Not running for Congress=Almost Certain 3rd party bid if we lose the nomination

[nyrgoal99]

This is definitely the reason.

[Bruehound]

Ron Paul is not a fool and will not run third party.

[specsaregood]

This is definitely the reason.

So you are calling Dr. Paul a liar?

[PastaRocket848]

He could... In 4 states

[Sola_Fide]

But the argument could be made that it would hurt Rand in 16. I thought about it too, but it would be too detrimental...

[trey4sports]

But the argument could be made that it would hurt Rand in 16. I thought about it too, but it would be too detrimental...

agreed.

[Kotin]

NO IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT.. lol reallly.. Are we back to this??

[erowe1]

If he wanted to run 3rd party, then he wouldn't run in the GOP primary. A lot of states have sore loser laws where they won't let him put his name on the general election ballot in any party other than the one he ran on in the primary.

[KCIndy]

I wish everyone would hold fire on this third party stuff.

Ron just doubled down on his presidential bid: All or nothing. Sounds to me like he has a lot of faith in his grassroots support. Now it's up to us. The ball is in our court, and it's gut check time. Let's get moving.

[rp08orbust]

If he wanted to run 3rd party, then he wouldn't run in the GOP primary. A lot of states have sore loser laws where they won't let him put his name on the general election ballot in any party other than the one he ran on in the primary.

Ron Paul won't be on any primary ballots for quite a few months, so if he makes no progress in the polls by then, if he wanted to (which I don't think he would) he could drop out and still be eligible for the general election ballots as an independent.

With that said, I agree with the post above me.

[kah13176]

He's not running for Congressional Re-election?

[rp08orbust]

He's not running for Congressional Re-election?

LOL, did you just wake up?

[Sola_Fide]

He's not running for Congressional Re-election?

Yeah dude. Check the news today. It will blow your mind.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Sadly, if he runs third party I won't be supporting him. A third party candidate can't win in this country and I couldn't live with myself if I helped reelect Obama.

Ron knows this though, which is why he is a Republican. I don't see third party happening.

[Sola_Fide]

Sadly, if he runs third party I won't be supporting him. A third party candidate can't win in this country and I couldn't live with myself if I helped reelect Obama.

Ron knows this though, which is why he is a Republican. I don't see third party happening.

Yeah, but if Ron doesn't win the nomination, I'm voting the Constitution Party anyway. Winning is not the most important thing for me right now. I'll be fine with a second Obama term and Rand coming in to restore some sanity in 2016.

[brushfire]

eeeyyaa... ummm... I'm gonna have tooo disagreeee with you.

RP has been pretty clear on his lessons of 1988 - he's not going to do that again. He doesnt have to anyway. My take is that in order to be a serious contender, he will not be able to commit to his role as a congressman. I think this action speaks more to his character and seriousness as a candidate, than it lends to any 3rd party aspirations.

[goRPaul]

-rep

[CaseyJones]

Ron is not going to run 3rd party!!!!!

again this

[Elwar]

Sadly, if he runs third party I won't be supporting him. A third party candidate can't win in this country and I couldn't live with myself if I helped reelect Obama.

Ron knows this though, which is why he is a Republican. I don't see third party happening.

It will not matter if it is Obama or Romney or some other neo-con. The country is screwed by either of them.

Your best vote if Ron Paul does not win is on which country you are moving to, or which type of gun you are getting to protect your house.

[Elwar]

Ron Paul's own state, Texas, has sore loser laws. We went over this back in 2008. Ron Paul would not even be able to run in his own state as a third party candidate.

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

It will not matter if it is Obama or Romney or some other neo-con. The country is screwed by either of them.

Your best vote if Ron Paul does not win is on which country you are moving to, or which type of gun you are getting to protect your house.

If it is Romney or Huntsman I won't vote for them. I would vote for the others in the general.

[Sola_Fide]

It will not matter if it is Obama or Romney or some other neo-con. The country is screwed by either of them.

Your best vote if Ron Paul does not win is on which country you are moving to, or which type of gun you are getting to protect your house.

Good point. Carve out some liberty for yourself. Forget Washington.

[Sola_Fide]

If it is Romney or Huntsman I won't vote for them. I would vote for the others in the general.

Why? Where are the significant policy differences?

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Why? Where are the significant policy differences?

Lower taxes and lower spending. Getting rid of ObamaCare would be a priority. They aren't perfect but they are better than Obama. I don't trust Romney or Huntsman to do the right thing or be any different from Obama.
They aren't perfect but they would be better than Obama.

[speciallyblend]

Lower taxes and lower spending. Getting rid of ObamaCare would be a priority. They aren't perfect but they are better than Obama. I don't trust Romney or Huntsman to do the right thing or be any different from Obama.
They aren't perfect but they would be better than Obama.

They are no different then obama just biggovgop obama republicans , one in the same! Ron Paul 2012 or bust literally! If the gop fails to nominate Ron Paul, the gop will elect obama! mark my words

[Havax]

Sadly, if he runs third party I won't be supporting him. A third party candidate can't win in this country and I couldn't live with myself if I helped reelect Obama.

Ron knows this though, which is why he is a Republican. I don't see third party happening.

Your one vote will NEVER sway an election. Always vote for who you believe in. Wise up.

[tremendoustie]

Sadly, if he runs third party I won't be supporting him. A third party candidate can't win in this country and I couldn't live with myself if I helped reelect Obama.

Voting on principle for an alternative to the one party schills is not "helping elect" either of them. Also, how could you live with yourself if you voted for romney, bachman, or a stooge like them?



Ron knows this though, which is why he is a Republican. I don't see third party happening.

Third party won't happen because most state laws make it impossible to drop out as a candidate for the nomination and win the general.

But, if Ron doesn't win the nomination, I'm sure I'll be finding a third party candidate to support.

[tremendoustie]

Your one vote will NEVER sway an election. Always vote for who you believe in. Wise up.

Exactly. This "doesn't have a chance" nonsense is what cons decent people into voting for tyrants, and it's a lot of the reason things have gotten as bad as they are.

[Restore-America-NOW]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJJCexg817w&feature=feedu

The bad news is, if we do not win, Ron Paul's influence on American politics will end. The good news is, this is yet another sign that Dr. Paul is in it to win it. Without an election in his district, he will be focusing EVERYTHING on the White House run despite what some people believe.

[enjerth]

If RP fails to win the nomination and you really want a third party run, draft Rand. He's got the popularity and the buzz.

[Romulus]

Let the man retire - he's already done so much. Its our turn now.

[MaxPower]

While I am not certain whether it would be a good idea in the broader sense, I will say that I would be delighted to have the chance to vote for Ron Paul for president, even only on a third-party ticket.

[libertarian4321]

If he lost the GOP primary, I'd love to see him run as a Libertarian, just so I'd have someone I could feel good about votinge for- in 2008, there was no decent candidate on the ballot- even the Libertarian ticket sucked.

However, I think there is about 0% chance that he would do so.

[libertarian4321]

Let the man retire - he's already done so much. Its our turn now.

He's not retiring until he finishes his 8 years in office!

[Restore-America-NOW]

If he lost the GOP primary, I'd love to see him run as a Libertarian, just so I'd have someone I could feel good about votinge for- in 2008, there was no decent candidate on the ballot- even the Libertarian ticket sucked.

However, I think there is about 0% chance that he would do so.

I agree, and I didn't support this until his announcement today. Should he lose, he ought to consider running as a 3rd party candidate and really focusing on getting access to the debates. He could act as the Perot of this election.

[Napoleon's Shadow]

Tom Woods explaining why running 3rd party isn't a good idea:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jb7SA-4Hds&feature=player_embedded

[TheDrakeMan]

A 3rd Party run will bring him a huge amount of attention. He may even get into the debates. But then don't expect to be taken seriously by the GOP for the rest of our (Libertarian) existence. Hopefully Ron will retire and we can get a good RP Republican, like Ronnie/Robert Paul or Medina, to replace him. Then we can continue infiltrating and influencing the Republican Party gradually. Plus, if Michele Bachmann wins we'll have someone in the white house that is sympathetic to our views.

[runningdiz]

Ron won't run as an independent so get over it. Support his candidacy for the Republican nomination.

[trey4sports]

A 3rd Party run will bring him a huge amount of attention. He may even get into the debates. But then don't expect to be taken seriously by the GOP for the rest of our (Libertarian) existence. Hopefully Ron will retire and we can get a good RP Republican, like Ronnie/Robert Paul or Medina, to replace him. Then we can continue infiltrating and influencing the Republican Party gradually. Plus, if Michele Bachmann wins we'll have someone in the white house that is sympathetic to our views.


Michelle Bachmann espouses buzzwords, and namedrops the right names, however, she is not one of us.

[libertybrewcity]

move along, this user is just trying to anger us..

[thomas-in-ky]

I wish everyone would hold fire on this third party stuff.

Ron just doubled down on his presidential bid: All or nothing. Sounds to me like he has a lot of faith in his grassroots support. Now it's up to us. The ball is in our court, and it's gut check time. Let's get moving.

+1

Plus, he won't spoil Rand's chances in 2016 by running third party.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

You know we may not even have to worry about this third party nonsense if everyone would give their all to make sure this man is our Republican nominee. I understand the desire to think about this but let's cross this bridge when we get to it and let's organize fundraising, get new and fresh ideas and dedicate ourselves to making sure every American understands where we are as a nation and what we have to do to resolve it!

[Kevin_Kennedy]

"Paul spox Jesse Benton re-confirms to me that Paul won't run third party. GOP nom or bust" - Dave Weigel

http://twitter.com/#!/daveweigel/status/90872909949710336

[sailingaway]

"Paul spox Jesse Benton re-confirms to me that Paul won't run third party. GOP nom or bust" - Dave Weigel

http://twitter.com/#!/daveweigel/status/90872909949710336


good. Now let's move on to the phone banks....

[Billay]

good. Now let's move on to the phone banks....

This.

[MozoVote]

-rep

I only "-rep" people when they are being obnoxious. But i did click this thread so that I could "1 star" it. :collins:

[Paul4Prez]

Ron Paul is all-in for the Republican nomination. Job No. 1 for us is to help him win it.

That being said, this is great strategy (announcing retirement from Congress now.) If the Republican Party thinks he might go independent for the general election, they can't mistreat him this time around. No speaking slot at the convention? Oh really. Nothing from Ron Paul's agenda in the party platform? That's interesting. See you in November, guys, have fun.

And for those saying third party can't win or can't be done or is too hard, you're wrong. The reason third parties don't win is because they have few supporters and they run weak candidates. A nationally known, universally respected, pro-freedom, anti-war candidate like Ron Paul running against two mealy-mouthed, anti-freedom, pro-war candidates like Obama and Romney/whoever would give both parties nightmares. Ballot access would be a snap with all of us helping out. Ross Perot did it with a fraction of the grassroots support that Ron Paul has. Sore loser laws don't apply -- you vote for the electors, not the candidate, and the electors didn't run for anything in the primaries.

Ron Paul has great appeal to independents and young voters, which would make him a strong general election candidate -- just one more reason why Republicans should nominate him, because of his electability (a quality Bachmann and Perry lack.)

[KingRobbStark]

There wont be a need for a third party bid. He IS going to WIN the primary. Instead of wasting time with useless threads, lets focus on ideas to get Ron Paul more support.

[Feelgood]

This is definitely the reason.

Let's all hope you are wrong.

[AdamT]

Yeah 2% in a national race as an Indie.....great way no end his legacy. Not.

[RabbitMan]

I'm pretty sure the primary reason he is not seeking reelection is because he is what, like 75? He's ready to retire. He's going to go out with a bang on this final run and pass the torch to Rand. From what I've read, it sounds like he will continue to lead and promote liberty, just not in Congress. Think Palin's chosen role, just without the narcissism and ego. But seriously. He's old.

[anaconda]

Ron Paul is not a fool and will not run third party.

Ron Paul is most definitely not a fool. Don't you see that this has been the strategy all along? Ron will run 3rd Party in 2012.

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Lower taxes and lower spending. Getting rid of ObamaCare would be a priority. They aren't perfect but they are better than Obama. I don't trust Romney or Huntsman to do the right thing or be any different from Obama.
They aren't perfect but they would be better than Obama.

Don't you realize it yet? They're all run by the same people, it doesn't matter whether it's Obama or another GOP puppet, Obamacare will only end if the men in shodows fear a backlash from the public & if that happens then they'll repeal Obamacare whether Obama is in office or not. This is the way Democrats must've thought that Obama will at least end the wars & Patriot Act & guess what, he carried on with Bush policies.

"Always vote for principle. Though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
— President John Quincy Adams

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And as for the question of 3rd party run, HE'S NOT GOING TO DO IT, he's said it many a times, over & over & over again & here it is once again (go to 10:00)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_9dNHr3or4

All of this third party talk is really going to hurt him, especially if mainstream voters think he's not confident of himself which is why media keeps asking him about 3rd party run, it's a way to scare away mainstream voters. So let's end this pointless 3rd party talk & focus on winning Ames & then getting him through the primaries.

[Badger Paul]

A "third-party" projects are little more than just vanity runs and personality cults. The party falls apart when the leader goes away, like AIP after Wallace and the Reform Party after Perot or John Anderson's run. If there's any third party project this time around it has to be the actual creation of a new party, not just the same-old, same-old. Ron would say again and again, this is bigger than me. And he's right. He's 76 years old. If nothing can be established which can outlive well into the future, we will have failed as others who tried to form party No. 3 have failed.

[Harry96]

And for those saying third party can't win or can't be done or is too hard, you're wrong. The reason third parties don't win is because they have few supporters and they run weak candidates. A nationally known, universally respected, pro-freedom, anti-war candidate like Ron Paul running against two mealy-mouthed, anti-freedom, pro-war candidates like Obama and Romney/whoever would give both parties nightmares. Ballot access would be a snap with all of us helping out. Ross Perot did it with a fraction of the grassroots support that Ron Paul has. Sore loser laws don't apply -- you vote for the electors, not the candidate, and the electors didn't run for anything in the primaries.



This is nonsense. The only time third-party candidates are promoted by the media as credible (which is a prerequisite to them having any impact on the race at all, much less winning it) is when they're recruited by the power elite to split the vote of the candidate the elite want to lose. Perot was inserted in 1992 to split the Bush vote and install Clinton; an investigation of phone records showed that the Perot campaign was in almost daily contact with the Clinton campaign.

Everyone with this bizarre fetish for Ron running third-party needs to face facts: if he can't overcome the media blackout (mixed with occasional attacks) to win the GOP nomination, then he won't be able to overcome it to win the presidency as a third-party or Independent candidate either.

Also, the saying that birds of a feather flock together tends to be true. We all (people in general, not just Ron Paul supporters) tend to exist in a bubble, and to forget that most people aren't like us. Ron is not necessarily as well-known as you think, and he certainly isn't universally respected (and many who do respect him do so for his integrity, sincerity and consistency, but still disagree with him and won't vote for him).

And ballot access would not be "a snap." Those laws are deliberately intended to prevent any third-party (non-controlled) candidates from getting onto the ballot (and it doesn't matter if they are if the media ignores them and they aren't in the "real" debates). If you can't get enough of Ron's supporters (or if he doesn't have enough supporters) to even show up and vote for him in the GOP primaries, you damn sure are not going to get enough of them to work long hours doing petition work for him to get ballot access in their states as a third-party or Independent candidate.

[-C-]

Uhm...I see history repeating itself if he were to run 3rd party. In the sense that it would be some sort of bull-moose party effect of the Teddy Roosevelt era. Where he pulls just enough of the republican votes to give away the executive to Woody, or in this case, obama.

He has to win the republican primary, anything beyond that does more harm than good, beyond "education" of course.