Time for Ron Paul to Give Up the Mantle of Republican...

Todesherr

Todesherr

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
9
I like Ron Paul a lot. I support him fervently and agree with him on most issues (I am pro-choice so that is one glaring difference) but I think the time has come for him to drop the mantle of 'Republican'. Yes, 50 or 60 years ago, being a Republican meant something different to that of the current title but one can only rehash the past so often. It is as if I were to tell an American I am a liberal. He would immediately ascribe to me positions which I do not hold and then when I told him I am a classical liberal he still likely would not understand. To back up my position I would say Adam Smith was a liberal! On the continent in Europe liberalism still carries its old semantic meaning whereas in the United States liberalism is almost exclusively associated with New Deal Liberalism. To an American I would say I am a libertarian. To a German I would say I am a liberal.
Ron Paul is making a mistake retaining his Republican status. He IS no longer in touch with party and that IS a very good thing. The current Republicans are scum. Making references to Eisenhower and Taft is the same as saying I am a 19th century liberal. No, Ron Paul is a libertarian for the most part and should run for both President and Congress as a member of that party. It would better suit him and it would be more honest. Rock on Ron Paul!

Republicani mortui sunt, libertariani viveant!
 
I think his strategy has worked remarkably. He has won more supporters and informed more of the general populace as a Republican candidate than he ever could have as a Libertarian. The system is biased against 3rd parties, and I know because I was a registered Libertarian for many years and I saw time and again how the media bashed our candidates, how the federal funding worked against us, and how incredibly hard it was for us to get on the ballot in all 50 states for a Presidential election.

Paul has had more face time on national television than any libertarian candidate for any office ever has. He wouldn't be in these debates if he wasn't running as a Republican. There wouldn't be all the youtube videos.

Furthermore, I think it possible to take back the Republican party from the neocons, and that would be quite a significant victory.

This is more about the spread of ideas than anything else, and the Libertarian Party was founded exactly for that purpose: as an educational endeavor. The first LP presidential candidate was a college professor, after all!

Once we win the war of ideas, we will win the fight for Washington.
 
We need to take our party back! Ron Paul is just the kind of Republican we need!
 
Indeed. If Ron Paul was running as a third party, he would not have been in any of the debates thus far -- nor any upcoming debates.

The debates are a cruicial element for a campaign, as they are a great tool for exposure.

Also, the libertarian label doesn't sit well with a lot of people. They need to bee educated on what it is, but during a campaign is not the time for that education.

If this were a third party campaign, we'd be sitting at less than the 10% we've been averaging.
 
Maybe if we could get MORE candidates like Ron Paul in the Republican party, things would start to change over time to where the Republican party used to be.
 
when?

han_solo said:
Maybe if we could get MORE candidates like Ron Paul in the Republican party, things would start to change over time to where the Republican party used to be.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you just have to junk the old car as it is no longer worth the cost of repair. I think that is true of both major parties.

What you suggest has been tried...Ron Paul arguably is the only libertarian who's reached and held a seat in congress. In fact, the Libertarian Party lost literally thousands of people (a huge walk off of members and supporters) to exactly this same strategy---hey, let's go take over the Republican Party. Yeah, that's the ticket! And has anyone noticed any success?

Many argue that a few members of congress, other than Ron Paul, have maintained libertarian voting records. However, few would argue that any other member has been as consistent as Paul.

The reality is the R and D officeholders for the most part are the same.

The distinctions are so blurred as to render each party meaningless as to any principles.

Obviously, the Libertarian Party is home turf for Ron Paul and those who support his ideals. Ron Paul is a member of the Libertarian Party. Libertarians support Ron Paul's current campaign...so, there really is nothing to separate Republicans who support Ron Paul from others who support Ron Paul.
 
Last edited:
Ron is literally the Republican's last chance with me. Not that they'll miss me much.

There is no point in supporting people who do exactly the opposite of 1) what I want and 2) what they promise me they'll do to get my vote.
 
Paul needs to stay a republican, I believe, and more of us need to join the republican party. It would be much more productive to steer the Republican party than to either try to make something viable out of the Libertarian party or start another party from scratch. The Republicans have been infiltrated by both Theo and Neo Cons. It's time for the Liberty Cons to get to work.
 
Most of his platform is right in line with 2000. Only states rights and gold/real goods economics are older "issues". At the root...the principles, he is right to say he has more in common with the official party line. Until they change the National party line, he is it.
 
Todesherr said:
I like Ron Paul a lot. I support him fervently and agree with him on most issues (I am pro-choice so that is one glaring difference) but I think the time has come for him to drop the mantle of 'Republican'. Yes, 50 or 60 years ago, being a Republican meant something different to that of the current title but one can only rehash the past so often. It is as if I were to tell an American I am a liberal. He would immediately ascribe to me positions which I do not hold and then when I told him I am a classical liberal he still likely would not understand. To back up my position I would say Adam Smith was a liberal! On the continent in Europe liberalism still carries its old semantic meaning whereas in the United States liberalism is almost exclusively associated with New Deal Liberalism. To an American I would say I am a libertarian. To a German I would say I am a liberal.
Ron Paul is making a mistake retaining his Republican status. He IS no longer in touch with party and that IS a very good thing. The current Republicans are scum. Making references to Eisenhower and Taft is the same as saying I am a 19th century liberal. No, Ron Paul is a libertarian for the most part and should run for both President and Congress as a member of that party. It would better suit him and it would be more honest. Rock on Ron Paul!

Republicani mortui sunt, libertariani viveant!
Click to expand...

You've got your brain on backwards. The Republican Party is no longer in touch with its roots.
 
Running as a Republican gives him guaranteed ballot access, free media exposure (especially the debates), easier fund-raising (most people don't want to donate to a third party), and millions of built-in idiot votes come general election time.

But yes, I would prefer it if he didn't have to run with a party label. Hell, I don't think anyone should. We need to adopt the kind of voting reform that could make that happen.
 
fmontez said:
Bingo! GOP forever... Ron Paul is our Candidate.. the liberals can go find their own Dr. Paul. .
Click to expand...

They do have their version....Dennis Kucinich.....the only reason he isn't catching traction like Ron Paul, is the mass hate for the GOP due to neocons running it, there isn't mass hate for the neolibs in the Democratic Leadership Council (The liberal version of the neocons).

Hillary gets elected and 8 years of the Neoliberals at the DLC running the party....and no end to Iraq and an invasion of Darfur....look for Kucinich to be the Ron Paul of 2016.....well at least if we still have a country left by then,,,,,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bryan
Greatest Ron Paul videos
Replies
0
Views
431
Bryan
Bryan
Cleaner44
This isn't what I imagined in 2007 but I will take it!
Replies
19
Views
2K
fisharmor
fisharmor
Michael Landon
I need help.
Replies
5
Views
640
Intrepid
Intrepid
nobody's_hero
Ron Paul: President Trump 2.0 hit the ground running
Replies
0
Views
912
nobody's_hero
nobody's_hero
PAF
The Problem With Voting for Candidates With Biblical Values
Replies
8
Views
2K
CCTelander
C
Back
Top