Would Ron Paul Win as a Third Party Candidate?

[TickTockMan]

What are your thoughts?


I think he would.

I think there are enough people that don’t like the other Republicans and don’t like Pres. Obama that he could win in a three way race.

 

[MystikWizard]

The answer is no. He wouldn't have the funding to get on the General Election debates, which apparently you need an absolutely enormous amount of money to do. Paul was asked that before in 2008 and basically said he wouldn't run as an Independent because "you needed to be a billionaire to even get into those debates if attempting to run 3rd Party".

That explains why so few actually do it. Last one that actually did it and was able to get in the debates was Billionaire Ross Perot during George H.W. Bush vs Clinton vs Perot

So he wouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[JayHawk]

FUCK NO....

I dont care how mad Americans are when the polls open... they will vote for the candidate with the best plan for fixing it... that candidate when President will NOT do what he says BUT we will always vote for the guy who has the best plan.... NO DOUBT. Nothing Ron Paul says is valid because he derides the very system he benefits vastly from in the form of campaign funds and local pork projects. So he is a lie and will never win a national election.

 

[chrisrobin]

No.

The history of third parties is bleak. Ross Perot got over 20% of the popular vote in 1992 but did not garner one electoral vote. That's not saying that third party candidates don't influence policy of the other two, because they have done so.

 

[leomendez93]

He has the potential if people who cares for this country actually tries to listen to the guy before discounting him as a waste of vote.... I am voting for him!

 

[MystikWizard]

He has the potential if people who cares for this country actually tries to listen to the guy before discounting him as a waste of vote.... I am voting for him!

I agree. But in the big scheme of things, the office of the President is given way too much credit when it comes to making policy.

Let's say that Ron Paul would become the Republican nominee in a major upset. Then, let's say he would somehow miraculously win the General Election. What would he be able to get accomplished? Do you think Republicans and Democrats in Congress are going to work with him on policy? Even Ron's own party would refuse to work with him on half of his proposals and the Democrats would refuse to work with him on almost 90% or more of his proposals.

Getting Ron Paul elected would accomplish absolutely zero in this country since Congress wouldn't work with him on anything. Ron would have direct control of Foreign Policy, but in terms of Domestic Policy, don't expect much of anything to happen.

That is what Ron's supporters don't seem to grasp. Even if you would somehow get Dr. Paul elected ... then what?

 

[chance1]

Crazy Uncle Ron

his heart is in the right place

that's about it

he would never win much less be competitive

 

[CowboyBob]

Ron Paul should run as an alternative candidate. That should siphon off some votes from Romney.

Let's encourage a Santorum / Bachmann ticket running on the Crazy Party. Both of those clowns are so preoccupied with other people's sex lives they're a natural.

Divide and conquer.

 

[hotatlboi]

Nope, we have a two party system for better or worse.

 

[TickTockMan]

Ron Paul should run as an alternative candidate. That should siphon off some votes from Romney.

I think he would take votes from both sides.


Depending on how things play out within the next year I think the anger is going to be futher reaching and much higher.


If government doesn't start working for regular people again I do think Paul could win as a third party candidate.

Of course this is all moot. He has ruled it out already unless he changes his mind. You can tell he wants it much more though than in the past. He has moved to the right to try and get support.

 

[Just_Believe18]

His best chance is the Republican nomination, which he won't get.

 

[MisterMajestic]

I consider Ron to be another Opportunist...He runs for the nomination to build up his "funds"...he knows he's not going to win Shit...When all is said and done he will once AGAIN have a campaign chest over-flowing with Millions from his donors..

 

[frankfrank]

No.

Ross Perot got over 20% of the popular vote in 1992 but did not garner one electoral vote.

This was all because of the winner-takes-all system that we have, AND because he DROPPED OUT for a few weeks and, toward the end, started talking about some gone-off-the-rails-crazy conspiracy theories...and he STILL got more than 19%. I am thoroughly convinced that, AT THE VERY LEAST, if he had run an unbroken campaign and hadn't started saying the really crazy shit toward the end, he would have thrown the general election into a draw (i.e. nobody with 270 electoral votes), and into Congress. In that case, of course, the result would have likely been the same as what ultimately happened - having Bill Clinton be the winner - because in general Democratic and Republican lawmakers will NOT vote for an Independent over and above their own, and Congress was still Democratic at the time.

But in the big scheme of things, the office of the President is given way too much credit when it comes to making policy.

Getting Ron Paul elected would accomplish absolutely zero in this country since Congress wouldn't work with him on anything

The President does hold the important power to veto legislation which he believes is wrong, and it takes 2/3 to override that veto, a very tough hurdle to overcome nowadays. Therefore, the President has almost absolute control over whatever ALREADY-PASSED bills actually become law.

And the power of the Supreme Court to make policy, especially nowadays with it being composed of NINE totally-partisan hacks, can't be ignored either. The President nominates replacements for the vacancies that occur. Consider the prevalence of 5-4 decisions on many cases they hear, with Citizens United being the most notable in recent years. If instead of Alito or Roberts the two vacancies had been filled by people in the Harold Blackmun or Earl Warren tradition, many decisions would be very different.

And my opinion is that Ron Paul possibly could win enough electoral votes to throw the general election into the House of Representatives (which of course would mean a new yahoo in 2013...probably as vile as the yahoos in Gulliver's Travels or whatever book that was). If he had been campaigning as much as Ross Perot did a generation ago and the election was held tomorrow, I think he would actually WIN the required 270 electoral votes! More than fifty weeks from now could be entirely different.

 

[Kulindahr]

No. But he could make the real race more interesting. He might even be able to get the Big Two's candidates to talk about some important things.

 

[TickTockMan]

I consider Ron to be another Opportunist...He runs for the nomination to build up his "funds"...he knows he's not going to win Shit...When all is said and done he will once AGAIN have a campaign chest over-flowing with Millions from his donors..

Dumb question, but don't they have to use campaign money only for the campaign?


I don't think that is what he is doing, but he could be.

 

[TickTockMan]

No. But he could make the real race more interesting. He might even be able to get the Big Two's candidates to talk about some important things.

Just because you are you, do you think he could come in second place? Or do you think he would still place third.

 

[Kulindahr]

Dumb question, but don't they have to use campaign money only for the campaign?


I don't think that is what he is doing, but he could be.

No, they get to pocket any leftover campaign bucks. I think that only applies if they're never going to run again, but I'm not sure.

Personally, I think any leftover campaign funds should go to a random charity.

Just because you are you, do you think he could come in second place? Or do you think he would still place third.

Unless things get worse, I don't think enough people who don't ordinarily vote will get motivated, so unless the Republicans manage to pick a total basket case, I think he'd be third.

Unless Obama gets hit by lightning and Biden turns into the Democrat of choice....

 

[TickTockMan]

Unless things get worse, I don't think enough people who don't ordinarily vote will get motivated, so unless the Republicans manage to pick a total basket case, I think he'd be third.

Unless Obama gets hit by lightning and Biden turns into the Democrat of choice....

I think things are going to get much worse. We are a month in already with the OE movements and those in government still are dragging their feet. I don't think anything will be done until right before the election. By then I think it will be too late.

 

[Joshua_me]

Divide and conquer.

Exactly.

Ron Paul has a strong following. Not strong enough, sadly, but enough to syphon a good chunk of votes away from whatever the GOP ticket is....( Romney/Christie, if I had to guess...)

This should insure another four years of Obama. But, anything is possible.

There are a sizeable chunk of folks that would vote for Satan himself rather than to see that "Socialist Kenyan" back in office, and of course the GOP is doing all it can to make voting as difficult as possible for college students, the poor, African Americans and any other group that tends to lean toward the Democratic party.

Never underestimate the power of Karl Rove..

They stole one election, they could steal another...

 

[barnbuddy]

it's odd, the occasional appeal of Paul and Libertarians - but it's cerebral, and will never surmount

the emotional bonds that keep the two pol parties together

for GOP - despite all the talk of small gov't, they will never desert the idea of powerful gov't force

they love police, long sentences and overcrowded prisons

for Dem's, despite the appeal of a small military and a dismantled security state

they will never abandon middle class benefits like social security and medicare

and they love unions, which are anathema in a Libertian Universe