Republican nomination unlikely. Millions(11%) would vote Paul(Indepentent run)

[Russellk30]

Many in this forum go as far as saying that if one does not support the rEPUBLICAN pARTY, they are not really part of this movement, and adding that any other route other than through the rEPUBLICAN nomination is doomed to failure and at worst, hurts the freedom movement indefinitely through loss of relevance.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_c...paigns_in_2008

There are a few reasons why such absolutism is flirting on the edge of dishonesty.
-Ron Paul had the support of 11% of the country for an independent run in January, and that is with Bloomberg in the race as well, effectively taking some of Ron Paul's independent support away. Who knows how much that number would increase without Bloomberg?
-Ron Paul does poorly among Republicans and pretty darn good among independents. 5% and 25% respectively. Just look at exit polls for every state to see the stark difference between the groups. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/
-Mccain already has 714 delegates and anybody that thinks he will not get 1,191 is on the verge of dreamland. We can wait another four years, but do we really want to if we have the option of continuing?
-If 11% of voters would support a Paul independent run right now, how much would support him once actually learning of his positions? Maybe, at most, 1/4 of all Americans have some understanding of Paul’s positions. The rest know very little.
-How many people would never vote for him because he is a Republican? Quite a few, and if the freedom movement is forever associated with the Republican Party, those same people would be much less likely too accept such an ideology.
-If 15% in the polls is required to be in debates and mentioned in the Media, we are golden! This movement is continuing to grow, and with the option of either Hillary or Obama and Mccain, millions of voters will look somewhere else.
-In my opinion, the quickest route to irrelevance is to lose the Republican nomination and then focus on a Ron Paul run for congress. This movement has evolved from a loose group of local supporters to a nationwide phenomenon, and that should be our focus.

I would be happy to see Ron Paul receive the Republican nomination. I would be happy to vote for him as a Republican, but even after doing so, I would not consider myself a Republican. I am happy that many Republicans want to save their party and have joined this movement, but don’t think for a second that every person here is, or should be, a Republican.

There are many of us previously not associated in any way with the Republican Party, but we accepted the possibility and wisdom in a Republican run. It would be nice to see the same courtesy from the more aggressive Republican supporters. Agreement is not necessary, only respect. After all, politics would not exist without disagreement.

Do you support an Independent or third party campaing if all else fails? If so, contact the campaign and let them know! http://www.ronpaul2008.com/contact/form/ Here is my letter.

Hello Ron Paul Campaign,
I have been an active member of the movement since May07. I have donated hundreds of dollars, made signs, canvassed, promoted moneybombs, and have gotten many others to support the campaign. I hope that Dr. Paul gets the Republican nomination, but if he does not, I fully support an Independent or Libertarian campaign. I hope this path is followed if all else fails.

I know there is a concern over ballot access, but current supporters or the Libertarian Party would easily be able to get him on the ballot in all fifty states.

A recent poll conducted by Rasmussen shows Ron Paul with 11% support for an independent or third party run against Hillary, McCain and Bloomberg. There are many people yet to be informed of the positions of liberty and small government. Less than 25% of the population knows anything about Paul. This level of support could be and will be much higher.

Thanks for everything,
Jeffery R M/FC2 USN


I fully support continuing to try for the Republican nomination, but things are looking bleak so it is time to plan for the future.

[JahWarrior]

4. Dr. Paul is running for re-election in Congress as a Republican. Running 3rd-party would just cluster$#@! to all hell his re-election chances, the GOP would run someone against him after they kicked him out.

Add it up. Third party ain't happenin', bro.

Thats what they said about Lieberman. more or less.

[yongrel]

Several points, in order.

1. $#@! the GOP. It's about issues and not parties, I'd support Dr. Paul, based on his issues and principles, even if he was running as the "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party's candidate.

2. An independent run would marginalize the movement even more, as would a Libertarian Party run, or, for that matter, a "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party run. It just wouldn't attract the votes or attention.

3. Continuing the campaign means collecting more information on supporters in every state. More names, phone numbers, email addresses, people willing to be delegates and precinct leaders, etc. Building infrastructure for the future. Think LONG TERM. He'll get more of this as a GOPer than as an LPer during this candidacy.

... and the icing on the cake ...

4. Dr. Paul is running for re-election in Congress as a Republican. Running 3rd-party would just cluster$#@! to all hell his re-election chances, the GOP would run someone against him after they kicked him out.

Add it up. Third party ain't happenin', bro.

I'm tempted to copy and paste this every time someone mentions a third party run.

[mcgraw_wv]

Has Ron even gotten !% of the Total population to vote for him in the primary?

How is he going to get attention in a Presedenatial NAtional Campaign with no party to support him, and absolutely no "requirement" from the parties to have him in debates...

[nodope0695]

Several points, in order.

1. $#@! the GOP. It's about issues and not parties, I'd support Dr. Paul, based on his issues and principles, even if he was running as the "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party's candidate.

2. An independent run would marginalize the movement even more, as would a Libertarian Party run, or, for that matter, a "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party run. It just wouldn't attract the votes or attention.

3. Continuing the campaign means collecting more information on supporters in every state. More names, phone numbers, email addresses, people willing to be delegates and precinct leaders, etc. Building infrastructure for the future. Think LONG TERM. He'll get more of this as a GOPer than as an LPer during this candidacy.

... and the icing on the cake ...

4. Dr. Paul is running for re-election in Congress as a Republican. Running 3rd-party would just cluster$#@! to all hell his re-election chances, the GOP would run someone against him after they kicked him out.

Add it up. Third party ain't happenin', bro.

I agree with all you've said. The best part of you post was, "$#@! THE GOP". All the rest is frosting on the cake.

[Russellk30]

Several points, in order.

1. $#@! the GOP. It's about issues and not parties, I'd support Dr. Paul, based on his issues and principles, even if he was running as the "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party's candidate.

2. An independent run would marginalize the movement even more, as would a Libertarian Party run, or, for that matter, a "Satanist Communists for Abusing Children" party run. It just wouldn't attract the votes or attention.

3. Continuing the campaign means collecting more information on supporters in every state. More names, phone numbers, email addresses, people willing to be delegates and precinct leaders, etc. Building infrastructure for the future. Think LONG TERM. He'll get more of this as a GOPer than as an LPer during this candidacy.

... and the icing on the cake ...

4. Dr. Paul is running for re-election in Congress as a Republican. Running 3rd-party would just cluster$#@! to all hell his re-election chances, the GOP would run someone against him after they kicked him out.

Add it up. Third party ain't happenin', bro.

All right, I get your point. The Republican nomination is not a bad goal, but at this moment, the Republican nomination just isn’t going to happen. I know that there are thousands of "what ifs," but don’t bet on random chance. It would be good if he received the nomination, but it is a dreamer's goal.

I thought I made some pretty good points. I see others making similar claims, but I never really see any substantial counter point. All I ever see is general augments that are based on opinion more than anything like “it aint gona happen man, third party would be a disaster!” Paul already has 11% of the electorate, he would get much more as the season went along, why would that be a disaster? Wherever he goes, people will follow.

One thing is clear at this point. In a few weeks everybody is going to become much more realistic when it is clearer that the nomination is going to Mccain. If some how Paul gets the nomination, Ill eat my hat and enjoy doing it. Paul will get some of Romney's supporters, but so will Mccain and Huckabee. We have been optimistic about the chances of nomination since day one, but realism is starting to get in the way of optimism.

If Paul does not accept the possibility of a third party/Independent run, this election season is over. If that is what you want, fine, but don’t pretend that his chances for nomination are good.

Of all of the folks that claim a Republican run is the only way to go, do you think we are better off in our two party systems? I for one believe two choices every election season is a little inadequate. Considering the Republicans and Democrats currents positions, we really only have one choice.

The freedom movement is a great goal, but the current two party system breeds blind party ignorance. Without breaking away from the established system, the freedom movement will again be consumed by Republicanism, just as it happened with the Goldwater movement.

[Russellk30]

Has Ron even gotten !% of the Total population to vote for him in the primary?

How is he going to get attention in a Presedenatial NAtional Campaign with no party to support him, and absolutely no "requirement" from the parties to have him in debates...

Did you read any if the initial post? You question has already been answered.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

We all need to CONTACT DR PAUL right away and urge him to run indy or third party.

[rockandrollsouls]

We should work for the GOP nomination until it is forcibly taken from us. If that is the case, then I think Paul should continue indy. I don't want this to end and for the country's sake it can't.

[Feelgood]

I'm tempted to copy and paste this every time someone mentions a third party run.

For me it is alot simpler. I add them to my ignore list, and am now seeing alot less third party defeatist talk.

[nodope0695]

NO THIRD PARTY!!!! GET OFF IT!!!! MOVE ON, LOSER. GET PAST THE IDEA. WHAT PART OF "NO INTENTIONS" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND??? GET ON THE BUS, OR STAY AT THE BUS STOP, BUT $#@! OR GET OFF THE POT.

[nodope0695]

For me it is alot simpler. I add them to my ignore list, and am now seeing alot less third party defeatist talk.

Damn, the dreaded ignore list...sheesh, thats worse than being banned. I better mind my p's and q's. The ignore list is like getting put in the "friend zone" with a girl....ouch.

[Russellk30]

For me it is alot simpler. I add them to my ignore list, and am now seeing alot less third party defeatist talk.

Defeatists? Do you have a difficult time reading words when there are too many of them in a row? If anything, I am an optimist. I m glad to be part of this movement, I have hope for it and I want to see it continue. Since when does anti-republican = defeatist?

I think everybody here will agree the current Republican Party is a barrier to the ideals of small government pro liberty leaning individuals. You can try to change it if you want, but I hope you have a plan “B” because you chances are not looking too great.

You can ignore facts, reason and the ideas of others if you want, but it will lead to your own little personal echo chambers where everything you hear and see is "correct" and everybody else is stupid. That would effectively be the end of your intellectual growth.

New ideas are not always right, but neither are old ones. You probably already put me on your ignore list though, so I guess there isn’t much of a point in responding. Have fun in you echo chamber.

[Russellk30]

"NO THIRD PARTY!!!! GET OFF IT!!!! MOVE ON, LOSER. GET PAST THE IDEA. WHAT PART OF "NO INTENTIONS" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND??? GET ON THE BUS, OR STAY AT THE BUS STOP, BUT $#@! OR GET OFF THE POT."

I was unaware that "no intentions" was the same as "will not." Paul hasn’t made any definite plans; so quit acting like you know his plans. All I ask is that keep your options open.

I live in Washington State and I will be voting for Ron Paul at tomorrow’s Republican caucus. I will try to get him the nomination, but I sure don’t expect that it will happen.

By the way, how many people have you convinced to support Paul? With an attitude like yours, I wouldn't be surprised if you've driven people away.

[ConstitutionGal]

People here (myself included) don't like Ron Paul being ignored in the MSM now. Let him run third-party or Indy and everyone will get to see just how bad and blatant it CAN be. Most people have been so ingrained in the two-party system belief that they are unaware there ARE other parties. This is no accident. Even if/when a REALLY good candidate (such as Dr. Paul) comes along, the two major parties start giving out the garbage about how the party faithful MUST vote for candidate 'a' to keep candidate 'b' from the other party getting elected because, after all, candidate 'a' isn't AS bad as candidate 'b'. We're already seeeing it with McCain. The party base hates him but they'll still vote for him to keep Hilary out of the WH.

[KevinR]

No Third Party will ever win.

[familydog]

As far as I know, he is still in the bid for the GOP nomination. Didn't he just say yesterday or today or whenever that he will not act as spoiler and definately won't do a third party run?

[blakjak]

We all need to CONTACT DR PAUL right away and urge him to run indy or third party.

I'm pretty sure he has already considered it.

[familydog]

http://www.wset.com/news/stories/0208/494607.html

I figured this would end these threads. Apparently not.

[Lou337]

He's running his race. He knows what he's doing.

He won't be running for LP or Indy...for one thing his # of votes when he did run were around 400k. He's not gonna make the same mistake twice. Yes, we have more supporters than 400k. The media will ignore him even more if he does go Indy.

Once again, he knows what he's doing. He has the experience of running as a 3rd party candidate before and it didn't work did it?

We are reforming the party with him and with the Liberty Candidates running for Congress to make sure his priorities get done in Congress.

TS, Indy run unlikely.

Plus, HE SAID HE'S NOT GONNA!

[Scott Wilson]

People need to be realistic.

A third party run would be extremely difficult, it would require massive donations and intense grassroots work.

The Republican nomination is now a pipe dream. Huckabee is going to get more votes with Romney stepping back and McCain is going to get more votes with Romney suspending his campaign.

Ron may get a few more votes but be realistic please. Huckabee won Tennessee over Romney and McCain. Both McCain and Romney received far more votes than Paul. McCain only needs about 500 more delegates. Huckabee needs about 1000. Ron Paul needs about 1100 to win. You seriously believe Ron is going to make a come back with media bias and peoples perception that he is soft on terror? No way.

Even a brokered convention would not throw the bone Ron's way, not with so few delegates.

Beating a dead horse is futile, adapting to current circumstances is essential.

Either

1. Ron stays in, continues to tour and speak. Picks up a few more votes in primaries but ultimately does not win the nomination. If it goes this route the grassroots must alter their approach and get some fresh ideas in action. Community newsletters, signs with constitutional slogans or lessons, promote his book in the real world etc.

2. Ron runs as an independent, his support grows exponentially and grassroots activity picks up across the nation once again (in the post primary/caucus states). Who knows what can happen. This avenue also risks Ron losing his seat in Texas.


Ron's seat in Texas ought not be the deciding factor as Ron is not a messiah. He is simply a man who has been the focal point of an massive restore the constitution movement.

Anything can happen but we have to be realistic. To believe that Ron can win a brokered convention, in my opinion, is extremely optimistic. Many people go to Vegas optimistic too but it is much wiser to be realistic when setting out a plan.

[Russellk30]

No Third Party will ever win.

Thank you God, for you have shown me the light. Alright, everybody get back to posting and let there be no mention of third parties ever again. God himself has spoken and we all know the proper path to take.

I am glad there are so many omnipresent individuals around, for what would I do without the presence of such insight. I would be lost. At least we know that the two party system will forever be present in American politics.

We always knew that the “left right paradigm" forced upon us by the MSM was correct, and now it has been confirmed. God is now pleased. Let us continue are grazing, for the Shepard protects us from all evil.

[kutibah]

If Ron Paul can get 15% as an Independent in the polls, HE IS IN THE DEBATES. This is ALL that would be required to garner him the support of a possible 3rd Party Victory in 2008. People will notice that we now have 3 instead of the normal 2 candidates in the debates and wonder why the hell he's there. His message will be heard by millions. And since we're only at 11% right now, that's VERY ACHIEVABLE!

[nodope0695]

"NO THIRD PARTY!!!! GET OFF IT!!!! MOVE ON, LOSER. GET PAST THE IDEA. WHAT PART OF "NO INTENTIONS" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND??? GET ON THE BUS, OR STAY AT THE BUS STOP, BUT $#@! OR GET OFF THE POT."

I was unaware that "no intentions" was the same as "will not." Paul hasn’t made any definite plans; so quit acting like you know his plans. All I ask is that keep your options open.

I live in Washington State and I will be voting for Ron Paul at tomorrow’s Republican caucus. I will try to get him the nomination, but I sure don’t expect that it will happen.

By the way, how many people have you convinced to support Paul? With an attitude like yours, I wouldn't be surprised if you've driven people away.

As a matter of fact, I've convinced 4 for sure, and possibly two more. And those are the people I work with. I plan on getting more tomorrwo when we go out door to door.

As to the third party thing, it does us no good to keep harping on it. Our plan is to get to the convention. There are 20 more states to go, and almost all of the delegates are up for grabs, especially now that Romney is out. Ron Paul is a member of the GOP, not the NeoCon GOP, the BASE GOP. Like it or not, that is the way it is. Ron Paul is also a sitting congressman in the GOP. He is running for reelection IN the GOP. It would be political suicide if he went third part, especially now. And YES, "NO INTENTIONS" means NO. I can't wrap my head around why that is so hard for other people to, well...wrap THEIR heads around. You're falling into the MSM trap of pushing for a third party. That is exactly what they, and the NeoCons want to happen.

Do you know your history? Third parties have NEVER been given a fair chance, NEVER. You think we're marginalized now? We'd be completely, and totally INVISIBLE if Ron went third party. I don't claim to know what Ron's intentions are, but I'm not blind either. Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.... Do some research on third party runs...Did you know Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian back in 1988 before you joined the Revolution? I didn't. I'd never heard of the dude. Perhaps you knew of him, but I was too young back then, and smoking too much pot to have given a $#@!. But I do remember Bush Sr. and Mike Dukakis because they were all over the news.

My question to you and the other third party pushers is this: What do you hope to achieve in a third party run?

If Ron runs third party, the Democrats win. If Ron drops out after the convention, and McCain get the nomination, the Democrats win. Either way, the Democrats win. BUT, if Ron gets to the convention, and speaks to that crowd, there is no way McCain will get the required 51% for the nomination. That room is going to be full of base GOPers and conservatives who don't like McCain, and might vote for RP on a second ballot. This is what I bleive is the campaing's plan. And I think there is hope for it if we can just simply focus on ONE plan, and quit throwing all this third part stuff...its defeatist and unrealistic, and it would be just plain stupid from a tactical standpoint.

This is a game wether we like it or not. We've got to play it on the field, not from the parking lot where the third party tailgaters hang out.

[kutibah]

As a matter of fact, I've convinced 4 for sure, and possibly two more. And those are the people I work with. I plan on getting more tomorrwo when we go out door to door.

As to the third party thing, it does us no good to keep harping on it. Our plan is to get to the convention. There are 20 more states to go, and almost all of the delegates are up for graps, especially now that Romney is out. Ron Paul is a member of the GOP, not the NeoCon GOP, the BASE GOP. Like it or not, that is the way it is. Ron Paul is also a sitting congressman in the GOP. He is running for reelection IN the GOP. It would be political suicide if he went third part, especially now. And YES, "NO INTENTIONS" means NO. I can't wrap my head around why that is so hard for other people to, well...wrap THEIR heads around. You're falling into the MSM trap of pushing for a third party. That is exactly what they, and the NeoCons want to happen.

Do you know your history? Third parties have NEVER been given a fair chance, NEVER. You think we're marginalized now? We'd be completely, and totally INVISIBLE if Ron went third party. I don't claim to know what Ron's intentions are, but I'm not blind either. Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.... Do some research on third party runs...Did you know Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian back in 1988 before you joined the Revolution? I didn't. I'd never heard of the dude. Perhaps you knew of him, but I was too young back then, and smoking too much pot to have given a $#@!. But I do remember Bush Sr. and Mike Dukakis because they were all over the news.

My question to you and the other third party pushers is this: What do you hope to achieve in a third party run?

If Ron runs third party, the Democrats win. If Ron drops out after the convention, and McCain get the nomination, the Democrats win. Either way, the Democrats win. BUT, if Ron gets to the convention, and speaks to that crowd, there is no way McCain will get the required 51% for the nomination. That room is going to be full of base GOPers and conservatives who don't like McCain, and might vote for RP on a second ballot. This is what I bleive is the campaing's plan. And I think there is hope for it if we can just simply focus on ONE plan, and quit throwing our all this third part stuff...its defeatist and unrealistic, and it would be just plain stupid from a tactical standpoint.

This is a game wether we like it or not. We've got to play it on the field, not from the parking lot where the third party tailgaters hang out.

He will be in the Presidential Debates as a 3rd Party if he can get 15% in the polls. Current polls had him at 11% with an Independent run. This is all that would be needed to capture the American attention.

[Xenophage]

Paul CANNOT run 3rd Party or Independent.

If he does, there is NO way he can seek the Republican nomination again, and I think he has an exceptionally good chance if he takes another shot at it in 4 years, or if his son does. Meanwhile, a 3rd Party run is doomed to failure. I'd support him if he did it, but I know he couldn't win.

The best thing to do is focus on congressional and senate victories until we get a shot at the presidency again. Try to take over the republican party locally!

[humanic]

Defeatists? Do you have a difficult time reading words when there are too many of them in a row? If anything, I am an optimist. I m glad to be part of this movement, I have hope for it and I want to see it continue. Since when does anti-republican = defeatist?

I think everybody here will agree the current Republican Party is a barrier to the ideals of small government pro liberty leaning individuals. You can try to change it if you want, but I hope you have a plan “B” because you chances are not looking too great.

You can ignore facts, reason and the ideas of others if you want, but it will lead to your own little personal echo chambers where everything you hear and see is "correct" and everybody else is stupid. That would effectively be the end of your intellectual growth.

New ideas are not always right, but neither are old ones. You probably already put me on your ignore list though, so I guess there isn’t much of a point in responding. Have fun in you echo chamber.

QFT (Quoted For Truth). As of right now I am not personally convinced that an indy run is wise, nor am I convinced that it is unwise. What I am convinced of is that refusing to engauge in rational, civilized discourse is counter-productive to a movement that is supposed to be on facts and logic. One of the central beliefs of the man whose ideas we are all united here in support of is that "the best way for us to spread our message... is through example and persuasion." Calling people names and/or dismissing a topic outright in response to someone (with the same core goals as you) making a sincere, honest, rational argument is disrespectful, childish, foolish, hypocritical, and no substitute for actually articulating why they ought to adopt your view instead of the one they currently hold. To those of you doing so: please stop.

[familydog]

Maybe we should all consider what Ron Paul wants. Not what we want.

[Russellk30]

QFT

As of right now I am not personally convinced that an indy run is wise, nor am I convinced that it is unwise. What I am convinced of is that refusing to engauge in rational, civilized discourse is counter-productive to a movement that is supposed to be on facts and logic. One of the central beliefs of the man whose ideas we are all united here in support of is that "the best way for us to spread our message... is through example and persuasion." Calling people names and/or dismissing a topic outright in response to someone (with the same core goals as you) making a sincere, honest, rational argument is disrespectful, childish, foolish, hypocritical, and no substitute for actually articulating why they ought to adopt your view instead of the one they currently hold.

I agree 100%. It is difficult to make a point when those around actively dismiss the topic instead of engaging in thoughtful discussion. One of the reasons I became interested in Paul is that both the media and virtually all politicians irrationally dismissed him. That type of behavior is very ineffective if ones goal is to get others to agree with you. Absolute dismissal of a reasonable discussion is a sure sign someone’s motives should be questioned.

[Russellk30]

Maybe we should all consider what Ron Paul wants. Not what we want.

That is the plan. We cannot make him act otherwise. Do you know what Ron Paul wants? I think he wants to promote liberty as effectively as possible. Beyond that I don’t think any of us can accurately guess what his plans are.