No Paul = No Vote in November

[Gravik]

Even if Paul isn't on the ballot and there's no way to write him in, I'm still going to take a pen, cross out the candidates on the ballot, and write Ron Paul's name in.

 

[pen_thief]

If I couldn't write in Ron Paul, I would vote for Obama for two reasons.

1) Payback for the lovely treatment Ron Paul and his supporters have been given by the GOP.
2) If there is a 2016 (yes, things do look that bad to me sometimes), someone running on the Republican ticket could have a chance. It would be nice if we could break our left/right conditioning by then as a nation, but it would be a stretch, considering the fluoridated, MSG-filled brains of most Americans. (I wish we could save them.) I still see the two-party system in place in another four years, as our intelligence isn't growing as fast as the tyranny.

We're all scattering to the wind, it seems. But I'm a NOBPer ... regardless of how helpful that is. I'm not going around screaming it and trying to hold anything or anyone hostage. Like others have mentioned, it's just a fact.

 

[pen_thief]

Even if Paul isn't on the ballot and there's no way to write him in, I'm still going to take a pen, cross out the candidates on the ballot, and write Ron Paul's name in.

 

[opinionatedfool]

This only turns people off and makes people hate Paul even more rabidly.

As has been very clear so far, they already hate Paul. So who gives a rip?

No One But Paul!

 

[opinionatedfool]

Even if Paul isn't on the ballot and there's no way to write him in, I'm still going to take a pen, cross out the candidates on the ballot, and write Ron Paul's name in.

Totally agree.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I'll support Ron if he's on any ballot. And if he's not, I'll support Gary Johnson on the Libertarian card. I don't think that writing in Paul is useful.

 

[opinionatedfool]

I'll support Ron if he's on any ballot. And if he's not, I'll support Gary Johnson on the Libertarian card. I don't think that writing in Paul is useful.

I got turned off by Gary Johnson when he somewhat bashed Ron Paul a couple times.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I got turned off by Gary Johnson when he somewhat bashed Ron Paul a couple times.

I'd advise you to look closer at those supposed bashes. I'm not going to get into it because dozens of threads have already been turned into battles over this and I think the liberty movement needs to come together rather than drive wedges, so I'll just ask you to take a look deeper or PM me if you're interested in what I have to say about it.

 

[Brian in Maryland]

I'll support Ron if he's on any ballot. And if he's not, I'll support Gary Johnson on the Libertarian card. I don't think that writing in Paul is useful.

Writing in Ron Paul is absolutely usefull to me. It will be my last chance to do it and I will feel great about it. Last time I voted for the person that Ron Paul endorsed, Chuck Baldwin. I will vote for Paul this time no matter what. My wife feels the same.

 

[thoughtomator]

Gary Johnson doesn't get either monetary policy nor the foundational concepts of liberty. As he himself professed, everything with him is a cost-benefit analysis - which leads to many positions coincident with the liberty movement, but for all the wrong reasons.

In particular, Johnson's refusal to acknowledge that the economic crisis has come due to criminal behavior, and not mere innocent errors of judgment, is a deal-breaker for me. I know of at least twice he was pressed on this specific point and he definitely doesn't comprehend at all what happened and has no policy to deal with it moving forward.

"No One But Paul" is not a threat - it's a promise. And an inevitability.

 

[anaconda]

Regarding the article: I don't think the establishment will risk putting Rand on the ticket. Plus it's no guarantee that many Ron Paul supporters would vote for that ticket anyway.

 

[HigherVision]

Gary Johnson doesn't get either monetary policy nor the foundational concepts of liberty. As he himself professed, everything with him is a cost-benefit analysis - which leads to many positions coincident with the liberty movement, but for all the wrong reasons.

Better than the typical politician who comes to statism for all the 'right' reasons.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Writing in Ron Paul is absolutely usefull to me. It will be my last chance to do it and I will feel great about it. Last time I voted for the person that Ron Paul endorsed, Chuck Baldwin. I will vote for Paul this time no matter what. My wife feels the same.

It's useful for whatever personal satisfaction you may get from it, I guess. I was referring to usefulness from a results perspective.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Gary Johnson doesn't get either monetary policy nor the foundational concepts of liberty. As he himself professed, everything with him is a cost-benefit analysis - which leads to many positions coincident with the liberty movement, but for all the wrong reasons.

He never said that everything is cost benefit. He said that he governs from a cost benefit position. He wouldn't sell his children to slavery if the cost benefit was right, and he wouldn't betray his political ideals for a cost benefit. He talks cost/benefit because he's an executive, not a legislator - his focus has always been on being a manager. As an entrepreneur, I sympathize.

In particular, Johnson's refusal to acknowledge that the economic crisis has come due to criminal behavior, and not mere innocent errors of judgment, is a deal-breaker for me. I know of at least twice he was pressed on this specific point and he definitely doesn't comprehend at all what happened and has no policy to deal with it moving forward.

I've heard very articulate addresses from Gary on the financial crisis. If you have a link you wanted to review with me, shoot it over I'd love to see it.

"No One But Paul" is not a threat - it's a promise. And an inevitability.

For you.

 

[Bruno]

I got turned off by Gary Johnson when he somewhat bashed Ron Paul a couple times.

Me too.

 

[libertyman]

I can not vote for someone who has little or no respect for the constitution or the rule of law. That leaves only Paul. Sorry GOP but your phony conservatives are just fabrications of the corporatist machine. Fakes who love only money, power and are sold out meat puppets for the elite. They are not going to get much of the Paul vote I think.

 

[jolynna]

It doesn't have to. Ron Paul and supporters have been treated like crap at every turn. There is no way I'm voting for anyone other than Ron Paul during the primary. It's not about convincing, it's just a fact. If I didn't have the option of writing Ron Paul in I would probably campaign for the other side just to spite the freaks in the establishment.

It is just like in 2008 when the choice was Obama or McCain.

Everyone who HATES Obama, would have hated McCain if he'd been president.

Sometimes there is NO lesser evil. Obama vs. Romney will be one of those elections.

In my opinion.

 

[thoughtomator]

He never said that everything is cost benefit. He said that he governs from a cost benefit position. He wouldn't sell his children to slavery if the cost benefit was right, and he wouldn't betray his political ideals for a cost benefit. He talks cost/benefit because he's an executive, not a legislator - his focus has always been on being a manager. As an entrepreneur, I sympathize.

If he has moral principles, he is apparently loathe to articulate them. Based on what he has said to date, how exactly do you know he wouldn't sell his children to slavery for a profit? Listen to him - he doesn't base any of his arguments on simple recognition of right and wrong, he doesn't acknowledge the limited role of government envisioned by the Founders, and so on and so forth.

Any libertarian in Johnson is coincident with his managerial approach and does not appear to be morally grounded in any way at all.

 

[Nathan Hale]

If he has moral principles, he is apparently loathe to articulate them.

He just doesn't run on ideology. He runs on his experience and his strategic ideas.

Based on what he has said to date, how exactly do you know he wouldn't sell his children to slavery for a profit? Listen to him - he doesn't base any of his arguments on simple recognition of right and wrong, he doesn't acknowledge the limited role of government envisioned by the Founders, and so on and so forth.

He's mentioned the founders in the past, but he's not running from that angle, as I've previously stated. If you need that in a candidate then whatever, but not every libertarian is going to run as an ideologue.

Any libertarian in Johnson is coincident with his managerial approach and does not appear to be morally grounded in any way at all.

I regret that Johnson hasn't convinced you that he's a genuine libertarian. I guess I've been in the movement for so long that I take guys like Paul and Johnson for granted, as I've known them from back when the movement had no legs and everyone was talking to empty rooms.

 

[jolynna]

This only turns people off and makes people hate Paul even more rabidly.

If Ron Paul was worried about being "liked" he would tell people what they want to hear BEFORE the election and do it his way afterwards...like Obama did. And like Romney, Santorum and Gingerich will do...if elected.

It has cost Ron Paul votes. But, he hasn't budged on inch on matters that concern violating the Oath of Office OR the Constitution.

Integrity matters. I don't think Ron Paul expects his followers to support advocates of unconstitutional actions (including deliberately sending troops to die in vain in a needless unprovoked war OR the seizures of 200-year-old freedoms) to make him popular.

In my opinion.