Should ron paul run third party?

Post Reply New Topic

Topic*

This has worked before, remember Jimmy Carter? He ran third party after being shafted from his Dem party, but running third party he won. Everyone is currently sick of the lesser of two evils complex, not to mention the war, so it is worth a shot.

Jimmy Carter did not run third party, he was a dark horse who unexpectedly won the democratic nomination. The Libertarian Party has already offered Paul a spot on their ticket if he doesn't win the Republican nomination, and the Constitution Party also supports him. That said, those two party nominations combined are worth... what, 2% of the vote? Maybe 3%? And the media will continue to censor Paul. I support Paul, but realistically he has no chance of winning. That fact will not change my vote unless he drops out of the race- in which case I will not be voting at all.

Voter disenfranchisement in California

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWKxwVZmomc[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyKF8ckP_UQ[/youtube]


Flat out fraud in Chicago

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZKfP1ObSaU[/youtube]



and in the legislative, it's perfectly okay to commit voter fraud.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG6X-xtVask[/youtube]



So what are people supposed to do with all of this going on?

it wouldnt make any difference if he did. no third party canidate is gonna win for a very long time

If he has nothing better to do, then he might as well run as an Independent.

I wonder why he is getting so much financial support, but then almost nobody is voting for him?

He needs to run libertarian because running independant means your name might not even be on the ballot.

I so hope Dr Paul wins.

Obama and Hillary are just 2 flies hovering over what's left of the turd pile.

I wish people would quit claiming Obama is the next JFK.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIum0o-_LZk[/youtube]

Because he has been censored by the corporate media. Most people just vote for whoever they see on TV, and NBC, CNN, FOX, etc do not let Paul get air time, or if they do they try to portray him in a negative light. The people who are passionate and informed more frequently support Paul, but they are a tiny minority within the entire electorate. Which is one of the reasons I think we should do away with universal suffrage- when so many people who vote are completely uninformed (or misinformed, such as the huge number of New Hampshire voters who thought McCain was anti-war) the election results are completely meaningless. May as well institute a random lottery system if you're going to let ignorant morons have the power to outvote more thoughtful voters 100 to 1.

I have a poster on my locker that tells people to "Youtube Ron Paul". Assuming a few people you know have the high-speed computers to do so, that is a good place to start. We will take what we can get, before of course the internets get controlled.

Voting Ron Paul is like voting for Ralph Nader all over again!

*vomits*

Do you think that Ron Paul could get the Green Party nomination?

Hell Naw!

Well, Independent it is, then.

If he can get as much cash as Ross Perot, then he will be able to buy significant television time, and get is message out there.

One problem is that I don't think that he has given much thought to how his Gold Standard thingy would work. His lectures probably wouldn't go over very well.

Maybe. I wonder if Bloomberg would also run 3rd party.

Michael Bloomberg hasn't officially annouced he is running yet.

Even if, it would be too late for him to run.