Is RP still legally able to declare a 3rd Party run?

[anaconda]

I meant why would he want to run as VP?

Ron brings tons more money, name recognition, SUPPORTERS and attention. The prize would be the presidential debates and to say that should be Gary, not Ron, when Ron is the one bringing everything to the table is simply silly.

Two reasons:

1) I was naively speculating about the potential for possible "sore loser laws" in various state election laws. which Ron might avoid by being a VP nominee rather than a Presidential nominee. But I am am terribly ignorant about sore loser issues. I thought maybe I had heard somewhere that certain states would not put your name on the ballot as the nominee of a particular party if you had earlier campaigned for the nomination of another party. But it looks like, from what I've read in this thread, thanks to you, idiom, and Peace&Freedom, that this was perhaps not a legitimate concern.

2) Was kind of assuming that it would be poor protocol to have Gary step down, especially since the ticket would likely be seen by the voters as an arrangement of convenience, where the legitimate personification of the "President" vs. the "Vice President" would be blurred into complete ambiguity. The voters would be donating and voting for the "VP' more passionately than the "Presidential" nominee.

 

[sailingaway]

Personally I'd consider it an insult to Ron for him to be in the vp slot and I would be against his doing it. The reason to run is to debate obama and Romney, no other. I can see GJ's position on the other side, but in that case they shouldn't ask Ron, at all. If they ask they should know he should be presidential candidate if he accepted.

But maybe they'll let his delegates be seated to nominate him from the floor in which case this isnt going to happen anyhow, IMHO

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Respectfully, I've never heard Ron Paul say anything remotely close to this.

As a side note, I simply cannot imagine the puppet masters letting Rand Paul get anywhere near the White House. This idea of "playing nice" with the GOP on behalf of Rand simply baffles me. More realistically, it seems like a dishonest ploy to keep Ron and Rand in line as long as possible. But without any honest intention of reciprocating.

I've heard from an semi-insider this has been the emphasis for a while within the Paul family. Paul used the 2012 run to set the table for the future, in which the liberty movement continues in Congress after he retires with several successors to him elected to office, and his national apparatus is turned over to Rand.

 

[sailingaway]

I've heard from an semi-insider this has been the emphasis for a while within the Paul family. Paul used the 2012 run to set the table for the future, in which the liberty movement continues in Congress after he retires with several successors to him elected to office, and his national apparatus is turned over to Rand.

'within the Paul family' could as easily mean Benton/Rand as Ron.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Personally I'd consider it an insult to Ron for him to be in the vp slot and I would be against his doing it. The reason to run is to debate obama and Romney, no other. I can see GJ's position on the other side, but in that case they shouldn't ask Ron, at all. If they ask they should know he should be presidential candidate if he accepted.

But maybe they'll let his delegates be seated to nominate him from the floor in which case this isnt going to happen anyhow, IMHO

FWIW, there will be VP debates (if things play out as usual). Ron would get a chance to debate Biden (or someone else if the Bamster for some reason decides to drop Biden)

 

[sailingaway]

FWIW, there will be VP debates (if things play out as usual). Ron would get a chance to debate Biden (or someone else if the Bamster for some reason decides to drop Biden)

it isn't for me to say but I can't imagine Ron being interested in doing all that to debate Biden.

And he'd be the one bringing everything to the table, so it doesn't even make sense. I wouldn't even want him to in that case.

 

[Ivash]

Johnson got 8% in one extremely questionable poll- I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 8% of the American voting public hasn't even heard of the guy, and that on voting day he gets less than 2% of the vote (less than 1% is more likely, but I wouldn't bet any amount of money on it). I highly doubt adding Ron Paul into that mix would change much.

Edit: And, seriously, the idea of their being a unified group of 'puppet masters' in the Republican (or Democratic) party is ridiculous. The elites are split up in many dozens of different groups, and fight amongst each other all the time. Didn't the lack of unity during the Republican Primary show that? Many backed Romney, others backed his rivals, and a huge number of people waited on the sidelines for someone else to run.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Johnson got 8% in one extremely questionable poll- I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 8% of the American voting public hasn't even heard of the guy, and that on voting day he gets less than 2% of the vote (less than 1% is more likely, but I wouldn't bet any amount of money on it). I highly doubt adding Ron Paul into that mix would change much.

Edit: And, seriously, the idea of their being a unified group of 'puppet masters' in the Republican (or Democratic) party is ridiculous. The elites are split up in many dozens of different groups, and fight amongst each other all the time. Didn't the lack of unity during the Republican Primary show that? Many backed Romney, others backed his rivals, and a huge number of people waited on the sidelines for someone else to run.

They are in the same club. They work with and against one another (at different times), but not on anything important, just for kicks and fun. They are rich, have everything they need, and play games. But they are in the same club, and WE AIN'T IN IT

edit: Think: One minute (year) Santorum says, "If you want a conservative, it's Romney", then later, "Romney is no conservative".....they don't hate each other, they have fun together....and "Hey, you got me that time, next time....watch out buddy.....".

 

[Ivash]

They are in the same club. They work with and against one another (at different times), but not on anything important, just for kicks and fun. They are rich, have everything they need, and play games. But they are in the same club, and WE AIN'T IN IT

edit: Think: One minute (year) Santorum says, "If you want a conservative, it's Romney", then later, "Romney is no conservative".....they don't hate each other, they have fun together....and "Hey, you got me that time, next time....watch out buddy.....".

No, some of them really do hate each other. I'm not saying this from an outsider point of view- you'd probably consider me part of their 'club'. I can guarantee you that all the human failings of weakness, envy, pride, greed, etc affect them just as much as they do other people. This, along with type-A personalities that often clash means that there are many petty rivalries within the elite. There are also more substantial differences- one of the reason why so many routed against Romney is because he has so many people he owes already, and thus can't really give more people ambassadorial spots or the like. I guarantee you that if Rand Paul looked like a serious candidate people would go to him just because they want what he has to give (and he'd have to give it if he didn't want them to stand in his way). Others disagree with each other on policy. Many believe what they believe is best for the country, and find it difficult to listen to others (as you can see the faults of the elite are the same as the faults of us all), and this causes even more contention.

There is some unity, but much, much less than those viewing the scene from the outside would think.

 

[sailingaway]

No, some of them really do hate each other. I'm not saying this from an outsider point of view- you'd probably consider me part of their 'club'. I can guarantee you that all the human failings of weakness, envy, pride, greed, etc affect them just as much as they do other people. This, along with type-A personalities that often clash means that there are many petty rivalries within the elite. There are also more substantial differences- one of the reason why so many routed against Romney is because he has so many people he owes already, and thus can't really give more people ambassadorial spots or the like. I guarantee you that if Rand Paul looked like a serious candidate people would go to him just because they want what he has to give (and he'd have to give it if he didn't want them to stand in his way). Others disagree with each other on policy. Many believe what they believe is best for the country, and find it difficult to listen to others (as you can see the faults of the elite are the same as the faults of us all), and this causes even more contention.

There is some unity, but much, much less than those viewing the scene from the outside would think.

I don't think we consider them unified in lock step, but they are driven by an overlapping community of interests -- theirs -- which don't apply to us and run contrary to many of ours. Speaking of 'them' as a group is mere conversational convenience.