a three way race with Hillary and McCain. Imagine what we could do with a revitalized base after a March 5th announcement.

I currently go to college, and of the acquaintances that don't support RP, almost all support Obama. We can get that vote, period, if Obama loses the Democratic primary. There's enough people pissed off about the war, just like on the other side there's enough people mad about conservatism dying.

I can't believe I'm saying this but I'm pulling for Clinton in the March 4th primaries. The 3 Senators are all the same anyway.

[Shaun]

It's really quite funny that the guys who started working on this thing in Jan/Feb are THE HEROES of the campaign now.
Telling us all about a brokered convention. WHAT A CROCK!! GET A LIFE KIDS.
There will be no brokered convention...
I have a $1,000 cash here to bet ANYONE on this site at odds of 10-1 ( and yes, I can easily find 10k) IF THERE IS A BROKERED CONVENTION.
Come on, take the bet....OR STOP BULLSHITTING ABOUT THE BROKERED CONVENTION fantasy....

[Freedom 7]

Without question the 3rd party path is biased and extremely difficult. He would have to win against all odds..... Has the anti establishment path been any less difficult? What have we been doing for the past 12 months? Against all odds Dr. Paul has broken fund raising records and resuscitated traditional conservatism into a massive movement that will outlive us all.

Above all else he's responded to his supporters.

"As long as the numbers keep growing and the funds come in to support it, I will stay in the campaign."

He's a servant of the people so if we provide the funding and show the support he will run. Lets give him an offer he can't refuse.

A 3rd party money bomb!

[JS4Pat]

To all those people who say a third party run is a waste of time, WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW THAT IS WORTH OUR TIME?
Some of us are looking to the future. We know we have to seize the opportunity to build this into a lasting movement that can have real long term impact.

Convert the Meetup Group(s) in your area into this! (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=111402)

I do think Ron Paul could run third party without damaging his credibility. He openly said on Meet the Press that he wants to leave himself a little wiggle room on the question.

If it is Hillary vs McCain, then I really believe he should do it!

[acptulsa]

It's really quite funny that the guys who started working on this thing in Jan/Feb are THE HEROES of the campaign now.
Telling us all about a brokered convention. WHAT A CROCK!! GET A LIFE KIDS.
There will be no brokered convention...
I have a $1,000 cash here to bet ANYONE on this site at odds of 10-1 ( and yes, I can easily find 10k) IF THERE IS A BROKERED CONVENTION.
Come on, take the bet....OR STOP BULLSHITTING ABOUT THE BROKERED CONVENTION fantasy....

So what if there isn't? We've already got him on the ballot and we split the G.O.P. vote. And we continue to split the G.O.P. vote until it reforms or dies. If it reforms, fine. If it dies, fine. Meanwhile, real conservatives see that voting for what a conservative is generally told is the "lesser of two evils" begins to see that it doesn't work, and they might as well vote for the true conservative, and then we build up to critical mass and the bandwagon gets jumped.

And the only thing that stops us from doing this is believing the "get a life" crowd, because the only way to make this fail is for us to either all get thrown in Gitmo or for us to give up on it. Period.

[FreedomRings]

He won't run third party. Fine. We should still get him on the ballot in every state where that's possible--and that's forty-six states, as only four have "sore loser" laws. We don't need his permission, and he doesn't have to run third party--he doesn't have to run in a party at all, nor even run at all.

Interesting. So what exactly would be required to do that? How many people and how much money do we need?

[JS4Pat]

Interesting. So what exactly would be required to do that? How many people and how much money do we need?

46 different states - 46 different sets of rules.
It's crazy - some are very labor intensive - some would be no problem for the Meetup Groups in the state to handle.

Re:Sore Loser Laws

Does that mean you just can't get on the ballot as an Independent or you can't get on the ballot as the nominee for another party that already has ballot access?

i.e. The Consititution Party agrees to list Ron Paul's name under their party on the ballot.

[acptulsa]

More volunteers than money, and number of signatures required varies by state. My state is generally regarded as the toughest, but I'll be all over it this summer.

P.S. There's a thread going under Alternatives to the Official Campaign on this subject. Someone has already picked up the paperwork in Mississippi.

[Liberté]

Its pretty obvious the Ron Paul revolution is fizzling out. He won't get the Republican nomination. Sure, there may be a few effects of his campaign run in December and January, and up until Super Tuesday. But the country has all but forgotten him now.

If Ron were to run as a Libertarian, and kept his supporters busy from now until election day, the important issues would be getting addressed. He would still be mentioned in the news as a possible spoiler, and we could shame the Republicans for being such sell-outs.

To all those people who say a third party run is a waste of time, WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW THAT IS WORTH OUR TIME? It is a waste of time to pretend Ron is going to get the nomination for the Republican Party.

I am a precinct delegate and in two weeks I have to go to my local delegate convention, telling the party insiders I support Ron. It will be interesting to see if this does any good.

The two old parties are broken. A new party needs to replace them. It is tough, but a new party of energized outsiders big enough to really change things is sorely needed.

Some of us are out volunteering to be GOP Ward Chairs, Vice Chairs, etc... running for City Councils, running for State House, running for Governorships, running for congressional offices... WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

[acptulsa]

Some of us are out volunteering to be GOP Ward Chairs, Vice Chairs, etc... running for City Councils, running for State House, running for Governorships, running for congressional offices... WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

Good point. I know the G.O.P. can be saved, at least theoretically. It will take pressure from both without and within, in my opinion. Since it is in place and has name recognition, I suspect it would be the place to start.

This sort of action, placing delegates and getting Paul on the ballots to pressure the party could force them to admit to themselves where their only viable future is.

[stevedasbach]

Why the hell would we lock the thread? Discussion is what this site is all about.

He won't run third party. Fine. We should still get him on the ballot in every state where that's possible--and that's forty-six states, as only four have "sore loser" laws. We don't need his permission, and he doesn't have to run third party--he doesn't have to run in a party at all, nor even run at all.


Yes, you do need his permission. Virtually every state requires candidates to file a statement of candidacy or something similar. If the candidate doesn't file the form, (s)he is not placed on the ballot.

Even with write-in candidates, in many states the candidate must file some paperwork or else write-in votes for that candidate aren't tallied.

[Banana]

Consider this.

If every member of LP and CP joined GOP to support Ron Paul, then this would be a slam dunk.



IOW, it really doesn't really matter what party we're with. The objective is to get power back to the people and that requires a broad grassroot support. Praying for 3rd party run doesn't really take back the needed power to make changes.

We have to step up to the plate and play the game because they wrote the rules. They rigged it so if we tried to sneak by them, we'd lose instantly. So face them full force on and use their own rules against them. That's how we should win.

[acptulsa]

Yes, you do need his permission. Virtually every state requires candidates to file a statement of candidacy or something similar. If the candidate doesn't file the form, (s)he is not placed on the ballot.

Even with write-in candidates, in many states the candidate must file some paperwork or else write-in votes for that candidate aren't tallied.

Gathering the signatures is the time consuming part. It is also impossible to do it without someone noticing. Doing this will lay the groundwork, and allow Dr. Paul to negotiate at the convention from a position of strength.

Depending on how that turns out, he can then decide. We drafted him before. He doesn't seem to mind terribly following our lead. I really don't think he'd turn us down. He has, after all, always left himself, as he puts it, "wriggle room."

[G-Wohl]

Consider this.

If every member of LP and CP joined GOP to support Ron Paul, then this would be a slam dunk.

The Libertarian and Constitution parties differ on a lot of things, so I can't see this being a realistic possibility. I know for certain, as a Libertarian, that I would not want to join forces with the Constitution Party. A lot of their platform positions bother me, and aren't in the least bit in line with libertarianism.

[weslinder]

Consider this.

If every member of LP and CP joined GOP to support Ron Paul, then this would be a slam dunk.

Quoted for Truth! There is a huge power vacuum in the Republican Party right now that will get worse if McCain is the nominee and gets trounced in the general. Even now, with the neocons in charge of the party, they aren't the majority. We have an historic opportunity to oust the neocons and recenter the Republican Party around the Constitution, just like Goldwater did to the corporatists.

Maybe the people that are in the CP and LP will jump on the bandwagon when they see us regaining power in the Republican Party, but it'd be nice to have their support now.

[Banana]

The Libertarian and Constitution parties differ on a lot of things, so I can't see this being a realistic possibility. I know for certain, as a Libertarian, that I would not want to join forces with the Constitution Party. A lot of their platform positions bother me, and aren't in the least bit in line with libertarianism.

I'm aware of that, but when you think about this, this isn't really that much different from fiscal conservative Republicans, evangelicals Republicans, and warhawks forming a coalition behind their nominee. It's a common practice in European parliament as well.

And here's the best part:

The objective here is to take back power. Not to push a specific agenda, but rather push for more freedom and liberty for everyone. The end result is that everyone profits. (well, except for the Establishment) This is why Ron Paul can appeal to liberal Democrat, evangelical Christian, secularist atheist, black Republican and more while the likes of Clinton, Huckabee and McCain merely polarizes and Obama is just a empty husk.

[Gadsdenfly]

I would love it if Ron Paul were to run third party but it appears he has ruled that out in favor of building his movement within the Republican party to take it back from the big government neo-conservatives.

I will vote Libertarian Party and vote for any Ron Paul Republicans in future elections.

[Feelgood]

Why the hell would we lock the thread? Discussion is what this site is all about.

Hmmm maybe because it has already been discussed more times then any of us would care to count. Each time, ending with the same result. The real RP supporters being irritated by those with defeatist mentalities. Enough already...


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/unclespellbinder/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

[PennCustom4RP]

Hmmm maybe because it has already been discussed more times then any of us would care to count. Each time, ending with the same result. The real RP supporters being irritated by those with defeatist mentalities. Enough already...


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/unclespellbinder/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

I don't know where you get off in trying to say who is a 'real' RP supporter, or who isn't. The OP and myself have been here since May, unlike you Mr. December. It is those of your ilk, GOP loyalists that would rather cede back to the 14th D TX. and continue to beat your GOP dead horse, save the party from within yada yada, than seek an alternate path to the presidency. However difficult that venture might be, it is worth doing. The RP GOP run is done, and America doesn't have time for us to raise up all these RP Republicans to office.The GOP doesn't deserve RP, and probably doesn't deserve your support either. But go ahead, try to lock the thread, end any discussion, and you will be just as Fascist as those we oppose. Ignore what you don't want to hear, ask RP vs. MSM about that one...:rolleyes:

[PaleoForPaul]

Hmmm maybe because it has already been discussed more times then any of us would care to count. Each time, ending with the same result. The real RP supporters being irritated by those with defeatist mentalities. Enough already...


25 people wanted to discuss it.

You didn't.

Get over yourself, the forums aren't just for you.

Your claim that only your opinion is that of a 'real' Ron Paul support goes to show what a douche you are.

[buffalokid777]

I do think Ron Paul could run third party without damaging his credibility. He openly said on Meet the Press that he wants to leave himself a little wiggle room on the question.

If it is Hillary vs McCain, then I really believe he should do it!

If ever I thought there was a successful third party run this was it......

I understand why RP doesn't want to run third party....

But with the pundits and anaylysts saying 100 milion is what is needed to win the presidency....I really thought a third party run was the way to go based upon previous fund raising.

I have always been independent up until this primary and I will be switching back to independant ASAP.......

RP had the chance to pull a third party run unlike any other based on previous donations.....

But he chose not to....

I understand why he did and hold no Ill will against him for his choice,

But I also know if there ever was a chance to beat the odds in getting an independant elected president....this was our best chance and we will not have another opportunity anytime soon......

At least we CAN be sure RP will retain his congressional seat.....so we will at least have one person who will work for us in the congress......and Kucinich looks like he will hold his seat making two.....

Hopefully Murray Sabrin will win the senate seat in NJ giving us a toehold in the senate also.....

[Peace&Freedom]

There is no power vacuum in the Republican Party where it counts (the eastern establishment/big business set at the top). There is a cosmetic vacuum from the vantage point of the rank and file, which can lead to superficial gains by Paul supporters working to transform the party, especially after the election (given the expected wipe out of the McCain candidacy by the Democrats). This certainly should permit the outcome of electing to Congress at least a few Paulites, to act as very needed successors to Paul should he retire/expire. But I highly doubt it will change the elite domination of the party and the media.

Paul has chosen (for now) the GOP-only path of reform so as not to have the Revolution get scapegoated for the GOP losing the election, AND based on his guess that we may be able to have one more free national election (2012). This gives the save-GOP faction a window of opportunity (one election cycle) to show if the party is savable as they claim. Come 2012, two things will be clear: 1) the GOP will or will not be substantially reformed, and 2) supposing Democrats win in '08, we will either still be occupying Iraq, or not. With the bloom off the rose of a save-GOP effort, and anti-war Americans disappointed with the pro-war actions of Obama/Hillary, the stage will be set for a second Paul candidacy (or a run by one of his elected successors) to take the White House under a GOP and/or third party banner.

[G-Wohl]

I'm aware of that, but when you think about this, this isn't really that much different from fiscal conservative Republicans, evangelicals Republicans, and warhawks forming a coalition behind their nominee. It's a common practice in European parliament as well.

And here's the best part:

The objective here is to take back power. Not to push a specific agenda, but rather push for more freedom and liberty for everyone. The end result is that everyone profits. (well, except for the Establishment) This is why Ron Paul can appeal to liberal Democrat, evangelical Christian, secularist atheist, black Republican and more while the likes of Clinton, Huckabee and McCain merely polarizes and Obama is just a empty husk.

I don't agree with this argument. The Constitution Party completely contradicts the Libertarian Party's view in terms of freedom of choice, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. It's a very "Mike Huckabee" kind of party, and very few Libertarians, I believe, actually support the Constitution Party's platform overall because of this.

A lot of Evangelical Republicans are still fiscally conservative - people don't "get together" and settle their differences by picking one candidate and staying behind them; they choose the candidate that is given to them by the mainstream media. Most people are apathetic, vote with their party, and choose the candidate that is already "planned" to win by the MSM so that they feel their vote isn't "wasted."

Until people start becoming literally ANGRY and UPSET that the general populous' views are not being represented by their party, the party will never be able to crumble. But we ARE seeing evidence of this happening to the Republicans, mostly because of their big spending and war mongering.

I say take the Ron Paul approach and let the market decide. When the time comes, people WILL want to move to a new party, and then it will be up to the people to determine which party will eventually become the major third party or "replacement party" for the GOP.

[Brother Butch]

I don't agree with this argument. The Constitution Party completely contradicts the Libertarian Party's view in terms of freedom of choice, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. It's a very "Mike Huckabee" kind of party, and very few Libertarians, I believe, actually support the Constitution Party's platform overall because of this.

A lot of Evangelical Republicans are still fiscally conservative - people don't "get together" and settle their differences by picking one candidate and staying behind them; they choose the candidate that is given to them by the mainstream media. Most people are apathetic, vote with their party, and choose the candidate that is already "planned" to win by the MSM so that they feel their vote isn't "wasted."

Until people start becoming literally ANGRY and UPSET that the general populous' views are not being represented by their party, the party will never be able to crumble. But we ARE seeing evidence of this happening to the Republicans, mostly because of their big spending and war mongering.

I say take the Ron Paul approach and let the market decide. When the time comes, people WILL want to move to a new party, and then it will be up to the people to determine which party will eventually become the major third party or "replacement party" for the GOP.

Good post. I think people need the next year or two of reality to wake up and demand their freedom in numbers that count. Our job is to not falter in the meantime. As they come awake, we dust them off and bring them onto the freedom train.

Unfortunately for most, it will have to get worse before they demand better.

[Akus]

If we're looking at a brokered convention (and between McCain's eligibility requirements, his questionable dealings and the fact that he hasn't locked up the nomination yet and may not, I believe it more than possible) ....

Well, if it's possible, why mess with this whole third party business? To put a big fat X on all of our grassroots' efforts to tell republicans that he is better then huck or McCain?

I seriously wish that the admin would lock up threads about third party stink. I am tired of them. I am busting my ass off calling people, particularly republicans, trying to tell them that RP is a better choice for the GOP. If Ron Paul, at this point, after a giant effort on our part, decides to drop everything and run 3rd party, then screw it, I really don't have any reason to put any effort in promoting him. I'll still vote for him, assuming I'll be given such a choice come November, but as far as canvassing, and getting him on the ballot, you idiots do that.

Stop with the negativity. We are winning, do you people understand that? The states' GOP platforms are changing because enough Ron Paul delegates said they wanted them too. The metamorphosis of the Republican party has already started. So stop with you whining about the third party.

Because, since you think Ron Paul has no chance now, he will still have no chance running as a third guy, because most Ron Paul supporters are apparently whiny bitches, who won't do anything past a bumper sticker or another Youtube vid or some insane conspiracy theory about Reptilians blocking him out of debates.

arrrrgh:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

[Captain America]

SPLIT THE PARTY and declare the republicans and the democrats are the same party. Anti-War, property rights, gun owner democrats will join. No Third Party just a split at the convention.

He can not let us down, we are screwed without him.

[Banana]

I don't agree with this argument. The Constitution Party completely contradicts the Libertarian Party's view in terms of freedom of choice, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. It's a very "Mike Huckabee" kind of party, and very few Libertarians, I believe, actually support the Constitution Party's platform overall because of this.

As I already said, it does happens in European parliament. Besides, you have to admit that we would do well to shake the tree, even if we didn't agree on whether we want to pick the fruits, prune it, or chop it down.


people don't "get together" and settle their differences by picking one candidate and staying behind them; they choose the candidate that is given to them by the mainstream media. Most people are apathetic, vote with their party, and choose the candidate that is already "planned" to win by the MSM so that they feel their vote isn't "wasted."

IMHO, this is probably something we could educate voters on (but that's a long term goal and not that much to do with RP's run). They've been brainwashed into believing that POTUS is only the position worth a damn, and I bet that most of them don't even know who their state legislators are (mind, I'm talking state legislation, not Congress), despite the fact that we are supposed to live in a Federalistic system where such legislators/governors have much more power than their Federal counterparts.

POTUS should really be thought of an administrator best left up to that wonky nerd who is quite exceedingly precise in arranging his pens, not a place for snake oil salesman to slither into.


Until people start becoming literally ANGRY and UPSET that the general populous' views are not being represented by their party, the party will never be able to crumble. But we ARE seeing evidence of this happening to the Republicans, mostly because of their big spending and war mongering.

Shouldn't we help this along? Prod them a bit?


I say take the Ron Paul approach and let the market decide. When the time comes, people WILL want to move to a new party, and then it will be up to the people to determine which party will eventually become the major third party or "replacement party" for the GOP.

I hate to say it, but I think you may very well be right. The reason why I say I hate to say it is this: it'll literally require a bloody revolution by time people realize they want it back.

As Burke said, all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. (and I'd add that good men acting out unthinkingly is sufficient for evil to triumph, as well.)

[Akus]

To all those people who say a third party run is a waste of time, WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW THAT IS WORTH OUR TIME? It is a waste of time to pretend Ron is going to get the nomination for the Republican Party.

I am a precinct delegate and in two weeks I have to go to my local delegate convention, telling the party insiders I support Ron. It will be interesting to see if this does any good.

MN Patriot, I strongly advice you to ask the Republican non-Ron Paul supporters if they believe that McCain can beat such a political superstar like Obama.

Seriously, tell them about the anti-war sentiment in this country, tell them how 99.98% of blacks, Hispanics, and other non-whites will vote for Obama, how Democrats are voting 4 to 1 compared to Republican, how people will see a sharp contrast between a young black man and an old war hawk who wants to stay in Iraq and fight many more wars as well and how they will ignore whatever substace McCain will try to present and whatever substance Barak lacks.

Ask them when was the last time an electorate had a young guy/old guy choice and the young guy lost? JFK vs Nixon - who won? Bill Clinton vs Bush Sr - who won? Barack vs McCain - who will win?

This is what we're banking on. The party insiders will realize that the pro-war stance demands McCain, but the sheer pragmatism demands Ron Paul.


The two old parties are broken. A new party needs to replace them. It is tough, but a new party of energized outsiders big enough to really change things is sorely needed.

I do not see any serious third party out there. Any third party talk will be yet another disappointment for all of us who want a choice in the election. While Ron Paul's GOP run is organized, of only partially, his independent run will be chaotic and will only give an extra card to the Hannity/Limbaugh/Ann Coulter hand.

Who do you think you can attract to that party who isn't attracted to it just yet? GOP will still be GOP, liberals - liberals, Constitution, Libertarian, Communist, Prohibition, Green and other tiny movements that call themselves parties I don't have a clue why will find some reason to whine about and not help you.

We are working within the Republican ranks so that we are actually given one and if we have to tell everyone who we finally got on board to drop everything because Ron Paul is running on another party.... then you can rebuild the destroyed base on your own and I won't give you a dime of my $$ or a second of my grassrooting time and will dismiss you ever do deservingly as yet another bullshit fringe counterculture, that all third parties are.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Whether Ron Paul changes his mind later this year, or we have a RP Revolution successor in 2012, it will come down to a third party sooner or later. From all I've seen, only one third of the GOP rank and file is at all pliable on converting to Constitutionalist/Libertarian positions. The rest are drooling retards who are apocalypse-obsessed idiots going down with the Huckaboom ship, or war mongers. The latter is especially important, since these people do register in the polls as being unsatisfied or upset with the war.

What the same polls don't tell you is that these people ARE NOT anti-war or anti-interventionist. They're pissed because we aren't already bombing Iran, sweeping into Syria, and using Nazi-style tactics to "win" in Iraq. These are the ones who joke about nuking Mecca. They don't give a damn if the economy sinks or our liberties are taken or if there's even another draft: they welcome it, as long as the wars continue. Their insane hate for Muslims and others overrides all other considerations.

These types are, in my opinion, unconvertible. And ultimately, they continue to constitute a substantial majority of the Republican Party, along with the single-issue evangelical Christian mentioned above. This is why the GOP is a sinking ship, hated by almost everyone else outside the party to the point of completely writing off anything that comes from it, even if it's a Ron Paul movement.

If he refuses a third party run, then worming around in the corpse of the GOP is, unfortunately, the only real choice. However, it should only be viewed as an attempt to split off the minority of reasonable conservatives and libertarians still in the party who are ignorant of the existence of Ron Paul and our movement. Then, in 2012, we'll be way overdue for a new party, even though this is probably the last election to have a shot at winning without fighting just to keep our heads above water for survival.

[qh4dotcom]

I am still hoping that someone Ron Paul endorses might run 3rd party.

[N13]

Ron has been clear on this issue from the beginning.

No means No.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Ron has been clear on this issue from the beginning.

No means No.

Not really. If he was really clear from the beginning, he wouldn't have ever talked about wanting "wiggle room" on the third party question in his interview on Meet the Press with Russert.

[MN Patriot]

Some of us are out volunteering to be GOP Ward Chairs, Vice Chairs, etc... running for City Councils, running for State House, running for Governorships, running for congressional offices... WHAT ARE YOU DOING?

I already told you what I am doing: going to the BPOU as a Ron Paul delegate. 10 years ago I ran for Congress for the Libertarian Party, running on the same ideology as Ron Paul. Have you done that yet?

I've already spent alot of effort on this whole revolution deal, starting 12 or more years ago. It's getting to the point where I'm just going to look out for myself from now on. Let the socialists and fascists have their way with the country. I can take care of myself. Most people are too fricking ignorant to understand how they are getting screwed by the Establishment. Then when we tell them about freedom, people act like WE are the ones trying to screw them.

I'm going as far as I can as a Ron Paul delegate. But I truly think Ron will make a big mistake by not running as a Libertarian. That would be a revolution. Going through the process of trying to reform the Republican Party will be a big waste of time, in my opinion. If it works out, good. If it doesn't, well, I told you so.

[buffalokid777]

I was for the independent run.....

But if Ron Paul is in this for long haul, as in willing to run in 2012........

He should make that clear.....Nader is running at 76 though no one takes him seriously.

If Ron Paul is looking to go the Reagan route......He should announce his intentions to his supporters.....

Reagan was shunned by the republican establishment in 1976......but used the time from then until 1980 to build a strong organization to compete the next time around which the establishment could not use the same tactics to marginilze him like 1976....

The Ron Paul revolution is splintering.....if he announced to everyone that he is every intention of running again in 2012, this would revive the effort, imagine fundraising from the day after the election to 2012 and the base that has already been built having 4 years to spread the message....if Ron Paul promised a 2012 presidential run.....the Ron Paul revolution could set its site on a realistic goal.....4 years to get name recognition....4 years to spread the message....and 4 years to fundraise.....4 years to win the presidency....look how much money we raised.....look how much we accomplished....imagine if we had 4 years to work with.......we could if he would run in 2012.

That is our most realistic chance of a Ron Paul presidency......76 would be old to run, but as long as he sounds intelligent as he does today in 4 years, I don't see the age factor a problem. I really hope Ron chooses this route....in 4 years the economy should be in shambles based on the data i've been seeing.....RP could have an organization many times stronger than he does now....this is probably the only chance for an RP presidency at this point....building for 2012 and the sooner he expressed his willingness to run in 2012.....the quicker we could get to work into making it a reality.

[Paulitician]

LOL

I've said from the beginning that Ron Paul would not run third party. Also, this campaign (both official and grassroots), is pretty much dead. All hope is lost...

Ron Paul won't run in 2012. I don't understand why you guys would want him to run anyway. He'd be much too old by then, and he'd fail miserably again. As long as he gets invited to talk about politics and economics on shows for the rest of his career, I think that would be better and more effective for the cause of liberty.