Can Ron Paul Win as a Third Party Candidate?

This article makes a lot of sense to me. Ron Paul has a lot of Republican and independent supporters. But he also has a a good chunk, and growing, of Democrat supporters that are disappointed in Obama but won't vote for any other 'Republican' but Ron Paul. I can see him pulling equally from all three groups instead of just the right or left like past third party candidates. I can see him winning as a third party candidate and in so doing perhaps even creating a viable third party for future elections.

Quote :

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com

In a new poll, out yesterday, 7 out of 10 Republicans and right leaning independent voters believe Mitt Romney will be the GOP nominee for President. (Click here for that poll.) Does that mean it’s over for Congressman Ron Paul? I think it is safe to say it is probably a long shot he will be the Republican nominee, but what about a third party run? Can Ron Paul win as a third party candidate? I say that is much less of a long shot, and here’s why.

Let me first say, Dr. Paul has repeatedly said that he has no interest in running as a third party candidate. I do not know (or have talked to) anyone in his campaign. This is my objective analysis and nothing more. Ron Paul as a third party candidate would be much different than the third party candidates of the past. Conservative presidential candidate Ross Perot of the 1992 and 1996 elections predominantly took votes away from the Republican candidates. In 1992, national exit polls had Perot splitting the Republican and Democrat vote equally, but it was not split equally in every state. (Click here for more on this.) A president is voted in by winning each state’s Electoral College votes. It’s a winner take all game, so every state gives a certain number to the winner of each state. Also, Perot spent millions hammering Bush in the 1992 primaries; so, Perot mostly had a negative effect on the Republicans. The ultra-liberal Ralph Nader’s third party campaign in 2000 took votes away from Al Gore, the Democrat. More than 97,000 voted for Nader in Florida alone. Gore would have easily won the election and Florida if Nader would have not run.

Then there is Ron Paul. He would, no doubt, run on a Libertarian type ticket. Paul would take votes from Republicans that think Romney is not conservative enough. After all, he has, so far, come in second in the caucuses and primaries, but that is just with the GOP. He would take a large percentage of the 40% of people who call themselves “Independent” voters. Paul also does well with young voters. In Iowa and New Hampshire, nearly half of all GOP voters under 30 voted for Dr. Paul. He would probably do well with Democrats in the same group. He may be booed in South Carolina by the old guard for his anti-war policies, but the young, who would have to fight the wars, think his message is on target.

As far as liberal Democrats go, Paul would carve a significant amount out of President Obama’s base. Some of the most stinging criticism of the President has come from his own party. You can’t get much more left leaning than the ACLU, and that organization said the most recent signing of the “Indefinite Detention” bill by the President basically guts the Bill of Rights. The ACLU says, “The bill contains dangerous, sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provisions.” The ACLU has vowed to fight this unconstitutional legislation all the way to the Supreme Court. Even MSNBC’s Rachael Maddow, a self-proclaimed liberal, criticized the President on this issue. (Click here and hear her nearly 8 minute rant from early December 2011.) The President also said on 60 Minutes, “. . . some of the least ethical behavior on Wall Street, wasn’t illegal.” This statement is absurd because the meltdown of 2008 is 70 times worse than the S&L crisis 20 years ago when 1,000 financial elites were convicted of crimes. Zero criminal prosecutions of financial elites happened in the wake of the 2008 meltdown. I think it is safe to say Ron Paul would take some very disgruntled Democrats away from Obama.

On the other hand, GOP candidate Romney would get very few votes from Democrats because, after all, there is little difference between him and Obama on this issue. Romney thinks “corporations are people.” Romney and the GOP would like you to think the 2008 meltdown is “all the government’s fault” for making the poor defenseless banks loan money to poor people who couldn’t pay it back. That is a crock! Don’t take my word for it. Listen to William Black, former bank regulator and professor of both law and economics, on how zero financial elites have been prosecuted for crime. (Click here for one of many stories.) Remember, this is what Occupy Wall Street is all about. Obama and Romney will get very few votes from these folks.

So, Congressman Paul could do something that no other third party candidate has done in recent history– take votes from left, right and center. This is why both Democrats and Republicans fear and loath him. I have noted several Ron Paul snubs on both the left and the right, but Democrats seem especially terrified. Can you imagine Obama debating Dr. Paul on civil liberties, true Wall Street reform, budget deficits or war? After the New Hampshire primary, liberal commentator Lawrence O’Donnell said John Huntsman was the “real second” when, in fact, Ron Paul was by a significant margin.

Huntsman was doing so well he dropped out of the race before the next primary in South Carolina. Dana Bash, also, showed her true biased feelings on CNN in early January when she said she was “worried . . . Ron Paul will continue on long into the spring and summer.” (Click here to hear the comments of CNN reporter Dana Bash for yourself.) So, why would Congressman Paul “continue on long into the spring and summer” even if he would likely not win the GOP nomination? Do you know of any third party primaries out there? Of course not. Paul would keep campaigning just to get press and gain votes. Dr. Paul would love to narrow the field down to just Romney, and he has the money and campaign organization to do it. When it’s mathematically impossible for Paul to get the GOP nomination, I expect a third party run. At 76, I can’t imagine this man of conviction to just pull up stakes and leave the presidential race to the two corporate candidates put forth by the Democrats and Republicans.

http://usawatchdog.com/can-ron-paul-win-as-a-third-party-candidate/

Ron knows he doesnt have chance no matter what he trys to pull out of his hat. At this point as my father suggested he is thinking about the future of his movement and how his son could take it to the next level. He wants to make it to the Republican choosing of a candidate (sorry having a brain freeze on what its called.) and have his speach heard for the passing of the torch. As some said better treat the old man with respect otherwise him running third party will give obama 4 more years.

Ron Paul is sucking up to Romney rumor has it Ron Paul is vying for a cabinet position. Ron Paul has no plans on running as a third party candidate.

Sean Hannity said it best today. I love him on domestic issues. I wish I could change his foreign policy then he would be the perfect candidate.

eber322 wrote:

This article makes a lot of sense to me. Ron Paul has a lot of Republican and independent supporters. But he also has a a good chunk, and growing, of Democrat supporters that are disappointed in Obama but won't vote for any other 'Republican' but Ron Paul. I can see him pulling equally from all three groups instead of just the right or left like past third party candidates. I can see him winning as a third party candidate and in so doing perhaps even creating a viable third party for future elections.

Good article. I agree. As it says: "So, Congressman Paul could do
something that no other third party candidate has done in recent
history– take votes from left, right and center. This is why both
Democrats and Republicans fear and loath him.

And that's why I'll vote for him even on a third party.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

Ron Paul is sucking up to Romney rumor has it Ron Paul is vying for a cabinet position. Ron Paul has no plans on running as a third party candidate.

Sean Hannity said it best today. I love him on domestic issues. I wish I could change his foreign policy then he would be the perfect candidate.

I have destroyed this debate before. Please stop giving credit to mainstream media, it is easily proven who pulls there strings.

Ron Paul has ran on a much more positive platform and hasn't gone as far out of his way to attack people.

Romney is scared of constitutionalist. Here is a video demonstrating this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68pjMPnkGMc . So why is Romney going to poke Paul and give him the microphone to attack back?

That being said, here are videos of Paul talking negatively about Romney's campaign, just 3 I found on a 60 youtube search.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYgAbkXOAsw&feature=player_embedded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_Vw3a6gxRM&feature=player_embedded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cloHGFRjSSI&feature=player_embedded

Please stop believing everything the mainstream media tells you. Dr. Paul's foreign policy is the only that makes sense!

A: We are making enemies faster then we can kill them in this eternal war. This is making us less safe at home! Don't believe me? Then why does Paul have more donations from military personal then everyone else combined! These are the people that are seeing it first hand, all over the world. Seems like they should have a much better world view then someone who is tapped into government controlled media.

B: We can not afford to go to war! We are spending trillions of dollars we don't have to fight these wars, do you realize we have to pay interest on this? Interest to who? OTHER GOVERNMENTS and banksters! The same banksters that own mainstream media.

Wake up america, it is not to late.

PS: Ron Paul has also stated before that he would not accept an endorsement from RandomCorruptPoliticianX(name illudes me) because he would lose all credibility. Paul is the most honest politician you will find... now he is going to become part of Romney's team and sell out his 30+ years of credibility? Fat chance.

ssvs04 wrote:

Ron knows he doesnt have chance no matter what he trys to pull out of his hat. At this point as my father suggested he is thinking about the future of his movement and how his son could take it to the next level. He wants to make it to the Republican choosing of a candidate (sorry having a brain freeze on what its called.) and have his speach heard for the passing of the torch. As some said better treat the old man with respect otherwise him running third party will give obama 4 more years.

I don't entirely agree with this, he doesn't have a chance of winning the republican nomination, this I will give you but he is going to take alot of voters from the corrupt republican party. I am sure he is well aware that even if he does fail at becoming president he is still creating a path for Rand, as well as awakening the people to as much of this bullshit as he can get away with. JFK asked for this before they shot him.

I think he will also take a lot of votes away from the corrupt democratic party also. Lets be honest both parties have corruption. It is not specific to one party.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

I think he will also take a lot of votes away from the corrupt democratic party also. Lets be honest both parties have corruption. It is not specific to one party.

I am not being dishonest, Paul isn't running as a democrat.. I was pointing out his reasoning for running for GOP candidate to begin with. He had to know they were going to have fraudulent votes to see he never receives it.

YawnGG wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

Ron Paul is sucking up to Romney rumor has it Ron Paul is vying for a cabinet position. Ron Paul has no plans on running as a third party candidate.

Sean Hannity said it best today. I love him on domestic issues. I wish I could change his foreign policy then he would be the perfect candidate.

I have destroyed this debate before. Please stop giving credit to mainstream media, it is easily proven who pulls there strings.

Ron Paul has ran on a much more positive platform and hasn't gone as far out of his way to attack people.

Romney is scared of constitutionalist. Here is a video demonstrating this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68pjMPnkGMc . So why is Romney going to poke Paul and give him the microphone to attack back?

That being said, here are videos of Paul talking negatively about Romney's campaign, just 3 I found on a 60 youtube search.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYgAbkXOAsw&feature=player_embedded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_Vw3a6gxRM&feature=player_embedded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cloHGFRjSSI&feature=player_embedded

Please stop believing everything the mainstream media tells you. Dr. Paul's foreign policy is the only that makes sense!

A: We are making enemies faster then we can kill them in this eternal war. This is making us less safe at home! Don't believe me? Then why does Paul have more donations from military personal then everyone else combined! These are the people that are seeing it first hand, all over the world. Seems like they should have a much better world view then someone who is tapped into government controlled media.

B: We can not afford to go to war! We are spending trillions of dollars we don't have to fight these wars, do you realize we have to pay interest on this? Interest to who? OTHER GOVERNMENTS and banksters! The same banksters that own mainstream media.

Wake up america, it is not to late.

PS: Ron Paul has also stated before that he would not accept an endorsement from RandomCorruptPoliticianX(name illudes me) because he would lose all credibility. Paul is the most honest politician you will find... now he is going to become part of Romney's team and sell out his 30+ years of credibility? Fat chance.

We have gone over his lonnie tunes foreign policy at great length here. Both sides are on the extreme of both spectrum's. One side just wants to pull out and hide from the world and hope free trade will make everyone loving and peaceful. And the other side just cant except we dont need all these bases and troops spread across the world. But we do need to be out there in key areas for our own countries security. Even though I voted for him in Florida im not thrilled with him.

YawnGG wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

I think he will also take a lot of votes away from the corrupt democratic party also. Lets be honest both parties have corruption. It is not specific to one party.

I am not being dishonest, Paul isn't running as a democrat.. I was pointing out his reasoning for running for GOP candidate to begin with. He had to know they were going to have fraudulent votes to see he never receives it.

Look if Paul runs as a third party he will take a lot of youth vote away from Obama. That is just a fact. You should see the college support he has. Both from the left and right.

Eh.. I never said It wouldn't?

Slamming the GOP in no way means I am defending the other parties, or saying Paul won't take votes from them as well.. I do take a look at the support he has. I remember you originally thinking I was a liberal for defending Occupies right to protest.. this isn't the case either. IMO this entire left-right debate is to keep people fighting amongst each other for the peanuts while all the steak is carted out the back door.

YawnGG wrote:

Eh.. I never said It wouldn't?

Slamming the GOP in no way means I am defending the other parties, or saying Paul won't take votes from them as well.. I do take a look at the support he has. I remember you originally thinking I was a liberal for defending Occupies right to protest.. this isn't the case either. IMO this entire left-right debate is to keep people fighting amongst each other for the peanuts while all the steak is carted out the back door.

Actually you fit in well here. The whole point of this place is for every one to have conversation but agree or not agree just have the conversation without the name calling like you get on Fox News. I would love to get more people to join this forum no matter what they believe. To see if people can disagree without getting mad at each other. It is refreshing to have other perspectives. Your right sometimes I do judge to quickly.

ssvs04 wrote:

We have gone over his lonnie tunes foreign policy at great length here. Both sides are on the extreme of both spectrum's. One side just wants to pull out and hide from the world and hope free trade will make everyone loving and peaceful. And the other side just cant except we dont need all these bases and troops spread across the world. But we do need to be out there in key areas for our own countries security. Even though I voted for him in Florida im not thrilled with him.

I am beyond thrilled with him. He doesn't want to sit back and do nothing, he voted to kill either Sadam or Osama, i forget which. I don't think he plans on the entire world being peaceful either, he simply doesn't agree with us being the self righteous police man of the world. Not morally or financially. Most empires fall because they spread them selves to thin, this is what is going on today in america. Look what happened to Germany and Russia! America as a whole has nothing to gain from these wars.. were just lining the fat cats pockets... while murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent non violent people. Who pays the price for war? The poor. I really don't understand what is not 100% perfect about this, besides what the war loving media tells everyone.

Ok, to answer the question posed by the topic of this thread.

No, he cannot win.

Can we forget about him and talk about something serious?

Annoyed wrote:

Ok, to answer the question posed by the topic of this thread.

No, he cannot win.

Can we forget about him and talk about something serious?

Eh, Ron Paul does just as good nationally as anyone else including Obama, give or take 5%, but he actually keeps steadily increasing.. and only the republican debates are going on wait till he sets his sights on Obama. Also according to reuters latest national TELEPHONE poll Romney is slipping away and Paul just pulled ahead of Gingrich for 2nd place out of the GOP candidates. What part of this says he can not win? Why is it that people who bash Paul never back up there beliefs and seem to have the same beliefs that main stream media has been telling them to have?

I don't have the same beliefs as the MSM.
But the MSM does control alot of the voters in this country, and will never back Paul. So Paul will not win.

With that type of attitude you might as well dig your grave for them. Main stream media can and will be defeated:) The internet is fracking there whole game up, hence ACTA and the likes.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

I think he will also take a lot of votes away from the corrupt democratic party also. Lets be honest both parties have corruption. It is not specific to one party.

Boy is that the truth!
The rotten DemoPublican Party has been moving us away from Constitutional government (and into tyranny) for decades, and none of the current candidates - except for Ron Paul - wants to return America to constitutional government.