Convincing Ron Paul to accept $MILLS in matching funds for an independent presidential run

He can't sub out. In most states, he is not allowed to replace his name on the ballot. He's said he's a Ron Paul supporter and that Paul would be in his cabinet--that's pretty much all he can do. It's too late for Paul to be on the ballot in a third party or independent fashion.

Ron can just run write in then, as independent, but I think he can still make some of the ballots. I know he can make certified write in in CA. I'd support whatever he did and his matching funds could at least help him make an impression. But if it isn't with the LP or CP it is less likely to happen, probably.
 
The LP official quoted in a recent article merely said it would be "difficult" to replace GJ with RP, not that it was impossible. It sounded like they might lose ballot access in a few states, not "most". But even if they lost access in half of the states, so what? 10 million votes from 25 states is still better than 400,000 votes from 50.

Not to mention likely getting in the debates v not getting in the debates. However, the LP picked a candidate and if they want to pass this by, they have every right to do that. It is just no less against the rules for Ron to run as VP and my understanding was that that was on the table, when I started in this discussion. THAT wouldn't be worth it, imho.
 
Not to mention likely getting in the debates v not getting in the debates. However, the LP picked a candidate and if they want to pass this by, they have every right to do that.

I'd like to hear concrete details about the ballot issues of a ticket swap, but it sounds like the conference call should have been with Gary Johnson instead of Ron Paul, who is far too humble and sensible to initiate any negotiations with the LP. If 800 people got on the phone to GJ and Evan Alaska said what I wrote in post #36, I wonder what Gary would say. LOL

It's entirely GJ's decision on whether to step down. It then becomes the party's decision about who to replace him with, and if GJ endorsed Ron Paul, it would seem natural that they'd go with his endorsement, assuming holding another convention isn't practical.
 
Last edited:
He would never accept government funds /pipedream

this. he would reject it, i think way more easily than he rejected medicare money. and accepting it would be a betrayal of his principles so i wouldn't support him if he did. but since RP won't betray his principles, i know he won't accept it.
 
Last edited:
this. he would reject it, i think way more easily than he rejected medicare money. and accepting it would be a betrayal of his principles so i wouldn't support him if he did. but since RP won't betray his principles, i know he won't accept it.

Is that money not given voluntarily by taxpayers by checking that box?
 
this. he would reject it, i think way more easily than he rejected medicare money. and it would be a betrayal of his principles so i wouldn't support him if he did. but since RP won't betray his principles, i know he won't accept it.

Does this mean if Ron Paul had locked up the Republican nomination in the Spring, you would have stopped supporting him if he had accepted a $68M taxpayer-subsidized convention?
 
i don't follow. you're joking surely but i'm not getting the joke.

I haven't done a US tax return in 10 years, but I do remember a box that I had the option of checking that would have allowed a portion of my taxes to go toward matching funds for presidential campaigns (actually, I don't remember exactly what it was for, but it was something to do with campaign funding, so I assume specs is right about the details).
 
If he were going to run indy, why wouldn't he have done it months ago? What possible reason would he have now all of a sudden to decide to do that? And if people want him to do that, why did they wait until now to try to push it?
 
I haven't done a US tax return in 10 years, but I do remember a box that I had the option of checking that would have allowed a portion of my taxes to go toward matching funds for presidential campaigns (actually, I don't remember exactly what it was for, but it was something to do with campaign funding, so I assume specs is right about the details).

well, i paid income taxes and was never aware of the existence of that box, so it's not voluntary from my pov.
 
well, i paid income taxes and was never aware of the existence of that box, so it's not voluntary from my pov.

It was right there on the form. If you didn't check it, then you didn't give money toward it. It was a donation above and beyond what you already had to pay.
 
It was right there on the form. If you didn't check it, then you didn't give money toward it. It was a donation above and beyond what you already had to pay.

ok. i see, thanks. then it's probably not unethical for RP to take that money. probably late though, the election is soon.
 
The presidential election campaign fund checkoff appears on US income tax return forms as the question Do you want $3 of your federal tax to go to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund?

Originally $1 and implemented in the 1970s as an attempt at the public funding of elections, this money provides for the financing of presidential primary and general election campaigns and national party conventions. Beginning with the 1973 tax year, individual taxpayers were able to designate $1 to be applied to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.[1] Both the Republican and Democratic nominees in the general election receive a fixed amount of checkoff dollars. Nominees from other political parties may qualify for a smaller, proportionate amount of checkoff funds if they receive over five percent of the vote. The national parties also receive funds to cover the costs of their national conventions. Matching funds are also given for primary candidates for small contributions. The campaign fund reduces a candidate's dependence on large contributions from individuals and special-interest groups. This program is administered by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

Requirements to be declared eligible include agreeing to an overall spending limit, abiding by spending limits in each state, using public funds only for legitimate campaign-related expenses, keeping financial records and permitting an extensive campaign audit.

Checking the box does not change the amount of an individual's tax or refund. The $3 is paid by the government. In other words, checking the box causes the federal government to receive $3 less in tax revenue for other spending, than if you hadn't checked the box.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_election_campaign_fund_checkoff
 
Last edited:
If he were going to run indy, why wouldn't he have done it months ago? What possible reason would he have now all of a sudden to decide to do that? And if people want him to do that, why did they wait until now to try to push it?

Because a week ago, we all thought Ron Paul would get a 15 minute unedited speech to the RNC if 5 states put his name up for nomination. Then the clusterfuck of a Republican convention actually happened...
 
Because a week ago, we all thought Ron Paul would get a 15 minute unedited speech to the RNC if 5 states put his name up for nomination. Then the clusterfuck of a Republican convention actually happened...

We did? I sure didn't. And neither did Ron Paul. Besides, what does that have to do with anything? If he wanted to run indy, then why would he want to give a 15 minute speech at the RNC?
 
We did? I sure didn't. And neither did Ron Paul. Besides, what does that have to do with anything? If he wanted to run indy, then why would he want to give a 15 minute speech at the RNC?

Running independent now gives him a chance to get the message out that the RNC denied him the chance to deliver.

Nobody but Ron knows why the chances of him running 3rd party/independent went from ZERO to possible, but very small in the last week, but from what he said during the conference call last night, that seems to be the case. Perhaps he's as worried as I am that Mitt Romney is far more a closet Stalinist than anyone now dreams.
 
Running independent now gives him a chance to get the message out that the RNC denied him the chance to deliver.

But again, why would he wait until now to decide that? If he wanted to do that, the time to decide was months ago when he knew that he couldn't get the Republican nomination. The same goes for people who wanted him to take that route.
 
But again, why would he wait until now to decide that? If he wanted to do that, the time to decide was months ago when he knew that he couldn't get the Republican nomination. The same goes for people who wanted him to take that route.

Um, because no one knew before the convention that the RNC would completely silence Ron Paul and his delegates? If there had been talk of Ron running indy before the convention, then it would have been a certainty that they would silence him by any means possible.
 
Back
Top