We must draft Ron Paul, starting over, not an option

[robertwerden]

I see that some here are considering starting over with a different candidate for 2012. To me, it put us right back to the "google ron paul" days.

Remember how hard it was to get Ron Pauls name out?
Remember the vetting that had to be done to get past the lies about him and the BS?
Remember all the videos and news paper adds and constant arguing we did to defend him and educate people?

Why go through all that again for someone new?????????????????????????????


We accomplished so much and to throw it away now is moronic. Ron gets on the news every week. He is a house hold name now. The news broadcasters who trashed him are now calling him for interviews regularly.

If we allow him to not run, we will have spent all that time and money for nothing. We know he allows people to visit him in his office, so go see him. Lets start a draft Ron Paul campaign now before he officially says he is not running.

We need to pressure him to run, and focus on the GOP as well as pointing out the destructive nature of the Obama administration. The Republican party is still strong and if they had honestly believed in McCain he would have won. We have the same weapon Obama had, and that is the youth vote.

Trevor where are you, this is the time to get the "draft Ron Paul" message cooking.

 

[Primbs]

I agree.

 

[MRoCkEd]

I agree.

 

[Bruno]

Agree, but this time he needs to build support then switch to 3rd party when the time is right, imo. I know I will get hammered for that comment, and it may put his congressional seat in jeopardy, but a 3rd party can win.

Obama gets 33%
GOP nominee gets 33% (same cast of characters that we saw last time)
Ron gets 34%

And full force in Iowa with many personal stops. Do some infommercials like Perot.

 

[JoshLowry]

Agreed.

Although Bruno I couldn't even keep up with RP in Iowa. Him not working his ass off is a misconception and I'm not sure how it got started.

I was tired following him around at all the different places in Iowa and I didn't have to stand for hours at a time giving speeches.

 

[robertwerden]

3rd party should happen after he is in the White House.

 

[Bruno]

Agreed.

Although Bruno I couldn't even keep up with RP in Iowa. Him not working his ass off is a misconception and I'm not sure how it got started.

I was tired following him around at all the different places in Iowa and I didn't have to stand for hours at a time giving speeches.

I guess I was just passing along what I had read also that he didn't campaign as much in Iowa. I missed him here, and that is also through fault of the media, of course. I didn't do my own research, and found him too late. :o .

Glad I'm on board now, though! btw- Thank you and everyone else for all your hard work in Iowa and every other state. This grassroots teamwork blows Obama's away.

There's always more that can be done. He got 10% here then, he can get 20% next time, especially since the economy and personal freedoms will be more of a focus. The Iowa State Fair is huge! Set up a booth at the front gate, and RP can greet people one the first day. 1,000,000 walk through the front gate in 10 days.

Of course, the final decision will be his. Does he want to go through all that again? I bet he would, because of how much he cares for liberty and how amazed he was at all the people that he reached in the past two years.

 

[PureCommonSense]

He should run in the GOP first and build support. If he doesn't get the nomination - it could happen if we plan ahead - and the GOP is another old-fashioned pseudo-conservative then he should run 3rd. And himself this time...no "open 3rd party endorsements" that was lame. Except for a few notable exceptions 3rd parties in America are a buncha losers.

 

[torchbearer]

He should run in the GOP first and build support. If he doesn't get the nomination - it could happen if we plan ahead - and the GOP is another old-fashioned pseudo-conservative then he should run 3rd. And himself this time...no "open 3rd party endorsements" that was lame. Except for a few notable exceptions 3rd parties in America are a buncha losers.

Funny, that is what the neocons say about us....

 

[PureCommonSense]

The reality is we have a two-party system. It may not be ideal, but like it or not that's what we have to work with. And the Republican Party is where most of our core values stand so this movement must remain a Republican movement. End of story. Everything else is just a waste of time.

 

[torchbearer]

The reality is we have a two-party system. It may not be ideal, but like it or not that's what we have to work with. And the Republican Party is where most of our core values stand so this movement must remain a Republican movement. End of story. Everything else is just a waste of time.

Your wasting your vote argument.
If you don't vote for status quo you don't count.


I say, If you vote status quo, you get status quo.

 

[PureCommonSense]

Your wasting your vote argument.
If you don't vote for status quo you don't count.


I say, If you vote status quo, you get status quo.

Don't get me wrong, I always believe in voting - that's civic duty in our democracy. And if neither of the two candidates is good I sometimes do vote third, usually Constitution Party - after all if its a douche and a turd why not go for an apple pie that hasn't got a chance.

But that's my point, third parties rarely if EVER win - especially for president. The closest ones ever come is Teddy Roosevelt Bull Moose in 1912 and he was a former president who had high popularity. Voting for them sometimes is okay if its really the best option but we shouldn't make it the primary focus of our strategy or we're digging our own grave.

 

[torchbearer]

Don't get me wrong, I always believe in voting - that's civic duty in our democracy. And if neither of the two candidates is good I sometimes do vote third, usually Constitution Party - after all if its a douche and a turd why not go for an apple pie that hasn't got a chance.

But that's my point, third parties rarely if EVER win - especially for president. The closest ones ever come is Teddy Roosevelt Bull Moose in 1912 and he was a former president who had high popularity. Voting for them sometimes is okay if its really the best option but we shouldn't make it the primary focus of our strategy or we're digging our own grave.

They don't win because people keep spewing your argument.
Then people don't vote for them.
A self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[PureCommonSense]

They don't win because people keep spewing your argument.
Then people don't vote for them.
A self fulfilling prophecy.

My "argument" is the way the world works. I'm not saying its a good thing, but we have to change what we can within the context of the world.

Serenity Prayer:
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.

Ron Paul's philosophy of freedom is something we can spread, if we have the courage to. But the two-party system is something we must have the serenity to accept, at least in the short term.

 

[torchbearer]

My "argument" is the way the world works. I'm not saying its a good thing, but we have to change what we can within the context of the world.

Serenity Prayer:
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.

Ron Paul's philosophy of freedom is something we can spread, if we have the courage to. But the two-party system is something we must have the serenity to accept, at least in the short term.

Self-fulfilling prophecy, you are doomed to suffer from the same government.
Enjoy it.

 

[LibertyEagle]

"Always vote for principle. Though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." — President John Quincy Adams

 

[PaleoPaul]

But guys, the "others" that "we" (not you guys, but others) may want aren't unknown. They've already gained some national notoriety.

So, it wouldn't be as hard to have to get their names out as it would have for Dr. Paul.

 

[mstrmac1]

I Agree someone start a site to draft Ron Paul 2012 ... I think he is waiting on us to tell him. Lets do this!!!

 

[enjoiskaterguy]

dispite whatever people may say to make Ron Paul look like he can't run because of his age, or because of the other candidates runnning, or the current times, or the Obama factor, I will still suppport ONLY Ron Paul in 2012 for president.

 

[enjoiskaterguy]

I Agree someone start a site to draft Ron Paul 2012 ... I think he is waiting on us to tell him. Lets do this!!!

yes...a draft ron paul site must be made...I know trevor lyman isw doing some lame $5 dollers for freedom deal, but I think becuase of his name recognition in the money bomb world, he should create this website. I also encourage anyone with web design skills to do it to. Lets do this thing.