View Full Version : Libertarian Party Tells Ron Paul to Come On Over
bobbyw24
10-31-2011, 10:25 AM
Rep. Ron Paul may not win the Republican nomination for president, but the prospect of him running as a third party candidate in the general election is not off the table, he says.
Paul, long a favorite of the Libertarian Party, is drawing enthusiastic support from its leaders, who are openly pushing him to consider a third party run for the White House.
“Absolutely, that would be fabulous,” said Jim Lesczynski, media relations director for the Manhattan Libertarian Party.
Lesczynski says his party agrees with Paul on most of the major issues, calling him an “ideal candidate.” He added that Paul will do better than he did four years ago, but ultimately thinks he will fail in his bid to gain the Republican nomination.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/libertarian-party-tells-ron-paul-to-come-on-over/
pcosmar
10-31-2011, 10:29 AM
Already posted. Thread in HT.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?326959-Libertarian-Party-Tells-Ron-Paul-to-Come-On-Over
angelatc
10-31-2011, 10:30 AM
If they wanted to help, they would already announce he's their candidate and then start the ballot access in their respective states. A lot of states tie the cut off to the primary date, to keep this from happening.
kylejack
10-31-2011, 10:32 AM
Does third party status hurt us with the sore loser laws? I know independents are allowed to run. I suppose Ron could run as an independent and take the Libertarian Party's access in the states where it's allowed.
bobbyw24
10-31-2011, 10:35 AM
Already posted. Thread in HT.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?326959-Libertarian-Party-Tells-Ron-Paul-to-Come-On-Over
Hot Topics? No wonder I din see it.
Drink the GOP Kool-Aid with me y'all:D
This hurts Ron more than it helps right now. Promotes the "he's a Libertarian!" narrative. If they wanted to help, they would secretly be campaigning for him, but not be trying to boost themselves in the process. That is a lot to ask, though, and I guess if the LP is getting coverage on ABC, hey, it is hard to not advertise oneself.
CaptUSA
10-31-2011, 10:58 AM
The Libertarian Party has gained access on most ballots. They should just put Paul on their ballots right now! Regardless of the outcome of the GOP primary.
Is it possible to have the same person running for President for two parties in the same election? What if he were on both lines? Would he split his own vote?
The Libertarian Party has gained access on most ballots. They should just put Paul on their ballots right now! Regardless of the outcome of the GOP primary.
Is it possible to have the same person running for President for two parties in the same election? What if he were on both lines? Would he split his own vote?
In Montana, they had some fun with their ballot and I am almost positive Ron Paul was on it.
ctiger2
10-31-2011, 11:06 AM
MSM is pushing Ron for a 3rd party run cause they know he's going to win IA and it's scaring the shit out of the. Ron needs to stay the course and let it play out. Barring any unforeseen tricks, Ron's going to get the GOP nod. hehe game on!
BrendenR
10-31-2011, 11:33 AM
He should announce he has ruled out a third party run, this way we can avoid the distraction of these types of articles and ideas. It's use to marginalize him. Everyone knows a third party cannot win. We need to establish the libertarian/constitutional conservative as part of the Republican base if we expect to get anywhere. Jumping to another party does not help IMHO.
Look at how much exposure he gets as a part of the Republican party, all the debates on national TV. You're not going to get that with a third party candidate.
He could be Wayne Allyn Root's VP! lol
angelatc
10-31-2011, 11:39 AM
Does third party status hurt us with the sore loser laws? I know independents are allowed to run. I suppose Ron could run as an independent and take the Libertarian Party's access in the states where it's allowed.
There are no sore loser laws that apply to the office of president. However, most states accomplish that by tying the ballot registration deadline to the primary.
angelatc
10-31-2011, 11:41 AM
He should announce he has ruled out a third party run, this way we can avoid the distraction of these types of articles and ideas. It's use to marginalize him. Everyone knows a third party cannot win. .
4 years ago I would have agreed.
kylejack
10-31-2011, 11:41 AM
He should announce he has ruled out a third party run, this way we can avoid the distraction of these types of articles and ideas. It's use to marginalize him. Everyone knows a third party cannot win. We need to establish the libertarian/constitutional conservative as part of the Republican base if we expect to get anywhere. Jumping to another party does not help IMHO.
Look at how much exposure he gets as a part of the Republican party, all the debates on national TV. You're not going to get that with a third party candidate.
He needs to keep his options open. Yes, he won't get as much attention as a third party candidate, but his road ends as soon as his Republican nomination bid ends. May as well keep the dialogue going as much as possible.
Peace&Freedom
10-31-2011, 12:33 PM
Threatening a third party run now would hurt Paul's chances in the primary with some "no one but GOP" voters being turned off from voting for him. But deciding to run third party by late February or early March would be the healthiest development in American politics in a generation. Similar to the way the Tea Party showed their teeth by deposing Republican incumbents in last year's primaries, it would signal to establishment Republicans that there will be REAL PAIN associated with blacking out or marginalizing the liberty movement from now on. The major media would also be taught that their stranglehold on elections was now broken, and if they vote-fraud Paul out of primary wins or strong showings this time, there will be consequences. Our movement will not grow unless it inflicts pain on the current order.
Everyone does NOT know a third party cannot win. With Paul we could finally get to see how a seriously funded, nationally known and strongly grassroots supported candidate could do on Election day. Third parties have struggled because the establishment gerrymanders most districts for Dem/GOP hacks, and locks alternatives out of coverage (and thus access to visibility and funds) in elections. They can't do that to Paul because of the money bombs, which will buy him the advertising and exposure, thus circumventing media blackouts. If Paul starts raising $7-8 million per month from February on, he will have at least $60 million to work from by the fall. Let's rock and roll!
anaconda
10-31-2011, 01:19 PM
Threatening a third party run now would hurt Paul's chances in the primary with some "no one but GOP" voters being turned off from voting for him. But deciding to run third party by late February or early March would be the healthiest development in American politics in a generation. Similar to the way the Tea Party showed their teeth by deposing Republican incumbents in last year's primaries, it would signal to establishment Republicans that there will be REAL PAIN associated with blacking out or marginalizing the liberty movement from now on. The major media would also be taught that their stranglehold on elections was now broken, and if they vote-fraud Paul out of primary wins or strong showings this time, there will be consequences. Our movement will not grow unless it inflicts pain on the current order.
Everyone does NOT know a third party cannot win. With Paul we could finally get to see how a seriously funded, nationally known and strongly grassroots supported candidate could do on Election day. Third parties have struggled because the establishment gerrymanders most districts for Dem/GOP hacks, and locks alternatives out of coverage (and thus access to visibility and funds) in elections. They can't do that to Paul because of the money bombs, which will buy him the advertising and exposure, thus circumventing media blackouts. If Paul starts raising $7-8 million per month from February on, he will have at least $60 million to work from by the fall. Let's rock and roll!
Great analysis. And thank you for not cowering to the "Oh dear we cannot risk upsetting the closed minded rank-and-file GOP base or the party elite" lament. They, and we, deserve a true conservative choice on election day, one way or another.
MSM is pushing Ron for a 3rd party run cause they know he's going to win IA ...
I can't wait to see them try to black that out.
Wesker1982
10-31-2011, 02:00 PM
In Montana, they had some fun with their ballot and I am almost positive Ron Paul was on it.
Ron was on the ballot for the Constitution Party IIRC
angelatc
10-31-2011, 02:03 PM
Threatening a third party run now would hurt Paul's chances in the primary with some "no one but GOP" voters being turned off from voting for him. But deciding to run third party by late February or early March would be the healthiest development in American politics in a generation. !
Yep.
erowe1
10-31-2011, 02:08 PM
If Ron Paul decided to run third party, they'd strip him of his subcommittee chairmanship...
Oh wait.
anaconda
10-31-2011, 02:57 PM
I can't wait to see them try to black that out.
I think we all might be surprised out the extent the media can go to to downplay and marginalize. A win in Iowa would be spun as "meaningless" with references to Huckabee and so forth. And not in any way indicative of the later primaries
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.