Ron Paul Does Not Rule Out A Third-Party Run

Ron Paul won't rule out 3rd party run

Honestly, if he doesn't get the Republican nomination I think running as an Independent or grabbing a 3rd party nomination may do more damage than good at this point. Clearly the media is making a concentrated effort to shutout Ron Paul and Gary Johnson and that would only continue if he ran on his own.

I respect Dr.Paul immensely for promoting the message of Liberty and for presenting it to the American people. However, what he needs to do is to show his followers the way to other liberty minded candidates. One man can not sustain a movement and he should start helping others who want to follow in his wake.

Ron Paul, candidate: "Look, Juan, you have to realize let's say that I was thinking about that and I said that. Then it would undermine what I'm doing. I'm running for president. I'm doing pretty well, I'm in third. So, no, I'm running for president in the Republican party, I'm doing very well. And last time they wondered about it, but, you know the whole thing is, is boy the people are really frustrated. You go to New Hampshire there are more independents then Republicans or Democrats."
Williams: "But what you're saying is you are not saying that you will not run as an Independent."
Paul: "Well, I say, is that I have no plans to do it."
Bret Baier, host: "So, how about are you big on pledges? Would you pledge here tonight that you would not run in a third party?"
Paul: "I pledge that I have no intention of doing it."
[laughing]
Paul: "I'm running for this Republican primary!"

He has NEVER run for anything besides a Republican because of his personal stances. If he changes his mind it will be because the urgency of our situation outweighs affiliation. BUT, in NO way did he state that he was running independent if he didn't get the Republican nomination. Is there some softness to his decision? MINIMAL. The thing is announcing a 3rd party spin-off right here and now LIMITS his chances of winning the Republican Nomination. You don't jump ship until it's sinking. He's not sinking right now.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


He ran for the Libertarian party in 1988.

Republican? Independent? Doesn't matter. If they don't let him play in the Republican party and the American people want him as president, I say run as an Independent.

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse


It would show exactly how disingenuous Ron Paul truly is. He has been a life long republican, endorsing the ideology and agenda of the GOP. So, to dump the GOP and go independent would be a slap in the face of real independents trying to gain credibility in this two party system.

Once again Paul shows his FAILURE as a candidate.

Cool, I remember him saying in a video that he had no intention of running for office if he didn't get the Republican nomination, but it makes sense that he should downplay that possibility until he knows for sure that he doesn't get on the Republican ticket. I think he's poising himself very well for when that time comes, and that will be when RP's light shines.

Originally posted by HauntWok

 

So, to dump the GOP and go independent would be a slap in the face of real independents trying to gain credibility in this two party system.

"in this two party system."

Does it really even matter anymore what party label is on someone? Aren't we just contributing when we do that?

"Ron Paul Does Not Rule Out A Third-Party Run"

Where does Dr. Paul Say that ?
He is campaining as a republican candidate .
The debate organizers and the MSM ignore him even the other candidates avoid debating him but he still remains a republican candidate and has not implyed otherwise
It is the MSM playing with his words..
Has any other candidate been asked the same question , are we just to assume the other won't ?

Why can't people see when their being led to think a certain way ?

reply to post by HauntWok


And you've shown your FAILURE to deny ignorance as an ATS member.

Question, do you honestly believe people will believe your lies? or you do it on purpose wishing to be called out on it?




And please provide a link where RP specifically said he doesn't want to rule out a third party run, I heard him telling Bret Baier yesterday that he does NOT intend to run third party.

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by CynicalDrivel

 

He ran for the Libertarian party in 1988.

Sorry, did not know that. But that doesn't change much of the rest.

Republican? Independent? Doesn't matter. If they don't let him play in the Republican party and the American people want him as president, I say run as an Independent.

Yay!

reply to post by eLPresidente

And please provide a link where RP specifically said he doesn't want to rule out a third party run, I heard him telling Bret Baier yesterday that he does NOT intend to run third party.

You answered your own question right there.

So what exactly are you asking from me?

reply to post by FSBlueApocalypse


I'm neither for nor against Mr. Paul. I have a difficult time understanding him mainly. He speaks in partial sentences and has a horrible time getting his thoughts to come out of his mouth. Not sure how he could survive direct debates with Obama.

One thing for sure is if Paul runs as a Third Party Candidate, Obama wins. No way it could end otherwise. Obama would be thrilled and it would almost make me think it was Paul's intent, since he knows it would guarantee an Obama win. No way he would not know that is true.

I don't see him doing that to be honest, but he should put it to rest.

When I heard this over the weekend it worried me as well. More power too him if he can win the nomination, but it would be horrible if he goes the other way. We can't take another term of Obamanomics.

reply to post by HauntWok


To understand where this is coming from click on this LINK and watch the video.

When asked if he would pledge not to run as a third candidate Paul dodged giving a direct answer. "I pledge that I have no intention of doing it," Paul said cheerfully.

"Well, you know, I have to vacillate a little bit in my life," Paul said when pressed more about his opinion. Transcript below.

One thing for sure is that FoxNews is giving Paul lots and lots of coverage this time. He's been on around fifty times I think and it's just getting started.

I wish he could speak in full sentences and express himself better so I'd understand him better.

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by CynicalDrivel

 

He ran for the Libertarian party in 1988.

Republican? Independent? Doesn't matter. If they don't let him play in the Republican party and the American people want him as president, I say run as an Independent.

Problem is the core Republicans will not go that way and it would for sure guarantee a win for Obama and nothing for Paul. He simply does not poll high enough nationwide yet. Of course he may later on, but then he has been in the national spotlight for a long while now and still can't get much over 10% of conservative voters.

I see that confronted with a real question the Paul supporters ignore the thread. Hmmmm, interesting. I'm wondering how many of his supporters are actual voters?

The reason Ron Paul is running as a Republican is because the media ignores you even more if you are an independent. Donors ignore you, people laugh at you, and the media isolates you. I've worked for independents and run as an independent for an elected office, getting shut out by ballot access laws. For better or worse, Paul is stuck in the two-party matrix because that is how Americans think.

That said, I think the idea that Paul running as a third party candidate automatically secures an Obama victory is wrong. His most controversial position about ending all foreign involvement is that which does not appeal to Republicans, but more to progressives and Democrats. I personally know a number of Democrats, Greens, and others for whom this is an important enough issue that they would vote for Paul.

I was a Republican for a number of years, and if they select a candidate whose views don't fit my own such as Mitt (let's waterboard them all) Romney, I would not only not vote for him, but would welcome a third choice.

In terms of what Paul has to say, I agree he delivers a terrible sound byte and lacks polish, but there is reason and logic behind all he says. I'm not nearly as radically libertarian as he is, but I suspect having someone inclined to using little power as the executive would serve to focus both parties in Congress in a better way, and make an immediate dent in our ongoing debt and budget crisis by reducing our foreign commitments immediately.

Unless his perspective has radically changed from 2008, I believe Paul will be disinclined to run as a third party candidate, but I also believe that a great many of the votes posters claim will be lost from the GOP if he runs are votes that other candidates might not find so easy to get. They wouldn't vote for Obama, but they very well might just sit on their hands.