No Paul = No Vote in November

[socal]

Just about every possibility has been covered, but maybe not this slight variation. If Paul is not on ballot,

(1) if the race in my state or the overall election is not close, largest 3rd party, probably Libertarian. Even if Johnson is a fake, he's not going to win, and it would send a message. I want to make sure my vote is counted, hence no Paul write-in.

(2) if the race in my state and the overall election is close, Obama. The best way to take over the GOP is to make sure they're defeated again.

Fortunately I don't think (2) is going to happen as I don't ever want to have to vote for a Dem.

 

[wgadget]

I have a friend who swears that it will take four more years of Obama for enough people to wake up to the truth espoused by Ron Paul.

When everything sucks into 2016, they'll say, "GEE, Ron Paul was right after all...again."

 

[Nathan Hale]

My heart tells me to write in Paul because that is who I truley support
My head says we need our numbers to show to get recognition and validation even if its a loosing stratagey. A liberitarian vote might actually be the best way to show this?

Follow your head. I'm in this to benefit the movement, not to feel good while we go down in flames. Boosting the LP helps the movement, so if Paul isn't on a ticket, I'm voting for Gary Johnson and the LP.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Writing in Paul. Period

Gary Johnson is a fraud, too, like Obama and Romney.

Gary Johnson is not a fraud. He's been courted by the LP since he was in office, and if you think Ron Paul supporters have a high bar, you've never met the Randroid Ancappers at the head of the Libertarian Party.

 

[Athan]

No Paul = No Vote in November

Ron Holland
The Daily Bell
March 10, 2012

“I would also say of Ron Paul – he doesn’t need to win. In his view he is winning already. This is an ideological point he is making. But here’s why it’s electorally significant – a lot of people, I mean 41 percent in Virginia, only two people on the ballot, still a lot of people voted for Ron Paul. A lot of those voters are portable. They’re not Republican – they’re not dedicated Republican voters.” – Tucker Carlson, Editor, The Daily Caller

It is time for a groundswell of Ron Paul supporters to quietly, respectfully but firmly make their position clear to the mainstream media and the GOP establishment. Simply put, “No Paul on the ticket means no vote for the GOP in November.”

The Ron Paul Campaign has the GOP establishment stuck between a rock and a hard place even though they have not won a single state in the primaries to date. Every Paul supporter knows the underhanded tactics used by the Republican leadership at the state and national level as well as the organized smear and news blackout campaign carried out by the mainstream media.

rest of article here:
http://www.thedailybell.com/3693/Ron-Holland-No-Paul-No-Vote-in-November

Oh, I'm voting. I'm writing in Paul and then voting on other candidates. Republicans and democrats beware.

 

[tbone717]

I have a friend who swears that it will take four more years of Obama for enough people to wake up to the truth espoused by Ron Paul.

When everything sucks into 2016, they'll say, "GEE, Ron Paul was right after all...again."

I tend to agree with your friend. Which if Paul does not get the nomination, having influence on the GOP platform is important. That way if by chance Romney wins the general, the at the very least we have some our our agenda in the platform. That will help our guys in the House and the Senate move some legislation through.

 

[PolicyReader]

I have a friend who swears that it will take four more years of Obama for enough people to wake up to the truth espoused by Ron Paul.

When everything sucks into 2016, they'll say, "GEE, Ron Paul was right after all...again."

"...oh but he's done with Politics now... so who do we vote for?" cue bitter party/partisan infighting.

Most of the (younger i.e. under 40) dems and (esp) Indies I know who voted for Obama did it for reasons like Civil Liberties and a sane foreign policy (I tried to tell them at the time that he was a fraud but that's another story) most of the GOP voters I know this time round are talking about "anyone but Obama" and aren't seeing how Romney IS Obama when it comes to Policy (or how Santorum isn't much of a shift either).
Most voters I know have a bias toward both parties, Dems for Paul are more likely to lean Dem sans Paul, Rep for Paul tend to lean GOP sans Paul, Indys for Paul tend to eye-ball a "lessor of two evils" vote. (obviously these are just trends not universal truths).

Paul has PROVEN his record, bluntly no one else has to the same degree. You think it's hard to get apathetic voters, youth voters, new voters, dem voters, semi-neocons to turn out to vote and be involved now with the connections and voting history Paul has? Try it in 2016 when things are worse, times are even tougher and there's no candidate with the same proven integrity. It's not going to be pretty and from all the experience I have in volunteering and activism (sans a Paul win) I don't see this getting any easier in 2016, in fact I see it very much going the other direction. I could be wrong, and I hope I am but I likely won't believe it until I see it since it flies in the face of all my experience and observations.

I'll keep fighting regardless, and I usually try to keep my posts positive so I don't lose a constructive presentation but I think that if we're banking on 2016 to be easier than 2012 we're really kidding ourselves.

 

[HardyMacia]

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.

You missed the point of what he was saying. It's not that there was no criminal misdeeds, but many of the misdeeds the Government gave them approval to do them all as the bankers were generally following the laws in most cases. (You know all the bad, unconstitutional, banker lobbyist created laws.). The solution is to throw them all out still.

 

[HardyMacia]

Yes, Ron is the ONLY candidate that can bring enough Independents & Democrats to beat Obama so if GOP voters want to oust Obama then Paul has to be the nominee

Actually, Johnson pulls more independents than Paul. Johnson has been elected twice as governor in a democratic state. After Paul drops out and the momentum shifts to Johnson then Obama/Romney better beware because even if the GOP voters aren't fed up enough the American public is fed up, and they will vote for Johnson en masse.

 

[HigherVision]

Yeah I'm gonna vote for Johnson in the final I decided. Paul in the primary of course.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Gary Johnson is not a fraud. He's been courted by the LP since he was in office, and if you think Ron Paul supporters have a high bar, you've never met the Randroid Ancappers at the head of the Libertarian Party.

Who have the LP candidates been in the past and who have they supported since running? And yes, GJ is a fraud.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Who have the LP candidates been in the past and who have they supported since running? And yes, GJ is a fraud.

You must be George W Bush, because you seem to think that simply repeating something makes it true. And your analysis of LP candidates makes my point. Yeah, in 08 they nominated Barr, which, considering his endorsement of Gingrich, was a huge mistake. But before that, they had another huge flaw - they were a debating society with no political sense that nominated purist tip-of-the-diamond Randroid minarchists. And yet for three cycles before Barr they pushed Johnson to run on their ticket. How about that.

 

[wgadget]

1. Become a delegate.
2. Listen to the March 12 Josh Tolley audio.
3. Practice saying "President Paul."

 

[John F Kennedy III]

1. Become a delegate.
2. Listen to the March 12 Josh Tolley audio.
3. Practice saying "President Paul."

This.

 

[Anti Federalist]

No One But Paul is not a threat to convince anyone to switch alliances (though if it has that effect, great!) It is a reality that will happen regardless.

Exactly, it is a simple statement of fact, that the GOP rank and file could have taken heed to or ignored.

It appears that they have ignored it.

Very well.

Four more years of Obama are likely a certainty then.

(Not that I care in the least one way or the other with regard to the other Three Stooges or O-bomb-ya. On every single major issue that is important to me, there will be no appreciable change or difference)

No One But Paul

 

[row333au]

 

[row333au]

 

[Liberty74]

Not in 2012. But when Obama once again wins in a landslide, despite being a piece of shit president, they'll have to take a big leap in our direction to have a chance in 2016.

Obama is not going to win in a landslide assuming he wins period. Their camp came out yesterday and admitted they would lose to Romney if the election was held today. There are no signs things are getting better economically.

The establishment will never come our way.

This is why we must use our numbers and platform to take control of the Indy Party that has 30-35% of the voters yet no platform or leader.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Obama is not going to win in a landslide assuming he wins period. Their camp came out yesterday and admitted they would lose to Romney if the election was held today. There are no signs things are getting better economically.

The establishment will never come our way.

This is why we must use our numbers and platform to take control of the Indy Party that has 30-35% of the voters yet no platform or leader.

Admitting he will lose to Romney is purely rhetoric. And Indy isn't a party.

 

[Nathan Hale]

//