Why Ron Paul should run for president for the Libertarian Party

[MN Patriot]

If Ron wanted to spread the idea of libertarianism, then he should really run for president under the Libertarian Party. I think that is our only hope, to create a third party to make the Republican Party irrelevant. If Ron ran as a LP candidate, and encouraged the LP to have a libertarian candidate for every Congressional race and as many state legislative races as possible, the libertarian message would get broad publicity. Libertarianism gets misconstrued as some sort of radical conservative ideology when a Republican is also a libertarian. Libertarianism and conservatism are distinct ideologies, with some similarities regarding economics and gun rights. Beyond that, they are incompatible with one another.

(this was a response I gave in another thread, but thought it would be good enough to start a new thread)

We need THOUSANDS of Ron Pauls running for every office possible. Expecting one 76 year old man to fix things is completely unrealistic. The Republican Party DOES not want libertarians in their ranks. They want "conservatives" in the Republican Party. Ron Paul is the only person who could lead enough libertarians out of the Republican Party and into the Libertarian Party so that it would truly be a force to be reckoned with.

[Vessol]

Haven't we gone over this a thousand times before? Why do we need another thread about this?

[Michael Landon]

If he does not get the nomination then I really wish he would run 3rd party. I think he would gather enough votes from both sides to make it a good 3 way race with him probably coming out on top. I actually have more liberals I work with that agree with him than I do neo-cons.

- ML

[rp08orbust]

Review your assumptions after Ron Paul wins the Ames straw poll.

[MN Patriot]

Haven't we gone over this a thousand times before? Why do we need another thread about this?

Because maybe there are people who agree with me and want to get the revolution rolling to the next level. If you want to get bogged down in the Establishment controlled Republican Party, expecting one man to save us all, then good luck with that.

[MN Patriot]

If he does not get the nomination then I really wish he would run 3rd party. I think he would gather enough votes from both sides to make it a good 3 way race with him probably coming out on top. I actually have more liberals I work with that agree with him than I do neo-cons.

- ML

Yes, as a Republican, many people instantly dismiss him as just another Republican, but a lone kook Republican. If Ron were to run as a Libertarian, with thousands of fellow Libertarians on the ballots all over the nation, that would give libertarianism much more credibility.

[Aldanga]

Yes, as a Republican, many people instantly dismiss him as just another Republican, but a lone kook Republican. If Ron were to run as a Libertarian, with thousands of fellow Libertarians on the ballots all over the nation getting very few votes, that would not give libertarianism much more credibility.
FTFY.

(In case you want to flame me, I am a registered member of the Libertarian Party—at least until the primaries.)

Sore loser laws + intentional limiting of third parties = fail idea. It's been covered ad nauseum. I wish people would realize it's a dumb idea that won't go anywhere.

[Matt Collins]

third parties are not viable now.

[nate895]

This is the second time I felt like I needed to post this today:

http://files.sharenator.com/181148_triple_facepalm_super_RE_The_most_awesome_t hing_u_will_ever_see-s600x480-89034-580.jpg

[TheTyke]

This is the second time I felt like I needed to post this today:

http://files.sharenator.com/181148_triple_facepalm_super_RE_The_most_awesome_t hing_u_will_ever_see-s600x480-89034-580.jpg

Agreed...

Is 40 years of not winning federal elections not enough? Those pushing RP to run LP remind me of the folks who think government is still the solution even after failing all this time...

[kah13176]

LP = NO media coverage. No televised debates or airtime to spread the message.

Plus, LP is a eunuch as far as political leverage and strength goes.

[mport1]

Parties are stupid and meaningless. Why run for the LP and get absolutely no media coverage? Running for a major party is the best way to get the message out through politics.

[MN Patriot]

FTFY.

(In case you want to flame me, I am a registered member of the Libertarian Party—at least until the primaries.)

Sore loser laws + intentional limiting of third parties = fail idea. It's been covered ad nauseum. I wish people would realize it's a dumb idea that won't go anywhere.

So why are you a registered member of the LP, if you think third parties are a dumb idea?
Yes, it has been covered ad nauseum, because people have been conditioned to think third parties will always fail. I am trying to challenge that mindset. As soon as they see something about third parties, they reflectively say what has been brainwashed into them by the Establishment that does not want third parties.

If enough people decide to dedicate themselves to a third party, it can succeed.

At this stage of the game, sore loser laws are irrelevant. Ron could easily get the Libertarian endorsement in 2012, get enough LP candidates on all the ballots. Run as a Republican until the fall, then switch parties. The only problem is whether or not the LP is capable of rising to the challenge.

[MN Patriot]

Agreed...

Is 40 years of not winning federal elections not enough? Those pushing RP to run LP remind me of the folks who think government is still the solution even after failing all this time...

And in those 40 years, when did the LP ever have a presidential candidate with the recognition and broad support of Ron Paul? The LP has never had a full slate of Congressional candidates.

Going on past performance is no guarantee of future results. (Ever see that before?)

[torchbearer]

So why are you a registered member of the LP, if you think third parties are a dumb idea?
Yes, it has been covered ad nauseum, because people have been conditioned to think third parties will always fail. I am trying to challenge that mindset. As soon as they see something about third parties, they reflectively say what has been brainwashed into them by the Establishment that does not want third parties.

If enough people decide to dedicate themselves to a third party, it can succeed.

At this stage of the game, sore loser laws are irrelevant. Ron could easily get the Libertarian endorsement in 2012, get enough LP candidates on all the ballots. Run as a Republican until the fall, then switch parties. The only problem is whether or not the LP is capable of rising to the challenge.

couldn't the LP nominate its slate of electors to ron paul either way? if they really want him, the could assign their electors to him. he does not need to give you permission to have electors vote for him.
that is all a presidential ballot is- a slate of electors who promise to vote(but aren't bound) for a certain candidate.

[low preference guy]

good thing I put MN Patriot on my ignore list earlier in the afternoon, because all of his posts i read are about pimping the LP

[MN Patriot]

Parties are stupid and meaningless. Why run for the LP and get absolutely no media coverage? Running for a major party is the best way to get the message out through politics.

Running as a lone libertarian for the Republican Party is the best way to be marginalized. Ron Paul proved that in 2008.

[nate895]

Running as a lone libertarian for the Republican Party is the best way to be marginalized. Ron Paul proved that in 2008.

Have you been following the events since 2008? Ron Paul was a no-name Texas Congressman in 2007. This year he is the leader of a grassroots movement.

[torchbearer]

Running as a lone libertarian for the Republican Party is the best way to be marginalized. Ron Paul proved that in 2008.

I held the office of vice-chair of the lalp once upon a time. a member of their central committee for a decade.
ron paul did more for the liberty movement in his two years running as a gop presidential candidate, than we did in the lp over our lifetime.
he was in the debates. we weren't.
if you don't see that he is right in his path, no reason/logic will reach you.

[MN Patriot]

good thing I put MN Patriot on my ignore list earlier in the afternoon, because all of his posts i read are about pimping the LP

Whatever. Visionaries are the ones getting flamed until enough people wake up and realize they have been right all along.

[MN Patriot]

I held the office of vice-chair of the lalp once upon a time. a member of their central committee for a decade.
ron paul did more for the liberty movement in his two years running as a gop presidential candidate, than we did in the lp over our lifetime.
he was in the debates. we weren't.
if you don't see that he is right in his path, no reason/logic will reach you.

Ross Perot was in the debates as a third party candidate.

Ron has done well, I give him lots of credit. But there will come a point when libertarians will have to decide if they really want to trudge along with conservatives in the Republican Party.

Please explain the reason/logic of libertarians trying to co-opt the Republican Party.

[Aldanga]

So why are you a registered member of the LP, if you think third parties are a dumb idea?
I am a registered member of the LP because I got sick to my stomach when I thought about my registration in the GOP. It was also a symbolic move when the LP candidate for governor was trying to get the LP full party status in my state.

This system is built for two parties, and I don't expect that to change anytime soon. Either play the game or go home. Hoping and wishing that you will convince enough people to vote third party is ridiculous.

[AdamT]

Note the video I'm posting tomorrow. Panel Discussion.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?p=F4DE6D99CEBD778E

[torchbearer]

Ross Perot was in the debates as a third party candidate.

Ron has done well, I give him lots of credit. But there will come a point when libertarians will have to decide if they really want to trudge along with conservatives in the Republican Party.

Please explain the reason/logic of libertarians trying to co-opt the Republican Party.

libertarians came from the gop. they left during nixons big government/fake money administration.
a group of guys who had given up on the gop.
but not all libertarians left the gop. the party is as much the abolitionist party as it is the neocons party.
we are taking the ship back.

[MikeStanart]

This is the second time I felt like I needed to post this today:

http://files.sharenator.com/181148_triple_facepalm_super_RE_The_most_awesome_t hing_u_will_ever_see-s600x480-89034-580.jpg

http://chzupnextinsports.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/funny-sports-pictures-quadruple-facepalm.jpg

[MN Patriot]

Have you been following the events since 2008? Ron Paul was a no-name Texas Congressman in 2007. This year he is the leader of a grassroots movement.

Yes, and I contend he should take that grassroots movement and create a third party that will eventually put the Republican Party out of business. Give the voters an honest choice instead of the phony two party system we have now.

[JohnGalt1225]

No, I don't like it. Too me it would only serve to make him look more "fringe." He can run and hopefully get the GOP nomination, if that doesn't work out he can spend his time endorsing liberty candidates.

[low preference guy]

Give the voters an honest choice instead of the phony two party system we have now.

The voters have an honest choice because Ron Paul is on the ballot. Everything else you say is bullshit.

[MN Patriot]

http://chzupnextinsports.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/funny-sports-pictures-quadruple-facepalm.jpg

Why don't you facepalmers man up and put out some REAL arguments.

I know them already. 3rd partys = fale. No medea. Sore looser laws.

Why wouldn't Ron Paul as a Libertarian candidate WHO WOULD GUARANTEED TO BE ON THE BALLOT NATIONWIDE, with a full slate of Libertarian congressional candidates, plus state candidates, promote his ideas more effectively than ONE 76 YEAR OLD MAN WHO WILL FAIL TO RECEIVE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION?

[mport1]

Running as a lone libertarian for the Republican Party is the best way to be marginalized. Ron Paul proved that in 2008.

These guys all proved the best way to be marginalized is to run for the Libertarian Party:

John Hospers
Roger MacBride
Ed Clark
David Bergland
Congressman Ron Paul
Andre Marrou
Harry Browne
Michael Badnarik
Bob Barr

[MN Patriot]

The voters have an honest choice because Ron Paul is on the ballot. Everything else you say is bullshit.

Can't ignore me, can you?

Ron Paul WILL NOT BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2012. At least if he runs as a Republican. Revolution over.

[Captain America]

When he is asked if he will run third party. He should say "i run to talk about liberty." Just leave it at that.

[MN Patriot]

These guys all proved the best way to be marginalized is to run for the Libertarian Party:

John Hospers
Roger MacBride
Ed Clark
David Bergland
Congressman Ron Paul
Andre Marrou
Harry Browne
Michael Badnarik
Bob Barr

And none of them had the national prominence at the time that Ron Paul does now. Once again, past performance is no guarantee of future results.

[torchbearer]

Can't ignore me, can you?

Ron Paul WILL NOT BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2012. At least if he runs as a Republican. Revolution over.

He was on the ballot in my state in 2008. but we figured out how to do it, and we got it done.

[MN Patriot]

No, I don't like it. Too me it would only serve to make him look more "fringe." He can run and hopefully get the GOP nomination, if that doesn't work out he can spend his time endorsing liberty candidates.

10 years ago "libertarian" was fringe. Now John Stossel, Glen Beck, and a bunch of prominent people call themselves libertarian.

All of those libertarians would likely endorse Ron Paul. :cool:

[cindy25]

running a libertarian candidate in every district is a good idea, and they could run in Rep and Dem primaries also.

Peter King should face a primary, so should Sensenbrenner. in some states such as NY one can have more than one ballot line, so why couldn't RP seek both the GOP and Libertarian nominations?

[MN Patriot]

He was on the ballot in my state in 2008. but we figured out how to do it, and we got it done.

Explain. As a Republican in the general election?

This isn't about just getting Ron on the ballot, this is about starting a genuine REVOLUTION, man. Ron is 76 years old, what will we do in 2014? Stay with the same lame Republican Party?

[MN Patriot]

running a libertarian candidate in every district is a good idea, and they could run in Rep and Dem primaries also.

Peter King should face a primary, so should Sensenbrenner. in some states such as NY one can have more than one ballot line, so why couldn't RP seek both the GOP and Libertarian nominations?

Each state is different, so they should decide how to maximize their political advantage.

[mport1]

There is the other reason not to do this is that the Libertarian Party is no longer libertarian. It has been taken over by Republicans.

[mport1]

Can't ignore me, can you?

Ron Paul WILL NOT BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2012. At least if he runs as a Republican. Revolution over.

The revolution will not be over. Liberty does not ride solely on Ron Paul. I think there is likely zero chance he will win under any circumstance. However, that is not what is important. The most important thing is changing hearts and minds about the message of liberty. Winning elections will do nothing if the people still want big government and don't understand liberty.

[torchbearer]

There is the other reason not to do this is that the Libertarian Party is no longer libertarian. It has been taken over by Republicans.

in our state, almost all the lalp leadership become republican and led most of the ron paul groups around the state.
the only guys that were left in the lalp were the assholes and inexperienced. the anarchs left several years ago because of the hostility they would have from the assholes.
the inexperience don't know any better, and can't help that much.
our la movement grew out of the lp. we got our training running as the outsiders.

[MN Patriot]

I am a registered member of the LP because I got sick to my stomach when I thought about my registration in the GOP. It was also a symbolic move when the LP candidate for governor was trying to get the LP full party status in my state.

This system is built for two parties, and I don't expect that to change anytime soon. Either play the game or go home. Hoping and wishing that you will convince enough people to vote third party is ridiculous.

Times they are a changin'. Many people are tired of the two old parties. The word "libertarian" is all around us now. I think it is time to take it mainstream.

[Flash]

If Ron Paul fails to secure the Republican nomination, then I would support a third party run. Preferably a merger of Constitution, Libertarian, Conservative Party, & Reform Party into one, brand new party. Give it a name like the Taxpayers' Party, or simply the Conservative Party. This is, of course, assuming a few independent polling companies put Ron Paul at least 15% in a 3-way race. If he wasn't eligible for the debates, it makes this whole thing pointless.

Thankfully, PPP released a poll a year ago that placed RP @ 13% in a hypothetical three-way race between Obama/Romney/Paul. So, I can only assume his momentum will keep growing and more Moderates/Dems will hear his message and be willing to support him in a third party run.

Besides, this could be the event we need to wake the Republican Party up. Either listen to the Tea Party/Conservative/Libertarian wing of the party or die.


Times they are a changin'. Many people are tired of the two old parties. The word "libertarian" is all around us now. I think it is time to take it mainstream.

Meh, the word Libertarian is cool to use on forums or message boards... but it would make more sense to 'hijack' the word Conservative or something more main stream.

[MN Patriot]

The revolution will not be over. Liberty does not ride solely on Ron Paul. I think there is likely zero chance he will win under any circumstance. However, that is not what is important. The most important thing is changing hearts and minds about the message of liberty. Winning elections will do nothing if the people still want big government and don't understand liberty.

I agree wholeheartedly. But I am trying to promote the idea that libertarianism naturally belongs in its namesake political party. It doesn't belong in the Republican Party. The LP needs to grow and become bigger than the Republican Party. Until then, this is their best chance to receive national recognition as the party of liberty, with Ron Paul leading the charge. It is about the future, will libertarians spend the next x years as maligned and disregarded members of the Republican Party? Or as a distinct group with distinct ideas? Sure, the statists will still malign and disregard libertarians, but as a viable political party, enough voters may eventually choose the LP over the other two parties.

[MN Patriot]

If Ron Paul fails to secure the Republican nomination, then I would support a third party run. Preferably a merger of Constitution, Libertarian, Conservative Party, & Reform Party into one, brand new party. Give it a name like the Taxpayers' Party, or simply the Conservative Party. This is, of course, assuming a few independent polling companies put Ron Paul at least 15% in a 3-way race. If he wasn't eligible for the debates, it makes this whole thing pointless.

Thankfully, PPP released a poll a year ago that placed RP @ 13% in a hypothetical three-way race between Obama/Romney/Paul. So, I can only assume his momentum will keep growing and more Moderates/Dems will hear his message and be willing to support him in a third party run.

Besides, this could be the event we need to wake the Republican Party up. Either listen to the Tea Party/Conservative/Libertarian wing of the party or die.



Meh, the word Libertarian is cool to use on forums or message boards... but it would make more sense to 'hijack' the word Conservative or something more main stream.

Sore loser laws prevent a candidate from running as a third party candidate if they don't get the nomination. That is why Ron should decide by the fall of this year to run as a Libertarian.
Yes, a coalition should be considered.
I disagree with hijacking anything. Why not be open and honest about our goals and motives? We have nothing shameful to hide, unlike the socialists who use terms like "progressive" and "liberal".

[MN Patriot]

You facepalmers haven't risen to my challenge yet.
Why don't you facepalmers man up and put out some REAL arguments.

Why wouldn't Ron Paul as a Libertarian candidate WHO WOULD GUARANTEED TO BE ON THE BALLOT NATIONWIDE, with a full slate of Libertarian congressional candidates, plus state candidates, promote his ideas more effectively than ONE 76 YEAR OLD MAN WHO WILL FAIL TO RECEIVE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION?

tired...going to bed...pick this up tomorrow...maybe...

[TIMB0B]

If you want the LP to have a chance in the presidential elections, you first need to vote libertarians into the house and senate to the point where their numbers overwhelm the dems and repubs combined.

[RM918]

Also, wouldn't he lose his committee assignment? And if he does run, won't he severely split the Republican vote and Obama will win (I think he'll win anyway if they don't nominate Paul), then everybody will blame it on him?

[libertybrewcity]

If he was running in the Libertarian Party the moneybomb ticker would read about $200 right now.

[cindy25]

If Ron Paul fails to secure the Republican nomination, then I would support a third party run. Preferably a merger of Constitution, Libertarian, Conservative Party, & Reform Party into one, brand new party. Give it a name like the Taxpayers' Party, or simply the Conservative Party. This is, of course, assuming a few independent polling companies put Ron Paul at least 15% in a 3-way race. If he wasn't eligible for the debates, it makes this whole thing pointless.

Thankfully, PPP released a poll a year ago that placed RP @ 13% in a hypothetical three-way race between Obama/Romney/Paul. So, I can only assume his momentum will keep growing and more Moderates/Dems will hear his message and be willing to support him in a third party run.

Besides, this could be the event we need to wake the Republican Party up. Either listen to the Tea Party/Conservative/Libertarian wing of the party or die.



Meh, the word Libertarian is cool to use on forums or message boards... but it would make more sense to 'hijack' the word Conservative or something more main stream.

you can't do that because NY already has a conservative party (and elected Jim Buckley to the US senate back in 1970)

and more importantly conservative has become the same as neo-con in a lot of minds. when I think conservative I think McCain, not Paul. conservative means stay the same, and I want change.

[Flash]

e loser laws prevent a candidate from running as a third party candidate if they don't get the nomination.

Don't only a few state have sore loser laws? I only know of Texas having them. Would Ron Paul win Texas anyways in a 3-way race? Probably not.



Also, wouldn't he lose his committee assignment?

That's not a problem if he's planning on retiring soon anyways, which could be a possibility.


And if he does run, won't he severely split the Republican vote and Obama will win (I think he'll win anyway if they don't nominate Paul), then everybody will blame it on him?

Yeah that's the main problem that I have with a Paul third party run. I don't want the Paul family to be blamed for years to come for Obama. Then on the other hand I think-- how long does America have left before another depression?


you can't do that because NY already has a conservative party (and elected Jim Buckley to the US senate back in 1970)

and more importantly conservative has become the same as neo-con in a lot of minds. when I think conservative I think McCain, not Paul. conservative means stay the same, and I want change.

Yeah and Liberals/Moderates may not like RP identifying himself as a 'Conservative.' I guess 'Constitution Party' is an OK name.

[MN Patriot]

If you want the LP to have a chance in the presidential elections, you first need to vote libertarians into the house and senate to the point where their numbers overwhelm the dems and repubs combined.

Yes, but you miss the point, which most everyone else here in the RPFs do. ONE MAN CANNOT CHANGE THINGS. It takes thousands of candidates and millions of people supporting them.
There are already millions of people in the USA who identify with the libertarian ideology. They view the Republican Party as the lesser of two evils.

In a three way race, all you need is 34% of the vote. Jesse Ventura proved that third parties can win.

Yes, a libertarian revolution needs candidates for every elections. That is what I have been saying, run a full slate of congressional LP candidates. Run state wide office LP candidates plus as many state legislature candidates as possible in 2012. The libertarian message would be impossible to ignore.

Hoping that Ron and Ron alone will receive the Republican nomination to carry the libertarian message will likely end in the primaries when the Establishment favorite will win. If Ron ran as a LP candidate, he would be on the ballot in all 50 states, if the LP were able to get competent leadership to do that. hopefully Ron would attract enough people to follow him to the LP. But so many libertarians have been conditioned to think "3rd party = fail" by the political Establishment.

[MN Patriot]

Also, wouldn't he lose his committee assignment? And if he does run, won't he severely split the Republican vote and Obama will win (I think he'll win anyway if they don't nominate Paul), then everybody will blame it on him?

If Ron does run as a Libertarian, the Republican would be taking votes away from him.

As so what if Obama wins. That might be a good thing, with the economy going bad. If a full slate of LP candidates reverses the Republican takeover in 2010, then Democrats in office will be held accountable for our bankrupt government.

This is one of the most challenging aspects of this third party thing, having the "conservatives" mad at libertarians for ruining their party. So what, "conservatives" have proven themselves incapable of running government like libertarians because they are NOT libertarians.

[MN Patriot]

To racap this thread, like a ninja master, I deflected all the arguments against my position with ease why Ron should run for the LP in 2012. People who post a facepalm picture utterly fail to present a rational aguement. I facepalm your facepalm.

Why wouldn't Ron Paul as a Libertarian candidate WHO WOULD GUARANTEED TO BE ON THE BALLOT NATIONWIDE, with a full slate of Libertarian congressional candidates, plus state candidates, promote his ideas more effectively than ONE 76 YEAR OLD MAN WHO WILL FAIL TO RECEIVE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION?

This is a libertarian revolution, not a conservative revolution, so Ron the libertarian should run in the party that describes his philosophy.

Running as a Libertarian, Ron WOULD be on the ballot nationwide in the general election. Running as a Republican, Ron will likely fail to win the primaries.

Running as a Libertarian, Ron would get massive media coverage as the spoiler for the Republicans. Plus all the LP candidates for Congress. Plus all the talk show hosts who call themselves libertarian would have the opportunity to endorse him.

Ron is 76 years old. Where will this revolution be in 2014? 2016? Will it fizzle and die because Ron is no longer running as a Republican? I contend that libertarians need to look long term, have Ron start a new Libertarian Party that will have a new status as a viable political party that makes the Republican Party irrelevant.

The word "libertarian" has gained public prominence, with many talk show hosts who call themselves libertarian. More people understand what it means. I say ride the trend.

[FrankRep]

[Larry McDonald] was the most principled man in Congress.
- Ron Paul, The Philadelphia Inquirer


Ron Paul on Congressman Larry McDonald (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_McDonald), the President of the John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/).


Ron Paul went to Congressman Larry McDonald, a Democrat, for advice on running for Congress. McDonald said, "Run in the party you think you can WIN because political parties are irrelevant." This made Ron Paul become a Republican.


Ron Paul explains:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQQ--ju7Vxk

[dude58677]

Historically third parties have failed because of the electoral college. Ross Perot was a long shot from even getting an electoral vote.

[FiannaPaul]

This thread is a FAIL

[demolama]

Ron did his best to get people to vote 3rd party and you know what the LP presidential candidate Bob Barr gave him a big FU. As long as people like Barr and Root are the main guys the LP wants... I'll pass

[psi2941]

Peter Schiff sums up nicely what the LP should do
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45sN9xbBOEE