PDA

View Full Version : My analysis of why a LIBERTARIAN RUN is worth considering




Chase
01-09-2008, 02:20 PM
Before everyone blasts me, I want to say a few quick things. First, I was one of the many who was heavily critical of anyone making even the slightest murmur of a third party or independent presidential run. Second, I ask that this thread be seen as an opportunity for an exchange of ideas and not seen as someone whining about Iowa and New Hampshire and conceding defeat.

So where do we stand? We have some name recognition, $20 million dollars and a bunch of die-hard supporters.

Where does everyone else stand? The country is hungry and thirsty for real change. As Olbermann (a pundit I hate) aptly pointed out, both parties have failed America. We went into Iraq on false pretenses with the overwhelming support of both parties. We got all the new Constitutional shredding legislation (Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.) with the overwhelming support of BOTH PARTIES. Neither party seems ready to do what it is really going to take to quickly get us out of Iraq.

What are we up against, trying to get the Republican nomation for Ron? We have an entire field of candidates that are all pro-war bushies that steal Ron Paul's talking points as their own, then viciously cut him off before he has even 30 seconds to explain why his views are right in any debate. So much of the party leadership is trying to shut Ron down. The remaining Republicans are mostly the die-hard Republican base. These are people that are probably okay with the idea of 100 years in Iraq, new wars, more spending and less liberty. Do we really want to tie our victory to converting these people -- the most difficult people in the country to convert?

Sure, we can try to recruit new voters to the Republican party in order to support Ron. But time is running out... deadlines are looming, and defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire (even if they are only 2 of 50 states) don't do much to encourage people we can be successful in the Republican party. There are also a lot of people that are distrustful of the Ron Paul campaign simply because he's a Republican and part of a party they don't trust. Republican has become a dirty word in some circles!

How much money does the Libertarian Party normally spend on a Presidential run? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that $20 million might be a little more than they're used to.

There's some crossover between Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters, but not all Ron Paul supporters back the Libertarians and not all Libertarians support Ron Paul. So why not UNITE THE CLANS? Make the story not just about Ron Paul's surging support, but the Libertarian Party's surging support?

If the Libertarian Party is ever going to be successful in getting elected for a "big job" now is the kind of prime opportunity they need. The entire country is pissed off at both parties.

Imagine if we started a Libertarian run now. We'd have some time to get a real head start on running for the GENERAL election on a National level. We could do some huge advertising blitzes painting Ron as the guy he truly is - an answer to a corrupt two party system that has FAILED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. With so many Americans hungry for CHANGE, we could have a good shot at getting the MESSAGE out. And we might have a real chance of setting history and winning the election! Ron can set fundraising history... maybe we can set election history as well.

I can just imagine the advertising. "It's time for a THIRD PARTY to address the three things Americans need addressing the most. WAR, the ECONOMY and LIBERTY. Seize the opportunity to vote for REAL CHANGE and bring crushing defeat to the two-party system that has failed America. Vote Ron Paul, Libertarian candidate for President."

So how about it? We have some strong allies, a lot of money and a huge base of supporters. And if Hillary actually wins the Democratic nomination (which looked impossible after Iowa but once again possible after New Hampshire), the negatives against her and the negatives against the Republicans would leave us open to lots of votes from people otherwise disgusted.

JaredR26
01-09-2008, 02:25 PM
How much money does the Libertarian Party normally spend on a Presidential run? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that $20 million might be a little more than they're used to.


We would need roughly $100 million dollars and a solid base of 25% of the populace that we can rely on to make a showing.

We don't have that, at least not yet.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:26 PM
Absolutely awesome post. You nailed it. I am switching my registration today to the Libertarian party.

All the old ideas about third party runs not having a chance are thrown out. The internet has changed everything. Can you imagine how fired up the Libertarian Party would be to have millions and millions of people flooding into their party, not to mention tens of millions of dollars??!!! We could easily raise another $50 million for the general election and be the one and only TRUE change candidate.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:27 PM
We would need roughly $100 million dollars and a solid base of 25% of the populace that we can rely on to make a showing.

We don't have that, at least not yet.

That pipsqueak nutcase Ross Perot got 19,000,000 million votes in 1992 and could have WON the race had he not dropped out and pulled all the stunts he pulled. We could do better than that, and raising money is not an issue.

Indy Vidual
01-09-2008, 02:31 PM
Ron no longer supports their platform 100%, and neither party tends to compromise one bit. :(

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:32 PM
They have offered him the top ticket outright. They held a news conference about two months ago begging Ron to head their ticket.

Devil_rules_in_extremes
01-09-2008, 02:33 PM
READ THIS: http://www.paulunteer.com/news-stories/remember-the-secret-plan-youre-about-to-see-it-plus-words-of-wisdom-from-your-fellow-supporters/

Hook
01-09-2008, 02:36 PM
So how is Ron changing to Libertarian going to fix the real problems with HQ again?

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:37 PM
The HQ issues can be dealt with in time.

ProfNo
01-09-2008, 02:37 PM
Absolutely awesome post. You nailed it. I am switching my registration today to the Libertarian party.

All the old ideas about third party runs not having a chance are thrown out. The internet has changed everything. Can you imagine how fired up the Libertarian Party would be to have millions and millions of people flooding into their party, not to mention tens of millions of dollars??!!! We could easily raise another $50 million for the general election and be the one and only TRUE change candidate.

Don't change your registration if your state has a closed primary until after the primaries.

Support Ron Paul as long as possible.

Ack
01-09-2008, 02:38 PM
Ron no longer supports their platform 100%, and neither party tends to compromise one bit. :(

The Libertarian party platform is whatever registered Libertarians decide it to be. If a large number of RP supporters join the LP then they can modify the platform.

Chase
01-09-2008, 02:40 PM
So how is Ron changing to Libertarian going to fix the real problems with HQ again?

I don't think you can blame all of what has happened on HQ. I believe they've had their shortcomings, but I get the impression a lot of it is a problem of lacking manpower and organization. Accepting the Libertarian ticket (which was already offered to us on a silver platter) gives us the Libertarian party machine to help with the campaign.

Ron Paul alone might not be able to make the kind of waves we really want, and the Libertarian party alone might not be able to make the kind of waves we really want. But if we brought our waves into phase and united the clans, that's one hell of an amplitude we'd be throwing out into the spectrum...

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:40 PM
The Libertarian party platform is whatever registered Libertarians decide it to be. If a large number of RP supporters join the LP then they can modify the platform.

Exactly. We have the numbers to literally take over the party, and Ron is our leader.

literatim
01-09-2008, 02:41 PM
It isn't going to happen. So give it up.

Chase
01-09-2008, 02:42 PM
It isn't going to happen. So give it up.

Are you writing off the election too?

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 02:49 PM
It isn't going to happen. So give it up.


You're the one who is giving up on Ron by insisting that he waste his time, money and effort just so you can cast a "protest vote" in the GOP. I'd rather see him run third party and actually have a chance of winning.

Karsten
01-09-2008, 03:01 PM
Don't change your registration if your state has a closed primary until after the primaries.

Support Ron Paul as long as possible.

If Ron Paul runs as a Libertarian, there would be no need to switch to Libertarian to vote for him in the GENERAL election, where everybody can vote for anybody.

Indy Vidual
01-09-2008, 03:03 PM
They have offered him the top ticket outright. They held a news conference about two months ago begging Ron to head their ticket.

LOL :D

Your enthusiasm is wonderful, but not fully accurate.
They issued a (long overdue) statement which invited him to compete for the nomination.

```
If you think 'real Libertarians' compromise, then you don't honestly know much about them. :)

The issues which will cause huge problems are:

* Immigration

Ron is not even close to being in tune with the LP on Immigration.
Post 911, the open borders policy is a tough sell, but you won't find many LP delegates willing to change their platform. (Still time to start looking into becoming a delegate? Perhaps you could help fight to change their stagnant, nearly lifeless party)


* Transition plans

In the real world, we need transition plans to make freedom acceptable.
'Pure' (large 'L') Libertarians do not support 'transitions', compromises, any taxes, or any deviation from the 'non-aggression' principle.

They will choose a broke, unknown candidate in order to avoid compromise. :eek:

One other issue = Sore loser laws

Ron can't get on the ballot in Texas as a Lib. if he runs on the Rep primary ballot this cycle.
This is an issue I'm not an expert on, but I think it is a huge problem.

``````````````````

Of course, Ron would have a very good chance at the nomination.
To say they were "begging him" is a bit much. :p

literatim
01-09-2008, 03:05 PM
Are you writing off the election too?

Nope. Ron Paul will not leave the Republican Party, period.

Kotin
01-09-2008, 03:08 PM
but we need those debates and republican press, you think you see a Ron Paul media blackout now? try after he went LP

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 03:09 PM
LOL :D

Your enthusiasm is wonderful, but not fully accurate.
They issued a (long overdue) statement which invited him to compete for the nomination.

```
If you think 'real Libertarians' compromise, then you don't honestly know much about them. :)

The issues which will cause huge problems are:

* Immigration

Ron is not even close to being in tune with the LP on Immigration.
Post 911, the open borders policy is a tough sell, but you won't find many LP delegates willing to change their platform. (Still time to start looking into becoming a delegate? Perhaps you could help fight to change their stagnant, nearly lifeless party)


* Transition plans

In the real world, we need transition plans to make freedom acceptable.
'Pure' (large 'L') Libertarians do not support 'transitions', compromises, any taxes, or any deviation from the 'non-aggression' principle.

They will choose a broke, unknown candidate in order to avoid compromise. :eek:

One other issue = Sore loser laws

Ron can't get on the ballot in Texas as a Lib. if he runs on the Rep primary ballot this cycle.
This is an issue I'm not an expert on, but I think it is a huge problem.

``````````````````

Of course, Ron would have a very good chance at the nomination.
To say they were "begging him" is a bit much. :p


Well if the Libertarians want to reject millions of new members and tens of millions of dollars just so they can stick to open borders, I would be surprised. :)

Regarding sore loser laws, perhaps it is vital to not compete in those states right now in the GOP. If we drop out now, that would prevent these laws from hurting us later, right?

Indy Vidual
01-09-2008, 03:16 PM
Well if the Libertarians want to reject millions of new members and tens of millions of dollars just so they can stick to open borders, I would be surprised. :)

Regarding sore loser laws, perhaps it is vital to not compete in those states right now in the GOP. If we drop out now, that would prevent these laws from hurting us later, right?

(I don't claim to know much about sore loser laws)

'Sore loser laws' are a pretty new concept.
Texas might be the only one(?), but it's also Ron's home state.

````
The LP might be a great match for Ron's political grand finale. :)
I'm just pointing out it is not as simple as "accepting their invite."

DrNoZone
01-09-2008, 03:20 PM
Absolutely awesome post. You nailed it. I am switching my registration today to the Libertarian party.

All the old ideas about third party runs not having a chance are thrown out. The internet has changed everything. Can you imagine how fired up the Libertarian Party would be to have millions and millions of people flooding into their party, not to mention tens of millions of dollars??!!! We could easily raise another $50 million for the general election and be the one and only TRUE change candidate.

I left the LP 6 years ago and will NEVER go back, unless they reform (http://www.reformthelp.org) their party.

Mogwai
01-09-2008, 03:29 PM
I think he should run as an independent, because he got a lot of limitations running on a libertarian party ballot.

We should also keep in mind that when he is polling high enough, he might get invited for the debate. So instead of sharing airtime with 5-7 other candidates (GOP debates) he would share it with 2 other candidates (presidential debates). So he would have enough time to elaborate on his message/issues and people will remember his name.

Chase
01-09-2008, 03:36 PM
I think he should run as an independent, because he got a lot of limitations running on a libertarian party ballot.

What do you mean about limitations, exactly? The advantage of the LP in a non-Republican run is that they are already on the ballot in most states. That's the biggest challenge to running for President as a non-two-party guy, already taken care of.

Mogwai
01-09-2008, 03:54 PM
What do you mean about limitations, exactly? The advantage of the LP in a non-Republican run is that they are already on the ballot in most states. That's the biggest challenge to running for President as a non-two-party guy, already taken care of.

- The history and association people have with the libertarian party.
- Limitations for choosing a vice president, couldn't pick a democrat to create a bigger base.
- I don't know if the presidential nominee has full authority

I think when you have enough support to win the election, getting on the ballot wouldn't be difficult.

Xonox
01-09-2008, 04:15 PM
I think a Libertarian run would be superior to an independant run. It would give him more ligitimacy, and perhaps bring to power (at least a bit of power) a whole knew party with him. And don't forget, the Republican party has changed significantly over time, and in the same way we can change the Libertarian party.
A better option in the long run that I've heard mentioned is the possibility of creating our own "Constitution Party", but that would leave many more dificulties than a Libertarian run as far as this election goes.

juddpuds
01-09-2008, 04:43 PM
I am leaning towards the idea of a libertarian run. That would make us the fourth-party candidate, since Mike Bloomberg is surely going to run as an independent. To me the whole reason for RP to run libertarian though is to try to get some libertarian congressmen elected. He could be the spearhead of a push to elect legislators. I also think that it would be far, far better if in the general elect we ran a regional rather than national campaign. What if RP ran as a libertarian and poured all his resources into whatever are the friendliest 10 state ignoring the other 40? That is a recipe for potentially getting some electoral votes and increasing the likelihood that no candidate from any party would get a solid majority of electoral votes.

Chase
01-09-2008, 05:58 PM
I don't know if 10/40 is the right ratio, but there is certainly an argument for focusing on certain large states like California, Texas, Florida...

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-09-2008, 06:27 PM
I have always favored us starting a new party called the "Liberty Party" from scratch. We've got the money and people to do it.