-5 votes

21 Reasons that Ron Paul should run Independent (if he might actually want to be President)

I've been compiling this list over the course of the last two months. Some of the items are admittedly controversial, especially those at the beginning. But I think it's important to put it out there. If you agree, keep it going and pass it on as appropriate. If you disagree, then please disagree with all your heart and mind in the best interest of Liberty! Thanks for reading and considering.

1. He will not get the Republican nomination in the usual way -- that is, by receiving large number of votes from Republican voters. Simply, not enough traditional Republican voters will be swayed by his message, and there are not enough new Republican voters coming in the door.

2. If Dr. Paul were to win the Republican nomination through some other means -- for example, commandeering the delegate process -- the victory would appear hollow and illegitimate. This would have devastating consequences for his prospects in the general election. The Republican Party might even fracture into two parties, temporarily, and Dr. Paul would not receive support from his own party.

3. If Dr. Paul were to lose the Republican nomination, he would not be able to switch to independent later, both because of sore-loser laws and also a sore-loser perception. Neither would there be any other liberty-oriented third party candidate available with any chance of winning. We would be irreversibly stuck with two statists.

4. By running independent, on the other hand, Dr. Paul would keep options open: He could abandon the independent campaign in favor of a liberty-friendly GOP nominee if one arose. Or he could choose to pursue his own campaign all the way.

5. Funding required for ballot access as an independent would be provided quickly from one or two money bombs. An army of eager supporters will take care of petitions and other paperwork.

6. Any attempt to keep him out of the debates would backfire. His following and his media presence are too big now.

7. He would not squander financial and personal resources on a bruising primary battle.

8. He could remain on TV interviews during much of the primary season, commenting on politics and the presidential race as it occurs, elevating his own stature above the petty arguments likely to surface among the GOP candidates.

9. He would be free to select a VP running mate from outside of the establishment GOP, or outside of the GOP altogether.

10. He could announce his candidacy during a crisis, if one were to occur. (He has stated previously that he would run if the country particularly needs him.)

11. He could time his announcement precisely at the peak of public frustration over the choice between the likely Republican and Democratic nominees.

12. The political parties are part of the problem. Dr. Paul has mentioned this many times, including the chapter in The Revolution entitled "The False Choices of American Politics", his endorsement of third-party candidates in 2008, and frequent interviews alongside non-GOP allies. Dr. Paul has already placed himself outside of the boundaries of the GOP.

13. Political parties are collectivist institutions by their very nature. A stand against political parties is, in itself, an inspiring statement of libertarian ideals.

14. If successful, an independent campaign would not only elect Ron Paul but also bust up the major-party duopoly.

15. Many of his issues appeal to independents more than Republicans. Just for example, witness the speech at 2011 CPAC, with the concentration on the Patriot Act, foreign aid, and interventionism.

16. There are a lot of silent Paul supporters outside of the GOP, who have largely been sidelined by the Tea Party movement. They will come roaring back to life.

17. The "spoiler" label would not matter as much to Dr. Paul, who believes that a Democrat president is only marginally worse (if at all) than a Republican president anyway.

18. He might pick up endorsements from other independents such as Jesse Ventura or Ralph Nader.

19. He would have more time to evaluate whether he really wants to run.

20. It's not 1988 anymore.

21. It is rare for a game-changer to win by playing the game.
(Please consider this last point from the perspective of your own lives and your own experiences outside of politics. How do these things usually work?)

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How is this thread at negative 6?

If the GOP ok's the debt ceiling raise, then the United States is saying "yeah... we are okay with decaying further into nothing"


we don't need no stinkin' GOP. Let him run as the Liberty Party Candidate an Independents time has come and if anyone is independent in terms of uniqueness of thinking it's Dr. Ron Paul. The Republicans after the bushes are stuck holding up Reagen some type of hero President??? yeah you can keep that club. Ron Paul as independent as they come. He should say cmon Jesse comb your hair and trim those leather tassels a bit and let's take a shot at this. GOP/DEMS all rotten, paid off skunks. Ron Paul anything but the GOP, dirty,rotten,rusa,frsua,GOP,dick,dastardly

9/11 was an inside job .....time to get some answers..RP 2012

There's only one reason

that has any bearing on "running".
And that reason is that Ron decides how and when he's going to run.

No matter how many of these independent-run threads come up, they are nothing but a total waste of time.

He will run.

He will run as a Republican.

If he wins the primary, its off to the general.

If he loses, and has already been placed on the ballot by Libertarians, Constitution Party, Nader, the Greens, he may use this as an avenue to get into the general election debates. If that happens, expect him to either be president or retire from congress all together and hit the lecture circuit.

I think that about sums it up.

If Ron Paul Doesn't Win Republican Nom. or Run as Independent

I will support RJ Harris if he is the Libertarian Party Presidential nominee. Check out his Facebook page and his blog on the Daily Paul.

21 Reasons Why Ron Paul Must Run as a Republican

1. The Republicans are more open to Ron Paul's positions than the public at large. If Ron Paul cannot win in the Republican Primaries, he can never win as an independent.

2. Ron Paul winning the Republican nomination depends on there being a perfect storm of trouble that eliminates all other candidates' credibility. There is no other way.

3. If Dr. Paul were to run as an independent he would have to give up his seat in Congress.

4. By running independent, he would severely damage the chances of his two sons future political success.

5. Ballot access is not achievable with money alone. The requirements of some states require huge petition drives, and even national third parties have not been successful in gaining access in all 50 states.

6. Remember Ross Perot

7. Failing to enter the Republican Primary will mean that he will face a Republican household name in November. He would be a spoiler at best.

8. He would be written off as a non-player in the primary season if he were not to run as a Republican, and would be ignored even more than he has been in the past. Libertarians underestimate the philosophical animosity of his political enemies.

9. He would be free to select a VP running mate from outside of the establishment GOP, or outside of the GOP altogether.

10. A majority of the electorate would only consider his candidacy during a crisis, which is likely to occur before Nov. 2012. (He has stated previously that his Republican candidacy would depend on the condition of the economy. That he is moving toward becoming officially a candidate indicates that he believes the condition is worsening rapidly.)

11. As an independent he would escape notice with the huge amounts of money being spent by the other candidates.

12. The 2 main political parties are firmly in grip of enemies of liberty. Ron Paul is the only one who could help wrest control of the Republican Party away, in favor of the People. His enemies have tried to paint him as an outsider, but his national image as a deep thinker has only gained him more respect and prestige as a Republican Congressman and Committee Chairman.

13. The Libertarians formed their own party over 30 years ago, and have gotten nowhere. Political parties are of necessity coalitions of disparate groups that don't all think alike. Ron's chance is to be in the right place at the right time. The right place is the Republican Party.

14. If an independent or third party candidate were to win by some fluke, he would face a congress firmly united against him, with absolutely no influence with either party.

15. His issues draw from Conservative and Libertarian themes, and appeal to independents. His candidacy can draw huge numbers of independents and Libertarians into the Republican Party, thereby increasing our chances of gaining control.

16. Ron Paul supporters who remain outside of the GOP are shooting themselves in the foot, and harming his cause by not becoming active in supporting him within his party.

17. Ron Paul is not a Democrat or an independent because his wisdom, and history, show him that he is more effective as a Republican than in any other political environment. He has more in common with more Republicans than with any other political group.

18. People might confuse him running as an independent as being like a Ralph Naderite or a Ross Perot. The comparisons would be inevitable and people would write him off, considering their suspicions that he is too much of an oddball to be confirmed.

19. He might as well just retire.

20. Unlike in 2008, his Party is grudgingly acknowledging that he was right, and has even granted him honors previously denied him, including his chairmanship.

21. He will never win if he isn't seen. Consider how few voters frequent libertarian sites.

Granted. Now for a few questions in need of answers.....

So what do you propose to do about the control wielded by the PTB of both the RNC and the DNC? Remember, they also, for the most part, control the media. (Not to mention DIEBOLD!) We do not have time to be fighting over this, The Bill of Rights is on life-support now! We need a clear plan for how to deal with this, education is fine, but it will only carry us so far. Unless we deal with all these issues, we will end up again with the choice of throwing the vote to Obama (or, in case of a decision against his eligibility, another Democrat), or holding our nose and voting for Trump, Huckabee, Romney or another CFR, lesser-of-two-evils choice. Many of us tired of voting for the lesser of two evils long ago. I wish the Major liberty-loving third parties would simply consolidate and be a real force, but they are too busy 'fighting over love songs'.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


I'm tired of being told there R only

two choices, I'd like to D-empower both! Seriously? How shall we deal with the CFR? How can we rid ourselves of DIEBOLD? How to we counteract the tactics used by the MSM through lap-dogs like Hannity, O'Rile-me, ad-infinitum. The only answer I can find is to spread RP's message as far and wide, and as gracefully as possible, then have a bunch of RP people as poll watchers.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Alright --the rant is over

I am overcome by discouragement when I see how rigged it really is.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

you are 100% correct!

And the most damning of all items is ballot access and the ability to get into debates. Without those two items there is no point in running. The debate about Dr. Paul running as an independent has been discussed at length over the years and to do so would limit his ability to get his message out, let alone a chance to compete. If he had a trillion dollars an independent run would work as he could bribe all the corrupt election folks from state to state, and perhaps that would be the only way.

Always remember:
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ~ Samuel Adams
If they hate us for our freedom, they must LOVE us now....

Stay IRATE, remain TIRELESS, an

Independents are totally ignored

Unless you are a charismatic billionaire with pop-culture celebrity credentials, the chances of any Independent receiving a snowballs chance in hell minute of any News Media coverage, or serious recognition is absolutely nil, zero, nada.

Ron Paul proved that he did the correct thing in 2007-2008 (unlike 1988), because he got his message on TV.

Take myself for example. I had never even heard of Ron Paul before. I was a progressive Democrat rooting for Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel to somehow break through. Instead, Ron Paul's televised performance in the debates was so masterful that it caused a huge sensation, and went viral on the Internet, and catipulated this otherwise unknown and unrecognized congressman into an instant "hit". It was through this that people became drawn into and inspired by his message futher, and his presentation of the issues.

The fundraising and the big following arose from that National exposure -- which Ron Paul never would have gotten otherwise by trying to just retrace his obscure 1988 campaign from which there are no memories, no TV, no following, and no fundraising.

So Ron Paul has to run as a Republican to be treated as "a real candidate" at all on any level, and to get the exposure, and to build from the point where he left off in 2007-2008.

And yes he can win. Iowa and New Hampshire and well known for bucking the Establishment favorite and choosing an underdog, darker horse guy (Huckabee in Iowa in 2008, McCain in N.H. in 2000). So Ron Paul can win if he builds a first-class Campaign infrastructure and organization, and canvasses these States from top-to-bottom.

As it stands now, Paul would probably pick-up 3%-5% as a write-in candidate even if he were not on the ballot. But a serious effort by him will put him into contention this time around. The competition is weak. There is no Bush in the race (Jeb Bush), and if Ron Paul can win in these early states -- it can be hard for the juggernaut to stop.

Well stated

When I posted my 21 Reasons on Thursday, I told myself that I would not get argumentative over the issue. And I won't -- mostly because there's no denying that the pro-GOP-primary side has some compelling points. Thanks for posting many of these points. I find myself agreeing with a lot of them.

Dr. Paul (and we, his supporters) face an uphill battle either way. True?

What haunts me most of all is the image of the Republican Party as a kind of box to keep Dr. Paul contained. As long as he doesn't climb out of that box, the situation can be managed. Let him think that he can keep his seat in Congress and educate a few more people, let his supporters dream, but ultimately he will stay enclosed within a comfortable margin of defeat. Bottle him up with the solid, reliable anti-Paul GOP numbers.

Instead of playing into that script, he needs to do something dramatic. People like drama too; they pay attention. It is the only way to clear the hurdles. There's a reason that football teams throw a "hail Mary" pass -- it's a long shot but they recognize that it's the only shot, realistically.

Just a few responses to your points:

6. Ross Perot was in fact leading the 1992 presidential race in June, before dropping out and then re-entering the race with a story about George Bush planning to disrupt his daughter's wedding. We should trust that Dr. Paul will not act like that.

13. The Libertarian Party has never run a candidate with the stature and broad appeal of Ron Paul 2011/2012.

14. I'm afraid that Congress will be against President Paul no matter what. Some of his policies, especially fiscal policies, are very difficult for people (or their elected representatives) to swallow. A strong case can be made that America is just not ready yet.

16. I will campaign for Ron Paul and send him money regardless of what party/nonparty he runs with. I encourage everybody else to do the same!!!!!!!!!!!

19. This may indeed be his last chance to have a major impact in political office. He might well retire after 2012, yes. We know that our Movement will face that day eventually. Hopefully we will maintain our morale, optimism, and enthusiasm to continue on after that day comes.

Dear rlcmcallen,

With Donald Trump making waves and the Republican sycophants drooling for his next vapid utterance, how can you honestly believe that Dr. Paul has a snowball's chance in hell of capturing the Republican nomination?

Ron Paul is the antithesis of what the puppet masters would want.

Neither the Dems or the Repubs, want to curb the wasteful, and exorbitant practice of policing the world, because the banks, the corporations, and the military industrial complex, all want endless war for resources, and empire for power.

The puppet masters run the world, and the president is just a puppet, unless, that president is Ron Paul.

That is what they fear.

A man who would do what is right, and not their bidding.

I don't know if you realize this, but the members of this site have helped to demonstrate to the people, that the left-right paradigm is a dead idea, a lie, a trap and a dead-end.

The American people are realizing that most elected officials are corrupt, bought out and paid for.

It is time for some real change.

Ron Paul as an independent, would be unbeatable in my mind.

As an Independent, you could truly throw all the mud you want at both parties, and the American people would back you, because they realize the game is rigged at this point in time.

Many people just hate the name of Republican, because of that dimwit George "W" Bush, and his lies, and corporate welfare policies, and endless war against a tactic.

Ron Paul should run as an independent.

He has given his entire life for America, what has he got to lose at this point, how much longer is he going to live?

I wouldn't be surprised if he ran as an Independent.

He is the only politician I trust.

How about less of what you

How about less of what you want and more trust in Dr. Paul. The fact you fail to comprehend is that Ron is not an independent, he is a republican. He is more of a republican in fact than most republicans.

If he cannot win as a republican then he cannot win.

While I know it is an uphill battle, I do believe under the right circumstances and economic conditions Ron does have a shot. But this independent nonsense is a distraction. Have you listened to Ron? There is zero chance he is running as anything other than a republican. You and Jesse Ventura should not hold your breath.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

I only offer my opinion.

but would also suggest, that some people, Ron Paul included, are so close, that they can't see the forest through the trees.

I will faithfully endorse, support, and finance whatever road Dr. Paul chooses to take.

Of course! I would never

Of course! I would never suggest you don't have the right to your opinion. You do and its valid. I even understand the sentiments behind those who want Ron to run indy! I would support him if he did. I only mean its a distraction because Ron has said in a dozen ways that he will never run as an Indy again. Since Dr. Paul is not the normal typical politician, I think we should take him at his word.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

I agree with everything you said,

and would like to add, that if Dr. Paul ran as an independent, then Jesse Ventura would willingly be his running mate, and they would win.

Independents have little public face.

No debates, no anything. Check out what happened at the Louisiana caucus and you'll see how dangerous the GOP thinks Ron Paul is.

What does it take to get someone on the ballot in your state?

As an independent? Tell us, please. Then go try getting the requirements met, before telling Dr. Paul how easy it will be.


Although I didn't say "easy", it is probably a lot easier than getting through the Republican gauntlet that they call a primary.

In 1980, independent candidate John Anderson got on the ballot in all 50 states. He spent several million dollars to do it. The number of required petition signatures at that time was maybe half of what it is now. However, Anderson's following hardly compares to Ron Paul's following today.

My state's requirement is 30,000 signatures, out of a population of 10,000,000. I was told this morning that there are 10,000 Campaign For Liberty members in the state. See if these figures might lead you to the same conclusion that I've arrived at.

#1 reason he shouldn't run as independant...

Is that I trust Ron Paul's Judgment on the matter!

I am POSITIVE he has thought through this a million times.

He's trying to spread the message as far and wide as he can. Televised debates are a good way to do this. And he can only get that as GOP (or DEM).

I agree

Anyone who thinks the GOP will allow the nomination of Ron Paul needs to get a reality check up. The GOP cronnies can't stand the guy's principals or platform. It ain't going to happen. So, what do you do? Me thinks the time is about right for REVOLUTION, at least with the political process. The 2 party system cowing down to the Federal Reserve is getting pretty stale, and thanks to lots of internet blogging, people are starting to see things in Washington for what they really are - scams.

alan laney

Let Trump

... waste his money on an Independent run.

Please enjoy, "RON PAUL And All That Jazz"
Central Pa, Lycoming County, Williamsport

I ask you to prove #3

I do not believe sore loser laws apply to Presidential races.I however agree that he should run third party off the bat.

Handicap but not a death-blow

Here's a pretty good article about sore-loser laws:


It's only four states but they include two biggies: Texas and Ohio. The legal status is a bit murky, apparently.

Public perception of a sore loser is even harder to guage. There isn't enough historical record to go on. The example of John Anderson (1980) from the above article is not necessarily comparable to Ron Paul. However, it is encouraging to note the Anderson successfully got ballot access.


That's it??!!! Well what are we waiting for! Ron does the Televised GOP Debates and then goes for it Independent.

Talk about making a STATEMENT.

Does he HAVE to lose his position on the Financial Committee?? Does he instantly lose that if he runs Independent?


What about Ron Paul running as a Libertarian? The party would get him on the ballot, while he could use his grassroots money actually campaigning. He would obviously win the LP's nomination. Hell, they would probably just give it to him. This would bring a third party onto the map and help break down the two party establishment. I think he could poll 15% against the Democratic and Republican candidates which would get him a spot on the national debates! Ron Paul 2012 as a libertarian would be awesome!


I wish someone could post some figures here to quantify how much it really costs to get on the ballots. I talk to a lot of people and all I hear is "too much". How do they know it's too much? Because someone else said "too much".

Certainly Paul is a small-l libertarian, so the Libertarian Party would be the best fit philsophically if he needs a home. But I still wonder if the name is too tarnished to be a net benefit.

Yes, the 15% should be easy to attain. Romney-Obama, Cain-Obama, Backmann-Obama, etc... there should be easily 15% who don't like those choices.