Ron Paul will vote Bob Barr

[Jeremy]

He lives in Texas. There will be only one third party candidate. So unless he does a write in (which is not likely at all), he'll vote Barr.

This isn't any statement to "support" anyone... it's just looking at the facts. Ron Paul has an easy choice to make because there's only one 3rd party candidate on his ballot. So think twice before you make any baseless attacks. I personally agree with you if you have plans to vote either Barr or Baldwin. Barr and Nader will be on my ballot, but Nader is far from RP, so I still plan on voting Barr.

[Brassmouth]

I agree. I will be voting Barr come November, because I agree with him on most issues. That is what I base my vote on. Not press conferences. Not publicity stunts. The issues are what matters.

[Perry]

He lives in Texas. There will be only one third party candidate. So unless he does a write in (which is not likely at all), he'll probably vote Barr.

This isn't any statement to "support" anyone... it's just looking at the facts. Ron Paul has an easy choice to make because there's only one 3rd party candidate on his ballot. So think twice before you make any baseless attacks. I personally agree with you if you have plans to vote either Barr or Baldwin. Barr and Nader will be on my ballot, but Nader is far from RP, so I still plan on voting Barr.

You actually believe he'll vote for the lesser of three evils? I doubt it.

[Arklatex]

Exactly, you'd think Barr would realize this also and show up to his little stage, hold hands with Nader and everyone else, smile a little bit, then push for Paul running as his VP. That's how things should have and could have went down.

[Spider-Man]

If you can't vote for any other third party candidate, I don't blame you for voting Barr.

Actually, I don't blame anyone for voting Barr, as Paul has already said that we should vote for any of the third party candidates based on our personal affinity with them.

But, as always, I add the disclaimer that I find Barr's actions on Sept. 10 to be reprehensible and will be voting for Baldwin.

[DeadheadForPaul]

I agree. I will be voting Barr come November, because I agree with him on most issues. That is what I base my vote on. Not press conferences. Not publicity stunts. The issues are what matters.

+1

He's no Ron Paul but he's the best thing I got

[Jeremy]

Exactly, you'd think Barr would realize this also and show up to his little stage, hold hands with Nader and everyone else, smile a little bit, then push for Paul running as his VP. That's how things should have and could have went down.

Barr simply didn't want to be involved with the "vote for anybody message," but I think he misunderstood it a tad

[hotbrownsauce]

I didn't appreciate his remarks on the Fox News interview with Neil Cavuto. But who knows.... even though I said I won't vote for Barr I still might.

[Kilrain]

Barr simply didn't want to be involved with the "vote for anybody message," but I think he misunderstood it a tad

Nah, I think Barr thinks that he's higher up on the totem pole than Baldwin, McKinney and Nader, and that he would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by sitting in with them, just like the two major party candidates won't debate Barr (or anyone else) because they think they're higher up on the totem pole and would have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Before today, Barr could even have been right about that, but he kinda forgot about Dr. Paul. If it had just been Baldwin, McKinney and Nader there, Barr not showing up wouldn't have mattered that much, but snubbing RP is another matter entirely. I guess Barr just didn't think it through enough.

[Jeremy]

Nah, I think Barr thinks that he's higher up on the totem pole than Baldwin, McKinney and Nader, and that he would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by sitting in with them, just like the two major party candidates won't debate Barr (or anyone else) because they think they're higher up on the totem pole and would have nothing to gain and everything to lose.
Maybe, but that would be somewhat correct. Either way, it doesn't really matter... I think some people should just look at it coming from Barr's point of view. Sure, I still say he should have gone, but I'm not his campaign manager.

[Kilrain]

Maybe, but that would be somewhat correct. Either way, it doesn't really matter... I think some people should just look at it coming from Barr's point of view. Sure, I still say he should have gone, but I'm not his campaign manager.

I edited my post a little before you answered, adding a few lines.

[Bradley in DC]

Barr has made mistakes in his past. IMHO, he made one today. I'm sure he'll make more. And so will all of the rest of us. And yet somehow we still go on and the world hasn't come to its end.

[Bman]

He lives in Texas. There will be only one third party candidate. So unless he does a write in (which is not likely at all), he'll vote Barr.

This isn't any statement to "support" anyone... it's just looking at the facts. Ron Paul has an easy choice to make because there's only one 3rd party candidate on his ballot. So think twice before you make any baseless attacks. I personally agree with you if you have plans to vote either Barr or Baldwin. Barr and Nader will be on my ballot, but Nader is far from RP, so I still plan on voting Barr.

Hey didn't McCain and Obama miss the deadline for being on the ballot in Texas?

Barr might be the only candidate on the ticket.

[specsaregood]

Barr has made mistakes in his past. IMHO, he made one today. I'm sure he'll make more. And so will all of the rest of us. And yet somehow we still go on and the world hasn't come to its end.

Bradley, has Barr mentioned the TX ballot situation any where during his interviews? I would have thought being on FoxNews today, given the topic at hand: it would have been a great opportunity to bring up the "I'm the only one legally on the ballot in TX".

[Jeremy]

Hey didn't McCain and Obama miss the deadline for being on the ballot in Texas?

Barr might be the only candidate on the ticket.

In a perfect world where everyone followed the rules, lol

[Bman]

In a perfect world where everyone followed the rules, lol

It is Rons state. He could make quite a ruckus. I have to wonder why more hasen't been said.

[Bradley in DC]

Bradley, has Barr mentioned the TX ballot situation any where during his interviews? I would have thought being on FoxNews today, given the topic at hand: it would have been a great opportunity to bring up the "I'm the only one legally on the ballot in TX".

I don't know. I don't have cable and don't watch so much TV. (On a side note, a bunch of us formed a "Bob Barr's Bastard Children" team for a Trivial Pursuit-type competition at a bar tonight, and none of us got hardly any TV references. We pretty much just got the geography and history related questions right.)

I know the campaign has made a big stink about it.

[Bradley in DC]

It is Rons state. He could make quite a ruckus. I have to wonder why more hasen't been said.

One set of rules for them, another for us. :mad:

[me3]

I don't think Ron Paul will vote. Call it a hunch.

[gls]

I don't think Ron Paul will vote. Call it a hunch.

If he does my guess would be that he will write-in his good friend and longtime supporter Chuck Baldwin. The Baldwin campaign is officially registered for write-ins in Texas.

[Kotin]

He might... I personally think he will vote Chuck Baldwin

[mapcommander]

you may just be on to something there.. ;)

[RickyJ]

Ron Paul will vote Bob Barr

When hell freezes over.

[Barney]

Nader has always been against War and Empire as is Paul.
Barr voted for the War and an advocate of CIA misdeeds.

Nader has always been for Civil Liberties as is Paul.
Barr voted for the Patriot Act TWICE.

Nader has always been against the fascist war on drugs as is Paul.
Barr is a career drug warrior.

Nader has always been against corporatism and largess as is Paul.
Nader is against the Federal Reserve and deficit spending as is Paul.
Barr says he's all these things, but...

Paul I believe and agree with.
Nader I believe.
Barr I distrust.

[DRV45N05]

I'm voting for Barr for a couple of reasons.

1) Of the candidates on the ballot in North Carolina, I agree with him far more than any other candidates; and

2) I'm a member of the Libertarian Party, and if Barr or Gubernatorial Candidate Mike Munger get 2% in the election in North Carolina, then the LP gets automatic ballot access in 2012, which means they won't have to pay $200k to get signatures in arguably the hardest state in the country to get on the ballot.

[Dorfsmith]

As long as people vote for one of the third party candidates I'll be happy. My point the last few days is that Barr lost my vote. I would rather people vote for Barr than Obama or McCain. I was sure hoping we could move beyond all this but the Barr campaign keeps firing shots. How does Barr think that attacking is going to advance the cause of liberty? Somebody please answer this for me.

[jmdrake]

Nah, I think Barr thinks that he's higher up on the totem pole than Baldwin, McKinney and Nader, and that he would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by sitting in with them, just like the two major party candidates won't debate Barr (or anyone else) because they think they're higher up on the totem pole and would have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Before today, Barr could even have been right about that, but he kinda forgot about Dr. Paul. If it had just been Baldwin, McKinney and Nader there, Barr not showing up wouldn't have mattered that much, but snubbing RP is another matter entirely. I guess Barr just didn't think it through enough.

If that's the case then Barr can't count. Nader is higher in the polls then Barr.

[gls]

If that's the case then Barr can't count. Nader is higher in the polls then Barr.

He has a lot more money, too.

[H Roark]

If you actually listened to the press conference yesterday, it would be apparent that Ron Paul would more likely not vote then vote for the lesser evil (Barr).

[LibertyEagle]

If you actually listened to the press conference yesterday, it would be apparent that Ron Paul would more likely not vote then vote for the lesser evil (Barr).

I listened. He suggested everyone vote.

[H Roark]

His remarks not only encouraged anyone listening to support any one of four candidates, he also applauded ‘non-voters’. To me encouraging people not to vote is not principled leadership for the Liberty agenda.

And whats ironic is that the statement above was taken from Bob Barr's official blog.