Source Close to Ron Says it's Possible he Could Still be Swayed to Run 3rd Party.......

Ummm... I rarely use Facebook and only log in every 2-3 months, n it looks a lot different now than I remember but I posted the link to the project page on FB for drafting RP and then went to "invite friends"... I entered match for ron paul 2012 and it only matched about 200 (ok over) and I had to click a check box for every F'n one of them... and then the ones for other ppl you might want to invite... then I posted the link on my wall that goes out to about 3,000 friends (all RP supporters) with about 500 waiting to be approved - I'm pretty promiscuous on my political account... and suddenly my inbox (e-mail) is blowing up :(

Not my facebook e-mail, but my personal e-mail!

I've been poking around settings and not finding anything that turns off e-mail notifications! Does anyone know where I can find that?

Thanks,

-t
 
Last edited:
IMHO, I think we need to get behind Gary Johnson right now. Ron Paul has not, and may not run a 3rd party candidacy. And so, to keep this momentum going, Gary Johnson is now at the forefront of this movement.

Gary Johnson sickens me. He could won that empty senate seat instead of running a failed presidential bid.
 
Wouldn't GJ be making a big announcement on Leno (instead of RP) if this had anything to do w/ the Libertarian party?
 
Guys, Ron is not going to run third party, he is done. He is probably going to talk to Leno about his retirement plans, and how he wishes to spend his remaining days.

And he has earned it.
 
Rand is not going to get a shot. Ryan, Christie, Rubio. There is just no way.

I think a 3rd party 2012 run should be done, it may actually help things down the road by showing you can not win without Ron Paul!!!
 
Rand is not going to get a shot. Ryan, Christie, Rubio. There is just no way.

I think a 3rd party 2012 run should be done, it may actually help things down the road by showing you can not win without Ron Paul!!!

Don't forget Palin, Santorum, Huckabee, and Bush III. Rand has less chance than Ron ever had. If Ron has it in him, he needs to make one last run for it and do the right thing, team up with Johnson and make a coalition of independents/third parties. Crush the two party system and the corporate fascism of Obama/Romney.
 
Don't be so quick to assume that taking over the GOP, assuming it could be done, would work.

From Joel Skousen, in his Aug. 24 World Affairs Brief, discussing the GOP's treatment of Ron:

"Hopefully, this will end the movement's false hope that you can take over or reform the Republican party. Even if we did, the media and key politicians would suddenly claim the Republican Party was 'captured by extremists' and move to form a new party which they would instantly grant majority status. That's what they did in Israel when they formed Kadima.

"And even if it were possible to finally expose the conspiracy which controls both parties, they would reform and create new parties with new names and fresh faces, but controlled by the same people. That's what they did in Italy in 1994 when all the major parties were exposed for corruption. Fighting secret combinations of power in government is extremely difficult once they have gained control of a majority in Congress, the courts, and the media, not to mention the secret organs of enforcement in the police state."

They will indeed try to do this, but forcing them to do so would be a victory in and of itself: The GOP has a 150 year tradition, and identity politics with the GOP brand are strong. When we force the neocon leaders into starting a new party, they will have a significant degree of difficulty establishing the legitimacy of that party as a sole competitor to the Democrats, even with the media's help. In the best case scenario, we'll hold the Republican Party, and their top-down splinter party will fizzle out after ordinary Republicans see them as sore losers and control freaks. In the worst case scenario, they'll gain traction...but this moment of confusion would still briefly destabilize the two-party system and give other third parties an unprecedented chance to get a piece of the action as well. With some luck, we could take advantage of this period and get enough people elected to Congress to replace winner-take-all plurality voting with range voting and proportional delegation, thereby destroying the two-party system for good.

All that said, we must totally expect this reaction and prepare for counteracting the media propaganda the best we can. Nothing is certain...but all we can do is our best. At the very least, we'll make them work for it for once. ;)

This sounds about right to me. Those people aren't going to just say "welp, you beat us, I guess we just have to lay down and accept it." They will find somewhere else to carry on if they're unable to in the Republican Party. That's why the primary focus must be intellectual and educational, not political. Once we win the intellectual battle, the political battles will take care of themselves. The way to win is with intellectual conversion combined with plain old attrition.

Unfortunately, you overestimate the average person's intelligence and open-mindedness, because you have exceptional intelligence yourself. We've come to the point of diminishing returns for purely educational approaches, because most people do not have even remotely rational personality types, and they do not form their views based on intellectual conversation or rational arguments.

Instead, most people form their views based on social cues and conformity and pick up logical supporting arguments later, so they can defend their views just well enough when challenged to sidestep serious cognitive dissonance. The less intelligent someone is, the less they need to know for this, because they're less able to recognize competence or judge an argument's validity. If an argument goes over an average or below average thinker's head, they're likely to just dismiss it and fall back on insults or restate their original points, unaware they've already been demolished. (Virtually everyone does things like this on occasions when they're being absent-minded, but some people make it much more of a habit. ;)) At the farthest frontiers of incompetence that push the boundaries of credulity, complete idiots won't realize they're losing an argument under almost any circumstances, unless they're made to feel out of touch with the peers whose acceptance they rely upon. That's the one thing most people can't handle: Social rejection. Not coincidentally, most of us are pretty good at dealing with that, which is part of the reason we let our minds stray far enough from the mainstream to take libertarian arguments seriously in the first place.

No matter how emotional, irrational, and biased people are though, almost everyone has brief windows of "vulnerability" to growth when the social atmosphere changes: For instance, if someone who values strength and power ties their identity to the "strength" of the GOP and suffers a humbling loss, it can shake them enough to actually start thinking and wondering why. (McCain's loss helped in this regard.) Similarly, if someone sees that former pariahs are now taking over a major party and ousting former power brokers, this signals a shift in the winds. The same applies to winning elections. It's popular in libertarian circles to think that we need to educate a lot of people, because that's how we came around, but we're exceptional in a lot of different ways. In many ways, it's actually winning that demonstrates "social proof" of an idea's viability (popularity and social acceptability) and opens people up to it.

If we want to actually bring people over, we have to understand how they think...and most people do not think like us at all. We can either learn from this and adapt, or we can continue running into brick walls.
 
Last edited:
Guys, Ron is not going to run third party, he is done. He is probably going to talk to Leno about his retirement plans, and how he wishes to spend his remaining days.

And he has earned it.

I know his former long term chief of staff. Who QUIT over his hiring decisions in protest - I think Benton. She was a LONG TIME chief of staff! Dr Paul is in excellent health. Excepting flat feet and hearing. His spouse is not. Carol is a wonderful lady - I know her. This is a wonderful lady who has produced a wonderful family.

His former chief of staff told me that he has a very active mind and that he would NEVER RETIRE! I believe that.

Just saying... This is starting to compromise personal family issues so I'm just going to STFU!

-t
 
Last edited:
Since sore loser laws in many states prevent him from being on any ballot this is NOT going to happen.

I thought the same thing, but in further research it seems that the sore loser law does not apply running for the President of the United States.

It would never apply to the VP office. In fact The founders of the Constitution assumed that the second place vote getter would be the second most qualified, and therefore should be vice president.

I would love if Ron Paul and Gary Johnson ran as a team! That is also how the Constitution saw the roles of President and VP.

GO RON PAUL!!!
 
Just occured to me...

What if its announcement to run for a local office?

Governor of Texas? Perry has been in there for a record number of years (12).
 
Well, I certainly hope Ron is reading up on all our sage advice... :)

I can't imagine there would be any question as to whether we would support him or not.
 
Paul will not run third party in 2012 although I wish he would, to hold the GOP and Romney accountable for the vote rigging and rules breaking they perpetrated throughout the year. He has tried to prevent the movement from being plausibly blamed for the Republican loss of the election, and an indy run at this point would certainly lead to our being scapegoated.

Paul is retiring from CONGRESS, but not from politics. He will be continuing to build the movement through speaking, writing and fundraising efforts for other liberty candidates over the next few election cycles. I have also suggested that he could be running third party in 2016, as a means of protecting Rand Paul while he runs for the Republican nomination. An LP/CP run wouldn't be as tasking for him as another GOP attempt, so it would be quite doable for Ron.

The GOP will know in that situation that they can't escape a Paul being on the ballot on Election Day that year. The establishment candidate wouldn't have the false aura of electability, and vote rigging couldn't be performed to defeat Rand, as it would ensure Ron stayed in on the LP/CP line.
 
Last edited:
Paul will not run third party in 2012 although I wish he would, to hold the GOP and Romney accountable for the vote rigging and rules breaking they perpetrated throughout the year. He has tried to prevent the movement from being plausibly blamed for the Republican loss of the election, and an indy run at this point would certainly lead to our being scapegoated.

Paul is retiring from CONGRESS, but not from politics. He will be continuing to build the movement through speaking, writing and fundraising efforts for other liberty candidates over the next few election cycles. I have also suggested that he could be running third party in 2016, as a means of protecting Rand Paul while he runs for the Republican nomination. An LP/CP run wouldn't be as tasking for as another GOP attempt, so it would be quite doable for Ron.

The GOP will know in that situation that they can't escape a Paul being on the ballot on Election Day that year. The establishment candidate wouldn't have the false aura of electability, and vote rigging couldn't be performed to defeat Rand, as it would ensure Ron stayed in on the LP/CP line.

So, ummm....You haven't read the entire thread?

We have an answer to all your objections. ;)
 
Back
Top