Poll - Should Ron Paul run as an Independent?

[PollM]

Ron Paul constituents a force to reckon with.

Scarborough further noted that if Paul were to run for president as an independent, it "would be really bad news for the Republicans." He then seemed to think better of his earlier remark about Paul's colleagues considering him crazy, concluding, "He's an extremely impressive man, he's brilliant ... and everybody's excited about this guy."

Should Ron Paul run as an Independent?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=794

.

[RonPaul_Has_2_first_names]

He should stay republican and try to win the primaries. If he is not nominated for the republican party, he should try to get on any third party ASAP and get their nomination if it's a party that has nominations.

[Smiley Gladhands]

Only if he just barely loses the nomination, due to some foul play...and Bush goes into Iran.

Then Ron basically has to, since the obvious would be getting obviouser. :D

[NH4RonPaul]

He has said NO and I agree. He has to return to Congress as R so this would not help.

[Ron Paul Fan]

It's a moot point because he'll be the Republican nominee. I guarantee it!

[Sematary]

Ron Paul constituents a force to reckon with.

Scarborough further noted that if Paul were to run for president as an independent, it "would be really bad news for the Republicans." He then seemed to think better of his earlier remark about Paul's colleagues considering him crazy, concluding, "He's an extremely impressive man, he's brilliant ... and everybody's excited about this guy."

Should Ron Paul run as an Independent?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=794

.

No. You can't win as a third party in this country. Waste of time.

[Drknows]

he certainly would get more attention i can tell you that right now.

Hillary, Rudy and Ron Paul.

Who would America choose?

[Drknows]

It's a moot point because he'll be the Republican nominee. I guarantee it!

I agree

nuff said

[FrankRep]

If the Republicans want to win the election, they will need Ron Paul. He's the only one who can beat Hillary.

[10thAmendmentMan]

There are laws in some (I don't know exactly how many) states that if someone runs for a party's nomination and loses, he can't be on the ballot in the general election. It's usually called a "sore loser" law.

That would be another large obstacle.

[ThePieSwindler]

The more i think about it, the more i realize that US election laws are a farce. It is so controlled and so much is restricted. Its simply a duopoly of parties. It would be one thing if it were like the olden days, where there were two primary parties that had defacto power, but new parties could emerge depending on a shifting of the political climate, and they could form without any actual technical obstacles. Unfortunately today, the mass media bias, the false dichotomy, and the incredibly absurd, strict election and campaign finance laws have turned America into little more than a two-party system of rule. The only difference between the US and China is that their party-limitations are constitutional (this is a joke, think for a sec. do a google search, and you'll get it), ours have nothing to do with our constitution and are simply regulations put in power by the current statism paradigm to create a semblence of freedom and choice when in reality, there is none.

[Minlawc]

There are laws in some (I don't know exactly how many) states that if someone runs for a party's nomination and loses, he can't be on the ballot in the general election. It's usually called a "sore loser" law.

That would be another large obstacle.

Then it would depend on which states they are.

I think it would be very justified if he wins, then they have to have a "re-count".

This country's down the drain if he doesn't win.

[10thAmendmentMan]

Then it would depend on which states they are.

Texas is one. That's two metric buttloads of electoral votes right there.

[michaelwise]

Ron Paul should run as a write-in candidate. Is this not the same as an independent, or is it different. Could someone explain this to me?

[Channing]

I think we needn't worry about this until it actually happens.

[Jeffboste]

Ron stay true to the Message Not the Party.
Your Constituency will Follow

[yaz]

He has said NO and I agree. He has to return to Congress as R so this would not help.

He's 72, who cares.

[centure7]

Ron Paul constituents a force to reckon with.

Scarborough further noted that if Paul were to run for president as an independent, it "would be really bad news for the Republicans." He then seemed to think better of his earlier remark about Paul's colleagues considering him crazy, concluding, "He's an extremely impressive man, he's brilliant ... and everybody's excited about this guy."

Should Ron Paul run as an Independent?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=794

.

I looked up "Republican Party" on Wikipedia. On a point-by-point basis, Ron Paul is at least 90% Republican. Therefore, the only reason for him to not run as a Republican is because the neo-cons have such domination of the party that they spit him out. Its irritating they are trying to do this. They are shooting their own party in the foot.

[Danny Molina]

IF and IF Dr. Paul does not win the nomination he should run independent.

Why? I think if enough voters see the massive numbers of people that are going to vote for a 3rd party candidates they as well as the media will start to take 3rd party candidates more seriously. We all know that if Dr. Paul runs against both Hillary and Rudy that Dr. Paul could definitely have a chance.

[AgentSmith]

He has said NO and I agree. He has to return to Congress as R so this would not help.


I hate to break it to you but he said no because he absolutely has to. The second he doesnt say no they declare him a traitor to the Republican party. Dont worry - he will change his mind after he has wrecked havoc in the Republican primary.

[michaelwise]

If Ron Paul said he would run as a write-in, what would happen? I here Mickey Mouse usually wins the write-in for President.

[expatriot]

ALERT!

The poll posted at the beginning of this thread has a serious flaw with
the way it is worded.

[please do not misread this - I am not assailing the original poster in any way,
I would like to think this is a simple misunderstanding which can be rewritten
somehow.]

The way it is worded is that it makes Ron Paul appear to be an outsider
to the Republican party.

If anything, the way the results can be used to attack him as a non-Republican
is the worst sort of trap we could fall into at this point in time.

If nothing else, go to the poll and vote NO!

If the poll had been rewritten as a conditional dependent on losing the Repubican
party nomination, then it may have relevance.
As it stands, the poll gives you two faulty choices:
Yes (- inferring he is not a True Republican)
No (- implying he should not be on the ballot in any case)

That is what semantic/memetic analysis of the poll question indicates.:cool:

This may sound a bit overbearing and, as I said at the beginning,
it is not intended as a flamewar or anything.
(I know, having naively done similar things which I lived to regret):(

Additional comment:
There are more of these flawed polls on the site.
Best to consider very carefully if you fell tempted to vote there,
many questions are pure flamebait.

[Andrew76]

Ron Paul constituents a force to reckon with.

Scarborough further noted that if Paul were to run for president as an independent, it "would be really bad news for the Republicans." He then seemed to think better of his earlier remark about Paul's colleagues considering him crazy, concluding, "He's an extremely impressive man, he's brilliant ... and everybody's excited about this guy."

Should Ron Paul run as an Independent?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=794

.

I agree with a lot of you. I think he, the campaign staff and us should focus 110% of their energies on getting him nominated by the GOP. In our heart of hearts, we know that if he goes up against Hillary, or whoever the Dems throw at us, Ron will win. Our first, and most ridiculous step, is having to convince the damn GOP that he is their man! Their stubbornness on this issue is simply breathtaking, but we can't let it slow us down.

IF he doesn't get the nomination, then and only then, do I think, we should all switch gears and convince him to run as a third party candidate. I think he should do this for two reasons. One, I believe he'd still have a good chance. He'd technically be third party, but he'd be huge. How could the news not report on him? A split in the GOP? His supporters convinced him to run 3rd party? Who will this hurt more, the dems? The repubs? That'd be big big big news and a lot to talk about for a long time. Maybe I'm too hopeful on that aspect.
Second, he needs to run as an independent if only to continue to drive his message of limited government and individual liberty home to the American people and the rest of the world. He'll be educating and simultaneously recruiting thousands more to our noble cause. In my mind, it's a win win, no matter what happens.

However, if he runs 3rd party, does this affect his congressional position in any way?

[lonestarguy]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lopez1.html

excellent article at lewrockwell on this..........RP is not going away. indeed, after all is said and done, the debates, the advertising, the national soul searching, when the voters step into the booth, pulling the curtain behind them, and the names Rudy, Hilary, Ron confront them on the ballot.......as the article aptly describes, the people will protest

[stevedasbach]

He should whatever will best serve the long-term effort to restore our liberty. Too early to tell what that will be.

[A Ron Paul Rebel]

Who in the hell keeps starting these poll posts?

Many are stupid and a waste of time and I fear
that they are being started by outsiders who only
want to confuse and distract us.

[PollM]

We need to be true to Ron Paul the Candidate and his message NOT the Party. This Republican Party has not been true to Ron Paul, and that is the truth.
I for one will vote for Ron no matter what party he runs under.
Be Prepared and not blind.

[Starks]

No. You can't win as a third party in this country. Waste of time.

Even so, Wallace won electoral votes when he ran as a 3rd party...

[PollM]

Who in the hell keeps starting these poll posts?

Many are stupid and a waste of time and I fear
that they are being started by outsiders who only
want to confuse and distract us.


Short sighted,

You need to hang out with people who pad you on the back and agree with everything you say. Your the Man Stan

[davidkachel]

This silly speculation is an utter waste of time and only serves to tell the enemy we are not as committed as we need to be.

[Mandrik]

If he doesn't get it, he goes back to Congress and works towards a '12 run.

[PollM]

This silly speculation is an utter waste of time and only serves to tell the enemy we are not as committed as we need to be.

Not true, it tells them we are committed to Ron's message and not necessarily to the Party. Ron can take a big chunk away from the Republican Party, he has a huge following.

[Bradley in DC]

No way!

[inibo]

I voted no, but it is mostly irrelevant to me. I am going to vote for him in my primary if I have to write him in. I am going to vote for him in the general election if I have to write him in. So, personally, I don't give a flip what letter is next to his name.

[Pauliana]

He won't do it. He has better things to do. We will need to rally around his legislative agenda if we can't rally around him as president. Let's cement his influence in Congress by flooding our own respective congresscritters with calls to cosponsor and vote for ALL Ron Paul's bills. Starting with Tax Free Tips. He's getting cosponsors to dribble in on that one.

In fact, we don't have to wait for January or November for that - we can bug our reps to vote for his bills RIGHT NOW. He's already got some measure of power. Let's help him use it!

[Jeffboste]

Ron has my vote, any party. Anyway he can maximize his chances to become President I'm on board.

[dsentell]

Ron has my vote, any party. Anyway he can maximize his chances to become President I'm on board.

Exactly my thoughts -- I will vote for Ron Paul the Republican -- Ron Paul the Libertarian -- Ron Paul the Independent, or if I have to, I will write in Ron Paul. My vote is for Ron Paul, I could care less about the party.

One other thought, though 3rd party candidates have never had a chance in this country, if they ever will have a chance it is now, because of all the dissatisfaction with both the Dems and Reps.

[Minlawc]

Exactly my thoughts -- I will vote for Ron Paul the Republican -- Ron Paul the Libertarian -- Ron Paul the Independent, or if I have to, I will write in Ron Paul. My vote is for Ron Paul, I could care less about the party.

One other thought, though 3rd party candidates have never had a chance in this country, if they ever will have a chance it is now, because of all the dissatisfaction with both the Dems and Reps.

If I'm not mistaken, the Republicans were a 3rd party... Anything can happen!