Hypothetical: Let's say RP goes Independent early in 2012... [Archive]

malkusm

06-30-2010, 05:10 PM

...and the tickets are: Obama/Biden (D) vs. Romney/Gingrich (R) vs. Paul/??? (I).

I think that, when deciding how to fill in the ??? portion of that, we need someone who will pull votes from the left and solidify the ticket as being truly anti-war, anti-government involvement in marriage, and pro-civil liberties. Paul would presumably pull Tea Party support and disproportionately hurt the (R) ticket, leaving the door open for Obama to steal a second term.

That said - how do you feel about this guy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer

In March 2005, Schweitzer suggested that Montana's National Guard troops be recalled from service in Iraq to assist firefighting during Montana's wildfire season. He has also gained national attention for his focus on converting Montana's vast coal reserves into fuel, which he has said is one way to wean America off of foreign oil. Schweitzer has been interviewed by 60 Minutes (first aired on February 26, 2006),[15] and Charlie Rose (March 7, 2007) regarding his work in this field.

Schweitzer is against gun control[8] and a vehement critic of the REAL ID legislation.[16]

Schweitzer signed in to Law the Montana Firearms Freedom Act on April 15, 2009 which became effective October 1, 2009. The law exempts firearms made and kept in Montana from Federal firearms regulations. It applies mostly to non-military types of firearms, along with ammunition and accessories such silencers,[17] provided that these items are manufactured in the state, and do not leave the state.

ETA: By "early in 2012" I mean, let's say he doesn't win IA or NH or SC, and would announce an independent run at that point.

djdellisanti4

06-30-2010, 05:14 PM

I feel it would have to be a big name candidate. Schweitzer doesn't sound like a bad guy, but he doesnt have a lot of name recog.

malkusm

06-30-2010, 05:19 PM

I feel it would have to be a big name candidate. Schweitzer doesn't sound like a bad guy, but he doesnt have a lot of name recog.

Neither did Palin, but she's become a pretty huge name since her VP nomination.

Schweitzer's reputation led him to be mentioned by some political pundits in the liberal blogosphere as being among the top candidates for Vice President under Democratic nominee Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election.

So, he's got some credibility on his side. Plus, Paul's a guy who would do well in Montana anyway. Add Schweitzer, and he could steal a state easily (and maybe wreck the electoral process with a couple other states).

Agorism

06-30-2010, 05:21 PM

Total waste of time. We already have the Constitution and Libertarian parties for that (going indie I mean)

tremendoustie

06-30-2010, 05:22 PM

CoreyBowen999

06-30-2010, 05:26 PM

I would choose your choice as well Matt. He would appeal to the left, and hes actually a decent choice to be beside Ron in the election. An honest man indeed

Total waste of time. We already have the Constitution and Libertarian parties for that (going indie I mean)

To be honest its not a waste of time. With the millions being poured into his campaign and a decent VP choice, he could have a good chance to pull in one of the biggest %'s in independent history. Even more than Perot. While this still may not allow him to win, it would be a HUGE victory

Agorism

06-30-2010, 05:27 PM

If Rand wins in Kentucky, then Ron Paul can win CPAC again. Then we'll need to win Iowa Straw poll, which will be 6 months from CPAC.

Still a long shot, but Paul's C4L has the money base this time and he will have a strong base from the outset rather than having his base consolidate late like last time.

Voting indie is fine, but only as a protest vote, which I did last time.

tremendoustie

06-30-2010, 05:28 PM

I would choose your choice as well Matt. He would appeal to the left, and hes actually a decent choice to be beside Ron in the election. An honest man indeed

To be honest its not a waste of time. With the millions being poured into his campaign and a decent VP choice, he could have a good chance to pull in one of the biggest %'s in independent history. Even more than Perot. While this still may not allow him to win, it would be a HUGE victory

Yeah, third party and independent runs only work with big names. RP is a big name.

Agorism

06-30-2010, 05:28 PM

Rand Paul has party backing in Kentucky so he might actually win. Ron Paul needs to control the party machinery if he wants a reasonable chance at the WH.

nobody's_hero

06-30-2010, 05:29 PM

I'm not going to get my hopes up and say that he'd win. I do feel that the republican party would lose if Ron Paul is not the nominee, which would hopefully show them that they cannot win without us (a position that they absolutely hate to be in, judging by what some die-hard neocons have said). :) :)

Agorism

06-30-2010, 05:30 PM

We got 32% at CPAC last time with the biggest CPAC turnout ever. If Ron Paul upped his investment we could get close to 50% of the vote and have great momentum for Iowa Straw poll.

Republicans are in a more rebellious mood than they were in 2008 anyway. Plus the Kentucky will influence the mood of things really.

AGRP

06-30-2010, 05:32 PM

Wont work. Hes got to be on the R ticket. Hes got a better chance of being elected on the D ticket than an I ticket.

People are sheep!!!!

KramerDSP

06-30-2010, 05:35 PM

I'd bet money that if RP runs independent, he'll be doing so against Romney/Huckabee and Obama/Hillary. Gingrich and Romney seem too identical to me, and Huckabee pulls in the social conservatives that would otherwise not vote for a Mormon.

2young2vote

06-30-2010, 05:42 PM

If he goes Independent, he won't get into any of the debates, he won't get nearly as much support and votes due to him not being labeled a republican and he will be seen as the outsider even more than he would be as a R.

An Independent run doesn't make any sense at all. He did it right the first time and he did a very good job, so it can only get better.

But, if he does do it, i think Gary Johnson would be a great VP. Does anyone know if the Judge would ever do something like that?

charrob

06-30-2010, 05:45 PM

KramerDSP

06-30-2010, 05:49 PM

i'll be yelped at (sorry) but i like Kucinich. -i don't agree with all his policies, particularly immigration, but most on the left would support him as they have had it with Obama at this point.

You probably will be yelled at! But I kinda agree. A unity ticket of RP/Kucinich would certainly make waves. I still think an Independent run is nothing more than fool's gold. We have to win the nomination.

Also, if Ron doesn't win the nomination in 2012, does he risk running third party and in all likelihood, ensuring four more years of Obama, leading to Rand getting all the blowback from the GOP?

KramerDSP

06-30-2010, 05:50 PM

If RP were to go the Kucinich route, he may as well go all-in and have Vice President Grayson next to him.

nobody's_hero

06-30-2010, 05:55 PM

If RP were to go the Kucinich route, he may as well go all-in and have Vice President Grayson next to him.

I think they would have to come to an agreement to handle only the 4 major issues that the minority parties agreed to in the "We agree" conference in 2008, and then resign.

(Think about it, if all they did was handle the Fed, the War, at least make a dent in the Debt, and stop infractions of privacy and rights to trial, we'd be a lot better off).

I don't think it will happen, though.

TNforPaul45

06-30-2010, 05:55 PM

Ron/Rand 2012!!!!

Father and son dynamic duo, better than the Kennedy haha

......pipe dream

KramerDSP

06-30-2010, 05:57 PM

I think they would have to come to an agreement to handle only the 4 major issues that the minority parties agreed to in the "We agree" conference in 2008, and then resign.

(Think about it, if all they did was handle the Fed, the War, at least make a dent in the Debt, and stop infractions of privacy and rights to trial, we'd be a lot better off).

That alone would take 4-8 years!

malkusm

06-30-2010, 05:58 PM

Alright guys, I appreciate all the feedback, but I want to focus the direction of this thread.

I respect the views of those who say "an Independent run would never work" - although I respectfully disagree with all of you - but that isn't the topic of this thread. The thread is based on the assumption that he's running independent and needs a running mate. (And, notice, I prefaced this situation by saying that he'd run as a GOP candidate initially, but would drop out and become Independent if he didn't win either of the first 3 primaries.)

Kucinich certainly would grab the left, but could he and Paul agree on enough issues to be running mates? I don't think Paul OR Kucinich would sell out their messages when it came to health care (free markets vs. single-payer) because they're both very principled and passionate about their beliefs, and ObamaCare is going to be a huge issue in the next election cycle. And that's just one example.

Most importantly, I want you guys to vet Schweitzer and tell me why you wouldn't support him as Paul's VP in such a situation.

malkusm

06-30-2010, 06:00 PM

I like nepolitano, and woods, but neither do much for appealing to the left.

It's hard to think of people who are known for pro civil liberties, anti-war positions, who also aren't raving socialists.

So, what do you think of Schweitzer, then? He's not 100%, but he's probably 90% in line with Ron, is pro civil liberties and anti-war, and isn't a raving socialist. A big proponent of states' rights, to boot.

KramerDSP

06-30-2010, 06:36 PM

For what it's worth, someone else also vouched for Schweitzer a year ago in the forums.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2181833

speciallyblend

06-30-2010, 06:36 PM

Total waste of time. We already have the Constitution and Libertarian parties for that (going indie I mean)

not really. the cp and lp will eventually join the gop or join a new liberty-minded party but the cp/lp will go no where nationally unless they are willing to form a new political coalition aka new party Liberty sounds nice . it will be the gop or a new party that includes the lp/cp and indy's and other coalitions!! the lp/cp have chances at local races but nationally. there will need to be a reclaiming of the gop or forming a new coalition!!

itshappening

06-30-2010, 06:56 PM

Kookcinich wouldn't go I as he would lose committee privileges, he is a career congressman and that's it for him

I would say Traficant would be a good running mate to get blue collar votes

malkusm

06-30-2010, 07:01 PM

Kookcinich wouldn't go I as he would lose committee privileges, he is a career congressman and that's it for him

I would say Traficant would be a good running mate to get blue collar votes

Ex-convict =/= VP material, even if he was 100% innocent of the crimes he was charged with. Just isn't going to fly in a national election with 24/7 media scrutiny.

AJ Antimony

06-30-2010, 07:22 PM

It's in my sig

Koz

06-30-2010, 07:26 PM

Joe Biden.

Democrats vote for jackass idiots, he is a jackass idiot. Problem solved.

Paul/Biden, plus we would still get the dumb ass comments in the news to laugh at.

Peace&Freedom

06-30-2010, 07:39 PM

I can see Trafficant as an appointee in a Paul administration. I could also see Chuck Baldwin (yes, Baldwin) as a running mate with Paul in the CP, and even LP nomination (if Paul really pushes the benefits to the LP, and Chuck runs the way he did in 2008). The LP and CP will never fully unite (given their well established differences and demographics) but they have proven in '08 they can get behind a solid libertarian constitutionalist. The notion that either will ever join with the GOP is even less likelier given their principles.

The problem with the CP and LP failing to get traction has mostly to do with external structural suppression of all independent political movements. The establishment roadblocks of ongoing media blackout, and the corresponding inability to raise serious funds, keep both parties from gaining ballot status in most states. If Paul runs as their candidate he has the workarounds to beat both problems (e.g., he will get ongoing money bombs), and can get an average of 5% or more easily in each state. This will get both parties regular ballot status in most states, making it tremendously easier to run liberty candidates in the following election cycle.

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 08:00 PM

Total waste of time. We already have the Constitution and Libertarian parties for that (going indie I mean)

hmm... well, I believe we have 2 independent reps and one independent senator currently serving in Congress. How many Constitution or Libertarian party candidates are? How many have ever been elected to Congress?

Currently, more voters are registered as independents than as Dems or Repubs. I believe the Constitution and Libertarian party candidates brought in so few votes that they weren't even reported.

Running Independent would damage Paul's Congressional career (committees on, seniority and possibly his chances at re-election, but it probably would get him past the primaries and on the ballot in 2012.

Running mate, hu? - How about Ted Nugent?

-t

Stop Making Cents

06-30-2010, 08:07 PM

Paul / Ralph Nader could win. Maybe even Paul / Kucinich

But I don't think i could vote for a ticket with Nader or Kucinich on it. I'd have to think long and hard about it.

malkusm

06-30-2010, 08:08 PM

Running Independent would damage Paul's Congressional career (committees on, seniority and possibly his chances at re-election, but it probably would get him past the primaries and on the ballot in 2012.

Would he really care? He'll be 76 in 2012. He's bound to retire from the House soon anyway....

malkusm

06-30-2010, 08:09 PM

Paul / Ralph Nader could win. Maybe even Paul / Kucinich

But I don't think i could vote for a ticket with Nader or Kucinich on it. I'd have to think long and hard about it.

The question is, could you vote for a ticket with Schweitzer on it? :confused:

malkusm

06-30-2010, 08:13 PM

It's in my sig

And, again, I prefaced my scenario with "He drops out after Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina."

Is it really worth him staying in the GOP primary to the end like he did in 2008 at that point? Personally, for him, the answer is no. He has no ties to any of the 501(c)(4) organizations like C4L or YAL because of FEC restrictions, and the grassroots could continue to work towards influencing and taking the GOP through local elections and grassroots work. Ron Paul inevitably influences many more through running independent than he does by staying in an unwinnable GOP primary with a limited audience.

In such a situation, if you're Ron Paul, why wouldn't you go Independent?

Stop Making Cents

06-30-2010, 08:17 PM

The question is, could you vote for a ticket with Schweitzer on it? :confused:

He sounds ok for a Democrat, but i'd have to learn more about him to decide.

charrob

06-30-2010, 08:20 PM

Kucinich certainly would grab the left, but could he and Paul agree on enough issues to be running mates?

well, areas they agree on:

both against pre-emptive war
both against sanctions
both for civil liberties and against patriot act
both against torture
both for bringing the troops home from all around the world
both against free trade pacts like nafta and wto
both want to end the billions and billions of $ we give to all foreign countries around the world every year
no 'special' friends
both would like to see an end to the federal reserve
both refuse money from Lobbyists, (mil.indust.complex, bigOil, etc.)
both have libertarian views when it comes to gay marriage
both have libertarian views when it comes to war on drugs
both have a history as friends, even eating lunch together everyday
when Kucinich was a Pres. candidate he stated his choice for a VP would be RP

I don't think Paul OR Kucinich would sell out their messages when it came to health care (free markets vs. single-payer) because they're both very principled and passionate about their beliefs.

didn't Kucinich write a bill to allow State's Rights- to be able to vote for/against single-payer within a State?

I couldn't find much info. on Mr. Schweitzer regarding free trade, etc., but it does sound like he's very popular in Montana.

silus

06-30-2010, 08:25 PM

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 08:28 PM

Would he really care? He'll be 76 in 2012. He's bound to retire from the House soon anyway....

I talked to Penny about that, and she was of the opinion that he will never retire. Too active of a mind, too much energy and not the type to quit till he gets what he wants or dies trying. We should have him around for another decade or two.

And, again, I prefaced my scenario with "He drops out after Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

That's called double dipping. A number of states have laws against it. Basically, if you start a campaign declared as being part of one party, you can't flip parties to get another bite at the apple. You either stay with that party through the entire election, or you are not on the ballot in those states.

-t

malkusm

06-30-2010, 08:35 PM

I talked to Penny about that, and she was of the opinion that he will never retire. Too active of a mind, too much energy and not the type to quit till he gets what he wants or dies trying. We should have him around for another decade or two.

That's called double dipping. A number of states have laws against it. Basically, if you start a campaign declared as being part of one party, you can't flip parties to get another bite at the apple. You either stay with that party through the entire election, or you are not on the ballot in those states.

-t

My understanding is that, if he were to drop out after those three states, that those are the only 3 states that he'd have to fight to be on the ballot in (through petitions etc., and I don't think they have "sore loser" laws). Any state where you drop out before the election can't consider you to have "competed" in that election - but I might have misinformation.

malkusm

06-30-2010, 08:37 PM

speciallyblend

06-30-2010, 08:38 PM

Ron Paul figured long ago that a 3rd party, in this political climate, was a dead end. When will we figure the same? This discussion is a complete waste of time. We should be talking about other candidates that might build up 3rd parties for the future. Ron Paul has one election left in him, and its to win. He has to go Republican or bust.

well no more dead end then the republican party .if we fail to reclaim the gop. then this country is screwed but if the gop doesn't shape up soon .i would rather go to hell in a basket without the r next to my name!! Liberty Party or the gop!! if the gop fails to change . then a 3rd party is viable as the gop alienates themselves!!

speciallyblend

06-30-2010, 08:41 PM

Ok, I regret naming the thread title the way I did, because I never intended to have a discussion on "Should Ron run 3rd party?!?! OMG!!!!"

I'd really like to vet Schweitzer, because he seems like a principled, states' rights Dem. I will no longer be responding to any posts that don't relate to this topic.

your title is fine but in truth. if the gop fails to nominate Ron paul in 2012, i suspect the gop will lose in 2012. i cannot fathom myself voting republican in 2012 unless it is Gary or Ron. it will be like the gop wants me to vote for anyone but a republican! Ron Paul 2012!!!!!

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 08:48 PM

My understanding is that, if he were to drop out after those three states, that those are the only 3 states that he'd have to fight to be on the ballot in (through petitions etc., and I don't think they have "sore loser" laws). Any state where you drop out before the election can't consider you to have "competed" in that election - but I might have misinformation.

Well, found this:

http://rangevoting.org/BallAccess.html

Lost in the furor surrounding this – which the US press kept remarkably silent about – was the fact that in most of America Lieberman would not even have had the option of pressing on as an independent. According to Richard Winger in Ballot Access news, 46 states have either explicit "sore loser laws" or simultaneous filing deadlines making a post-primary shift impossible for any candidate other than a presidential one. Only Connecticut, Iowa, New York and Vermont allow such a loophole for "sore losers." The previous 2 sentences were quoted from Troy Schneider's New York Times op-ed 16 July 2006. And in 11 states it is not permitted for anybody who is (or recently was) a member of a political party, to run independent for any seat!

That page also has info on the states it's a pain to get on the balloy in vor third parties and independents

VT fixed this:
Vt. enacts 'sore loser law' for independent bids
By John Curran
Associated Press Writer / June 15, 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2010/06/15/vt_law_change_changes_rules_for_indy_candidates/

-t

sratiug

06-30-2010, 08:58 PM

Well, found this:

http://rangevoting.org/BallAccess.html

Lost in the furor surrounding this – which the US press kept remarkably silent about – was the fact that in most of America Lieberman would not even have had the option of pressing on as an independent. According to Richard Winger in Ballot Access news, 46 states have either explicit "sore loser laws" or simultaneous filing deadlines making a post-primary shift impossible for any candidate other than a presidential one. Only Connecticut, Iowa, New York and Vermont allow such a loophole for "sore losers." The previous 2 sentences were quoted from Troy Schneider's New York Times op-ed 16 July 2006. And in 11 states it is not permitted for anybody who is (or recently was) a member of a political party, to run independent for any seat!

That page also has info on the states it's a pain to get on the balloy in vor third parties and independents

VT fixed this:
Vt. enacts 'sore loser law' for independent bids
By John Curran
Associated Press Writer / June 15, 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2010/06/15/vt_law_change_changes_rules_for_indy_candidates/

-t

I still think the Libertarian Party should nominate Dr. Paul BEFORE the Republican primaries start so they know they can't win without him.

freshjiva

06-30-2010, 09:00 PM

Here's an interesting idea...

Ron Paul / Al Sharpton 2012!

Think about it :D

Sharpton is for:
1) Tax reform
2) Strong on individual civil liberties
3) Anti-war
4) Supports freedom for gay marriage
5) Quite possibly could be supportive to end drug wars, especially legalizing/decriminalizing marijuana

I'm sure with a little discussion and convincing, we can also win him over to become a vocal advocate of Federal Reserve System transparency and free markets. I doubt he'd be for abolishing the welfare state, but hey, cutting down on entitlements is something Ron Paul said he couldn't do as President anyways. It would have to be an act of Congress, which he would then support.

Ron Paul + Al Sharpton. I'm telling you -- its a winning ticket! :)

South Park Fan

06-30-2010, 09:02 PM

Brian Schweitzer is pretty good as far as Democrats go, though he did endorse Obama in 2008.

Distinguished Gentleman

06-30-2010, 09:07 PM

Let me preface: I don't think any amount of money or a high profile vp can ensure a Paul win. I see Ron as an educational leader who serves as a kingmaker for the Liberty movement. Libertarians are not more than 4 percent of the voting populace. I do think there's portions of our ideas that can be marketed to a large "independent" block of the population, however.

To me, the most practical thing to do is to pick an up and coming Liberty Republican, one who agrees on a large part of the platform and make him a star as Paul's running mate. It would help someone, say Lawson, to become prominent in the media before any future runs as a Republican.

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 09:27 PM

Maybe people on these lists should be considered...

http://www.opencongress.org/people/representatives?sort=approval

Congress critters with the highest approval ratings:

House:
Rep. Charles Diou (R-HI) 100% approval
Rep Ron Paul 92% approval
Rep. Paul Ryan R-WI 75% approval
Rep Dennis Kucinich 69% approval
Rep Jack Kingston R-GA 69% approval
Rep Gregg Harper R-MS 69% approval
Rep Dean Heller R-NV 69% approval
Rep Thomas Latham R-IA 66% approval
All the rest are 65% or less.
Interesting that there are tons of R's in the 50-100% approval rating and tons of D's in the 0-25% approval rating space.

http://www.opencongress.org/people/senators?sort=approval
Senate: (looks like the senate is in the doghouse with the public...
Sen Bernie Sanders 57% approval
Sen Jim Demint R-SC 58$ approval
Sen Russel Feingold D-WI 52% approval
Everyone is 50% approval or less.

-t

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 09:33 PM

I still think Ted Nugent would be a good pick.

He's conservative.
He's well known
People that don't vote or pay attention to politics would probably vote for him.

Set up a concert tour, and bang! - 3 criteria are met:

stage for a political rally before the show
ballot access petitions - they come to you!
fundraising

-t

Stop Making Cents

06-30-2010, 09:41 PM

Elle

06-30-2010, 09:56 PM

sofia

06-30-2010, 10:24 PM

walter williams.....

he'll help the ticket pick up the liberal white guilt voters who went for Obama....also steal a bunch of black votes too

sofia

06-30-2010, 10:27 PM

Ron Paul figured long ago that a 3rd party, in this political climate, was a dead end. When will we figure the same? This discussion is a complete waste of time. We should be talking about other candidates that might build up 3rd parties for the future. Ron Paul has one election left in him, and its to win. He has to go Republican or bust.

Ron Paul has ZERO chance to win a GOP primary.

These people are Christian-Zionist, Limbaugh-loving scum that get off on killing Arab babies too much. .....15-20% is the best we can hope for.......and then go independent

Original_Intent

06-30-2010, 10:44 PM

Paul/Beck!!!!!

It would totally split the all-important Mormon vote! Beck could be Ron Paul's padowan learner libertarian!:D

(This is totally a joke for anyone that is about to tear me a new bung hole.)

tangent4ronpaul

06-30-2010, 11:01 PM

That is right Beck is Mormon. That would split the Mormon vote.

Now if we could only find a black, lesbian, moderate Mormon that is well known... What's Opera up to? :D

-t

charrob

06-30-2010, 11:15 PM

interesting: the wife of Dennis Kucinich served Mother Theresa in India:

http://current.com/technology/89028338_elizabeth-kucinich-a-leader-in-her-own-right.htm

micahnelson

06-30-2010, 11:30 PM

If Ron Paul runs there needs to be a true liberal counterpart running as well, otherwise its just giving the election to Obama.

Not that I care if Obama wins over whoever the republican may be, but id rather not waste my time on a plan that could have worked.

Ninja Homer

07-01-2010, 12:26 AM

I don't know a whole lot about Schweitzer... I just read his wikipedia entry, and watched the video of his DNC speech. He speaks well, he's personable, and he's pretty good on some issues. The problem I see with it is rather than getting additional support from the democrats, it may end up turning away just as many republicans. It may piss off both sides rather than being some kind of unity ticket. Watch the speech and you'll see what I mean... it's mostly about renewable energy, but he's really pushing for Obama. It would be used against him by both sides; the Obama campaign would play clips of him saying how Obama is the right choice for president, and the GOP would pretty much do the same. On top of that, I'm not sure how well his policies would mesh with Ron Paul's. Schweitzer may not want to be Ron Paul's VP, and I'm guessing Ron Paul would stick to his guns and not want somebody like Schweitzer as his VP who wants the government to invest in alternative energy.

YouTube - Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) in Denver (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNHysr_IluI)

charrob

07-01-2010, 12:31 AM

i have a big apology to make as i've just read the other thread on the audit the fed bill: Dennis Kucinich voted against it??? God I can't believe he would do that :mad: . Scratch him from the list!

Ninja Homer

07-01-2010, 12:39 AM

i have a big apology to make as i've just read the other thread on the audit the fed bill: Dennis Kucinich voted against it??? God I can't believe he would do that :mad: . Scratch him from the list!

It seems to me that Kucinich has been selling out a lot more than he used to since Obama got into office.

AJ Antimony

07-01-2010, 01:08 AM

And, again, I prefaced my scenario with "He drops out after Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina."

In such a situation, if you're Ron Paul, why wouldn't you go Independent?

As my sig suggests, he wouldn't because he doesn't want to throw away his building influence in the Republican Party all to massage the egos of the 2% of the population who are obsessed with losing and fighting for ballot access.

How about instead of dreaming for Ron Paul to lose IA, NH, SC so you'd finally have a reason to support the world's worst strategy, just focus on winning said primaries.

Peace&Freedom

07-01-2010, 06:11 AM

As my sig suggests, he wouldn't because he doesn't want to throw away his building influence in the Republican Party all to massage the egos of the 2% of the population who are obsessed with losing and fighting for ballot access.

How about instead of dreaming for Ron Paul to lose IA, NH, SC so you'd finally have a reason to support the world's worst strategy, just focus on winning said primaries.

Even if Paul got the nomination, the establishment would run Bloomberg or Gingrich on an independent line to split the non-liberal vote and defeat Paul in the election. Wake up, the GOP IS the world's worst liberty strategy. I suppose others would like to continue losing legislatively with the GOP for another 80 years, than trying to win electorally with a new party with a clean legislative record. Repeat, the Republicans have been failing consistently where it counts for DECADES, and getting our candidates to win in their party will likely only result in massaging the egos of those who like 2% representation of our guys in Congress.

It's a dead end recipe for ending up with just a handful of new, younger Dr. Nos in office to carry the torch after Paul retires or passes on. That's not something we should be setting as a goal, nor giving the proven dead end of the GOP yet another generation worth of our time and energies to fail even more. The future lies in running Ron Paul Republicans, Democrats, and Independents and taking back the entire establishment, instead of waitng to be co-opted by the Republican leadership, who will reform us long before we can ever reform them.