Judge Napolitano asked Ron Paul directly about a potential third party run yesterday on Freedom Watch. Surprisingly, Paul did not dismiss it out of hand. He commented about how sore loser laws might keep him off the ballot in certain states, and spent a lot of time talking about the unfairness of our current two party system.
14 Comments
Comments are closed.
MORE MIKE BENOIT ………..
Here is a message from Ron Paul. I hope you will join me in supporting him tomorrow / today!
You know he could raise 10 million if we averaged 100 dollars per person at 100,000 donations.
[Ron] I’m running for President because it’s time to take a stand.
For principle over power.
For conviction over compromise.
For responsibility over recklessness.
For the American people over all those who would defend the status quo while selling out our children and grand children’s futures.
Beginning at midnight tonight, my campaign’s grassroots supporters will hold another Money Bomb to help guarantee I can continue building a top-tier campaign and pull out all the stops to finish strong in the Iowa Straw Poll on August 13 th.
So I hope you will visit http://www.RonPaul2012.com this Tuesday, July 19, and give whatever you are able to at this crucial time.
I am certain that with 100,000 autos with Ron Paul for President magnetic signs on them he wins. He has more than 100,000 supporters.
Get the Ron Paul magnetic signs here http://www.ronpaul2012.com/store/
Or if you are in San Diego [County] get them from me. If you have no money we have some donor pairs.
Lets win a free country. Purchases count towards the money bomb. ——– Mike [Bioit and Don Lake fav ………]
I’m wanting all “l”s to broaden their vision. I’m not pushing for Johnson, just say I’m “pulling” for Paul and Johnson in the RP primary as I was for Paul and Gravel in their prospective primaries in ’07-’08 ! The world needs both Johnson and Paul on the future R debate stages this cycle. I’m hopefully smart enough to know in Nov.’12 the LP’s candidate is probably my last hope in this POTUS race. Every “l” should never put all their eggs in one basket. Not a “R” basket for certain! Support ALL libertarian candidates as long as you can. They certainly need and deserve your support, if you are a “l” !! Why should any “l” denigrate any “l” candidate at anytime if they stay on message and wear a decent wardrobe ? (IOW don’t embarrass us!)
Does Paul’s principles fit? It’s according to which “l”s you talk to I guess. Most are pro-choice, open boarders and don’t believe there is a worldwide move to a “New World Order” for the benefit of a few Elitists. Ron Paul is opposite on all three beliefs. Me, I can support anyone in politics who agrees with me over 75% of the time. Especially on those ideas in which we agree !!!
Buchanan was a Conservative leading a conservative “Brigade”. Facing a fake conservative in Dubya and the moonbeam veep Gore. His very strong brigade (conservative movement) in the 92 and 96 R primaries disintegrated when placed on the main Nov. stage and destroyed a fifty state Party in the process. The MSM still can sway them (even the conservatives) anyway they are told to lead them. (Pat had always been one of my favorite conservatives however the Buchanans could very well have been placed where they were to do what they did. Destroy the Reform Party. I do not trust an action or a word they say now and never will again! )
Has it crossed no one’s mind that the fundraising is down this time ? With an Iowa straw poll moneybomb planned shortly the Paul staff may have decided to go all in this time? The time was “right” to show a “new” seriousness ! Thirty million plus the pension is nicer to retire upon also and afterall the price of FIRST CLASS has certainly increased since ’08…
* * * ^ * * *
“Real Conservatives Vote Libertarian” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=253
Recovering Republican Mouse Pad – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=829
The Libertarian Party’s anti-crime plan would do what the Democrats and Republicans have not done:
•Respect the victim’s rights and make criminals pay full restitution.
•Hold all criminals responsible for their actions.
•Double the police resources available for crime prevention without any additional government spending.
•Reduce the number of criminals at large on our streets.
•Defend the most effective crime deterrent available, the private ownership of guns.
•Create jobs, end welfare dependence, and improve education.
This Libertarian program would help make America’s streets safe again.
– http://www.lp.org/
3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.
– http://www.lp.org/
kleptocracy – you seem to be pushing for Johnson who is ALSO a candidate in the GOP primary. How is that different?
Just wondering.
Also, Ron Paul doesn’t change what his principles are. Do they fit or not? Isn’t that the point?
But that bridge is yet to be crossed. Right now, clearly, Ron Paul is running as a Republican
11 klep: A nice and decent man, HOWEVER he is NOT the savior for whom some of you still pine !
me: I don’t “pine” for Paul…I do find the idea of his rebolting an interesting possibility. I don’t think he’s the savior by any means.
klep: Remember what happened to Pat Buchanan? He received far more support in the RP primaries than Ron Paul has and WHAT exactly happened ?
me: IMO, yours is a false analogy. Buchanan was a lifelong conservative R running on the Reform line as an expedient. RP is a lifelong libertarian who has and is both a R and L. “Reform” was really not a movement of ideas and people, but more a generic protest vehicle. The LP and LM are a movement, and Paul is a leader in that movement.
Yes, why not WREAK havoc in the third party movements again in ’12 ? With some perfectly political “speak”. Leaving faults hope, always TAKING more money away whenever po$$ible !!!
Ron Paul is a REPUBLICAN candidate for POTUS. He is not a candidate in the LP, CP, GP or as an independent. He is a man fast approaching 76 years of age. A nice and decent man, HOWEVER he is NOT the savior for whom some of you still pine !
The LP and CP must build from the ground up WITH the ones who are LOYAL to the cause NOT opportunists !! Remember what happened to Pat Buchanan? He received far more support in the RP primaries than Ron Paul has and WHAT exactly happened ? Less than half a million votes if I remember correctly and a national third party destroyed !! Ron Paul IS NOT the savior, you need to NEVER forget it !!!
* * * ^ * * *
Ron Paul Should Stand Aside for Gary Johnson: http://www.uncoveredpolitics.com/2011/04/ron-paul-should-stand-aside-for-gary-johnson/
The Libertarian Party offers a positive alternative to the failed welfare state. We offer a vision of a society based on work, individual responsibility, and private charity. It is a society based on opportunity and genuine compassion It is a society built on liberty.
– http://www.lp.org/
“A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.” – Libertarian Party Platform, Section 2.0 – http://www.lp.org/
Government is Best, Which… http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=671
Sore loser laws do NOT pertain to Presidential candidates, though that hasn’t stopped some States from attempting to claim that they do.
If a state applies a sore loser law to a candidate, then even if the state is wrong, the candidate may still have to go through an expensive court battle to prove it.
If that’s the scenario, then sore loser laws are indeed a practical impediment, and Paul isn’t wholly wrong.
Aaron Starr: As evidence that sore loser laws do not apply in the case of President: John B. Anderson was defeated during the 1980 primaries…
Your evidence is not entirely irrelevant, but it is stale. I’m guessing that some (many?) sore loser laws were enacted after 1980.
As evidence that sore loser laws do not apply in the case of President:
John B. Anderson was defeated during the 1980 primaries when he sought the Republican nomination. He ran as an independent and was on the ballot in all 50 states.
6 rp, Paul actually said about the sore loser situation: “I have not looked into that.”
I suspect Paul knows that most Rs are not going to support him in the primary process, freeing him from needing to not — in essence — leave the door open for (re)bolting and going independent/third party.
In 88, he noted that half his campaign funds were spent on ballot access. Now, it might be — what — 1/10th?
Paul has been a pretty consistent critic of American democracy. Given his past statements and his ’08 endorsements of alternative candidates, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an indy/3rd party run this year.
Thanks for the info re. sore loser laws. It’s kind of surprising Paul would repeat bad info. This probably suggests his people really haven’t explored the issue that closely.
That said, I’m surprised Paul didn’t downplay the question more than he did. Being seen as potentially flirting with a third party or independent run generally hurts you in a partisan primary. Paul spoke up pretty strongly on behalf of more fairness in the process, and this is good for us all. (This is from memory because I can’t watch the video on the computer I’m on.)
Sore loser laws do NOT pertain to Presidential candidates, though that hasn’t stopped some States from attempting to claim that they do.
Memory tells me that sore loser laws [probably unconstitutional, any who] are for non P races.
There is a reason that some of us designate presidential runs as PXXXX. And of course, for our fellow citizens in Guam, DC, PR ………..
I believe Richard Winger has said in the past that sore loser laws don’t pertain to the presidential race. As I recall it has to do with ones vote being for a set of electors not a person despite how it may presented on the ballot.