John Fund is WRONG
Submitted by Jane Aitken on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 15:43I have had many people write to me to tell me that Ron running as a third party candidate would be a very bad idea and I agree. I have written back to tell them that Ron has given us his word that he will NOT run as a third party candidate if the GOP is foolish enough not to see that his nomination would bring in enough Independents, Dems and Libertarians along with GOPers to put us ahead of any Democrat, including Hillary, in the general election. If they act like this is 1996 they will be doomed to another Clinton presidency!
Here is the article, one of a few I saw recently claiming this possibility.
Paul for the Long Haul
By John Fund, 10/10/2007 8:34:37 AMCould Ron Paul be considering a third-party run for the White House after the GOP primaries are over? After all, in 1988 he left the GOP to run as the Libertarian Party candidate. He is just ornery enough to do it again.
A hint of his dissatisfaction came last night during the CNBC debate when Chris Matthews asked him if he would promise "to support the nominee of the Republican Party next year." Mr. Paul's answer was a flat no. "Not unless they're willing to end the war and bring our troops home. And not unless they are willing to look at the excess in spending. No, I'm not going to support them if they continue down the path that has taken our party down the tubes."
When I saw Mr. Paul last Friday after a speech he gave to Americans for Prosperity in Washington, he was clearly feeling his oats on the public reaction to his stand opposing the Iraq war. He rejected my comment that his anti-war emphasis was crowding out his free-market message "Everything is tied to the war. It threatens our financial security as well," he told me. I left our brief encounter with the clear impression he wanted to continue to talk about his message well into the future beyond the GOP primary race.
Despite his libertarian views, a Paul third-party run might hurt the Democrats more than Republicans. If he emphasized his support for pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq immediately, he would trump Hillary Clinton on the left. If he talked about his support for drug decriminalization, he would clearly appeal to a constituency ignored by both major parties.
The logistics of a Paul run are also there. The Libertarian Party national convention doesn't meet until late May in Denver, and becoming its nominee guarantees a spot on 26 state ballots immediately. Another 20 state ballot lines are fairly easy to obtain.
Mr. Paul could, of course, retire from the House if he ran for president. But Texas law also allows him to both run for president and seek re-election to the House, thanks to a statute rammed through by Lyndon Johnson. The GOP primary in which Mr. Paul is being challenged for his seat is held in early March, well before he would have to publicly announce any third-party intentions. Nothing prevents him from running as, say, a Libertarian for president and a Republican for the House at the same time.
It's also likely that Mr. Paul might be the rare third-party candidate who could actually raise his own money. He took in over $5 million in the last quarter, exceeding the fundraising totals of candidates such as John McCain and Mike Huckabee. A chunk of his money comes from liberals such as singer Barry Manilow, and he might find himself the recipient of some support in a general election from anti-Hillary Democrats who deplore the grip of the Clinton clan on their party.
John Fund is an editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal and the OpinionJournal.com.
Subscribe to his political diary at http://www.opinionjournal...
Maybe he should...no, make that *definitely* he should
I may have to disagree on this one. Not only should he seek them, but do it ASAP, right after he takes the matching funds.
For starters, look at the calendar. Both the LP and CP have their nominating conventions months before the GOP. If Dr. Paul doesn't go into St. Paul with the LP and/or CP nominations in his pocket and doesn't get the nomination, he's sunk, and this movement loses its rallying point and a LOT of momentum. Couple that with the coming splintering of the GOP in various directions depending on who gets the nomination, and he may need those other nominations to stay in the thing.
Second, don't buy into the argument that if Dr. Paul goes third-party that it will guarantee a Hillary win. There are far too many variables in this situation and far too much time between now and then to even consider buying into that argument. At least, not yet. That even assumes a Hillary win, which is by no means assured. Granted, the DP nomination is hers to lose at this point, but her recent debate Cackle may come back to haunt her. There is a large anti-Hillary crowd in the DP and they are looking for a good reason to go Edwards or Obama.
Third, if Dr. Paul goes into St. Paul with either or both of the LP/CP nominations in his pocket, then he gains that much more leverage if there is a splinter. He can simply invite the splinters to join him instead with a ready-made nomination or two, which makes their ballot access problems that much easier. And if he gets the GOP nomination to boot, that means he gets a true fusion candidate ballot listing (up to three spots on some ballots?), and the ballot gets narrowed from five national candidates to three (Dr. Paul, the G, and the D). That is a major campaign boost since the D couldn't claim that unifying label. In that scenario, the G hurts the D and the right gets behind Dr. Paul, plus the cross-spectrum support he's building anyways, and he can win the whole damn thing.
Fourth, no third-party candidate since Theodore Roosevelt has this level of support and war chest. Sure, Perot had the war chest, but his out-again-in-again activity killed him, and there is no such worry with Dr. Paul.
Fifth, Fund is right in that Dr. Paul is the only one who can outflank Hillary on the left on I-wreck, and on the right economically, ESPECIALLY the health care issue.
Now, I know that some in the GOP leadership will say that if he goes into St. Paul with the LP and/or CP nominations already sewn up that he won't need the GOP nomination. That, of course, is self-serving and self-preserving BS as their own butts are on the block. However, by that time the primaries will be done, and if by then there is a delegate split in the GOP (most likely), Dr. Paul could become the kingmaker for the GOP, and then things go to a good old-fashioned floor fight. That could be damned interesting to say the least. But when that happens if he has the other nominations in hand then he can simply and most strongly claim they he should be nominee because they *will* not win otherwise. He can make it him or bust, him or Hillary, and he can still go on afterwards with the funds and the other nominations while the GOP founders if they nominate someone else. All that means is that whether Dr. Paul seeks the third-party nominations or not, the work on the streets must go on to try to land as many primary delegates and funds as possible, and especially to land a top-three showing in New Hampshire.
I guess what I'm really seeing here is that having the CP/LP nominations in hand create a bunch of opportunities that aren't there without them, and their absence can create more long-haul difficulties than benefits.
Doesn't Matter
If Dr. Paul fails to get the Republican nomination, it won't matter (as far as the elections are concerned) if he runs 3rd party or not. We WILL have another Clinton presidency. A 3rd party Paul will only make Hillary's victory larger. It would be better for Dr. Paul to save his money and assist in the growth of the organization - groom new, young leaders for the movement, stem the despair that will inevitably come from the loss. We will prevail - it's only a question of when.
Doesn't Matter???
I differ with you on this opinion. I for one don't care what party he runs for he will get my vote. If the Republicans nominate someone other than Paul it won't make a difference. You shouldn't look at this from a Republican or Democrat point of view. I think you should look at it from the logic that is the Ron Paul message. Dr. Paul is the only one that can and will save our children from a lifetime of National Debt that was created by our generation and those of our fathers. As a parent of young adults how can I justify leaving my children in debt for the rest of their life because we were the ones that allowed the government to accumulate all this debt. It happened on our watch and it is us that must make it right. We allowed the government to borrow money from the Social Security Trust Fund. We allowed them to squander the finances of our retirement on unworthy programs and projects. If you are a parent and love your children you have only one choice and that is to support Ron Paul even if you have to write him in as a candidate. Time to grow up America and deal with "our head in the sand" mentality. To undo what has been done will not be easy but it is the right thing to do. Speculation will not do anything, Action will!!!
Dr. Paul needs to SPEND
Dr. Paul needs to SPEND EVERY PENNEY HE HAS SPREADING HIS MESSAGE BEFORE THE PRIMARIES!!
I don't want him saving... EVEN A DIME!!
The more that hear.. the more that join... the more CHANGE WE CAN MAKE
Incidentlly... this could be the best election cycle in a couple of generations to run a third party candidate.. they would "only" need about 33.34 percent to win...
Considering there are a TON that won't vote for HILLARY.. EVER... and same goes for Romney/McCain/TheGhoul
Register Republican and VOTE IN YOUR STATES PRIMARY!!!
Word to John Fund...
Ron JUST THIS MOMENT told Tucker Carlson on MSNBC that he under NO circumstances will run as third party...
Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers
Word to John Fund
I guess I better go back and listen again because I thought he said he didn't envision running on a 3rd party ticket. He was focusing on the Republican nomination and he is right to not think like he might not get the nomination. Besides its a free country and why shouldn't he be able to change his mind if the situation changes. I would.
In the unlikely event
Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I'd write him in for president!
Ron has actually been very
Ron has actually been very careful with his words on this. He hasn't definitively said he isn't going to do it. He has said that he isn't currently considering doing it, he has said that he does not intend to do it, but that doesn't mean that he can't change his mind. I do agree, though, that he shouldn't say anything about doing it now, because that would take away from his viability to get the Republican nomination, of course.
Third party has no chance. Paul has to win the nomination!
Quit hoping he'll go third party. Put your energies into getting him the Republican Nomination.
Tracy
SD Ron Paul liberty Operation up an running.
http://www.southdakotaforliberty.com/
Donate here https://rally.org/southdakotaforliberty/donate
Volunteer for Phone from Home here http://www.southdakotaforliberty.com/node/4
My 2 cents
.
Call me cynical, but I think the political system is pretty darn corrupt. I know I have bored many with my CFR stuff, but it is real and formidible and can mess up a good thing, such as our Republic. Nor do I trust the Diebold voting machines nor the people who run and program them.
Most of us remember that Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but, through the miracle of chads and the Supreme Court we ended up with George W. Not encouraging. Voter fraud has a long history, going back to the days when Janet Reno was elected in Dade County, FL. That was pretty bad; worse, it continues.
Ron Paul has stated that if he does win the republican nomination he will return to his Congressional district. However, to quote Napoleon, Ron Paul would be "abandoning the field" to his opponents. That is his choice to make. With a 3rd party run, he would continue to spread his message of freedom, of the Constitution, and gain more supporters.
As I posted a while ago, which I hope he will consider, Ron Paul can be president of the people right now; by setting up a website to advise his millions of supporters on legislation; and to provide a way for us to reach our reps via the internet. This could have monumental impact. And, sadly, it is only through our reps that we have any leverage in this rather corrupt political system: they want to get re-elected. So that is leverage we can apply, but only in large numbers, and only with a massive effort.
I like your thinking
I too have thought that Ron could be the "people's president" online should the nomination fall through.He could advise his many supporters how to take back the country bypassing the presidency. He could start this now and continue the revolution regardless of whether he wins the Repo nom. As for a third party run, I think it's probably a bad idea. Unless ron could get into the debates (probably not) he would have no chance of winning. In the end, I think our best shot at actually having a real President Paul would be working diligently till 2012. If we continued this movement another four years and doctor paul does'nt quit on us or fall into bad health. I think we could be unstoppable come 2012. Particularly If Benito or Bilary are elected in 08.
zen
Hey zen - good thinking there regarding the other ways Paul's influence could be wielded. Also - I appreciate your CFR notes! Perhaps you should put together a short reading list or other concise resource to help those of us who are unstudied on the organization get up to speed.
There's this book...
.
One of the other Daily Paul posters suggested I get a book called The Shadows of Power by James Perloff. It is a wonderful book, all about the CFR and its influence, dating back to 1921. The book was published during the mid-1980s, the Reagan administration. But it still has some very useful info. You can find it on eBay and Amazon, but be sure to get the Perloff book, and not someone else's.
The other thing is to just do a Google search. The CFR site is not very helpful since they say they are a scholarly organization and a think tank. That is like saying that the Corleone family is in the olive oil business!
The list of famous people (politicians, media, industry) is just jaw-dropping. Most of the current candidates are also CFR. Only Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Ron Paul are not. All the others are, and this is not good.
Anyhow, best wishes and good luck.
Oh, there is also a very interesting video series on YouTube. Not about the CFR per se, but about orgainizations that "rule" the world, in secret. Search YouTube for: The Truth John Coleman. I do not agree with everything he says in his 10-part series, but it is extremely interesting.
Election 2008 is Slaves vs their Masters
If we can wake enough people up to Ron Paul's message of personal freedom and responsibility, in light of the alternative CFR making billionaires out of a few individuals and corporations at the cost of the many - we will win. I believe Hillary Clinton has firmly been chosen to lead this country by the higher ups in the CFR. Its still up to the people to make this happen, and we can do it, just get out there and talk to everyone - we have the numbers. Help people to understand how important Ron Paul is to their freedom. Do you want to avoid a recession? Do you want your kids to be free from your burdens? Do you want America to be a great country again with free individuals?
Or do you want to be in debt the rest of your life?
Its firmly in our hands, do not rely on the media or anyone else to spread Ron's Message. Look at what we've accomplished so far, its amazing. We can do more. We can write articles, we can all suck it up and be that guy who brings up politics at the dinner table.
Our future depends on it.
GOP leaders love Hillary
Just my theory, but I've long held the belief that the GOP power brokers (upper level establishment) would much rather see Hillary Clinton in the White House than Ron Paul and, therefore, it will be more difficult for Ron Paul to win the GOP nomination than the Presidency. So... my point is that I don't think this has anything to do with the GOP being "foolish" - in fact, they know exactly what they're doing.
I don't believe there's any hope at all in trying to convince the GOP establishment to support Ron Paul for any reason. The only hope lies in the voters during the primaries to go against the establishment and vote for Ron Paul.
GO RON PAUL! :-)
PS: I actually don't understand Paul's apparent refusal to run as an Independent. I totally understand focusing on the GOP nomination and playing to win... but utterly ruling out a third party run? If Ron Paul's fund raising could exceed expectations again, and we see unbroken momentum during this Quarter... and he were to, nevertheless, lose the GOP nomination, I'd personally hope he'd reconsider.
GMTA
Great minds think alike!
But no, Ron does not want to be a 'spoiler' because he would forever be castigated by the GOP if seen as a Perot-like character, because that is the PERCEPTION, that the GOP wouldn't want Hillary.
But when I say 'those in control' I'm not necessarily referring to the GOP at our level. I am referring to those who really run the government behind the scenes and who control both parties and their presidents.
To those who don't understand I have simple fact to tell them that usually gets their minds sparked: David Rockefeller visited Bill Clinton while he was still in college, to gain his loyalty and do their bidding. He did, and was promoted by the media and thus rewarded with the presidency. That's a huge simplification but you know what I mean.
Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers
:-) Yeah - I hate the term
:-) Yeah - I hate the term "spoiler" associated with the Doctor's campaign. It's way more important than that.
You're right, Jane.
It's phenomenally-stupid, but we see it over & over because apparently it's easier than coming up with other arguments against Ron Paul.
I am old enough to have voted for Dr. Paul in '88. I had since given up on Libertarian politics (and politics in general!) a while ago. IMO it's still a lost cause with our present unfair third-party anti-ballot-access laws. These moronic laws (which benefit us as Republicans) somehow assume an American public which mentally negotiates the complexity of combinations of choices on fast food breakfast menus every morning would still be "confused" by more than 2 choices in something as 'unimportant' as a US election. I'm serious, this is the gist of the legal argument Florida courts have actually affirmed, which is a big part of why I hold them in such incredibly-low esteem.
It's BS, but the law is the law, and most other states are no-different, with some even-worse. Dr. Paul has been realistic, just like me, about it -- "Been there, done that." Why don't people want to discuss the actual issues, instead of stuff like this BS alternating with pure hate?? (Oh, yeah...Because it quickly becomes obvious we're right on the issues.)
Anyway, in addition to being WRONG, what's left of my memory tells me there's a little dirt-diggin' blog out there in 'net-land somewhere (whose name escapes me at the moment). This blog, from a former squeeze, accuses one John Fund of being one of those 'brave' guys who habitually beats the living hell out of the women he "loves." Chances are google can find this blog for you, if you try a bit. Warning: It's ugly if you do...
JMR
Sad but true...
If the GOP really wants to keep the White House, this would be the way to do it. No Republican worth his or her salt would vote for Hillary if she is the nominee, and you know she will be. She is just too Marxist/far left. Now if they had someone more moderate to offer I would worry. But the Democrats are not afraid to offer their most extreme..
So in that case, along with the GOPers who will absolutely not vote for her, we would get every Libertarian, MANY Independents, and some Democrats, assuring us of a win over the devious Hillary.
To me, if the GOP nominates anyone else but Ron, they may as well hand her the presidency because many will stay home. THEY NEED US, plain and simple.
I fear that to those in control, it won't matter whether it's Rudy or Hillary -- because to them, they are one and the same.
Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers
Rudy & Hillary
Would be a "choice" like the Kerry vs Bush "Skull vs Bones" 'choice' -- it's NOT acceptable. We must do all in our power to keep these RINOs (who would vastly prefer Hillary to Ron Paul, even though they'll never admit it) from winning the primary. And Hillary's only fear is a Ron Paul campaign -- I've even had a few Democrats admit it to me. :)
JMR
Oh, and http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0220,cotts,34774,6.html isn't the article I was thinking-of about Fund, but I think it'll do to describe what I'd mentioned above a bit better...
sad but true
You Have to understand...the GOP would rather see hillary then Ron Paul... the family dynasties must continue! 4 years bush sr. 8 years of clinton, 8 years of bushy jr. then they want 8 more of hilly... BOTH PARTIES ARE THE SAME.. RON PAUL WOULD WRECK EVERYTHING THE ELITE HAVE BEEN DOING TO THIS COUNTRY FOR THE PAST 80 YEARS! Folks we need delegates.. and we need DONATIONS. if were gonna win thing and I know we can - IT WILL TAKE EVERY SUPPORTER- DONATING AND VOLUNTEERING! WE NEED LOCAL DELEGATES BADLY! RON PAUL IN 08!
Oh how I wonder, oh how I worry
And I would dearly like to know
How all this squander of earthly plunder
will leave us anything to show
John Fund is a moron..
John Fund is a moron.. working for the new conservativ (neo-con) republican party.. doing ALL HE CAN DO.. to give people a reason NOT to vote for Dr. Paul... regardless of HOW MUCH SENSE HE MAKES!!