On the rare chance that things don't work out....

[winston_blade]

and Ron Paul doesn't win who are you going to vote for? I will either vote for a Libertarian candidate or the democrat nominee. This is because I want the Republicans to lose as much support as possible so that it imploads so that real conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists can have the chance to get in on the ground floor of a new party, perhaps a new republican party (keep the name) or a party by a completely knew different name. That is what I hope happens if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination, how about you?

[aravoth]

If he doesn't get the nod, I'll write him in. I'm not going to waste my vote on another special interest douche bag.

[winston_blade]

If he doesn't get the nod, I'll write him in. I'm not going to waste my vote on another special interest douche bag.

It doesn't count though unless he has acknowledged that he is running for president. So if he doesn't do that, it would be a wasted vote. I like the loyalty though.

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

I hope, if things aren't looking good after NH and early primaries, that he can still run on the LP or Constitution Party ticket.

I'm not voting for any of the other thugs running for GOP nomination.

[MsDoodahs]

No one, and I'll "de-register" from the voter rolls if I can.

[ratsbew]

John McCain

[Melchior]

If he doesn't win I'll be looking into whoever the LP nominates.


John McCain

Be Afraid of President McCain (http://www.reason.com/news/show/118937.html)

[ratsbew]

Be Afraid of President McCain (http://www.reason.com/news/show/118937.html)

Yes? I support the war.

[NMCB3]

It doesn't count though unless he has acknowledged that he is running for president. So if he doesn't do that, it would be a wasted vote. I like the loyalty though."Always vote for principle, though you vote alone, you may cherish the sweet reflection that your vote is never lost". John Quincy Adams.

[TheDuke]

I would vote for the Libertarian candidate

[augustwest]

I would see who the LP fields, but it's likely that I would decline to vote.

[ratsbew]

I would see who the LP fields, but it's likely that I would decline to vote.
Is it really wise not to vote at all? Wouldn't you rather vote for the lesser of two evils?

[winston_blade]

"Always vote for principle, though you vote alone, you may cherish the sweet reflection that your vote is never lost". John Quincy Adams.

What I am saying is that he has to say he is running before they hold the polls. He said he wouldn't, thus it wouldn't count anyway. That is what I meant.

[augustwest]

Is it really wise not to vote at all? Wouldn't you rather vote for the lesser of two evils?

I could not in good conscience cast a vote for any of the "lesser evils" we're being offered thusfar. I don't see anyone but Dr. Paul in the running who wouldn't, IMO, do grave harm to our republic. I won't be a party to that.

[MsDoodahs]

Is it really wise not to vote at all? Wouldn't you rather vote for the lesser of two evils?

DON'T VOTE - IT ONLY ENCOURAGES THEM!

:D

I've not voted in years and years.

I don't vote because I withdrew my consent from the system.

Voting is an expression of your agreement to be ruled by the system.

Read Spooner's No Treason. :)

[NMCB3]

DON'T VOTE - IT ONLY ENCOURAGES THEM!

:D

I've not voted in years and years.

I don't vote because I withdrew my consent from the system.

Voting is an expression of your agreement to be ruled by the system.

Read Spooner's No Treason. :) Actually Spooner said the exact opposite, but I know what you mean. ;)

[Melchior]

Just vote third party, it doesn't have to be lesser of two evils.

Everyone should vote, even if there are virtually no options, just write in a candidate.


Yes? I support the war.

Oh? Well you know you're on a forum supporting an anti-war candidate.

Are you one of those neolibertarians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolibertarianism) by any chance?

[Therion]

If things don't work out and Paul doesn't win the primaries I won't vote at all. Not because I don't want to, but because I'll be so busy swallowing ice-cream crying and like a pregnant teenage girl that even leaving my house will be impossible.

Here's the thing. Al Gore, McCain and the others can keep running each time no matter how bad or often they lose. Ron Paul is different: he's already so old that he may not even live till the next election four to eight years from now. Another man like him won't come around for a long time, especially if he doesn't manage to fix the system and refresh American political thinking.

[Brandybuck]

Yes? I support the war.
As the only other candidate that doesn't gleefully embrace "enhanced interrogation techniques", I have respect for him. If we must have a war, then I would rather see McCain in charge of it than Rudy.

But McCain would be disastrous domestically. Bad campaign reform views, bad immigration views, bad health care views, bad freedom views. He may be an honorable man, but that he's still an active proponent of big government paternalism.

[winston84]

Whoever is on the Constitution party ticket, which out of all the parties most closley resembles RPs platform both socially and economically. I do hope however that both the Libertarian and Constitution parties fully endorse RP for the time being. I do think this is kinda early to be discussing the possible failure of the RP campaign, it would be indeed rare that RP would lose considering his surging support.

[mdh]

I've been around the LP for a while. Most of my LP friends, and just folks I know around the LP, strongly support Ron Paul. If Ron Paul fails to win the Republican party's nomination, I'll vote for the LP candidate in the generals.

[Lois]

I'm confused. I always figured if Ron Paul wasn't a candidate, me and everybody else would just Write His Name In. Why can't that work? Do you mean he has to make some formal announcement that he's still running for president or something like that?

[thuja]

i think he can win, a lot of formerly uninformed are happy about him, so keepspreading the word.

[Minuteman2008]

As the only other candidate that doesn't gleefully embrace "enhanced interrogation techniques", I have respect for him. If we must have a war, then I would rather see McCain in charge of it than Rudy.

But McCain would be disastrous domestically. Bad campaign reform views, bad immigration views, bad health care views, bad freedom views. He may be an honorable man, but that he's still an active proponent of big government paternalism.


You're exactly right. I would even vote for a Demoncrat before I'd vote for McCain.

If not Ron Paul, it just depends on who the nominee is. I could not vote for Giuliani under any circumstances. I could vote for Romney, especially if he were to choose a patriot like Hunter or Tancredo as his VP. I don't trust Romeny one bit, but with the current crop of Democrats, I don't see any alternatives.

Barring that, maybe I'd vote for the Constitution Party candidate -- which looks like it may be Dr. Jerome Corsi, a writer I admire.