Ron Paul must run third party OR endorse a third party Candidate
Posted August 29th, 2008 by SirFelix
output
We have fought for the last year+ for Ron Paul and his message.
I don't know about you guys, but I NEED to continue the fight.
What Dr. Paul has taught me cannot be un-done.
I will fight for the tenets of Ron Paul's message until the day I die.
But we need direction from Dr. Paul
A) Will he run for third party with Jesse Ventura?
B) Will he endorse a third party candidate?
I prefer option A, but option B also gives me a focus for my energies.
Ron Paul must make some sort of decision at the Rally for the Republic.
I am posting this message in the hopes that Dr. Paul sees it and gives the Revolution some direction.
Please Bump.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
I was saying this all year,
I was saying this all year, but I've given up on it.
It's too late for Dr. Paul to get ballot access as an independent, so that's out if the question.
I don't think Dr. Paul wants to run Third Party, either, because he cares more about keeping his Congressional seat. Both the Constitution and Libertarian parties tried to woo him to run on their tickets six months ago.
It's really too late for this now. The time to try to sell the idea of him running Third Party is over. After Tuesday, Ron Paul is done as a presidential candidate. I have very serious doubts that he'll run for anything but Congress for the rest of his life.
I seriously doubt he'll endorse anyone, either. It's just not his way. I hope I am proven wrong.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Kevin, I know that you were calling for 3rd party all year,
and now that objective seems all but dead.
I was really posting this to say that Ron Paul must endorse a 3rd party candidate if he himself doesn't run 3rd party.
Ron must endorse a 3rd party candidate to give the patriotic revolutionaries some direction.
Peace.
I would hope so. Baldwin
I would hope so. Baldwin would benefit massively from Dr. Paul's endorsement.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Yep, that pretty much covers it...
I seriously doubt that you'll be proven wrong...
http://groups.yahoo.com/g...
Ventura also shows no interest
Ventura also shows no interest in running with Dr. Paul, and vice versa.
No Opinions?
Hmmmm.
Paul/Palin '08?
Can I please vote for a Vice Presidential candidate but a different Presidential candidate?
I can write them in!
Most states require that one vote for both a Pres. and a Vice Pres. candidate. Those who wish to write in Ron Paul should be united in writing in Sarah Palin as the VP. Wouldn't it be something if Sarah got more votes than John McCain?????
Purely symbolic, obviously. But if you're writing in or voting third party, it's already pretty much symbolic to begin with.
Paul/Palin '08?
Can I please vote for a Vice Presidential candidate but a different Presidential candidate?
I can write them in!
Most states require that one vote for both a Pres. and a Vice Pres. candidate. Those who wish to write in Ron Paul should be united in writing in Sarah Palin as the VP. Wouldn't it be something if Sarah got more votes than John McCain?????
Purely symbolic, obviously. But if you're writing in or voting third party, it's already pretty much symbolic to begin with.
Unfortunately no
You cannot in all likelihood.
The reason is that no one will be voting for President or Vice-President in November.
What we will all be doing is voting for a slate of electors from our states that will cast their votes for a particular candidate for President and Vice-President in December.
That's why a presidential contender has to file as a 'write-in' It's not the candidate that is on the ballot, but his/her electors. Paul would have to file a slate of electors for president for you to write him in. Most of those deadlines for filing have or will soon pass this week or next.
Only the 538 members of the electoral college, which will be chosen by you and I in November will actually vote for President or Vice-President.
Although the electors are 'bound' in some states to vote for who they pledged to ahead of time, any such requirement is technically unconstitutional and so they can vote for whomever they want. Though most do as they are told. There have been a few cases of 'faithless' electors in the past, but it hasn't made a difference in the outcome since the early 1800's.
In some cases, faithless electors were issued fines. I don't know if any fought the fines in court on constitutional grounds. While the states decide HOW the electors are chosen, the constitution is very specific about the fact that the electors vote for who THEY want.