Topic: Ron Paul
Ron Paul is not running for President
(except in Montana). I have had to deal with that. I hope that you can, too.
by George Dance
(libertarian)
Sunday, September 7, 2008

Last Boxing Day, with some time on my hands, I decided to go on the Internet and catch up on the U.S. presidential election. The Democratic race looked interesting, but the Republican race shocked me (in a good way). Every story I read mentioned a darkhorse candidate who, while still low in the polls,had emerged as both a "fundraising wizard" and an "Internet phenomenon" (or words to that effect). And I recognized the name: Ron Paul.

As a Libertarian for 35 years, I knew of Ron Paul. I knew of Ron Paul from before he was a non-interventionist (back in the 70s -- it's true). I'd cheered many of his battles in Congress, and was thrilled when he ran for President as a Libertarian in 1988. I'd followed his struggle to get back into Congress in 1996, but lost touch afterward. Now he was back in a new heroic guise, the master of cyberspace and inspirer of multi-million dollar money bombs.

I spent the balance of my Christmas vacation reading everything I could find on Ron Paul; and by the end of the week I was hooked. From then on, I continued to read whatever I could find on him, every day. By February, I had started writing about him as well.

However, by February, it was clear to me that Ron Paul would not win the Republican nomination. I hoped then that he would go third party: Not only the Libertarian Party (LP), but the Constitution Party (CP) as well, were practically begging for him to grace the top of their tickets. Paul had his own ideas, though, and graciously declined. Instead those parties nominated two of his supporters and allies: Chuck Baldwin for the CP, and Bob Barr for the LP.

I had to accept that, and move on. However, many rEVOLutionaries could not. For the entire summer, it seems, I read article after article here on Nolan Chart begging Dr. Paul to launch a third-party bid. Most of those had more readers than my own methodical, detailed pieces, so I was a bit jealous. Beyond that, though, my emotions were mixed: I sympathized with each writer, while at the same time wanting to scream: "Stop it! It's not going to happen!"

Finally, near the end of summer, those articles stopped; relieved, I thought that finally the "Paul should run third party" meme had run its course. Then -- BAM! -- it was back, as strong as ever.

What set it off, this time, was this cryptic message posted last Friday on the Campaign for Liberty website:
Ron Paul to Make Major Announcement Next Week

Friends,
Dr. Paul just authorized me to send this press release to the national wire. Stay tuned!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jesse Benton
September 5, 2008

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA On the heels of his historic three-day rally in Minneapolis that drew over 12,000 attendees, Congressman Ron Paul will make a major announcement next week in Washington at the National Press Club.
More details will be announced Monday.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=456

Readers who went to Baldwin's website discovered that he would be joining Paul at the Press Club:
9/10/08
10:30AM
Ron Paul Press Conference
Ron Paul has invited Chuck Baldwin to a press conference outlining the positions voters should look for when choosing a presidential candidate.

http://baldwin08.com/EventsCalendar.cfm
Those who visited Barr's website found that he would be there, too:
Sep 10 [...]
National Press Club
Joint Press Conference10:30 am
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/events/
And then it started all over again. In no time at all, blogs like (for example) the Economic Policy Journal were reporting:
Speculation is that Baldwin and Barr are stepping aside so that Paul can become the nominee of both the Constitution and Libertarian Parties
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2008/09/ron-paul-to-make-major-announcement.html
Which only fed the rumor; now it was official.

The announcement the same day that the Montana CP (which is not affiliated with the national CP) had placed Ron Paul on its presidential ticket, with Paul's tacit consent, only increased the fervor.

I felt like screaming all over again: It's not going to happen, it's not going to happen. But screaming is not very convincing; so I began to compile a list of reasons why it would not happen. That was cut short today though, when I discovered that, at Libertarian Peacenik, Thomas M. Sipos had done that job for me. Here, thanks to Mr. Sipos, are the reasons Ron Paul will not be a presidential candidate this November:
What wrong with this rumor?
  1. It's not on any LP officer's radar. The LNC just had its meeting this weekend, and no one knows about this, or was discussing it.
  2. Barr's campaign people are aggressively working on Barr's campaign -- and not for Paul's sake.
  3. I can't imagine egos as big as Bob Barr's, much less Wayne Allyn Root's, stepping aside for anyone.
  4. I don't know that the LNC could order a substitution. Or would even want to.
  5. I don't know if state laws would allow it. The LP is having a hard enough time substituting George Phillies with Bob Barr just on the Massachusetts and New Hampshire LP ballots.
  6. I know less about matters at the Constitution Party, but I imagine there'd be similar problems. Their California affiliate (American Independent Party) just got through a court case over whether Alan Keyes or Chuck Baldwin was the rightful nominee.
  7. Ron Paul has repeatedly said, for many months, that he will not run third party. He's kept his word, eschewing both the LP and CP nominations when they were his for the asking. Why would he change his mind now?
(Thomas Sipos, "Bob Bar to Step Aside for Ron Paul?", Libertarian Peacenik, Sep. 7, 2008. http://libertarianpeacenik.blogspot.com/2008/09/bob-bar-to-step-aside-for-ron-paul.html)

Every one of those points is a fact and, taken together, they add up to an inescapable conclusion: No matter who else wants this to happen, the parties, the states, and Ron Paul himself do not. The veto of any one of these three would make it unlikely; the veto of all three together makes it practically impossible.

So, what will happen instead? I don't know. I do know, and can say, what I would like to see happen September 10:

Ron Paul will announce that the Campaign for Liberty is sponsoring a real all-candidates' debate, to be televised, featuring every presidential candidate on enough state ballots to win: Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, and Nader (and of course McCain and Obama should be invited, too, though they'd decline.) A network, even if only C-Span, has agreed to run the debate. An all-star panel (say, Gary Johnson, Naomi Wolfe, and Walter Williams) will ask the questions. The moderator will, of course, be Dr. Paul himself.

The announcement goes over strongly enough to replace "Sarah Palin," or whatever next week's Top Story is. The momentum builds, and continues to build, until, on debate day, 25 million Americans watch the debate. It's so successful that the network arranges for a full set of three, which end up being watched by over 100 million American voters. Suddenly, for the first time since television became central to it, the election process is a level playing field.

I would love to see that occur this fall. However, I know that all my love is not going to make it occur. Sometimes life is like that; what one wants to see happen, and thinks ought to happen, does not happen. One has to deal with that, while continuing to live and act.

Which is the same type of adjustment I had to make with the reality that, in 2008, Ron Paul will not be a presidential candidate. Adjustments like that are not easy, but, if one is going to live and act in the world as it is, one has to deal with it as it is. I've done my best to deal with it. I hope that you can, too.

-

©2008 George Dance, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Sunday, September 7, 2008
Last modified: Tuesday, September 9, 2008

The views expressed in this article are those of George Dance only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. George Dance is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.

Report violation by George Dance of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.

More Articles By George Dance

Reader Comments:

Posted By: I am an American
Date: 2008-09-07 19:15:13

I'd love to see that debate!

I also hope there is a plan. If everyone who is behind Paul, Barr & Baldwin don't join together, I'm afraid Obama will win this election.

Report violation

Posted By: Spence
Date: 2008-09-07 21:33:23

Fraid you're not going to get a reprieve any time soon. That's why I've sharply decreased visiting this site. It continued throughout the summer, and every time I thought it was finished, come back and bang- there's some thread like "Ron Paul farted" or "'Something big's coming,' says Ron Paul after indigestion. It's enough to make you want to reach through your computer and slam these people's heads against their screen.

 They simply aren't willing to recognize a fad, and they'll attack you for ruining their cult of personality.

 "You should hope that this kind of fervor about Ron Paul never stops" some fool here once said to me.

 Anyway, I thought I'd just check up to see what was going on this time, cause IPR's down right now. Come check it out. The people there are more intellectual and they'll actually hear other viewpoints (even if they don't respect them fully). 

 www.independentpoliticalreport.com

Report violation

Posted By: Steve
Date: 2008-09-07 21:56:47

Ron Paul hasn't got the muscle to force an open debate. He might be able to buy television time for a third parties debate.

Unless, there is more going on such as the problems in Texas.

Also, given state election laws it is probably way to late to substitute Ron Paul's name for other candidates. 

What, I could see RP doing constructively is putting together a coalition of 3rd parties to minimize the cost and improve the likely hood of all of them getting on the ballot in a lot more states.  Similarily, I could see a coalition against the duopolcy in terms of media outreach.  

Report violation

Posted By: Stefan
Date: 2008-09-08 01:21:54

Good article, George. Yes, it will be interesting to see what will be announced. Some do not know about the "sore loser" clause in 4 or 5 states, according to which Paul would not be allowed on the ballot under another party if he did not win the primary of the party he run under: the GOP, like in Texas. One does not know if there are ways to evade thisrule in those states, like if he would be as an Independent candidate, or as the VP (not presidential) candidate in those states...?

I also think Paul would be greatly ignored by the media,  if he would run third party and then he would not have any political power after the election, having forced out of his congressional seat. 

The Ron Paul Revolution is also not strong enough yet.

He could use his "wiggle room", but one has to see. 

Paul has to consider strategy, based on the reality that he was denied a speech at the RNC.

There is probably not enough time for a possible merger between the LP and CP in two months. What Paul can do, is to facilitate debate as you say as well as the creation of a new political party with a new name (like Independence Party - already active in Minnesota with success as well as New York), which would include most of the CP, LP, Reform Party and other third parties. At the same time he remain in the GOP to work inside congress for change and question Ben Bernanke and see what happens. If the GOP does not go back to its roots in less than say two years (before the 2010 election), not only Paul, but many of his collegues can join and lead the new party and participate in the 2010 elections.

Paul mentioned in an interview last week that he hopes third parties can get say 25% of the vote, that would really send a message and I fully agree with him. I think for the time being it is important for Paul to stay in the GOP for now, also as many of his potential supporters may be voting for Palin (NOT for McCain) on a McCain-Palin ticket, as well as for Obama, on the Obama-Biden ticket and they are bound to be disappointed in their respective parties and join Paul (later).

 For a viable third party, there should be major money coming in, and this will take some time.

Report violation

Posted By: nader paul kucinich gravel
Date: 2008-09-08 05:04:12

Fannie & Freddie has forced the issue.

nader paul kucinich gravel
mckinney ventura
perot charts
rage

Got honesty?

Report violation

Posted By: Jonathan
Date: 2008-09-08 06:20:47

No news here. Except for teenagers blogging everyone knows Ron is not running. As far as candidates stepping down, that couldnot happen since it is too late to substitute their names on the state ballots. I hope your next article is one to make arguments for people to vote for Bob Barr

Report violation

Posted By: David F. Nolan
Date: 2008-09-08 06:40:47

If Barr and Baldwin do anything, the most likely scenario is for them to announce that if they carry any states, they will ask their electors to vote for RP.  This gives Paulites a reason to vote for Barr or Baldwin. Of course, if they split their vote between the two, the effect will be pretty minuscule.

Report violation

Posted By: Michael Seebeck
Date: 2008-09-08 07:32:27

The reason that the LNC wasn't discussing it was because they wasted half to their meeting time trying to remove Angela Keaton from the LNC for having the guts to liveblog the meeting in here usual no-holds-barred manner--a long waste of time engineered by Starr, Sullentrup, Redpath et al. All  the details anyone could ever want are at http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com in various threads.

 The rest of the time was the usual inconsequential stuff, as well as the questioning of why Barr has no LP label on his  materials, a meaningless Afghanistan withdrawal resolution, and deciding to destroy videotapes of the meetings.

 

Report violation

Posted By: Coming back to the LP
Date: 2008-09-08 07:40:52

I started posting this message a few days ago.  Glad to see others have the same idea:

Dr. Paul has gained a huge following and a great deal of respect in the media. There are many in the media, and many well-known national figures who would support including all 6 candidates who can theoretically win enough electoral votes in a series of nationwide debates. Recent polls have indicated that a majority of the public at large supports this as well.

By using the high ground of his Campaign for Liberty, and if he is NOT a candidate and has endorsed NO candidate, then Dr. Paul will come into the arena with an unbiased, objective stance, supported by the masses and opinion makers and an organization with the funds to sponsor and obtain nationwide coverage for 6 way debates.

The existing National Debates Commission, or whatever it’s called, is dirty, biased and will not bend its 15% barrier to democracy. But, if Ron Paul takes the high road, he can, and WE can, smash that barrier and smash the National Debates Commission.

By setting up a major forum, on a major network, nationwide, the candidates would receive major coverage. If either one of the D or R candidates refused to attend, but the other came, then the absent candidate would look foolish and “chicken” indeed. And if they both refused, the others would have a field day attacking the truant, chicken candidates, and putting themselves in a good light by comparison.

True, both McCain and Obama could refuse to attend, but if either is behind, he wouldn’t pass up the chance for extra exposure and then the other would be forced to attend.

This is the best opportunity we have ever had for such a breakthrough. It would benefit not only all third parties, it would benefit all Americans. And it is popular. It is what the people want.

And Ron Paul would benefit as well. He would be seen as a statesman doing something for all Americans. And they could see that if Dr. Paul is this sincere and serious, then he must be about other issues as well.

Dr. Paul could only be on the ballot in a non serious way in a few states this fall. He will look foolish no matter what happens if he leaves his name on those ballots. He will be seen as a spoiler. He will be seen as a stubborn, old fool who doesn’t know that he has already lost. Even though I don't see Dr. Paul that way and maybe you don't see him that way, others will. It will hurt his reputation, damage the cause of liberty and squander a REAL chance to make a lasting change on elections in America.

Please Dr. Paul,

Take your name off all ballots.

Endorse no candidate.

Turn the Campaign for Liberty into the greatest unbiased, all inclusive, fair and balanced debate sponsor in history.

Thank you.

Report violation

Posted By: Eric Rowe
Date: 2008-09-08 08:53:22

I'd love to see that debate too. It would be refreshing to hear that Barr had finally agreed to something like that after refusing to do so for so long in terms very similar to the way the major parties had refused to include him in their debates. Of course, I assume that any change like that on Barr's part would be because he finally realized there's no possible way he'd actually get into the major party debates, and not because he actually managed to muster up some integrity. But hey, whateer works.

 Your article does have one factual error. While it's true that Chuck Baldwin was a staunch supporter of Ron Paul throughout his entire campaign, and wrote many articles endorsing both his candidacy and his ideas, Bob Barr never supported Ron Paul for president. And, while Baldwin's platform is virtually identical to Ron Paul's, Bob Barr's is hardly distinguishable from McCain's.

Report violation

Posted By: Ben There
Date: 2008-09-08 10:01:36

Eric,

Bob Barr encouraged Ron Paul to accept the LP nomination that was awaiting RP, having been all packaged up nicely on a silver platter, nicely gift wrapped and with a pretty bow on top.

Yes, Bob Barr supported Ron Paul and wanted him badly to be the LP nominee. 

  

Report violation

Posted By: Ben There
Date: 2008-09-08 10:05:42

Also, in addition to Montana, Ron Paul will be on the ballot as the candidate of the Louisiana Taxpayers Party in Louisiana, and as an independent candidate in WV.  Also, as the vice presidential candidate (with Bloomberg) in Virginia.  All of these were done without Paul's explicit approval and without him signing any paperwork.

Wild, isn't it? 

Report violation

Posted By: PainfullyAware
Date: 2008-09-08 10:24:26

As Long As Ron Paul Is Allowed To Speak The RE-Education OF America Will Continue.

Why Would Anyone Advocate That Someone Speaking Truth To Issue Be Silenced And Want Them To "Go Away".

Fools And Their Rights Are Soon Parted.

To Assume Benevolence IS Foolish.

Debate Is The Distillation OF Reality.

The Only Difference Between The Dems And The Repubs Is What They Say Not In What They Do.  They Are Both Members Of The Money Party.

Current Events Reek Of Police State And Destruction Of The Fiat Money System.

Only Fools Keep Doing The Same Thing Expecting Different Results.

Choose Substance Over Symbolism.  There Are Many Fronts And Many Battle Fields.  Anyone Working For A Return Toward The Constitution Is An Ally.

There Is Doom On The Horizon.  Choose To Look And Confront It Or Look The Other Way And Enjoy The Last Days.

There Is No Hope In Inaction.

War With Iran IS Coming And With It The Slippery Slope To War With Russia.  Do Not Be So Foolish As To Expect Russia To Let The US Control Over 60% Of The Worlds Oil Interests.

When Your Cities Are Glassed Remember Those Who Cried Out; Those That You Chastised For Their Vocal Dissention. 

Report violation

Posted By: DDD in Seattle
Date: 2008-09-08 12:10:57

Can you see McCain and Obama subjecting themselves to direct questions from Ron Paul?

 

I don't think so.

Report violation

Posted By: RPfan
Date: 2008-09-08 21:38:45

To end the suspense, here's a link that might help:

[link edited for length]

Enjoy!

Report violation

Posted By: Spence
Date: 2008-09-10 23:01:29

Just as I figured. Now watch a couple million dopes swoon in their seats at once in awe at what Paul did. Such a novel idea!

 

-.-

Report violation

Posted By: Michael P. Nolan
Date: 2008-10-31 09:34:10

Revolution!

Report violation