-52 votes

Americans Elect Update: Ron Paul Needs More Votes!

Do you want to be sure that Ron Paul will be on the ballot in November? You can help draft him to head the ticket of Americans Elect (AE), which offers an online process to nominate a president and vice president. AE already has ballot status in 26 states, and its leaders plan to have it in all 50 states by the fall. They will hold their Internet primary in May, and their Internet convention in June. To help place Ron Paul on their primary ballot, you must take action by Tuesday, May 8.

More than 8,500 Paul supporters already have signed up as AE
“delegates,” which means they can vote for him in the online primary and convention. That’s twice as many supporters as counted for the second candidate in line, former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer. But each candidate needs at least 10,000 delegates to qualify for the primary. Another requirement: A candidate needs at least 1,000 delegates from each of 10 states in order to show broad-based support. The ten states with the most Paul supporters signed up so far are: California, Florida, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. But each has fewer than 1,000 Paul delegates at present.

It shouldn’t be that difficult to push each of these states to well over 1,000 Paul delegates. People who are, or plan to be, RP delegates to Republican conventions shouldn’t sign up with Americans Elect. But they can urge family, friends, and colleagues to do so. Any U.S. registered voter--whether independent or a party member--can become an Americans Elect delegate and vote in the AE primary and convention. Here’s the way to do it:

1) Go to www.americanselect.org.

2) Select “Sign Up” and follow the steps there. You’ll have to decide on a password and provide information they need to verify that you’re a
registered voter in your state.

3) Be sure to click your support for Ron Paul in the appropriate place!

4) Write down and keep handy your password so you'll have it to vote in the primary and convention.

5) It’s a good idea to request their e-mail updates so you’ll be alerted when it’s time to vote for RP in the primary and convention. (Note: It’s a bit confusing, but they refer to each stage of their primary as a “caucus.”)

Since no candidate has the required minimum yet, it looks as though the primary won’t start until May 15. A candidate needs at least 10,000 supporters--with the required 10-state spread--by May 8 in order to qualify for the May 15 vote.

Let’s go for it! Let’s overwhelm AE by May 8th!

* * * * *

Here are some answers for those who have objections to Americans Elect and/or the independent/third-party route:

“Americans Elect leaders and advisers are too tied to the establishment.”

Well, sure. But how about the Republican Party and its deep ties to Wall Street and the Military-Industrial Complex? That hasn’t stopped Dr. Paul from speaking truth to power within the GOP. The AE folks are independent enough to want a November alternative to Tweedledum and Tweedledee. And they’re taking the risk that their process may produce a ticket they don’t entirely agree with. In fact, they seem to expect that, since they want a “balanced” ticket. This includes the possibility of one Republican and one Democrat, or one independent and either a Democrat or a Republican--but not the possibility of two people from the same political party.

“Aha, but they get to decide if the ticket is ‘balanced’ enough!”

That applies only in certain cases--for example, if one member of the ticket is an independent. If the ticket is composed of one Republican and one Democrat, it automatically will be deemed to be balanced. If Dr. Paul decides to go the AE route, he can choose a Democratic running mate who agrees with him on the key issues. Americans Elect would not run the campaign; the candidates would be responsible for running it and raising the money for it. (Americans Elect leaders see AE as a nominating process rather than a national political party. But an AE press aide told me that “in most states we have qualified as a minor party.” She said that “it was more efficient to petition for ballot access that way..."

“We should consider an independent or third-party run only at the end of the GOP convention--depending on how the convention turns out.”

According to a Federal Election Commission chart, filing deadlines for independent presidential candidates will have passed in most states by the time the GOP convention ends on Aug. 30. The FEC chart does not have complete information on filing deadlines for third-party candidates, but I believe the same is true of them. It would make no sense to launch a late campaign that’s guaranteed to lose.

“Going independent would mean turning our back on everything we’ve
accomplished in the Republican Party so far.”

Not necessarily. It would depend on how the November election turns out. Dr. Paul could give Romney a real run for his money among younger voters and conservatives--and do the same with Obama among independents and Democrats. The 2012 election may be our last chance for many years to win the profound changes in policy that our country needs. If this year’s choice is one between Obama and Romney, we can expect more wars and possibly an economic meltdown. We can also expect continued attacks on our civil liberties, and those attacks will make serious political efforts harder to mount in the future. We will miss our old Bill of Rights when it’s gone. Not to mention the rest of our Constitution...

“Dr. Paul can’t win as an independent because he would be excluded from the presidential debates.”

Actually, if he polled at least 15 percent in several major polls, he would be part of the debates. If he were not polling that high initially, there would be ways to use political jujitsu to his advantage. For example: After each debate, run paid TV ads on the theme of “Why Things Will Get Worse with Either One.” Or “Why We Need Major Course Corrections--and Why Obama and Romney Won’t Make Them.” There could also be a huge Ron Paul rally the day after each debate, where our guy would give a stump speech--commenting on the Obama-Romney answers to key questions and then giving his own.

An independent campaign would offer many chances for creative signs, advertising, and rallies--and maximum use of the Internet. I would hope for more positive, pro-Paul ads than we have seen so far this year. For example: An ad showing Paul supporters from all walks of life who explain why they support him. Ads with brief excerpts from some of the best Paul media interviews, explaining his positions on the top issues. Ads with excerpts from some of his stump speeches--providing both substance on issues and the evidence of huge crowds.

Shifting gears for an independent campaign could be liberating and energizing for everyone--including our valiant candidate.

Comment viewing options

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


I've never seen Google do that. :)

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I see no harm in this IF you're NOT a GOP delegate..

I also have have no problem with Ron Paul winning multiple party nominations.

And I'm a fan of opportunities to make news...

AE's shutting out the clear fan favorite could make news...and definitely would make news for alternative media.

Let's say Ron Paul wins this AE thing and then turns it down - his turning it down could create more media attention from the "are you going to run 3rd party?" crowd than he's had this entire campaign!

Support Liberty Media! http://benswann.com/ - http://www.bluerepublican.org/ - http://krisannehall.com/ - http://lionsofliberty.com/

We won't turn things around until we 1st change the media - donate to a liberty media creator today!

Americans Elect = Anti-Ron Paul?

Didn't Americans Elect come up earlier as undermining Ron Paul Delegates?
I didn't take the time to read your entire article above - I am open for correction. But still in question, all in the defense of liberty.

Americans Elect = Anti-Ron Paul?

I don't think Americans Elect has done anything to undermine Ron Paul delegates. But there is always the chance that some Republicans would make an issue of it if a Ron Paul delegate were publicly involved in Americans Elect.

Paul supporters who are not Republican delegates, and not planning to be, should have no worries about signing up with Americans Elect. And signing up to take part in their online primary and convention does not affect your voter registration. You can be registered as an independent, Republican, or Democrat--and still take part in Americans Elect.

Mary Meehan

Don't get sucked into this progressive elitist trash

Look at the board and the rules of control of this fake ass process.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Response to Attack

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama could have a lot to lose if Ron Paul decides to go with Americans Elect.

But what does Ron Paul have to lose? If enough of his supporters vote for him in the Americans Elect primary and convention, and he accepts their nomination, he will be on the ballot in 50 states; can greatly increase the number of Americans who support his cause; can keep up the pressure against war and bad economic policy; and can keep defending the Bill of Rights. And--who knows?--in this unusual election hear, he might even win the presidency.

So what's to lose?

Mary Meehan

The rules state that the AE board can make the rules

and change them at will.. It also states that they can pick and choose who they want.

You're barking up the wrong tree here with a board like that running the show. It reads as the who is who of centrist/progressive politics and power elite.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Knew it

She also posted a similar article recently, look at her history.

progressives. a slow and creeping kill of freedoms - cancerous.

get out of here and get back on your Mitt Romney sites.


Nothing progressive about that word lol.

The use of the term progressive has always struck me as odd anyway. It reminds me of other government words that denote goodness but in reality harbor ill intent.

The only forward movements that "progressives" makes is as you imply, towards destruction of good.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.


sure it's cancerous.

progressive = expressing tendency, disposition, function, connection, etc., with any progress toward a police state/communism, whatever you want to call it. they could not kill freedom in one fell swoop - but any little progress counts. it's pretty insidious stuff.

You nailed it

I agree 100%

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

If you're Supporting

Any third-party candidate (such as one run by Americans Electe) the Republican party can use it to impeach your credentials at the convention as not being a true Republican.

For though you think you know the thing, you have no certainty, until you try. -Sophocles

Nobody! here is suggesting

Nobody! here is suggesting that delegates sign this. Point noted! Now....the question is should non-delegates sign? I say, what do we have to lose? At the very least, we can get some good publicity if they try to steal it from us.

Don't Pay Attention...

This is just a distraction guys... please, it has already been noted on here that American's elect can just cause problems for us... so don't pay attention to these posts... even if you are not a delegate...


What "problems" can they

What "problems" can they cause for non-delegates? Specifics please.

do your research and you'll

do your research and you'll find out

In other words, there are no

In other words, there are no negative consequences.

nah, that's just your flawed

nah, that's just your flawed logic trying to rationalise your laziness to look it up yourself.

You made the accusation. The

You made the accusation. The burden of proof is on you. That is logic.

NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.

sorry, my goal is not to

sorry, my goal is not to convince anyone or to prove anything. this is not a game for me.

Yeah right. You're bluffing

Yeah right. You're bluffing of course. You have no negative consequences to list.