Why Ron Paul Should Not Run for President Again

[bobbyw24]

I AM JUST POSTING THIS PIECE-I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT

I wish Ron Paul had won the Republican nomination in 2008. I wish Paul had won the general election and was president right now. But he’s not, and by the time the 2012 primaries start, he will be 76 years old. This is past the age of almost any contender for the presidency that I am aware of. (In all of American history, I think only one major party contender was older than that–Mike Gravel in 2008.)

Of course, it is seriously unlikely that Paul would get elected if he did run a second time, so there is arguably no danger in him running what would effectively be another educational campaign. I think the problem is that it gives the impression that the liberty movement is solely focused and led by Ron Paul, which is not the case…or at least I sure as hell hope not. We need to put forth some new blood, which we are already seeing in Congressional and Senate races, most notably Paul’s son Rand in Kentucky. This must eventually be reflected at the top of ticket as well, whether it be in 2012 or later.

There might already be an good candidate out there to pickup where Paul leaves off in former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Johnson appears to be interested in running, and he lines up with Paul the vast majority of the time. Furthermore, he is from the Mountain West where libertarian ideas are most popular, which could deliver whole chunk of delegates.

The great danger here is that the liberty movement could be reduced to infighting if both Paul and Johnson run. The ideal situation in my mind is for Paul to endorse Johnson for president and then proceed to campaign around the country for him during the primaries. Any successful movement needs leaders (pl.). Repeatedly running the same candidate–no matter how ideal–only shows weakness.

Filed under: Uncategorized
One Response to “Why Ron Paul Should Not Run for President Again”

1.
Thomas, on November 18th, 2009 at 2:40 am Said:

This would be a disaster. Ron Paul is best known for his defence of strict constitutionalism and opposition to foreign wars and the Fed. Johnson is best known for his support of drug legalisation. This would allow the “liberty movement” to be tarred and feathered with the brush of social decadence. You would lose most all paleoconservative votes.

If there be no alternative, it is best that Paul run again and that he himself make some effort to groom a future spokesman.


http://www.amconmag.com/postright/2009/11/17/why-ron-paul-should-not-run-for-president-again/

[WClint]

Well Ron Paul is the only one I support and I am sure I am not alone!

[tangent4ronpaul]

You are not alone!

RP in 2012!

-t

[phill4paul]

I believe the saying goes "70s are the new 50s". Age is not a factor.

[RM918]

It took too much to get Paul up to the recognition he's currently at - which still isn't much - fresh blood, Paul endorsed or no, will simply be a black-listed repeat of '08.

[Elwar]

(In all of American history, I think only one major party contender was older than that–Mike Gravel in 2008.)


This part actually justifies a Ron Paul run in 2012...I don't recall any talk of Mike Gravel's age in the 2008 election. Even though there wasn't much talk about him anyway.

[klamath]

As Reagan said about this issue. "I Know some people want to make age an issue but I won't hold my opponents youth and inexperience against him."

[JamesButabi]

As Reagan said about this issue. "I Know some people want to make age an issue but I won't hold my opponents youth and inexperience against him."

save that golden nugget for the primaries

[robertwerden]

If Ron had won the 08 election would you not want him to run for re election in 2012?

[Reason]

anyone with a head on their shoulders knows that age is a factor...

I would like to see the Judge run tbh

[TCE]

anyone with a head on their shoulders knows that age is a factor...

I would like to see the Judge run tbh

A Fox News pundit? Right, I can't possibly see how that could fail. :p

[Reason]

A Fox News pundit? Right, I can't possibly see how that could fail. :p

Thanks for letting us know that you don't know anything about the judge...

You should try reading his books before opening your mouth imo

[Peace&Freedom]

Age is a real factor, yes, but wouldn't it serve as the ultimate humilation for the NWO and the controlled establishment for an independent, 76-77 year old liberty candidate to win by landslide over their highly polished, teleprompter-smooth incumbent President in 2012?

[Meatwasp]

anyone with a head on their shoulders knows that age is a factor...

I would like to see the Judge run tbh

anyone who is pushing for other people to run at a Ron Paul forum doesn't have a head on his shoulders

[specsaregood]

IT will be interesting to see what the latest "public policy" poll returns.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/11/vote.html



Voting is now open for who we should include with Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney on our next 2012 poll.

The choices are Rudy Giuliani, Rush Limbaugh, George Pataki, Ron Paul, and John Thune.

Thanks for all the good suggestions. I didn't put Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, or Tim Pawlenty on there simply because they'd been included in recent polls and we're trying to test a wider variety of candidates. You can vote until Friday morning at 10 AM and the poll will be out toward the end of next week.


That was last week. So the poll should be coming out later this week and RP should be on it.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I don't know if he could win, but a Ron Paul republican candidacy in 2012 would be a lot more viable. Here is why:

1. There would be no democratic primary. A lot of young people who would have otherwise supported Ron Paul were working hard for Obama. These people I think would be on our side in 2012.

2. Higher name ID.

3. Capability to raise funds much earlier. Paul didn't start really raking it in in 2007 until the fourth quarter. By then many chances had passed and Paul, after raising $75,000 with his expoloratory committee, had to hire a bargin-basement campaign staff.

4. Sarah Palin: her goofy supporters (not all, but the hardcore ones) will raise her a lot of money if she runs. I think the motivation to out-do her supporters would help raise Ron Paul even more. Imagine a Ron Paul graphs that featured a daily tracking of Paul-vs.-Palin like it did with Huckabee in 2007 and 2008.

[tremendoustie]

I don't know if he could win, but a Ron Paul republican candidacy in 2012 would be a lot more viable. Here is why:

1. There would be no democratic primary. A lot of young people who would have otherwise supported Ron Paul were working hard for Obama. These people I think would be on our side in 2012.

2. Higher name ID.

3. Capability to raise funds much earlier. Paul didn't start really raking it in in 2007 until the fourth quarter. By then many chances had passed and Paul, after raising $75,000 with his expoloratory committee, had to hire a bargin-basement campaign staff.

4. Sarah Palin: her goofy supporters (not all, but the hardcore ones) will raise her a lot of money if she runs. I think the motivation to out-do her supporters would help raise Ron Paul even more. Imagine a Ron Paul graphs that featured a daily tracking of Paul-vs.-Palin like it did with Huckabee in 2007 and 2008.


All of these are great points. The more I think about it, the more I believe a run in '12 is absolutely the right decision.

[specsaregood]

All of these are great points. The more I think about it, the more I believe a run in '12 is absolutely the right decision.

Another thing is the "racist" card is played out. The Republican voters have been trained to ignore it now. And as much as I dislike it, I feel a large number of americans are discovering their inner-racists due to that card being overplayed.

[tajitj]

I wait for Ron Paul to talk before I start bashing another candidate.

I imagine he and Johnson will work together on something. Come on, you think they would actually think they could both run and battle eachother for the same base.

[specsaregood]

I wait for Ron Paul to talk before I start bashing another candidate.

I imagine he and Johnson will work together on something. Come on, you think they would actually think they could both run and battle eachother for the same base.

Perfectly reasonable. I still think that if he does run again, he needs to have a VP candidate already selected and announce that selection at the same time as his own announcement.

[0zzy]

i say he shouldn't, and let Rand run in the later years.

[jmdrake]

Who cares about 2012? We still have races to win in 2010. If we win big 2012 is wide open no matter who becomes the standard bearer. If we come up empty we won't last through 2012.

[tremendoustie]

Another thing is the "racist" card is played out. The Republican voters have been trained to ignore it now. And as much as I dislike it, I feel a large number of americans are discovering their inner-racists due to that card being overplayed.

I don't agree with the "inner racist" thing, but I do agree the card has been overplayed, perhaps played out.

[klamath]

If Obama is at all weak in 2012 no race card would work. It will be because his policies were a disaster and no race card will pull him out. It is far to early to know how he will be viewed in that time. He could be Jimmy Carter's second run or Reagan's. Nobody knows at this point.

[dr. hfn]

We will flood the field with Liberty candidates and then support the last man standing!

[TCE]

Thanks for letting us know that you don't know anything about the judge...

You should try reading his books before opening your mouth imo

That is what he is known for. Do you think that 99% of Republican primary voters have read his books or have even heard of Freedom Watch? As for anyone who does know him, they'll see him as the judicial analyst that knows the law but nothing else. At least Dr. Paul was well known enough to get 1.3 million votes the first go around.

[WClint]

I don't agree with the "inner racist" thing, but I do agree the card has been overplayed, perhaps played out.

Theres nothing wrong with being racially aware. Its better to live in reality than a fantasy land.

[NoHero]

I can't seem to find a thing I dislike about Gary Johnson, and he was a governor (a very successful on at that), so with a Ron Paul endorsement I think he'd be an even strong candidate than RP.

[bobbyw24]

all of these are great points. The more i think about it, the more i believe a run in '12 is absolutely the right decision.

+1000

[jmdrake]

If Obama is at all weak in 2012 no race card would work. It will be because his policies were a disaster and no race card will pull him out. It is far to early to know how he will be viewed in that time. He could be Jimmy Carter's second run or Reagan's. Nobody knows at this point.

More like Jimmy Carter versus Bill Clinton. The similarities between Obama's first term and Clinton's are striking. Both came in partially off economic concerns about both attempted radical health-care overhauls their first years in office. I take heart in the fact that Bill lost the house and senate in the first off year election. I take dispondency in the fact that Bill won re-election anyway. But there couldn't have been a sorrier candidate than Bob "let me talk to you about erectile dysfunction" Dole.

[BillyDkid]

Sorry, the title just pisses me off. I'm sick of these Ron Paul shouldn't run threads. Of course he should run and of course we should support him.

[Matthew Zak]

Ron Paul shouldn't have to run. He doesn't want to. What he does want is for this movement to MOVE, and the ONLY way that's going to happen (whether he runs for president, or bakes a thousand cakes, or delivers elephant babies) is if WE make it move. WE are the strength of this revolution. We are the engine. We are the fuel. Ron Paul is the logo. People (not everyone here of course, but there are definitely a few) need to realize that they put their faith in Ron Paul the way the Obamabots put their faith in Obama. Please wake up. Whatever it is you hope Ron Paul will do, whatever reason you think he should run, STOP IT. Think about what YOU can do RIGHT NOW, to help this movement along. Seriously. Got a minute? Call your congressmen. Just print the word "liberty" on 100 sheets of paper while you're b rushing your teeth, grab a stapler on the way out, and over the next week staple it on random light poles. Buy the movie Braveheart for a loved one on Christmas. Just don't expect this revolution to go anywhere if you put all your hope in Ron Paul. The guy may not even be alive in 2012.

[Meatwasp]

Ron Paul shouldn't have to run. He doesn't want to. What he does want is for this movement to MOVE, and the ONLY way that's going to happen (whether he runs for president, or bakes a thousand cakes, or delivers elephant babies) is if WE make it move. WE are the strength of this revolution. We are the engine. We are the fuel. Ron Paul is the logo. People (not everyone here of course, but there are definitely a few) need to realize that they put their faith in Ron Paul the way the Obamabots put their faith in Obama. Please wake up. Whatever it is you hope Ron Paul will do, whatever reason you think he should run, STOP IT. Think about what YOU can do RIGHT NOW, to help this movement along. Seriously. Got a minute? Call your congressmen. Just print the word "liberty" on 100 sheets of paper while you're b rushing your teeth, grab a stapler on the way out, and over the next week staple it on random light poles. Buy the movie Braveheart for a loved one on Christmas. Just don't expect this revolution to go anywhere if you put all your hope in Ron Paul. The guy may not even be alive in 2012.
How the deuce do you know he doesn't want to run. Did he say so? I am sick of people saying he is too old . Now you are saying he might not be alive. How ugly and negative.