Raimondo on Ron Paul
My commentary on recent developments in the Ron Paul campaign — and an addendum here. An editorial note: I did not choose the title.
brad smithFebruary 13th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
I understand your frustration, I would also have loved to see Ron Paul run in a third party. However, I am not going to second guess his decisions.
I think Ron Paul sees things more clearly than any of us. Do you think it’s possible that he understands the futility of a third party run? I’m sure he knew from the ouset that he wouldn’t stand a chance no matter what he did. He has done what he could and more than anyone else has. He has opened the eyes of millions.
Now the choice is ours, close our eyes and go back to sleep or stay awake and continue the fight. when and only when we have woken up the sleeping beast that is America can we hope to win. Ron Paul has not stopped fighting and neither will I. I hope everyone that has heard the message will help to spread it.
Right now most Americans are not ready for the revolution. However, it won’t be long before they are. When they can no longer pay for thier SUV’s and high priced houses, when even the poor can’t pay for cable tv or trinkets from China, when everyone has lost a loved one to the wars, then and only then will they truly be receptive. We need to keep the message alive until the people are ready.
Ron Paul has passed the torch to us, now we need to spread the fire.
Daniel MaxwellFebruary 13th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
To put it bluntly, a third party run would have doomed his seat in House and he knows it. Besides, he already went down that road in 88.
wellbasicallyFebruary 13th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
When you look over the newsletters from back when, and the immigration TV ads right now, the veteran-support TV ads, even being charitable and accepting all RP’s explanations about the newsletters… the guy is a seriously conservative Republican. He was always an imperfect vehicle for the country, but we know where the center is: lower taxes and less war.
John LowellFebruary 13th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
I’ll tell you one thing, Justin, the credulity of the folks objecting to your analysis of the Paul situation rivals that of the Communists that stuck with Joe Stalin after the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in August of 1939, and, sir, that’s plain scary. Nothing presents more boldly in the comments here either in this or earlier threads or over at Taki’s than the knee-jerk loyalty of so many of the Paul enthusiasts. If that’s the kind of thing with which I was about to find company if he’d opted for a third party run and I’d supported him, I’d welcome someone showing me the door. Half of the stuff emanating from these yahoos is stomach turning its so saccharine.
Your take on Paul is right on the money. The guy betrayed his followers and that most of them can’t grasp that casts them as just irremediably infantile. Like abused children they cling to the illusion that a strategy of “boring within” has merit and beg for more punishment. Anything becomes plausable in the place of accepting that they’ve been had, anything. I’ve had quite enough of Ron Paul, thank you, and I suspect that that’s your feeling as well.
brad smithFebruary 13th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Why don’t you wake up. It’s not Ron Paul it’s the message! Ron Paul has done more to inform the average American than anyone in decades.
I am glad I donated to Ron Paul and worked on his campaign. When is the last time you have heard anyone speak truth to power? That alone was worth every cent.
So if your glad that Ron Paul is going away it can only mean that you want more of the same. More wars, more taxes, less freedom. No one is expected to agree with everything he says, but how can you think he hasn’t had a positive impact? Who in your lifetime has done more for the message of freedom, and liberty?
So go ahead and go back to bed, vote for Hillary, Obama, McCain or another useless third party candidate who will not even reach one tenth of 1 percent of the population.
Ron Paul has not betrayed his followers. We have recieved more than we expected. If you can’t see that its to bad. The rest of us are proud to have made the first step towards taking our country back.
Oh and and for Stalin yes that nut job screwed all the loyal communist and destroyed that movement. But how can you possibly equate the two?
BrentFebruary 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Is it possible to merge the libertarian party and the constitution party to call it the “Conservative Party” (conservative to the constitution, that is!)? Immigration, social issues, and abortion separate them. Unless we have a 3rd party with varying views on those subjects, but might confuse the public.
Anyways, America needs to be more like Britain, more possibilities with 3rd (4th, 5th, etc.) parties.
John LowellFebruary 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Brad, let’s you and I talk for a moment about an unusually attractive package of substandard mortgages we here at Farthingsworthy & Barnes would be willing to make available to just the right person. Now mind you, this investment isn’t right for everyone, its not recommended for cynics or those who haven’t got the capacity to trust. In a way, we see the purchase of this security as a sign of a kind of restoration, the reassertion of a faith which believes that America can be restored, taken back, as it were. Now wouldn’t it be wonderful if every transaction could be robed with a such a purpose? At the moment we’ve only five units left. Why don’t we sign you up for them?
Eugene CostaFebruary 13th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
“My speculations, sir,” dryly drawing himself up, “have been chiefly governed by the maxim of Lord Bacon;
I speculate in those philosophies which come home to my business and bosom — pray, do you know of any other good stocks?”
“You wouldn’t like to be concerned in the New Jerusalem, would you?”
“Yes, the new and thriving city, so called, in northern Minnesota. It was originally founded by certain fugitive Mormons. Hence the name. It stands on the Mississippi. Here, here is the map,” producing a roll. “There — there, you see are the public buildings — here the landing — there the park — yonder the botanic gardens — and this, this little dot here, is a perpetual fountain, you understand. You observe there are twenty asterisks. Those are for the lyceums. They have lignum-vitae rostrums.”
“And are all these buildings now standing?”
“All standing — bona fide.”
“These marginal squares here, are they the water-lots?”
“Water-lots in the city of New Jerusalem ? All terra firma….”
brad smithFebruary 13th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
John, what is your point? Try and be a little more clear and a little less sarcastic.
No wait, I get it you think I’m an idiot who was taken in by a scam. As I said earlier I recieved MORE than what I paid for not less.
What is it you propose?
More taxes, more war, more mindless Americans? I paid to help educate. Some people get that, but obviously not you. Ron Paul has woken some of the American people does that frighten you?
My guess is that it does. What you really want it to see America crash and burn. You haven’t gotten what you want and hope that we won’t either. I know to many people just like you. You think when it all goes to hell you will not be affected. Well wake up and smell the cofee, you will go down with everyone else.
The popularity of books such as THE STAND, EARTH ABIDES or SWAN SONG is that you will be one of the survivors. That is not how it works. It’s a stupid useless fantasy. Hoping for failure is a recipe for disaster. If what your looking for is the end (your only friend the end) you can always opt out now.
No wait, I know your hoping you get to enjoy going down with the ship. Well good luck, you may get your wish. But I’ll try jumping on a lifeboat.
John LowellFebruary 13th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
8BallFebruary 13th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
The main problem is that most of you are expecting some sort of orderly transition from s**t back to Shinola (anyone old enough to remember that brand?) but it is not going to happen like that. It took a revolution to make America and about 230 years to enslave it. It will take another one to put it back on track but most of the current inhabitants do not have the stomach for it… They would rather give their $ away and chatter endlessly about the way it should be.
brad smithFebruary 13th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I am a two time combat vet. I live in the woods of Northern Michigan. You know, the home of the Michigan Militia. We do more that just talk, we prepare. We are all armed for defense but none of us are even slightly talking about offense. We love the USA more than anyone seems to get.
You and others are right in that endless chatter or working it out politically is mostly useless. However, it’s the only option we have. At this point I say prepare for the worst, but don’t forget to make as many alies as you can. The more people we can wake up and get on our side the better.
Jay DadrassFebruary 13th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Ron Paul has always said that it is our movement, we need to stop looking for a solution and become the solution. All he is asking for is for us to get up from our couches and computer desks to march for our freedom and the lives of our children.
Justin, it is you who is disappointing. Stop pointing to all the ways it could fail and imagine all the ways it can succeed.
Remember, this is the perfect way for the movement to see their true numbers. If we are not enough than forget about the GOP, Third Party, and the American experiment all together.
We will march and we will march proud, we are not few, we are many. Let us show our true numbers.
MarkFebruary 14th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Ron Paul has defended the Constitution in Congress often times all alone during his career as a congressman.
He has stood alone countless times and voted against unconstitutional legislation much to the dismay of both democrats and republicans.
Should he lose his seat in congress, we would lose the last true defender of constitutional principles in our government.
A 3rd party run is just not worth losing his voice of liberty, reason, and sanity in our house of representatives.
I for one, am very grateful to Dr. Paul for all his sacrifices over the years.
He certainly could’ve turned his back on all the aggravation and scorn he has taken for his principled stance. He could’ve pursued quite successful as a doctor in private practice.
Thank you Dr. Paul for your sacrifices, the love you show for our country, and making all the vermin in congress squirm in indignation, when time after time, you expose them for what they are.
May you keep your seat in the house for as long as you want it.
DanoFebruary 14th, 2008 at 12:49 am
I agree with many of the responses above and understand both sides of the argument. I am generally cynical when it comes to politics, but the Ron Paul campaign has definitely changed that. I have followed Ron Paul since first hearing about him on antiwar.com during the US bombing of Yugoslavia, a time when the antiwar voice was all but silenced. I thought to myself, I have never heard a politician speak like this in a very long time. He understands US history, the constitution, world politics, and the economy…imagine that, someone with a brain and principles.
I was delighted to see him run for the GOP nomination, even though I knew he would not win. I still supported him by donating to a political campaign for the first time in my life. My story is similar to many others out there.
I think his reasons for not running as a third party candidate are stupid. Trying to change the Republican party (or any of the 2 parties for that matter) from the inside is a waste of time and energy. What does he expect to gain by winning another term in congress? A longer list of bills in which he is the only one to vote NO against all the other members?
He is 72 years old. Might as well go out with a bang. He survived the attacks of the neo-cons and stuck it to them pretty well during the debates (one of three left standing). He has a huge internet following and youth following around the country and the rest of the world! He shouldn’t even hesitate to run as a third party candidate. I think he would get a much larger percentage of the vote than anyone expects and stick it to both sides of the war party. What better way to end your political career instead of giving speeches in congress that go right over the heads of all members who actually listen to them….But I don’t think it would have to end there.
Revolutions happen in the streets, not in Washington. He should continue to work with groups to get the message out on the internet, etc, even after the election. Whether anyone likes him or not (I personally don’t) Al Gore has done more to promote his environment message in the last few years with a mediocre movie than he ever did in Washington during his whole political career. I think Paul could do the same. And because we all know the economy will crash, and we will go bankrupt, everyone would at least know that Ron Paul warned us all along and maybe they would start to listen.
This guy has an amazing following of intelligent people who are capable of promoting his message, but if he quits now, he will be viewed as just some loonie who wanted to end the federal reserve and the IRS. If he keeps his message going, however, I truly believe he will continue to bring many more people on board. There will be many younger Ron Pauls running for positions all over the country on a similar platform.
If he quits now, this movement might lose quite a bit of steam. The person above was right, WE have to continue the message, it is not about Ron Paul. On the other hand though, I do believe that his presence along with this message would be a wonderful asset in helping keep its momentum going.
Ron Paul…F**K congress, we’ve got a Revolution on our hands!!
peaceFebruary 14th, 2008 at 4:44 am
I am in full agreement with Dano, above. Ron, we need you to run for president in an effort to build a party that is anti-warmongeringism.
richard vajsFebruary 14th, 2008 at 6:16 am
The only thing that will turn America away from its empire and its insane war upon Islam (for Israel’s sake) is economic collapse. We have become too corrupt to accept any “belt tightening” or individual sacrifice (especially from the rich) to save our democracy. Ron Paul only reminds us of our corruption, so he gets rejected. We will elect either another egotistical moron or a peddler of undefined CHANGE who promises a miracle cure without any pain. Reality is buying none of it; our industrial base is crumbling (e.g. General Motors is trying to get rid of its work force), our banking structure is for sale, and our federal government has lost its checks and balances and wants to operate as a dictatorship. America’s empire will fall. I wouldn’t get in the way of any falling walls.
pauliteFebruary 14th, 2008 at 6:54 am
The war is non-ending, the economy is in a downhill spiral, the education system is turning out illiterates, the drug war is a farce, and the borders are an open gate.
Ron Paul gets only a small percentage of the votes in the primary elections.
That tells me the general population doesn’t care about any of the above.
Now tell me why Ron Paul should bang his head against a brick wall for people who don’t want to solve problems.
CrankyOlBroadFebruary 14th, 2008 at 7:10 am
F*ck congress indeed!
My a*s bite of a congressional *representative* Brad Sherman (D-Israel),co-sponsor of the Iran sanctions bill, and my former a*sbite of a congressional *representative* Henry Waxman (D-Israel) threaten me every time I complain that their work is in the best interests of another country and not the one they swore an oath to serve.
Just yesterday, Sherman’s office hauled out that tired old canard that “Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.” News flash buddy: the Palestinians, Lebanese, Turks and Iranians all hold elections. Some of them appear to be more fair than ours.
Sherman’s rep. also said that “Israel is our most trusted ally.”
When I pointed out to Sherman’s rep. that Israel has: attended the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (Shimon Peres himself); sold our military technology to our *enemies*; never agreed to a defense treaty with the U.S.; kisses up to Putin– he was non-plussed.
Truth hurts most people but not Israel-firsters. They are running our country into the ground — an attack on Iran and/or Pakistan would literally destroy what’s left of the “land of the free.”
Both Waxman and Sherman have a voting record that would do them proud in the Israeli Knesset, which is where they belong and which is where I told Sherman’s rep that Sherman needs to go.
If we didn’t support and fund Israel’s state-sponsored terrorism of her neighbors, and didn’t launch wars on primarily Islamic countries for Israel, then there would be no need for this “war on terror.”
We would be much better served economically if we negotiated for the oil — we get most of our oil from Mexico and Canada in any case. So the lefties who chant, ‘No blood for oil” are also being deceived by the pro-Israel lobby.
Instead of Paul, who I feel led us down the garden path, we now have three presidential *candidates* who dance to Tel Aviv’s tune. Of the three I give Obama the best marks on the Middle East as I think his pledging allegiance to Israel is not from the heart. However, if he wants to win, he has to suck up to the Israel lobby and he knows it.
We can’t survive this, and yet the slur of “anti-semite” and the monetary power of the pro-Israel lobby coupled with the voting power of *Christian* Zionists is such that candidates won’t even address the utter destruction that is being wrought on us.
And Paul basically dropped out, which I view as a betrayal, because he was the only one who would address this issue.
BTW: McCain is not a *Rapture* Christian. He pays lip service to religion at best, as evidenced by him whoring himself out to the *Christian* Zionists who attacked him (and his family!) in the 2000 election.
However, McCain is extremely pro-Israel, it comes first for him. His much-vaunted *loyalty* to the U.S. doesn’t exist when it comes to Israel. And yes, he will be worse than Bush. I’m speaking as a former Arizonan who’s lived through his time representing that state. Probably not worse than Cheney though.
John GFebruary 14th, 2008 at 8:37 am
It would be entirely wrong for Ron Paul to implicitly bequeath the Republican Party to the Trotskyite Zionist Neocon scumbags that have dragged the US and it’s People and the Rest of the world into a cesspit of horror and shame by pulling the strings of the shabbat goy President and Congress. The American people must be roused to anger and indignation and loathing and shame for what has been done to their Republican Party and their Constitution and their Country.
WillFebruary 14th, 2008 at 10:35 am
I think RP is right not to pursue the third party way. For a few reasons
He has a tough enough battle on his hand to fight the establishment, the military industrial complex and the energy industrial complex and the GOP. A third party ticket will have him also fight the 2 party system and add the Democrats against him. He will get excluded from debates, still get ignored by the MSM, ridiculed and ultimately blamed if the republicans lost, just like Ralph Nader was blamed for Bush.
The truth is although he had success in rousing many of the youth, he is not doing well at all when it comes to voting. I hoped he would be doing at least as good as Huckabee by now. But he had no significant victories. A general election with a third party will be no better.
It is better to plan for longer term and eat away at the republican party from the inside and win them over in future competitions, age and health allowing, than to leave them and forever be the one who put Clinton back in power.
The trick is for the grassroots to stay active and not become dormant. Keep working even after the election and growing. Start campaigning for 2012 right away. I believe the size of the grassroots needs to increase 10-folds before RP can begin to double his voter size and becomes competitive and actually win some states. 10 times the precinct-leaders, 10 times the money, 10 times the rallies, 10 times as loud. Only then will the MSM will be forced to take notice. Then he will have a better chance of winning the republican nomination where all republicans, even witches like Ann Coulter will have to decide, vote Republican even if it’s for RP or let the liberals win, and as such will have a better chance of winning an election.
A third party run now, if it earns him the average 8% of the vote he is getting now, will only doom his revolution.
BlakeFebruary 14th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I really don’t get all these artificial cries of “betrayal.” Paul has said all along he wouldn’t run as a third-party candidate. Even if he did, he would get, what, 1-2% of the vote at most? Why is Mr. Raimondo acting as though the “Paul movement” (for lack of a better term) is some mighty uprising that only needs Paul’s steady guidance to go straight to the White House? Has he been seeing the same election results I have? Paul’s candidacy was a near-total failure. I hate to say it, but this is a season for “straight talk,” no?
Now is the time to regroup and solidify. I have no interest in “going out with a bang.” We are in this for the long haul. For now, we need to win where we can, and we need NOT to lose our only steady ally in Congress. I work in Paul’s district; I know the place; I will be pleasantly surprised if he wins the congressional primary.
At the moment, I don’t think there’s any really acceptable third-party candidate for president who could fill in for Paul. (Though I see that the Branch Davidian wing of the rEVOLution is actually suggesting Bob Barr … I guess he’ll make his decision after he gets back from driving his latest mistress to the abortion clinic?) The sad truth is, as the Paul campaign showed, at the moment, there’s just no market at the national level for his ideas. We’ve got to start locally, electing congressman here and there, especially in the states where Paul did comparatively well.
That’s the reality. Why castigate Paul for not wasting his time and our money on a futile third-party run?
liberranterFebruary 14th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Perfectly stated, Richard! History has proved that all of the world’s greatest empires came to an end only through complete socioeconomic collapse. Peoples who have grown addicted to imperialism and its trappings do not readily accept its costs, nor do they voluntarily surrender to reason. As I’ve often said before, the majority of Romans in the late Fifth Century no doubt resisted attempts at reform, even as the invading Visigoths overran their towns and farms and their denarii had deteriorated in value to the point of worthlessness.
dontreallycareFebruary 14th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
i read the main page on this site and it says its almost broke. one can only hope for such things i guess
MetaCynicFebruary 14th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
I think that a 3rd party run will accomplish nothing. The MSM will simply ignore him as they are already inclined to do. The Libertarian Party has for 36 years consistently garnered about 1% of the national vote. And Ron Paul is running on an essentially libertarian platform.
The only reason that Paul received any media attention is because he ran as a Republican and was included in the debates where he made his impact confronting the other candidates. And it was Paul’s performance in the early debates that ignited the internet fervor. It’s highly unlikely that he would be included in any debates as a 3rd party candidate. Unfortunately, in today’s America, non coverage by the MSM is proof of nonexistence as far as the masses of voters are concerned. Witness the Ron Paul news blackout once the primary voting started.
What must be acknowledged is that the market for libertarian ideas, though much greater now thanks to Paul, is still small. Much grassroots activism to create a movement at the local level to elect local candidates must take place before the mass of voters is familiar with and comfortable with libertarian ideas. This is tedious, anonymous and unsexy work. But it must be done. To seek a savior to deliver us from the Evil State in one spectacular national election is totally unrealistic.
Our best hope this November is for the voters to decimate the Republican party as punishment for its crimes and folly. The libertarian remnants in Congress can then rally around Ron Paul, the elder statesman, to try to rebuild the now humbled party around something more substantial than the old Reagan rhetoric.
Eugene CostaFebruary 14th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Paul’s kindergarten ideas and presentations, such a “self-ownership”, which is both naie and archaic, does nothing to advance the Libertarian cause.
Further tying Libertarian ideas to the present statist and warmongering Republicans also damages Libertarianism.
Didn’t Paul run as a Libertarian candidate in ’88 whle not leaving the Rpeublican Party?
His own past shows his inconsistency.
And now he is a loyal member in standing of the party that, with Bush, and the Neo-cons, and the Zionist Born Agains and with the corporatists in the background, has come quite close to bringing the United States to its knees.
Nor will he come vigorously in favor of impeachment.
Something fishy here?
Before the US entered Iraq, I made a clear and detailed case that the worst and most intelligent enemy of the United States, including the old KGB, could not have thought up a better plan to destroy the country.
Eugene CostaFebruary 14th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
corr: “naive”, “Republican”, “come out vigorously”
Pardon all the typos.
Eugene CostaFebruary 14th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
“Their Republican Party”?
notthewayiwoulddoitFebruary 14th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
How about Mike Gravel?
Photon DriveFebruary 14th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
No one mentions Chavez cutting off ESSO & Shell Oil? The sanctioners are being sanctioned – leading to isolation. This is a spiral that cannot be arrested by “getting up and marching”! A vote for Obama COULD possibly change the war mindset – go Green & do without the oil – which is what this “Imperialism” is all about.
Eugene CostaFebruary 14th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Kudos to Congressman Paul for being one of the few Republicans to support the contempt citation against White House officials. It’s still small potatoes and not to the heart of the Constitutional crisis but still a step in the right direction.
peaceFebruary 14th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Thank you for not holding anything back, CrankyOB. I feel good just knowing that there are people like you alive in the USA.
FirstCasualtyFebruary 15th, 2008 at 1:36 am
Getting a small number of libertarians elected into Congress is a definite start, but is a small shrub that will bear little fruit. Paul running as an libertarian in this 08′ race is what every idiot box pundit wanted to know about, because he would upset everything. He would have had a decent chance as the only real anti-war, conservative candidate running in an election with two people no one want’s to vote for.
MetaCynicFebruary 15th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Many of us expected that Paul, as the only antiwar candidate in a large field, would prevail in the primaries by attracting the entire antiwar vote while all the others would split the pro-war vote. This didn’t happen because the war issue for most voters was secondary to frivolous things like hair style, religion and name recognition.
Even his grasp of economic issues, which Paul understands better than all those mental midgets put together, carried no weight with the voters. I recall viewing an online CNN exit poll which showed candidate preferences based on all kinds of demographic breakdowns. I was stunned that Paul’s support from voters seriously concerned about the economy and inflation was in the single digits! What does this tell us?
This is the voter doltishness that Paul will be up against as a 3rd party candidate and with probably even less media coverage and no debates inclusion. Why piss away resources on something so futile? If campaign finance laws allow it, Paul should save his campaign money to help build a grassroots movement from the wreckage of the coming Republican election debacle for the purpose of electing libertarian minded candidates to local offices.
Grassroots activism is the only way that the public will become familiar and comfortable with libertarian ideas.
FirstCasualtyFebruary 17th, 2008 at 12:16 am
The dinosaur media will never allow libertarian ideas to be become known by the dinosaur media watching public. Real Republicans don’t want McCain at all. He should run as a libertarian to really put the scare into everyone. This is the perfect time for libertarianism to do an end run around the dinosaur media as everyone will be searching for someone to vote. No one really wants Clinton or McCain.
VassiliFebruary 17th, 2008 at 8:35 am
The ONLY important question is – would the operation SD system build (if it is possible at all) before the collapse? And by whom would it be built? Since that would be a difference between “controlled demolition” (a.k.a. 9/11), or a much wider footprint collapse (i.e. will also ruin MY building).
VassiliFebruary 17th, 2008 at 8:44 am
I feel like it’s 1983 and I’m back in the USSR. Nobody cares. My father tells me that “The System” would exist for another 50 years at least – I argue 10 years max.
Well – the truth is – unless the economy would start to suffer, until people would start feeling pain, until they loose faith in the Govt., until they would start to hate the Govt. that is using the police-state laws to overcome the effects of the economy not working right. That will take up to 20 years.
But at least MJ would be decriminalized as a result of the activities of the “American Gorbachev” – to show up in 20 years.
Since I’m now progressively older, you can adjust these 20 years I feel now down I guess.
SkylerFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
SkylerFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Noooo! That tells you that the republican party doesn’t care about any of the above. Remember, these votes came in the primary not in the general election. You don’t know how many people told me they would not vote for Ron Paul because they swore never to vote republican again.
SkylerFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
republican party = perpetual, pre-emptive war
Did I miss anything?
Besides, isn’t it supposed to be dying? Why can’t we put it out of its misery.
SkylerFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
It is so obvious that McCain will lose in the general, that the blame game isn’t worthy of consideration.
Keeping the grassroots active – a trick indeed if the leader is going to force activity to remain inside the evil GOP.
The vote he’s getting now is only 8% because indies and dems can’t vote for him! Think how much more he’d get if he ran 3rd party!
All he needs is enough to beat McCain. That would effectively neuter the GOP and make the 3rd party top-tier.
MarieFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
When Paul was saying he wouldn’t run 3rd party, we thought he was just saying that so as not to offend anyone; we didn’t know he meant it!
Not 1-2%, he’d get 10-15% or more. We’ve worked so long and hard getting him name recognition, and if Basic Media, Inc. can get moving, Ron Paul could do very well.
MarieFebruary 17th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Freedom4America GroupFebruary 19th, 2008 at 1:41 am
As we have posted in many places now a 3rd Party can only be done if you have $100 Million. It is extremely expensive just to get on the ballots.
We did read somewhere that the Constitution Party may back Dr. Paul if you did decide to run in their party and get him on all 50 ballots. Not sure where we read that but the problem still lies with how biased not only the Media is towards a 3rd Party candidate but the political system as a whole.
Dr. Paul has NOT thrown in the towel just yet for the Presidency either. Quit being so gloom about this and realize he knows what he is doing.
3a7f284fb9edMay 10th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Advertise on Antiwar.com
Copyright © Antiwar.com 2014