Gary Johnson Gary Johnson polls at 7 percent in Obama/Romney match up

[cheapseats]

That is for Paul to decide who he endorses and who he stumps for.

What could go wrong with THAT, insofar as he CANNOT stump for them all?

Are you one of, or do you work on the campaign of, one of the Hopefuls?

But your suggestion that he will be running a "free-standing...

NO ENTANGLING ALLIANCES.

...all-out campaign"

IN IT TO WIN IT.

...he will be severely hampered by money and media coverage.

BOTH of these will be the case, whether he runs Republican or Independent.

And again, he has already stated that barring any major event, like the collapse of the dollar, he has no interest in running as a third party candidate. So until he decides to do so it is a moot point.

It would help a LOT, if he would state that unambiguously. But he always throws in a provocative qualifier? WHY?

If YOURS is the prevailing STRATEGERY, then he should DECLARE IT UNAMBIGUOUSLY. Make a press conference out of it..."a special announcement". FINITO, argument about it among Supporters. He should SAY that, too: STOP ARGUING.

The Republican FIELD is presently yanked TOO FAR RIGHT to win the General, I BELIEVE. Gary Johnson on the debate stage could only be GOOD for We The People, INCLUDING or ESPECIALLY Ron Paul.

But you can keep pushing the issue if you want.

Thanks, Dad.

Feel free to attend the LP and CP conventions if you wish. I think it is only 300 bucks for a ticket to each of them plus travel & lodging of course.

And prices at the GOP convention?

Have a safe trip.

You too, TRAVELING MERCIES.

 

[Cleaner44]

If the GOP fails to nominate Ron they will lose to Obama... slam dunk.

 

[tbone717]

I mentioned "others" because there are dozens of libertarian Republicans who are running in primary contests. There is a thread "stickied" in the 2012 candidates forum that lists them all

 

[cheapseats]

If the GOP fails to nominate Ron they will lose to Obama... slam dunk.

What if bona fide Deciders don't CARE about that? What if that kinda WORKS for them?

The Market closed 2011 basically EVEN, on an INCREASE in our already unsustainable #WealthGap. They'd rather that business was booming, sure, but since that ain't happenin' yet and WON'T be for awhile, BASICALLY FLAT ON INCREASED WEALTH GAP is a quite acceptable holding pattern.

That WORKS in #FeudalEconomics, which this IS. Landlords & Serfs. Nobles & Aristocracy. Monarchs & Courts. Some Ron Paul Supporters are FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM & JUSTICE, PERIOD. Some Ron Paul Supporters are JOCKEYING TO BECOME LIBERTARIAN-LEANING NOBLES. There is a world of difference.

Four more years of #Obama? Major Players spy sure route to controlling the White House for EIGHT, possibly even SIXTEEN years.

If Ron Paul will win, it will be in SPITE of Party, Media, Campaign, Die Hards...and even himself.

LANDSLIDE is one thing they cannot ignore or control. OF ALL PEOPLE, y'all should realize that a landslide is required for people to NOT ACCEPT "official" results that are at variance with what they were expecting.

 

[cheapseats]

...I have been doing this since the late 80's...

I mention this not to MAKE trouble, but to DISTURB SHIT.

I believe Ron Paul is FOOLISH not to play the third-party card. I believe threat of a third-party run is his LEVERAGE. I believe Aspiring Politicos care more about their own budding careers than the denouement of Ron Paul's illustrious career.

People disagree? Fine. People genuinely believe that the Delegate Strategy cannot be bushwhacked, like OTHER plans have been bushwhacked? DELUSIONAL, thinketh I, but FINE. Difference of opinion.

The SLANT of this Board is defined by particular Supporters with particular views. They OWN the Board or are OFFICIAL Moderators, you say? FINE to that, too. But it's STILL Censorship. Yes, it is.

Has no one but me ever watched movies depicting our Forefathers ARGUING LIKE HELL, PRE-REVOLUTION? Name-calling, resentments, ill will, the WORKS. Or do we reckon that's just Hollywood embellishment?

Try THIS on for lively disagreement . . . I believe anyone who has "been doing this since the late 80's" is absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt, PART OF THE PROBLEM.

 

[speciallyblend]

At present they only have ballot access in 27 states (source)

I misread your post about 8% more. My apology.

sounds like the lp is slacking if that is the case!

 

[tbone717]

I believe Ron Paul is FOOLISH not to play the third-party card...I believe anyone who has "been doing this since the late 80's" is absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt, PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Considering that Paul, has been part of this since the late 80's and actually before, must be the reason you think he is foolish for not buying into your strategy - he would be one of those that are "part of the problem". Yeah, us old guys who have made 10's of thousands of phone calls, knocked on thousands of doors, stood out in the rain for 13 hours handing out flyers on election day, given 10's of thousands of dollars to libertarian candidates -- yeah we are a real problem.

But you can keep pushing the 3rd party nonsense. The likelihood of it happening is infinitesimally small, so frankly it is a pointless to even discuss it.

 

[tbone717]

sounds like the lp is slacking if that is the case!

Well they really do not have all that many people in the grand scheme of things. If you take a big state that might need 5000 signatures to get on the ballot that takes a lot of time and manpower to accomplish the task. I thought at one time they had full ballot access, but maybe because of their lack of electoral success, they have begun to lose it in some states. They haven't won a state legislature seat in over 10 years, so maybe that is part of the reason. Honestly, though I am not sure. I try to keep tabs on the LP and CP, but their effect is so non-existent that I really don't pay too much attention to issues like this where they are concerned.

 

[speciallyblend]

Well they really do not have all that many people in the grand scheme of things. If you take a big state that might need 5000 signatures to get on the ballot that takes a lot of time and manpower to accomplish the task. I thought at one time they had full ballot access, but maybe because of their lack of electoral success, they have begun to lose it in some states. They haven't won a state legislature seat in over 10 years, so maybe that is part of the reason. Honestly, though I am not sure. I try to keep tabs on the LP and CP, but their effect is so non-existent that I really don't pay too much attention to issues like this where they are concerned.

I totally understand. When i say 3rd party as an option. I am just referring to this after they lock out ron paul. Hard to predict the future for sure. The gop truly has only 2 options in tampa. Ron Paul or Obama! It might be an easy decision for the gop establishment. Obama!

 

[IDefendThePlatform]

If the GOP fails to nominate Ron they will lose to Obama... slam dunk.

I agree with this, but obviously the rest of the GOP either hasn't realized it or refuses to accept it. One great way for us to gain ground would be to make this much more obvious to non-Ron Paul supporters.

A great way to make it more obvious would be for Ron to get the nomination of either the Constitution Party and/or the Libertarian Party and then have another national poll like the one that recently came out from Reason-Rupe:

June 28th, 2012
Reason-Rupe National Poll:

Obama (D) 43%
Romney (R) 35%
Paul (L, C) 16%


Once Ron is the official nominee of a third party that would be guaranteed to make headlines and draw attention to polls like this. The GOP delegates to the convention would know for a fact that a vote for Romney=a vote for Obama. Half of Romney's appeal is his supposed electability, so this would be the strongest case we could make to win over delegates at the convention.

 

[cheapseats]

At present they only have ballot access in 27 states (source)

I can do that, too.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/sinc...luded-from-presidential-debates/#.T3rbBGCPVZI

Since the Libertarian Party has ballot access in all 50 states, Congressman Paul could not be excluded from presidential debates


Paul/Ventura ticket would pose greater threat than Ross Perot’s 1992 campaign

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, November 9, 2011

A new poll conducted by NBC and the Wall Street Journal suggests that should Congressman Ron Paul eventually decide to run as a third party candidate, he could completely transform the 2012 election and pose an even greater threat to the establishment than Ross Perot’s 1992 campaign.


“Paul would earn the support of 18 percent of voters in a three-way race with President Obama and Mitt Romney, according to the poll, with Romney earning 32 percent and Obama receiving 44,” reports The Hill.

Paul’s number beats that of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who would garner 13 percent of the vote if he ran as a third party candidate.

Such figures are already impressive given the fact that Paul has not even begun to harness the momentum that a third party bid could generate...

NO, I do not see Jesse Ventura on a ticket.

YES, I know InfoWars is a Hot Topic.

Y'know where the above article sez "...reports The Hill"?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...n-paul-bloomberg-could-garner-sizable-support

Poll: Third-party bids by Ron Paul, Bloomberg could garner sizable support
By Justin Sink - 11/08/11 09:25 AM ET


A third-party bid by Ron Paul or New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg could seriously disrupt the 2012 presidential election, a new poll from NBC and The Wall Street Journal says.

Paul would earn the support of 18 percent of voters in a three-way race with President Obama and Mitt Romney, according to the poll, with Romney earning 32 percent and Obama receiving 44.

That 18 percent exceeds the 8 percent that Paul earned in the last poll of Republicans by USA Today/Gallup, showing some of the crossover appeal to independents and Democrats of the libertarian Texas congressman. Paul mounted a third-party bid in 1988, but has said so far that he didn't anticipate running if he does not win the Republican nomination.


“I have no intention of doing that. That doesn't make sense to me to even think about it, let alone plan to do that," Paul said Sunday on Fox News...

Observe that "I have no intention" is critically different from "I will NOT".

I thought "Ron Paul Republicans" WANTED the OTHER Republicans to lose if the "party" fails/refuses to nominated Ron Paul? Well then, jeepers, they'd WANT a third-party to play Spoiler. Theoretically...which, believe you me, I WELL know differs from Reality...for NO ONE BUT PAUL people (what's the view-count on that thread...about 30,000 now?), EVEN IF RON PAUL UNDERSTANDABLY DOES NOT WANT TO ASSUME THE THIRD-PARTY MANTLE, they'd want Gary Johnson to kick some ass.

 

[tbone717]

Cheapseats, you bold-faced this: "Since the Libertarian Party has ballot access in all 50 states, Congressman Paul could not be excluded from presidential debates"

This is incorrect. Not only do they not have access in 50 states as per their own website, the CPD rules state that a candidate must have a level of 15% support across five polls at the time the decisions are made as to who to include in the debates.

As far as the poll cited in the Hill, during the same time (and it may have been the same set of polls) Jill Stein got 24% in a hypothetical three-way race. Do you think Jill Stein is going to get 24% in November?

 

[cheapseats]

Cheapseats, you bold-faced this: "Since the Libertarian Party has ballot access in all 50 states, Congressman Paul could not be excluded from presidential debates"

Because it was the HEADLINE.

This is incorrect.

I don't trust you. Them's breaks. I believe yer givin' people BAD ADVICE, or I wouldn't post that.

Do you think Jill Stein is going to get 24% in November?

ARE. YOU. RUNNING. FOR. OFFICE. AS. A. REPUBLICAN. OR. BEING. PAID. TO. ASSIST. SOMEONE. WHO. IS. RUNNING. FOR. OFFICE. AS. A. REPUBLICAN.?

 

[tbone717]

Do you trust the source? http://www.lp.org/2012-ballot-access

And to answer your question, I am not running for office, nor am I a paid staffer.

 

[cheapseats]

I don't trust you. Them's breaks. I believe yer givin' people BAD ADVICE, or I wouldn't post that.

I can TELL you've been "in politics" for a long time...that you have EXPERIENCE...y'know HOW? You are slippery about NOT answering questions AT ALL, fugheddabout unambiguously.

My YES or NO question stands:

ARE. YOU. RUNNING. FOR. OFFICE. AS. A. REPUBLICAN. OR. BEING. PAID. TO. ASSIST. SOMEONE. WHO. IS. RUNNING. FOR. OFFICE. AS. A. REPUBLICAN.?

 

[tbone717]

I can TELL you've been "in politics" for a long time...that you have EXPERIENCE...y'know HOW? You are a slippery Master of NOT answering questions unambiguously.

My YES or NO question stands:

I already answered the question in post 74.

 

[cheapseats]

I already answered the question in post 74.

Missed that, THANK YOU. Maybe 'cuz you pointedly did NOT answer previous inquiries.

Maybe 'cuz this is the THIRD TIME I must ask a question repeatedly before you answer it.

In any case, I don't TRUST you.

 

[cheapseats]

I mentioned "others" because there are dozens of libertarian Republicans who are running in primary contests. There is a thread "stickied" in the 2012 candidates forum that lists them all

All thoroughly vetted, I suppose? Not a Christine O'Donnell or Scott Brown in the bunch?

Lemme ask you another question, DAD: Are you in recollection that no small few Ron Paul Supporters (invested, like pro-GOP people) can only even CONCEIVE of voting Republican BECAUSE of Ron Paul?

SHOW OF HANDS: Who thinks a Ron Paul loss is actually a WIN if we can get a host of OTHER Republicans into OTHER offices?

 

[tbone717]

Missed that, THANK YOU. Maybe 'cuz you pointedly did NOT answer previous inquiries.

Alas, I don't TRUST you.

I honestly do not care.

 

[cheapseats]

I honestly do not care.

I don't blame you. I don't care about YOU, either. As I said, I wouldn't even SAY it except I believe you are giving BAD ADVICE traceable to self-interest.

Do you care about THIS?

...No small few Ron Paul Supporters (invested, like pro-GOP people) can only even CONCEIVE of voting Republican BECAUSE of Ron Paul.

SHOW OF HANDS: Who thinks a Ron Paul loss is actually a WIN if we can get a host of OTHER Republicans into OTHER offices?