IF the RNC bans Dr. Paul

[MsDoodahs]

THEN...

We need to have a live broadcast streamed over the net where HE answers EACH QUESTION POSED TO EACH CANDIDATE.

The next debate is June 5.

How difficult/expensive would it be to set something like this up?

 

[nphsbuckeye]

I seriously doubt the Republic Party would do that. It would be the same thing as saying they are scared of Ron Paul, and in effect, would be the cowards way out.

 

[MsDoodahs]

AP reported the story earlier this evening.

There is an RNC state chairman (Michigan, I think it is) who has already started the effort.

 

[tsoldrin]

This move would split the Republican party... in fact, just attempting it may cause a lot of shockwaves. On the one hand, there are plenty of conservatives who are terrified of not being unified against the perceived threat liberals pose... on the other, there are the neocon supporters who seem to want perpetual war and are dragooning the real conservatives in with them through fear of a less powerful party. At some point it has to break, because it's becoming obvious to everyone that the ideologies of conservatives and neoconservatives are absolutely polar opposites. In fact, I would say it's time for the real conservatives to realize that the damn democrats are even more closely aligned with them than the neocons are.

 

[MsDoodahs]

Frankly, I hope and pray it DOES split the party.

Into smithereens.



I also hope and pray that someone will take this on and get prepared NOW so that IF the effort to ban Dr. Paul from any future debate IS successful, he can STILL get his message out.



I don't trust the GOP at all, and I expect them to ban him at the very last minute in an attempt to try and keep him from getting the message out, so we need a plan IN PLACE, and we need to get it in place as soon as possible.

 

[cujothekitten]

THEN...

We need to have a live broadcast streamed over the net where HE answers EACH QUESTION POSED TO EACH CANDIDATE.

The next debate is June 5.

How difficult/expensive would it be to set something like this up?

Not hard at all, he can do a few different things. He could set up a streaming chat on his site, which isn't difficult to set up. He can also use Stickam.com (though that's really low budget).

Personally what he should do is answer every question put forth from every debate into a few youtube videos.

 

[kelldor]

I was chatting in e-mails with Dr. Peterson, the author of the Stop the North American Union site, 1 day and she seemed to think that Dr. Paul might run as the Constitution Party candidate if he doesn't get the nomination. Last night he was asked by Allan Colmes (i think?) if he would consider running as an "independent" and he said "no", but he was never asked about a "3rd party".

There is still a lot of time left, but things are happening a lot earlier this election cycle than ever before. That means that if he doesn't get the nomination that there is still a lot of time to get people to dump the neo-conned republican party and register for the Constitution party. A good grass roots effort could successfully get him on the ballot in every state, and I think Ron Paul has already shown his ability to compete on a national level, considering multiple poll standings showing him winning or coming in 2nd in the 1st 2 debates.

 

[Anne]

If he is banned from the next debates we need to riot in the streets. Seriously.

 

[kylejack]

I was chatting in e-mails with Dr. Peterson, the author of the Stop the North American Union site, 1 day and she seemed to think that Dr. Paul might run as the Constitution Party candidate if he doesn't get the nomination. Last night he was asked by Allan Colmes (i think?) if he would consider running as an "independent" and he said "no", but he was never asked about a "3rd party".

There is still a lot of time left, but things are happening a lot earlier this election cycle than ever before. That means that if he doesn't get the nomination that there is still a lot of time to get people to dump the neo-conned republican party and register for the Constitution party. A good grass roots effort could successfully get him on the ballot in every state, and I think Ron Paul has already shown his ability to compete on a national level, considering multiple poll standings showing him winning or coming in 2nd in the 1st 2 debates.

He has been asked if he would run as a Libertarian again if he couldn't get the Republican nomination and he stated that he would not. I doubt he'd run on the Constitution Party platform. I think he's trying to put all bets on the Republican nomination right now so that people will take him seriously as a Republican candidate, but I think there's still a chance he might run on an Independent or Libertarian ticket if he doesn't get the nomination (and frankly, I think its not likely that he will).

 

[Texan4Life]

I agree.

I mean it would be a major grassroot battle to get the rep. nomination. But I don't think any amount of grassroots could get another party other than dem or rep. in the white house. and at that point i would probably vote lesser of two evils.. Not trying to rain on anyones parade or be a nay-sayer.

Thats why we need to be damn sure to give it all we got to get the nomination. Well at this point, keep him in the debates. Becuase his support goes up every debate. I would probably shit a brick if they successfully barred him from the debates.

 

[kelldor]

Something to keep in mind, Ron Paul and Libertarian Party has differences on immigration, as LP is for totally open borders.

 

[kylejack]

Something to keep in mind, Ron Paul and Libertarian Party has differences on immigration, as LP is for totally open borders.

The LP wouldn't let quibbles over borders and abortion keep them from running the greatest libertarian politician currently in Congress. He already ran on the ticket in 1988.

 

[Hawaii Libertarian]

Thoughts on Banning Dr. Paul

Michigan is interesting because I think they have more Arab-Americans there than any other state in the union. This may be pandering to a perceived group of voters.

The RNC has a real dilemma on its hands. Jim Gilmore is (or was) in charge of the RNC if I recall. If they try to ban Dr. Paul, they'll need to cover their tracks and take out the other "low pollers" like Gilmore himself, Tancredo, Hunter, and Brownback.

Any attempt to take out Dr. Paul this early will most likely be perceived as a transparent cave-in to the neocon and Rockefeller wing of the GOP and will nail the coffin shut for the Republicans as a wimpy party that can't handle diversity or criticism of its views.

 

[ratsbew]

I think it would be a good idea, but the problem is the only people who would watch it are likely those who already know about/support Ron Paul, so it would not do much good. But I agree that it would be great for him to be able to answer all of the questions without time limits.

Maybe he needs a daily/weekly video podcast, the first half should be devoted to one of his campaign managers telling how to help spread the word an the second half could be some Ron Paul.

 

[jimvkruse]

I think banning Paul from future debates or from the party itself or whatever would be an extremely stupid move by the GOP because they would be, in effect, making a martyr out of Ron Paul. That would be the second stupid move they've made towards Paul lately. The first was Rudy's ridiculous attack. They would've been smarter if they just continued the silent treatment Paul was receiving. Of course, if they were smart, they wouldn't be in the minority now.

 

[vertesc]

I have a web server and plenty of bandwidth if they ban him... I agree that a live feed of him answering ALL the questions would be great. It could be cut up into Youtube videos afterwards.

Anyways, I'm sure he has his own people working on this.

 

[jonpz]

Make sure you sign the petition to keep Dr. Paul in the debates...

http://www.petitiononline.com/RPRNC08/petition.html