Should Ron Paul run as a third party?

[madfoot]

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.

The PPP poll says Paul does pretty good among Democrats and Independents in Iowa, and you can change your party registration up until the caucus day in that state. The data I saw (either PPP or IA, don't remember) wasn't statistically significant, but still, there you go. Not all Democrats hate Paul.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/12/paul-leads-in-iowa.html

 

[Travis]

This Democrat hates Paul. His ideas on the economy and foreign policy are absolutely nuts.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

This Democrat hates Paul. His ideas on the economy and foreign policy are absolutely nuts.

What specifically is wrong with them? I mean, I am just an outsider, but for academic reasons I have an inordinate amount of interest in the Ron Paul campaign because I think it is significant in 2012. From my perspective, anti-war, non-interventionism goes down quite well with many Dems. Are those Dems also nuts? Also, balancing the books on the economy doesn't seem like an insane idea.

If Ron Paul were elected he could no doubt cast some considerable influence over foreign policy and civil liberties, while it is extremely unlikely that he would be able to dismantle 5 government departments and return to the gold standard.

Doesn't sound like too bad a trade off? Or you could go for Obama who is pro war, pro war on drugs, and anti civil liberties.

 

[Travis]

The mere fact he thinks about returning to the gold standard at all is reason enough to make sure he is never in power. But the fact that he also wants to turn America into some ultra isolationist backwater is also nuts. It's almost like he doesn't know or doesn't care that so much trade is global now.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

The mere fact he thinks about returning to the gold standard at all is reason enough to make sure he is never in power. But the fact that he also wants to turn America into some ultra isolationist backwater is also nuts. It's almost like he doesn't know or doesn't care that so much trade is global now.

Why is the gold standard so beyond the pale? Also, you misrepresent his foreign policy. He is non-interventionist when it comes to military misadventures, but is for free trade. Why is that 'nuts'?

 

[Arisia]

What specifically is wrong with them? I mean, I am just an outsider, but for academic reasons I have an inordinate amount of interest in the Ron Paul campaign because I think it is significant in 2012. From my perspective, anti-war, non-interventionism goes down quite well with many Dems. Are those Dems also nuts? Also, balancing the books on the economy doesn't seem like an insane idea.

If Ron Paul were elected he could no doubt cast some considerable influence over foreign policy and civil liberties, while it is extremely unlikely that he would be able to dismantle 5 government departments and return to the gold standard.

Doesn't sound like too bad a trade off? Or you could go for Obama who is pro war, pro war on drugs, and anti civil liberties.

If he were elected to be head of the Executive Branch, I'm sure he'd really try quite hard to dissolve 5 departments in the Executive Branch... I'm not sure what the other two branches could do to stop it.
I can't imagine many progressives/liberals will actually support him in the end, his desire to dismantle government departments that protect the environment, the poor and the young should certainly turn off many of them.

 

[Arisia]

Plus, I do wonder how Dems who switch their affiliation the day before would have much influence over local caucus events, since they tend to be controlled by the local lifelong Republicans (and actually happen in their homes in many cases).

 

[Spindrift]

Why is the gold standard so beyond the pale?

It would pretty much destroy the US economy and thereby the world economy. There are whole threads about that on this forum. Why gold? Why not bauxite?

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Ron Paul has been in Congrees almost 30 years. in all that time, what major pieces of legislation has he authored?

 

[Alferd_Packer]

if Ron Paul was often "the lone voice of dissent" that means that the rest of Congress didn't listen to him or support his ideas much. What makes anyone think that they will do so if he is President?

 

[Arisia]

Ron Paul has been in Congrees almost 30 years. in all that time, what major pieces of legislation has he authored?

And he pretty much claims outsider status, too, which seems funny considering how long he's been in DC.

 

[BenBurch]

...

Was there any TPC throughout history that actually won the American presidential election?

Hard to say who was a third party in the 1856 election or the 1860 elections.

 

[Checkmite]

Isn't that Rand?

I'm pretty sure it's both of them, along with Ron Paul's wife as executive secretary.

 

[elbe]

Ron Paul has been in Congrees almost 30 years. in all that time, what major pieces of legislation has he authored?

I think he has his name on a few here and there.

I once perused the wiki page listing legislation sponsored by Paul, some of it seems perfectly rational but then you get the ones that are, frankly, scary.

 

[MaGZ]

This Democrat hates Paul. His ideas on the economy and foreign policy are absolutely nuts.

What do you hate about his foreign policy?

 

[MaGZ]

I think he has his name on a few here and there.

I once perused the wiki page listing legislation sponsored by Paul, some of it seems perfectly rational but then you get the ones that are, frankly, scary.

Do you recall some of his scary legislation proposals?

 

[Travis]

Why is the gold standard so beyond the pale?

The gold standard was always nuts. It should never have existed in the first place. Fixing your currency to a commodity leaves you open to extreme boom bust cycles that are not good for establishing stability.

Also, you misrepresent his foreign policy. He is non-interventionist when it comes to military misadventures, but is for free trade. Why is that 'nuts'?

What do you hate about his foreign policy?

Free trade requires someone to be doing the intervention. If you think the Middle East is a mess now wait for the cluster **** it would become when there are no longer American carrier battle groups on constant patrol in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea. What do want as the over/under for the death toll when the Arab states try to exterminate the Israelis again?

Or is the plan to scurry away and hope that China rises up and provides the military force to keep the world in line and free trade smooth?

 

[elbe]

Do you recall some of his scary legislation proposals?

Just a quick runthrough of those listed.

American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2009. H.R. 1146 (less about the actual bill and more about the rationale)
Taxpayers' Freedom of Conscience Act of 2009. H.R. 1233
Abolition of income tax: H.J.Res. 23
Gold standard, 1983
Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act. H.R. 833
Honest Money Act. H.R. 2756
Free Competition in Currency Act of 2007. H.R. 4683
Religious Freedom Amendment. H.J.Res. 78 (is just stupid)
National ID (amendment)
Identity Theft Prevention Act of 2009. H.R. 220
Market Process Restoration Act of 1999. H.R. 1789
We the People Act. H.R. 539
Sanctity of Life Act of 2007. H.R. 2597
Marriage Protection Act of 2007. H.R. 724
Parental Consent Act of 2007. H.R. 2387
Health Freedom Protection Act. H.R. 2117 (rather disturbing)

 

[IchabodPlain]

How much support is "enough support"? The way I understood it, the debates are run by a committee made up of representatives from the two major parties, and they simply don't allow third parties into the debates...no matter how much support they have.

Too young to remember Ross Perot or had just forgotten?

 

[angrysoba]

I notice that Ron Paul is leading in some polls for Iowa. That should make things interesting. Maybe Gingrich will have to run as a third party!