Is RP still legally able to declare a 3rd Party run?

[febo]

Just interested...

[Indy Vidual]

Yes, but...
He could not be on the ballot in every state, and now it is getting really late.

In a more perfect world:
With a combination of super-pacs and grassroots billionaires (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?238518-April-Fools-Sunshine-Patriots-Inc.-Presents-quot-Who-Wants-To-Be-THE-Billionaire-quot&p=2622965#post2622965) how much money would we need to raise to convince Ron to run this year?

[anaconda]

Just interested...

I would think he could latch onto the ticket in the Libertarian party as VP and essentially be seen as the de facto Presidential candidate or co-candidate.

[idiom]

He only needs to win 1/3 of the states... or so.

You don't need to win the popular vote at all.

[NewFederalist]

It is far too late.

[dean.engelhardt]

I would think he could latch onto the ticket in the Libertarian party as VP and essentially be seen as the de facto Presidential candidate or co-candidate. Interesting. The best thing to happen is RP winning the GOP nomination. This would be the second best thing to happen.

[NewFederalist]

Deadlines have already passed to qualify for the ballot in CA (55 EVs) and TX (38 EVs) as well as PA (20 EVs), IL (20 EVs) and IN (11 EVs) and about a dozen other states. As I said, it is far too late.

[Carehn]

For the love of God people!!! He is not going to run third party.

[ninepointfive]

He would need an entirely new campaign staff to turn around the ship, but it's probably not possible anyways.

[kahless]

I would think he could latch onto the ticket in the Libertarian party as VP and essentially be seen as the de facto Presidential candidate or co-candidate.

A Johnson/Paul ticket complement one another weaknesses. A former Republican governor with a media narrative that has provided a Conservative track record, he is relatively unknown to people and without the labels baggage that Ron has. Ron could bring his notoriety, grassroots and supporters to the ticket.

[ninepointfive]

A Johnson/Paul ticket complement one another weaknesses. A former Republican governor with a media narrative that has provided a Conservative track record, he is relatively unknown to people and without the labels baggage that Ron has. Ron could bring his notoriety, grassroots and supporters to the ticket.

I'd be on board

[SneakyFrenchSpy]

Relevant

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/538807_10150527709259364_389654583_n.jpg

[SilenceDewgooder]

I'll start to indulge this idea after the convention if needed... but would like to see Dr. Paul debate Ryan on the budget and Biden on foreign policy...

[69360]

Ron isn't running third party, he's stated it over and over again. The LP VP candidate is Jim Gray.

[sailingaway]

It is far too late.

actually, 42 states allow write in, and Ron once said MAYBE he could be convinced that 3d party candidates using matching funds isn't as bad because of the ballot access and legal monopoly benefits to the other two parties (although he refused them running GOP last time.) And if he actually did take $39 million in matching funds he's entitled to, I bet the LP and GJ might be willing to make RP P and GJ VP to win the undying adoration of Ron's supporters going forward, and GJ is young enough to run next time (in fact he's already said if he loses he is planning to.)

NOw do I think that is going to happen? Not at all, but Ron definitely has the options if he wants them.

[Aratus]

he has not totally totaly closed the door on any of this.
this is being said as tampa looms with an eventuality!!!!!

[anaconda]

Ron isn't running third party, he's stated it over and over again. The LP VP candidate is Jim Gray.

Gray would obviously have to step down. I think everyone involved would be all over this. And, by the way, Ron was always responding to questions about running for President as a third party candidate, not and Vice President. Plus Ron never said "no" unequivocally. He was clearly careful not to.

[sailingaway]

Gray would obviously have to step down. I think everyone involved would be all over this. And, by the way, Ron was always responding to questions about running for President as a third party candidate, not and Vice President. Plus Ron never said "no" unequivocally. He was clearly careful not to.

IF Ron went LP it would be as Pres. LP would have to want the gratitude of his followers, and POSSIBLY his $39 mill matching funds (if Ron is willing to file for those). Ron as LP VP isn't worth running for, imho. The point would be the presidential debates, and RON SHOULD get into those. Mind you, polls can be scheduled at 'bad' moments etc. so I guess there is never a guarantee of that.

[anaconda]

actually, 42 states allow write in, and Ron once said MAYBE he could be convinced that 3d party candidates using matching funds isn't as bad because of the ballot access and legal monopoly benefits to the other two parties (although he refused them running GOP last time.) And if he actually did take $39 million in matching funds he's entitled to, I bet the LP and GJ might be willing to make RP P and GJ VP to win the undying adoration of Ron's supporters going forward, and GJ is young enough to run next time (in fact he's already said if he loses he is planning to.)

NOw do I think that is going to happen? Not at all, but Ron definitely has the options if he wants them.

I am worried that the LP will be stricken from the ballot in sore loser states if Ron were to be the LP Presidential nominee. But couldn't accepting Gary Johnson's VP slot do a complete end run around sore loser laws? And, besides, everyone would view it as essentially a de facto "dual Presidential ticket." It would likely be a 15% poll win and national debates.

[sailingaway]

I am worried that the LP will be stricken from the ballot in sore loser states if Ron were to be the LP Presidential nominee. But couldn't accepting Gary Johnson's VP slot do a complete end run around sore loser laws? And, besides, everyone would view it as essentially a de facto "dual Presidential ticket." It would likely be a 15% poll win and national debates.

I think sore loser laws don't apply to Pres election because of the constitution and the fact you are voting for ELECTORS -- this might be the time to challenge it. Or they could put something else on the ballot in TX and the few others with issues. Just the party could go on, for example. Ron wouldn't get in the debates otherwise, and he'd be the one who'd get the poll numbers to get there.

I don't think Ron will do it but if they shaft his delegates and don't seat enough for him to be nominated from the floor (which would require outright cheating by credentials if they failed to seat that many, imho) he might be pissed enough, or his supporters might be pissed enough to persuade him.

[anaconda]

IF Ron went LP it would be as Pres. LP would have to want the gratitude of his followers, and POSSIBLY his $39 mill matching funds (if Ron is willing to file for those). Ron as LP VP isn't worth running for, imho. The point would be the presidential debates, and RON SHOULD get into those. Mind you, polls can be scheduled at 'bad' moments etc. so I guess there is never a guarantee of that.

Respectfully, I think you're not seeing the potential of RP as LP VP. It would be huge. It would be an unprecedented case of a VP essentially being the de facto co-Presidential candidate. Everyone would "get it." It could likely bounce the ticket immediately into the 15% debate qualifying range. We don't need Ron in the debates..we need a liberty candidate. Gary is actually better equipped to debate those other two clowns than Ron. While we all love Ron, Gary, with proper preparation, could make the case better before the national audience. Ron would likely appear on the MSM quire frequently to reinforce the message.

[sailingaway]

Ron wouldn't get in the debates as VP. I can't imagine him running nor his supporters wanting him to as VP. And I absolutely don't think Gary is nearly as equipped to debate the others as Ron, GJ doesn't even argue from principles.

You are saying RON should be essentially propping up GJ's no traction race. That is bass-ackwards, imho.

[anaconda]

if they shaft his delegates and don't seat enough for him to be nominated from the floor (which would require outright cheating by credentials if they failed to seat that many, imho) he might be pissed enough, or his supporters might be pissed enough to persuade him.

This would be plenty of justification. The public would be supportive. The Democrats will use it extensively (so Ron & Gary wouldn't have to spend resources selling it to the media, against an otherwise Republican financed rebuke of Ron. Independents would love it.)

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Are pigs still legally able to fly?

[anaconda]

You are saying RON should be essentially propping up GJ's no traction race. That is bass-ackwards, imho.

8% is not "no traction." And Ron would instantly breathe another 8% into it. Debate inclusion happens. Gary contrasts 180 degrees in the debates with Mittens and Soetoro. Ron gets a national debate with Biden and Ryan and contrasts 180 degrees as well. We get default help from Democratic Party. LP scores around 15% in the general, sending the Republican Party to a landslide loss and given a harsh lesson for the future (like maybe: don't even think about screwing with Rand?).

And, while I am reluctant to beat a dead horse, I will suggest again that this scheme would be naturally and obviously seen by the voters and media as and unconventional ticket where the "VP" is a defacto co-Presidential candidate, if not the defacto Presidential candidate. Ron would, of course, give continued props and full support publicly for Johnson as the unambiguous Presidential nominee.

[sailingaway]

personally under those circumstances I wouldn't even want him to run.

[anaconda]

personally under those circumstances I wouldn't even want him to run.

What's not to like?. It would be a classic coup and a terrific opportunity to add geometrically to the freedom message that the media ran roughshod over during the primary season. It would thrust RP right back into the spotlight.

[idiom]

As I understand it, the LP has entered its Electors as ballot entries, not Gary Johnson. Pretty sure GJ would happily move to the bottom of the ticket for a chance to win and be top of the ticket next go around.

[sailingaway]

As I understand it, the LP has entered its Electors as ballot entries, not Gary Johnson. Pretty sure GJ would happily move to the bottom of the ticket for a chance to win and be top of the ticket next go around.

this was my thought too.

[anaconda]

As I understand it, the LP has entered its Electors as ballot entries, not Gary Johnson. Pretty sure GJ would happily move to the bottom of the ticket for a chance to win and be top of the ticket next go around.

Thank you for this. But, what about "sore loser" laws?

Also, won't the ballots read "Electors for Gary Johnson, Libertarian" or something that names him specifically? Or are you saying the LP can switch the name before the ballots are printed?

[sailingaway]

Thank you for this. But, what about "sore loser" laws?

there is a line of cases that say they don't apply to Pres because you vote for electors not candidates, and they are unconstitutional if otherwise applied. Sore loser laws talk about who is on the ballot. If in those few states only, the ballot says 'libertarian' instead of Ron Paul it doesn't apply even if they were constitutional as applied.

But do you expect to win? Because the only way to do that is to get in the debates and the only way to get in the debates is with Ron running as President. Otherwise, even in sore loser states they would do better than without Ron at the top of the ticket.

But maybe Romney's credentials committee won't cheat Ron out of being nominated on the floor.

[Peace&Freedom]

We're just wrapping up the LP petition drive in NY right now, and internally I can say (without getting into unneeded details) that many on the ground activists are not pleased with aspects of the GJ campaign. Either a Paul substitution with Gray or with Johnson would require both the campaign and the party to formally agree to it, but would be an awkward mess done either way. The big reason to go in as a VP on the LP line would be that it's a 'simpler' awkward move. The LP would LOVE Paul on either end of the ticket, as it would create an explosion of media coverage for the party, and give more visibility and higher poll standing to other LP candidates he would appear with in the fall.

One practical reason why Paul did not affirm an interest in going third party (besides the sour grapes states issue) were the GOP rules that seem to say a candidate for the nomination can't be involved in other party nominations as well, without being barred from the Republican nomination. That ceases to be a factor after Tampa, so Paul could at least openly endorse the LP or CP candidate in September.

Ron Paul has otherwise made clear he will not run 3rd party because he is pushing his son Rand in '16, and the 'within the GOP' model of reform. But he SHOULD have done it---both earlier as a way of complementing or enhancing his GOP run while deflating the "Mitt is electable" meme from the start---and now, as a way of holding Romney and the GOP hacks accountable for abusing Paul and Paul delegates throughout the primaries and caucases.

My preferred scenario is, at this point, that he not do it in '12, and let Rand try to run in '16. If the Republican establishment do the same thing to Rand that they did to to Ron, by April 2016 Ron announces he will run on the LP and CP lines. No sour grapes laws problem in that case, and the campaign apparatus behind Rand just shifts over to provide support for Ron. Result, we would finally get to vote for Paul in November, and see what a strong 3rd party candidate can do with full funding, organization and name recognition on Election Day, without writing his name in.

[anaconda]

But do you expect to win? Because the only way to do that is to get in the debates and the only way to get in the debates is with Ron running as President.

Do not expect to win. My hope is to use the bullypulpit to spread the liberty message far more than was even done during the primary campaign. Also teach the Republican leadership a lesson that they were unwilling to learn. Change or suffer the consequences. Also get the LP enough votes to qualify for 50 state ballot access in 2016.

[anaconda]

the only way to do that is to get in the debates and the only way to get in the debates is with Ron running as President.

I am pretty confident that Ron's appearance on the ticket as "VP" (wink nod) would lurch the LP into the 15% category. Gary debates Robamny. Ron debates Ryden.

[sailingaway]

Why on earth would Ron want to be VP?

[anaconda]

We're just wrapping up the LP petition drive in NY right now, and internally I can say (without getting into unneeded details) that many on the ground activists are not pleased with aspects of the GJ campaign. Either a Paul substitution with Gray or with Johnson would require both the campaign and the party to formally agree to it, but would be an awkward mess done either way. The big reason to go in as a VP on the LP line would be that it's a 'simpler' awkward move. The LP would LOVE Paul on either end of the ticket, as it would create an explosion of media coverage for the party, and give more visibility and higher poll standing to other LP candidates he would appear with in the fall.

One practical reason why Paul did not affirm an interest in going third party (besides the sour grapes states issue) were the GOP rules that seem to say a candidate for the nomination can't be involved in other party nominations as well, without being barred from the Republican nomination. That ceases to be a factor after Tampa, so Paul could at least openly endorse the LP or CP candidate in September.

Ron Paul has otherwise made clear he will not run 3rd party because he is pushing his son Rand in '16, and the 'within the GOP' model of reform. But he SHOULD have done it---both earlier as a way of complementing or enhancing his GOP run while deflating the "Mitt is electable" meme from the start---and now, as a way of holding Romney and the GOP hacks accountable for abusing Paul and Paul delegates throughout the primaries and caucases.

My preferred scenario is, at this point, that he not do it in '12, and let Rand try to run in '16. If the Republican establishment do the same thing to Rand that they did to to Ron, by April 2016 Ron announces he will run on the LP and CP lines. No sour grapes laws problem in that case, and the campaign apparatus behind Rand just shifts over to provide support for Ron. Result, we would finally get to vote for Paul in November, and see what a strong 3rd party candidate can do with full funding, organization and name recognition on Election Day, without writing his name in.

Thank you for taking the time to write this insightful and helpful post. One comment: Don't think Ron will want to run for President at age 80. Depending on circumstances, I can, however, imagine Rand bolting ti the LP in 2016.

[anaconda]

Why on earth would Ron want to be VP?

In a liberty administration? I believe Ron would love it. Besides, this is not about winning in 2012. It's about a potentially monumental opportunity to double or triple the reach of the freedom message over what happened during the campaign. And force the GOP to play ball with us hereafter (Rand could threaten to do the same in 2016, for example). It also gives everybody a chance to "vote for Ron Paul" without having to hold their nose (as would have been the case if Ron had been the GOP VP nominee, as some were speculating on a while back).

[sailingaway]

I meant why would he want to run as VP?

Ron brings tons more money, name recognition, SUPPORTERS and attention. The prize would be the presidential debates and to say that should be Gary, not Ron, when Ron is the one bringing everything to the table is simply silly.

However, the only possibility I see of this happening is if Ron's delegates are not seated and allowed to nominate him from the floor. The speech at RNC was the prize in this election for this campaign.

[anaconda]

Ron Paul has otherwise made clear he will not run 3rd party because he is pushing his son Rand in '16

Respectfully, I've never heard Ron Paul say anything remotely close to this.

As a side note, I simply cannot imagine the puppet masters letting Rand Paul get anywhere near the White House. This idea of "playing nice" with the GOP on behalf of Rand simply baffles me. More realistically, it seems like a dishonest ploy to keep Ron and Rand in line as long as possible. But without any honest intention of reciprocating.

[jointhefightforfreedom]

Just interested...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXkLs-Xesb4

we should run a grassroots campaign like this against romney and obama ( damn , i upchucked a little just typing those names)

[anaconda]

I meant why would he want to run as VP?

Ron brings tons more money, name recognition, SUPPORTERS and attention. The prize would be the presidential debates and to say that should be Gary, not Ron, when Ron is the one bringing everything to the table is simply silly.


Two reasons:

1) I was naively speculating about the potential for possible "sore loser laws" in various state election laws. which Ron might avoid by being a VP nominee rather than a Presidential nominee. But I am am terribly ignorant about sore loser issues. I thought maybe I had heard somewhere that certain states would not put your name on the ballot as the nominee of a particular party if you had earlier campaigned for the nomination of another party. But it looks like, from what I've read in this thread, thanks to you, idiom, and Peace&Freedom, that this was perhaps not a legitimate concern.

2) Was kind of assuming that it would be poor protocol to have Gary step down, especially since the ticket would likely be seen by the voters as an arrangement of convenience, where the legitimate personification of the "President" vs. the "Vice President" would be blurred into complete ambiguity. The voters would be donating and voting for the "VP' more passionately than the "Presidential" nominee.

[sailingaway]

Personally I'd consider it an insult to Ron for him to be in the vp slot and I would be against his doing it. The reason to run is to debate obama and Romney, no other. I can see GJ's position on the other side, but in that case they shouldn't ask Ron, at all. If they ask they should know he should be presidential candidate if he accepted.

But maybe they'll let his delegates be seated to nominate him from the floor in which case this isnt going to happen anyhow, IMHO

[Peace&Freedom]

Respectfully, I've never heard Ron Paul say anything remotely close to this.

As a side note, I simply cannot imagine the puppet masters letting Rand Paul get anywhere near the White House. This idea of "playing nice" with the GOP on behalf of Rand simply baffles me. More realistically, it seems like a dishonest ploy to keep Ron and Rand in line as long as possible. But without any honest intention of reciprocating.

I've heard from an semi-insider this has been the emphasis for a while within the Paul family. Paul used the 2012 run to set the table for the future, in which the liberty movement continues in Congress after he retires with several successors to him elected to office, and his national apparatus is turned over to Rand.

[sailingaway]

I've heard from an semi-insider this has been the emphasis for a while within the Paul family. Paul used the 2012 run to set the table for the future, in which the liberty movement continues in Congress after he retires with several successors to him elected to office, and his national apparatus is turned over to Rand.

'within the Paul family' could as easily mean Benton/Rand as Ron.

[heavenlyboy34]

Personally I'd consider it an insult to Ron for him to be in the vp slot and I would be against his doing it. The reason to run is to debate obama and Romney, no other. I can see GJ's position on the other side, but in that case they shouldn't ask Ron, at all. If they ask they should know he should be presidential candidate if he accepted.

But maybe they'll let his delegates be seated to nominate him from the floor in which case this isnt going to happen anyhow, IMHO
FWIW, there will be VP debates (if things play out as usual). Ron would get a chance to debate Biden (or someone else if the Bamster for some reason decides to drop Biden)

[sailingaway]

FWIW, there will be VP debates (if things play out as usual). Ron would get a chance to debate Biden (or someone else if the Bamster for some reason decides to drop Biden)

it isn't for me to say but I can't imagine Ron being interested in doing all that to debate Biden.

And he'd be the one bringing everything to the table, so it doesn't even make sense. I wouldn't even want him to in that case.

[Ivash]

Johnson got 8% in one extremely questionable poll- I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 8% of the American voting public hasn't even heard of the guy, and that on voting day he gets less than 2% of the vote (less than 1% is more likely, but I wouldn't bet any amount of money on it). I highly doubt adding Ron Paul into that mix would change much.

Edit: And, seriously, the idea of their being a unified group of 'puppet masters' in the Republican (or Democratic) party is ridiculous. The elites are split up in many dozens of different groups, and fight amongst each other all the time. Didn't the lack of unity during the Republican Primary show that? Many backed Romney, others backed his rivals, and a huge number of people waited on the sidelines for someone else to run.

[ClydeCoulter]

Johnson got 8% in one extremely questionable poll- I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 8% of the American voting public hasn't even heard of the guy, and that on voting day he gets less than 2% of the vote (less than 1% is more likely, but I wouldn't bet any amount of money on it). I highly doubt adding Ron Paul into that mix would change much.

Edit: And, seriously, the idea of their being a unified group of 'puppet masters' in the Republican (or Democratic) party is ridiculous. The elites are split up in many dozens of different groups, and fight amongst each other all the time. Didn't the lack of unity during the Republican Primary show that? Many backed Romney, others backed his rivals, and a huge number of people waited on the sidelines for someone else to run.

They are in the same club. They work with and against one another (at different times), but not on anything important, just for kicks and fun. They are rich, have everything they need, and play games. But they are in the same club, and WE AIN'T IN IT :)

edit: Think: One minute (year) Santorum says, "If you want a conservative, it's Romney", then later, "Romney is no conservative".....they don't hate each other, they have fun together....and "Hey, you got me that time, next time....watch out buddy.....".

[Ivash]

They are in the same club. They work with and against one another (at different times), but not on anything important, just for kicks and fun. They are rich, have everything they need, and play games. But they are in the same club, and WE AIN'T IN IT :)

edit: Think: One minute (year) Santorum says, "If you want a conservative, it's Romney", then later, "Romney is no conservative".....they don't hate each other, they have fun together....and "Hey, you got me that time, next time....watch out buddy.....".

No, some of them really do hate each other. I'm not saying this from an outsider point of view- you'd probably consider me part of their 'club'. I can guarantee you that all the human failings of weakness, envy, pride, greed, etc affect them just as much as they do other people. This, along with type-A personalities that often clash means that there are many petty rivalries within the elite. There are also more substantial differences- one of the reason why so many routed against Romney is because he has so many people he owes already, and thus can't really give more people ambassadorial spots or the like. I guarantee you that if Rand Paul looked like a serious candidate people would go to him just because they want what he has to give (and he'd have to give it if he didn't want them to stand in his way). Others disagree with each other on policy. Many believe what they believe is best for the country, and find it difficult to listen to others (as you can see the faults of the elite are the same as the faults of us all), and this causes even more contention.

There is some unity, but much, much less than those viewing the scene from the outside would think.

[sailingaway]

No, some of them really do hate each other. I'm not saying this from an outsider point of view- you'd probably consider me part of their 'club'. I can guarantee you that all the human failings of weakness, envy, pride, greed, etc affect them just as much as they do other people. This, along with type-A personalities that often clash means that there are many petty rivalries within the elite. There are also more substantial differences- one of the reason why so many routed against Romney is because he has so many people he owes already, and thus can't really give more people ambassadorial spots or the like. I guarantee you that if Rand Paul looked like a serious candidate people would go to him just because they want what he has to give (and he'd have to give it if he didn't want them to stand in his way). Others disagree with each other on policy. Many believe what they believe is best for the country, and find it difficult to listen to others (as you can see the faults of the elite are the same as the faults of us all), and this causes even more contention.

There is some unity, but much, much less than those viewing the scene from the outside would think.

I don't think we consider them unified in lock step, but they are driven by an overlapping community of interests -- theirs -- which don't apply to us and run contrary to many of ours. Speaking of 'them' as a group is mere conversational convenience.