PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul: No Third Party Run; Bring Positive Change to the GOP




bobbyw24
06-08-2011, 05:27 AM
Real Clear Politics interviewed Ron Paul and of course they asked him about a Third Party run in 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------

PAUL: Well, you know I did that one time in a third party. And we don't have democracy in this country. It's so biased. If you're in a third party, you can't -- I can't get into debates as a third party candidate. When I did it as a third party, I spent over half my money just trying to get on the ballot.

So we don't have a good democratic process. What happens if you come to the conclusion, as millions of Americans have, that the parties aren't different, they're all the same? The monetary policy stays the same. The welfare system stays the same. The foreign policy says the same. They get pretty disgusted. So there is but one party. So people who want to participate, more or less, have to get into one of the major parties. A lot of our people have gotten into the Republican Party and I've already noticed a difference in the appearance of Republicans.

They say, will you come talk to the Republican Party? I say, well, you know, they didn't invite me before so I went, and they're very friendly. Some of the old-timers are there, but they're twice the size they are because all our people come and they're part of the Republican Party. So there is a transition going on right now.

CROWLEY: So you see changing the Republican Party rather than a third party.

PAUL: I think what many of the supporters I have opted out for and they've seen that I've worked in the Republican Party, but that doesn't mean we join them. We get in the Republican Party and hopefully using that as a vehicle to bring about the positive peaceful changes that we want.

CROWLEY: Presidential candidate Ron Paul, thank you so much for joining us, Congressman.

PAUL: Thank you.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/05/austan_goolsbee_and_ron_paul_on_state_of_the_union _110101.html

FrankRep
06-08-2011, 05:42 AM
Thank God.

cindy25
06-08-2011, 05:42 AM
regardless of who wins the GOP nomination there will be a viable 3rd party candidate in 2012; might be Trump, might be Palin, might be an anti-war Dem; could be Rudy if Ron wins the nomination. but the president will be picked by the house.

FrankRep
06-08-2011, 05:47 AM
regardless of who wins the GOP nomination there will be a viable 3rd party candidate in 2012; might be Trump, might be Palin, might be an anti-war Dem; could be Rudy if Ron wins the nomination. but the president will be picked by the house.

3% won't win elections. Third parties have no power.

Austrian Econ Disciple
06-08-2011, 05:49 AM
regardless of who wins the GOP nomination there will be a viable 3rd party candidate in 2012; might be Trump, might be Palin, might be an anti-war Dem; could be Rudy if Ron wins the nomination. but the president will be picked by the house.

That hasn't happened since Thomas Jefferson tied Alexander Hamilton. It won't happen ever again I reckon.

123tim
06-08-2011, 05:51 AM
Ever wonder why this question is asked so much?

It seems that it's asked to make Dr. Paul look less viable. (My opinion.)

bobbyw24
06-08-2011, 06:05 AM
The way I see it is: if Ron Paul has a real chance, stay in the GOP.

But if he really doesn't have much of a chance to win, shake things up, run third party; raise lots of money; build a viable third party since most Americans are disgusted with the 2 major parties. He could make the Libertarian Party a legitimate third party with a run and millions of dollars in fund raising.

Does Ron Paul have a real chance to win the GOP nomination this time? I hope so. We will see

Napoleon's Shadow
06-08-2011, 06:08 AM
3% won't win elections. Third parties have no power.
3rd parties can have tremendous power in very close and tight elections.

The day after Gore lost to Bush in FL back in 2000 after a few thousand votes, Ralph Nader was quoted as saying "well maybe now the DNC will pay better attention to its left wing base" -- many Dems blame Nader for causing Bush to win because he received more votes than the margin of victory of Bush over Gore.

And remember that the LP had a higher amount of votes in 2 or 3 states back in 2008 than the amount that Obama won over McCain with.

bobbyw24
06-08-2011, 06:15 AM
3rd parties can have tremendous power in very close and tight elections. .

Remember 1912 (got Wilson elected since he would sign the Federal Reserve Bill)

The United States presidential election of 1912 was a four-way contest.[1] Incumbent President William Howard Taft was renominated by the Republican Party with the support of the conservative wing of the party. After former President Theodore Roosevelt failed to receive the Republican nomination, he called his own convention and created the Progressive Party (nicknamed the "Bull Moose Party"). It nominated Roosevelt and ran candidates for other offices in major states. Democrat Woodrow Wilson was nominated on the 46th ballot of a contentious convention, thanks to the support of William Jennings Bryan, the three-time Democratic presidential candidate who still had a large and loyal following in 1912. Eugene Debs was the nominee of the Socialist Party.

Wilson defeated Taft, Roosevelt, and Debs in the general election, winning a huge majority in the Electoral College, and won 42% of the popular vote while his nearest rival won 27%. Wilson became the only elected President of the Democratic Party between 1892 and 1932. Wilson was the second of only two Democrats to be elected President between 1860 and 1932. This was also the last election in which a candidate who was not a Republican or Democrat came second in either the popular vote or the Electoral College and the first election where the 48 states of the continental United States participated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1912

sailingaway
06-08-2011, 06:21 AM
3% won't win elections. Third parties have no power.

But they can be a spoiler. I think what cindy25 was saying was that even if Ron gets the nomination there is a way to sink him. However, at that point we would count on independents to make up any pull away from Ron. If there is a third party candidate (and it WON'T be Ron), Ron is the only chance the GOP has of winning.

speciallyblend
06-08-2011, 06:35 AM
The way I see it is: if Ron Paul has a real chance, stay in the GOP.

But if he really doesn't have much of a chance to win, shake things up, run third party; raise lots of money; build a viable third party since most Americans are disgusted with the 2 major parties. He could make the Libertarian Party a legitimate third party with a run and millions of dollars in fund raising.

Does Ron Paul have a real chance to win the GOP nomination this time? I hope so. We will see

.. yep

bobbyw24
06-08-2011, 06:44 AM
.. yep

Nice to see someone agrees with me.

I thought I would be flamed for being "negative," er, I mean realistic . . .

John of Des Moines
06-08-2011, 06:45 AM
regardless of who wins the GOP nomination there will be a viable 3rd party candidate in 2012; might be Trump, might be Palin, might be an anti-war Dem; could be Rudy if Ron wins the nomination. but the president will be picked by the house.


That hasn't happened since Thomas Jefferson tied Alexander Hamilton. It won't happen ever again I reckon.

Austrian, getting history lessons from Sarah Palin? The House of Representatives elected the President in 1824 between John Q. Adams, A. Jackson, and a couple of other guys. Here's the Wikipedia on it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1824).

Krugerrand
06-08-2011, 06:48 AM
I'd like to see him discuss this in the context of the neo-cons. They knew they could not get anywhere as a third party. They weren't getting what they wanted in the Democratic Party and then took over and re-directed the GOP.

We're looking to take the GOP back from the neo-cons. It doesn't make sense to abandon the GOP to do that.

Krugerrand
06-08-2011, 06:49 AM
The way I see it is: if Ron Paul has a real chance, stay in the GOP.

But if he really doesn't have much of a chance to win, shake things up, run third party; raise lots of money; build a viable third party since most Americans are disgusted with the 2 major parties. He could make the Libertarian Party a legitimate third party with a run and millions of dollars in fund raising.

Does Ron Paul have a real chance to win the GOP nomination this time? I hope so. We will see

I don't disagree ... but it's something I'd never want to hear from Ron Paul's mouth unless it were about to happen.

bobbyw24
06-08-2011, 06:49 AM
We're looking to take the GOP back from the neo-cons. It doesn't make sense to abandon the GOP to do that.

This could happen in about 25-30 years when the older guys are gone from the GOP

Austrian Econ Disciple
06-08-2011, 11:17 AM
Austrian, getting history lessons from Sarah Palin? The House of Representatives elected the President in 1824 between John Q. Adams, A. Jackson, and a couple of other guys. Here's the Wikipedia on it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1824).

My bad -- Jefferson tied with Burr and then Hamilton influenced the sway to get Jefferson elected. I also was unaware that the House elected the 1824 President. Thanks for the reminders and history lessons!

sailingaway
06-08-2011, 11:22 AM
I'd like to see him discuss this in the context of the neo-cons. They knew they could not get anywhere as a third party. They weren't getting what they wanted in the Democratic Party and then took over and re-directed the GOP.

We're looking to take the GOP back from the neo-cons. It doesn't make sense to abandon the GOP to do that.

And those are the terms that should be discussed -- we are taking our party BACK from those who hijacked it.