-32 votes

Vote Ron Paul in 2016, Obama in 2012 to keep Mitt out

To ensure that Ron Paul has a chance to run again in a GOP Primary, vote for Obama to keep Mitt from winning in 2012. If Mitt wins then he will automatically be the 2016 GOP Nominee and our movement won't advance.

We grow by leaps and bounds each time there is a GOP Primary.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

good analysis

As I can tell only GOP Primaries give us high growth otherwise we have no teeth, so to speak. That's why keeping Mitt out is the right move.

Ron Paul running in 2016??

Ron Paul running in 2016?? Give me a break.

Ron Paul running in 2012??

Give me a break.

Oh wait it happened. So can 2016.

RON

Paul 2016

Ron Paul 2012

lbtbruce

no 2016 primary though

unless you stop mitt in 2012.

Writing in Ron won't make that happen. Voting Obama will.

someone will run

Judge N? Rand? and why not Ron again. Only 4 years older than now. He'd have had plenty of time to rest as he won't even be in congress.

You say 80 is too old? well so is 76 and he still ran this cycle.

Paul will likely...

Paul will likely not run for President in 2016, they guy will be close to 80 years old.

If Ron does not secure the nomination I will not be voting for Obama. Romeny is going to lose this election anyway, and pretty badly by the looks of it. I, however, will continue to promote liberty by voting for Ron Paul or either Gary Johnson depending on what happens between now and November.

likely is not the same as certainly

Also there are other liberty candidates who can run instead, e.g. Judge N.

i'm gonna vote for gary johnson

if ron paul does not get the nomination at the convention. If the libertarian party gets 5 percent of the popular vote in the general election, they will get matching funds for the next presidential election. Please do not throw your vote away, vote libertarian to break the two party system if ron paul does not make the nomination.

it would only result in another 3rd party run in 2016

By voting Johnson you are letting Mitt win then there is no GOP Primary in 2016.

GOP Primaries and GOP Primaries alone are what put the liberty movement on the map and growing into a household name.

You think GJ takes away more

You think GJ takes away more from Obama than Romney? Hmmm, that's interesting. I did hear that Ron Paul takes more away from Obama than Romney if Ron Paul ran as a 3rd party.

he dosen't take away anything

If you vote for him it's the same as not voting which means you let Mitt win.

Or you stop him and we get a 2016 GOP Primary.

GJ poaches from the GOP

GJ will take GOP voters. He is a former GOP governor, not a Dem. He has brand value in the SW. If GJ gets into the debate he will do to Mittens what Ross Perot did to Bush 1.

If no Paul on the Presidential debate stage then I definitely want GJ to mix it up. If the GOP does not give me Dr. Paul I will not give them Willard.

Ron Paul in 2016? The good doctor fought a valiant fight. He gave it everything in both 08' & 12', the energy expended would have taken down younger men. Don't ask him to do it again in 2016. Dr. Paul has already succeeded and is handing off the baton.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

They'll never let Gary Johnson on that debate stage

no matter how well he polls.

Perot got on the stage because the debates were run by the League of Women Voters. Ever since then it was the "Bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates" which is a Republican/Democrat monopoly.

They even kept him off the GOP Primary debate stages except for 2 and one of those times was before anyone else declared except for a few others. (wayyy early). And he was a former Governor.

They will only let a Paul on stage in primaries because they are forced to.

Sad, but true. 3rd party is a waste of time.

Sad but true... too true

After Perot they raised the bar to 15% national polling in order to qualify for the presidential debates.

Dr. Paul cited exactly what you outline as his reason for staying in the GOP. And it is also the reason the media kept seeding doubt by saying he would run third party. It was sabotage.

However tough the odds are I will still help out however possible to get GJ on the that stage. If we don't get Dr. Paul then we get nothing but a RepubliCrat soundbyte presentation of non-issues.

I don't know how it can be achieved but we will not realize real change in the this country until the RepubliCrat lock on gov't is broken.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

ok...

I stand by that our best shot is to force a 2016 GOP Primary and get a Congressman Paul on the debate stage.

Dr Paul's Swansong

Dr. Paul will have a voice but he won't be running in 2016. This was his swansong, last call.

There are 4 years to see who could possibly fill that role. I stand that Gov. Johnson is a worthy presidential vote. Willard is not and never will be.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

ron never said he's only running for 1 term in 2012

meaning he was in it for 2 terms, to be elected in both 2012 and 2016.

So in 2016 he'll say he's running for 1 term.

I'll take Ron for 1 term any day over 2 terms for anyone else, including Gary Johnson.

I Concede

Can't argue with that one. Twelfth Knight, you have done Shakespeare proud.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

I am voting for Paul

and our doing that alone will probably end Mitt's attempts at the White House, if by some means he wins the nomination.

Ron Paul 2016

I'm writing in Ron Paul

for President and Michael Peroutka Vice-President "For Freedom". I could never in good conscience cast a vote for anti-life, anti-liberty, pro-big government Obama no matter the political maneuvering reasons for doing so. A vote for evil (regardless of the reason) is still a vote for evil.

Susie 4 Liberty's picture

No Write-in Vote Allowed in Texas

Or you can bet I'd do same as you plan...

Susie 4 Liberty

write-ins are thrown away anyway

Best to set up an actual campaign in 2016, by keeping Mitt out

evil happens

when good men do nothing.

take your pick, a write in vote that won't be counted anyway, or a 2016 GOP Primary that we will contend in.

probably...

is not the same as certainly.

As in certainly doing all you can to grow liberty.

Pick one: a write in vote that won't even be counted, or a 2016 GOP Primary.

An incumbent

Can be challenged in any electition cycle .
The goal really should be what ever party is out we should be working on putting a liberty candidate in both party's so we have a a choice between good and good.
If mitt Romney wins then Rand Paul will ither go dem or challenge romney.

rand will definately never go dem

.

Rand would never go dem, the

Rand would never go dem, the dems want a progressive

yup

Only in GOP Primaries does liberty make inroads.

not likely

No incumbent has been challenged in decades, not since all the incumbents were all NWO.

Rand isn't going Dem.

At least republicans besides mitt in general seem to care somewhat about limited government. That's why GOP Primaries are our shot.