Ron Paul Doesn't Rule Out Third Party Run

He is 99.9999% not going to run in a third party but only a buffoon talks in absolutes, which he is not. No plans. one more note he raised 6 mil and some change to add to his.... drum role...... 18.5 mil!this quarter. were do you guys get your info man, sad, all you have to do is go to his site and look at the daggum screen!

There is no point in talking about a third party run when he's kicking butt in the Republican primary. He is closer than many people think to winning the nomination.

What part of 9.999999% don't you understand? He is going to win the GOP by a LANDSLIDE.

As Bryan pointed out earlier, Paul raised $6.02M on Sunday. This brought him to $18M total. Five seconds of research would have given you this information. If not from his homepage, then a Google news search on "Ron Paul" would have brought up a few dozen other news stories with these totals.

So what we can rest assured of is that RON PAUL WILL NOT RUN FOR A THIRD PARTY. The more the media suggests it is the more it simply has to be re-explained. What should happen is Romney, Giuliani,McCain, and Huckabee need to run for a third party since they are more anti-conservative than anything. They need to form a new party and maybe call it the neo-colonialist party or the global welfarism party. Im really not sure what any of them are doing running for the Republican nomination when none of them are true Republicans or conservatives. Ron Paul is the only true conservative running. Also everyone knows the natinal polls are simply wrong. They let you in on their limitations and inacuracy by saying 'likely Republican voters' or ' registered Republicans'. When they say these things, its lets you know their numbers are off.

So what we can rest assured of is that RON PAUL WILL NOT RUN FOR A THIRD PARTY. The more the media suggests it is the more it simply has to be re-explained. What should happen in Romney, Giuliani,McCain, and Huckabee need to run for a third party since they are more anti-conservative than anything. They need to form a new part and maybe call it the neo-colonialist party or the global welfarism party. Im really not sure what any of them are doing running for the Republican nomination when none of them are true Republicans or conservatives. Ron Paul is the only true conservative running. Also everyone knows the natinal polls are simply wrong. They let you in on their limitations and inacuracy by saying 'likely Republican voters' or ' registered Republicans'. When they say these things, its lets you know their numbers are off.

The ugly American needs cosmetic surgery and the good doctor is just the man to do it.

Sixty years ago the intellectual elites of the free world admired and envied the United States. Today the US and particularly its foreign is intensely disliked. What has changed ?

When the US first carried the biggest stick, it was reluctant to use it and careful to use it sparingly. Think how the US agonized over World War II and how generous it was in the aftermath.

The presidential campaigns of Ron Paul and to a lesser degree Barak Obama have the capacity to reverse the almost universal dislike of the US. I say Obama to a lesser degree because he seems to be sliding against his will into the “tough guy” foreign policy rhetoric that to appeals to a significant percentage of the US electorate.

This “tough guy” rhetoric crosses party lines JFK did it in the sixties Bush does it today,. It has been the rhetoric of every president since the passing of the Roosevelt / Eisenhower days.

Whatever you may think of Ron Paul is or however naive you suspect Obama to be, they both display a kind of old fashioned humility that allowed USA to be the acknowledged champion of the free world. When Ron Paul says “its not because we are rich and free that they hate us but because we are over there” it demonstrates the big guy trying to put himself in the little guy's shoes.

What I find disturbing is the quasi censorship of Ron Paul by Big Journalism and Big TV. If Paul's views on government, health care and welfare run against mainstream wisdom then by all means trash his ideas on these matters. However silencing a presidential candidate who says no to war, no to torture and yes to trade and dialog is not a smart move. Once again the rest of the world watches Clinton, Giuliani and others making it plain the US is there to be the world's policeman or schoolmarm. Having the odd candidate however different say - The US does not have a mandate to impose it's views on the rest of the world is a breath of fresh air.


The ugly American needs cosmetic surgery and the good doctor is just the man to do it.

Sixty years ago the intellectual elites of the free world admired and envied the United States. Today the US and it's foreign policy are intensely disliked. What has changed ?

When the US first carried the biggest stick, it was slow and sparing in it's use. Think how the US agonized over World War II and how generous it was in the aftermath.

The presidential campaigns of Paul and to a lesser degree Obama, have the capacity to reverse the almost universal dislike of the US. Obama less because he seems to be sliding against his will into the “tough guy” rhetoric.

This “tough guy” rhetoric crosses party lines, JFK did it in the sixties Bush does it today,. It has been the rhetoric of every president after the Roosevelt / Eisenhower days.

However nutty or naive you may think Paul or Obama to be, they both display a kind of old fashioned humility that allowed the USA to be the acknowledged champion of the free world. When Ron Paul says “its not because we are rich and free that they hate us but because we are over there” it demonstrates the big guy trying to put himself in the little guy's shoes.

What I find disturbing is the quasi censorship of Paul by Big Journalism and Big TV. If Paul's views on government, health care and welfare run against the mainstream then by all means trash his ideas on these matters. However silencing a presidential candidate who says no to war, no to torture and yes to trade and dialogue is not a smart move. Once again the rest of the world watches Clinton, Guiliani and others making it plain the US is there to be the world's policeman or schoolmarm. Having the odd candidate however different say - The US does not have a mandate to impose it's views on the rest of the world is a breath of fresh air.

The only "wild card" I see is whether the major polling organizations' polling techniques will get the scrutiny they deserve. They seem to serve more the purpose of swaying public opinion than measuring it.

Your ignorance astounds me.

HE WON'T BE DOING IT.
THE POLLS ARE IRRELEVANT!
AT LEAST WAIT FOR THE GANDANG PRIMARIES !

When he wins the Republican nomination, this will be a non-issue :O)

If Ron Paul has not won the Republican nomination by April and there is no chance of him winning a brokered covention he should run as an independent on the libertarian ticket. He would be the only viable anti-war candidate having voted against the Iraq invasion from the beggining, the only pro-life candidate (assuming Rudy gets the Republican nomination) and be the only veteran running for president. He'd get more votes than Ross Perot ever did! I'd vote for him

A Ron Paul bumper sticker on every Truck in America! Here is the most important news release of the week!
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071217/budget_deficit.html

Non-issue as Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination.

Ron Paul CAN'T win the GOP nomination. He's a marginal candidate at best. And if he is truly pro-life, he must not put together a third party effort, because that gives Bill Clinton's wife the White House, hands down. Bill Clinton vetoed legislation banning partial-birth abortion, twice. Her Thighness would do no less as prez. I urge all you Paulites, support the GOP nominee whoever it is. The stakes are too high to do otherwise.

Don't EVER EVER expect that the media is going to present anything honest. It's all bought and paid for if you haven't realized it yet and I'm sure Google was at the top of their list for purchase, many years ago.

> I urge all you Paulites, support the
> GOP nominee whoever it is.

For god sakes, we've had 6 years of an entirely Republican executive, legislative, and judicial branch, and abortion is still as legal as it ever was.

When are you going to realize that the abortion "issue" is merely a tool to get you to vote Republican and absolutely nothing more?

If Paul doesn't win, it won't matter who wins. They are all, literally, the same and they only difference is in minor details. If Paul doesn't get the nomination, I'm going to WRITE him in. I'm NEVER goig to condone the garbage "front runners" by voting for them.

Ron Paul for President and let's hope he picks Tom Tancredo as his VP. They seem to be the only two candidates listening to Americans concerning the illegal alien invasion and the lax border security that mainstream Democrats and Republicans are so in favor of.

Richard Wicks, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you actually believe what you wrote. The abortion issue is not phony, not trumped-up, not a ruse to buy votes for the GOP. I rememeber when PA governor Casey, a pro-life Democrat, tried to address the Democrat national convention a few years back and was nearly booed off the stage. I recall vividly the horror of watching Hillary's hubby veto the bill to ban the grisly, barbaric, inhuman practice of partial birth abortion--twice. And I want to remind you that President Bush not only signed the partial birth abortion bill into law, he also stood fast (and successfully) against embryonic stem cell research. Based on your remarks, I suspect the killing of nearly 50 million American babies in the womb since 1973 doesn't mean much to you right now. It will become meaningful to you, at least from a fiscal viewpoint, when those 50 million Americans who were denied their right to life can not work and contribute FICA toward your Social Security income.
And I definitely believe what I've written.

WHY IS IT THAT THIS BLOG HAS ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES PICTURES AND NAMES ON THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN OF THE BLOG'S SPLASH PAGE EXCEPT RON PAUL? RON PAUL WILL SWEEP IOWA AND NEW HAMPSHIRE NEXT MONTH. HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO BET THAT THIS BLOG WILL STILL EXCLUDE RON PAUL'S PHOTO AND NAME? ANY TAKERS?

1) Ron Paul wont need to run as a 3rd party, if he GETS THE GOP NOMINATION! Critics like to paint his campaign as unwinnable, but apparently that's only a strategy to persuade SHEEP from voting their conscience.

2) If Ron Paul doesnt win the GOP nomination, we're gonna draft that old man anyway with the biggest write-in campaign this country has ever seen!