• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Should Ron Paul run as a third party?

He's polling second in Iowa, so this would be a pretty bad time for him to drop out.
 
Bikewer said:
The Donald is holding out for a third-party run "if he doesn't like the Republican nominee"...
Click to expand...
In other words, the Donald wanted to see his name in the paper this week.

Bikewer said:
Meanwhile, some pundits are pointing out that Paul might win Iowa....
Click to expand...
Oh, no. Paul supporters are insufferable when he wins an on-line poll, I can't imagine how they will be if he won an actual primary/caucus that counts.
 
bynmdsue said:
How many votes could he seriously remove? The Ronulans can't spam a voting machine.
Click to expand...


In contrast to all the thousands of enthusiastic Newtians we hear [and see] so often about, I guess. :rolleyes::D

Anyway, it's up to Paul if he decides to run as a TPC after he certainly will lose. Was there any TPC throughout history that actually won the American presidential election?
 
If Ron Paul ran third party, this time he would pull a lot of progressive votes.
 
Spindrift said:
Why do you think that?
Click to expand...

Google Ron Paul news. Look at all the comments beneath the articles. Many of them are from progressives who are changing their registration to be able to vote for Paul. Not the usual Ronulan suspects.

I think he will win Iowa and will be first or second in New Hampshire.
 
Democracy Simulator said:
Google Ron Paul news. Look at all the comments beneath the articles. Many of them are from progressives who are changing their registration to be able to vote for Paul. Not the usual Ronulan suspects.

I think he will win Iowa and will be first or second in New Hampshire.
Click to expand...

You're basing that on article comments? Couldn't be Ronulans trying a new tact.

Any real polling data to back it up?
 
Doesn't he usually do well in early polls? And then all his little drones get another chance to learn the civics lesson about the difference between media polls and actual votes?

They never do learn, but they keep getting that chance.
 
Ron Paul is a fruit loop. I love him for his craziness so long as he never actually is in charge of something important.
 
Spindrift said:
You're basing that on article comments? Couldn't be Ronulans trying a new tact.

Any real polling data to back it up?
Click to expand...

I don't believe any polls have asked this question, yet, I think there is a trend emerging. I have noticed that one prominent liberal commentator who voted for Obama in 2008 is urging his readers to become 'Blue Republicans' in order to elect Ron Paul:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/blue-republican_b_886650.html?page=2

It is hard to estimate the potential size of this phenomenon, but if Ron Paul snowballs with victory in Iowa, then one would assume that 'Blue Democrats' would multiply. It has been assumed that Ron Paul running as a 3rd party candidate would only take votes away from the GOP and cripple their chances, but I have an inkling that we may see the Ron Paul effect on the Dems also.
 
Donal said:
Doesn't he usually do well in early polls? And then all his little drones get another chance to learn the civics lesson about the difference between media polls and actual votes?

They never do learn, but they keep getting that chance.
Click to expand...

It seems that the 'little drones' are multiplying at a rate fast enough to be in the lead in the most recent Iowa polls. Also, do you have any evidence of Ron Paul consistently getting less votes than his poll numbers suggest?
 
If he can run his own medical accrediting organization for the purpose of accrediting himself, I don't see why he would have trouble forming his own party for the purpose of nominating himself.
 
Democracy Simulator said:
I don't believe any polls have asked this question, yet, I think there is a trend emerging. I have noticed that one prominent liberal commentator who voted for Obama in 2008 is urging his readers to become 'Blue Republicans' in order to elect Ron Paul:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-koerner/blue-republican_b_886650.html?page=2

It is hard to estimate the potential size of this phenomenon, but if Ron Paul snowballs with victory in Iowa, then one would assume that 'Blue Democrats' would multiply. It has been assumed that Ron Paul running as a 3rd party candidate would only take votes away from the GOP and cripple their chances, but I have an inkling that we may see the Ron Paul effect on the Dems also.
Click to expand...

I see no reason to assume any support for him from any significant percentage of Democrats.

Robin Koerner? He's not even an American. You must have a different definition of prominent than how I usually see it used.
 
Spindrift said:
I see no reason to assume any support for him from any significant percentage of Democrats.

Robin Koerner? He's not even an American. You must have a different definition of prominent than how I usually see it used.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not saying he will definitely garner X amount of support, I was making the observation that 'Blue Democrats' is a phenomenon that might catch on if RP takes Iowa and is first or second in NH. As I said, it's hard to estimate the potential size of this phenomenon.
 
Democracy Simulator said:
Well, I'm not saying he will definitely garner X amount of support, I was making the observation that 'Blue Democrats' is a phenomenon that might catch on if RP takes Iowa and is first or second in NH. As I said, it's hard to estimate the potential size of this phenomenon.
Click to expand...

I really doubt there are going to be many Democrats of any stripe to support Ron Paul.

Plus it doesn't matter right now anyway. They can't vote for him in the primaries. He needs Red Republicans not Blue Democrats.
 
Spindrift said:
I really doubt there are going to be many Democrats of any stripe to support Ron Paul.

Plus it doesn't matter right now anyway. They can't vote for him in the primaries. He needs Red Republicans not Blue Democrats.
Click to expand...

Sorry, any reference to 'Blue Democrats' should of course be 'Blue Republicans'. Tired brain and all that.

The interesting thing about the Blue Republicans, is that is exactly what the campaign is attempting to do - to get voters to switch their registration in order to vote for Paul in the primaries:

http://www.bluerepublican.org/

Again, I don't know how significant this is, but it is an interesting development.

It is also interesting to see that Iowans are being threatened with having their bellwether status being taken away from them if they produce a 'bad result' and vote for Paul. It will be interesting to see what happens if/when he surges in NH.
 
It seems that some Iowan Republicans are scared that Democrats are going to 'pervert the process' by registering and voting for Ron Paul:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70674.html

What especially worries Iowa Republican regulars is the possibility that Paul could win here on January 3rd with the help of Democrats and independents who change their registration to support the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman but then don’t support the GOP nominee next November.
“I don’t think any candidate perverting the process in that fashion helps [the caucuses] in any way,” said Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, adding that he didn’t know if that’s necessarily how Paul would win.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom