Topic: Ron Paul
Ron Paul for Vice President! Even if McCain wins the GOP nomination, we can STILL vote Ron Paul in for Vice President - here's how!by RP4VP
(Libertarian)
Monday, May 5, 2008
I would ask you to please read this article, then FORWARD IT to as many other Ron Paul supporters, MeetUps, Yahoo! groups, and email lists that you possibly can. I think you'll see why when you read it.
We have a chance to win the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention... but our backup plan has even MORE of a chance. Please take a couple of minutes to read this article, and let me explain.
I am an elected Alternate Delegate to the Republican National Convention, from Georgia.
I am also a Ron Paul supporter. I have been one since heading up North Carolina Students for Ron Paul during his first campaign for President, in 1987-1988. I then followed Dr. Paul out of the Libertarian Party and into the GOP, in order to help begin the process of bringing the party back to its true conservative, limited government roots.
A new political committee has been launched, which operates much like a PAC, but exists to support delegates only.
Please don't stop reading. I KNOW we are trying to get Dr. Paul elected as president. I'm right in there with you.
In fact, this Delegate Committee (DC - like a PAC) can be a big boost towards achieving that goal, in spite of its name.
You see, we've created this committee with the primary goal of raising money -- a LOT of money -- enough to send every single Ron Paul supporter who has been elected as a delegate or alternate to the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis/St. Paul.
We understand that the goal in Minnesota is the presidential nomination. But that can't happen unless we can get all of the people who have worked hard, in order to win their state's delegate elections, UP there to Minnesota.
That's where we come in.
We anticipate that there will be at least 500 delegates and alternates attending the RNC who are Ron Paul supporters (regardless of who they're "pledged" to vote for in the first round of presidential nominations). At an average cost of $3000-5000 per person, there will be a lot of people who really can't afford to go, who are willing to sleep in cars and eat peanut butter sandwiches in order to have the opportunity to affect CHANGE at that convention.
We don't think they should have to do that. That's why we're raising the money to send them.
Our Delegate Committee is the "public face" of the current INDEPENDENT effort to get Ron Paul elected at the National Convention. (Please Note: The Ron Paul Campaign is NOT affiliated with or endorsing this effort. They couldn't anyway -- he's not running for VP!) As a "political committee" under 11 CFR 110.14(b)(2) we are committed to two main goals: (1) to raise and donate enough money to send to the 2008 Republican National Convention every single Ron Paul supporter who has been elected as a delegate or alternate delegate; and (2) to promote the candidacy of Ron Paul to every delegate and alternate delegate attending the convention.
As you know by now, Ron Paul CAN still win the Republican nomination for President. Ron Paul will likely have at least 1/4 of the delegates at the Republican National Convention ready to throw their unpledged votes to him if it gets to a second vote. (Please Note: We are NOT encouraging bound delegates to disregard party rules or state laws in who they can vote for, and for how many votes.)
As we know, Ron Paul supporters have gotten very involved in the actual delegate selection process (not the primary and caucus votes, but the precinct, county, district and state conventions where delegates are selected to go to the RNC). They've quickly learned the ropes and rules of the process, and have reportedly gained sizeable minorities, if not outright majorities, in delegations from districts and states across the country. (Long-time Republican strategist Patrick Ruffini believes that the number of Ron Paul supporters attending the convention as delegates may be as high as 20-30%; the best estimate is that at a minimum there will be at least 500 there.)
The campaign to elect Ron Paul as the GOP nominee at the convention is obviously a VERY LONG SHOT effort. It's worth the try -- but there is a "backup" approach that can be engaged, and CAN BE WON on the first vote: The presidential nominee and the vice presidential nominee are NOT voted on together, and delegates are NOT bound to vote for the VP choice of the presidential candidate they may otherwise be bound to support. RNC rules say that the vice presidential nominee is voted on in the same manner as the presidential nominee (but in a separate vote). So, should McCain win the nomination, if a majority of delegates at the convention do not vote for his pick for VP, his pick cannot win the nomination for VP.
Just like with the presidential nomination vote, if a majority of the delegations from as few as five states support another vice-presidential candidate, they can force a floor vote on that alternative (see Rule No. 40b). So, should McCain win the nomination, and should the majority of at least five state delegations force a floor vote on Ron Paul for VP, and should Ron Paul then receive a majority of total delegate votes...
Ron Paul can WIN the VP nomination.
This will mean that we have to convince enough delegates coming to the convention -- who aren't already Ron Paul supporters -- to support the ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVE for the Vice Presidential nomination.
To do this, we also need to raise the money to fund informational campaigns targeted at national delegates, potential delegates, GOP officials and bigwigs, utilizing email, direct mail, phone banking, "grasstops" (person-to-person) lobbying, and more (it is much easier and less costly to campaign to 4,600 people coming to one location than running in 50 primaries and caucuses with 20 million voters!).
The greatest tool will be giving away thousands of copies of "The Revolution: A Manifesto," with one going to every single GOP delegate that arrives in Minneapolis/St. Paul in September. In fact, this should not be their first "touch" - a copy should already have been sent to their homes before they even left, along with at least four short informational DVDs on Ron Paul.
The bottom line is, we are trying to get OUR people to the convention through our "Adopt A Delegate" campaign, and we're trying to convince all of the OTHER delegates going to the convention to vote for Ron Paul on the floor of the convention through our "Convert A Delegate" campaign.
By the way... It was another freedom fighter with the last name of Paul -- Alice Paul, the suffragist -- who originally said, "If not us, who? If not now, when?" This is our chance to not only influence history, but to MAKE history.
Opportunities like this don't come along very often in the course of human events. Let's not miss it!
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 16 thumbs so far
2008 RP4VP, all rights reserved.
Published: Monday, May 5, 2008
Last modified: Monday, May 5, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of RP4VP only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. RP4VP 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.
OK, Paul refuses to endorse McCain and says that he prefers Obama's foreign policy to McCain's.
"In an interview on The Situation Room, Paul told Wolf Blitzer that endorsing Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee, “would really confuse” his supporters “because they know we have a precise program and we have to defend that program. .....Instead, Paul favors Sen. Barack Obama because of positions on foreign policy. ”
[link edited for length]
I fail to see how "forcing" John "Bomb, Bomb Iran" McCain to accept Ron Paul as VP makes any sense at all, even if it was possible which seems highly unlikely.
Rick, it's got nothing to do with Ron Paul endorsing McCain. The VP office is an entirely separate office, constitutionally. At our website's FAQ Blog, under "What Good Would The VP Slot Be?", we note:
The Vice President actually has a good deal of both formal and informal powers. Besides being the first person in the presidential line of succession, becoming the new President of the United States upon the death, resignation, or removal of the president, he also serves as the President of the Senate. In that role, he oversees procedural matters and may break tie votes in that chamber.
Congress also made the vice president one of four statutory members of the National Security Council in 1949. Wouldn't that be great to have Ron Paul on?
The Vice President's office is a great "bully pulpit," with daily opportunities to make the news. Want to get around the mainstream media, and get Ron Paul's ideas of liberty out to all Americans? Well, while the sitting President does not have franking privileges (sending letters, newsletters, etc. for free), the Vice President does, just like any other sitting member of Congress. Except this time, his constituents are every single American citizen.
And while we'll avoid the morbid issue of McCain's health, here's one more morsel to chew on: John McCain has already said that he may only serve one term. In recent years, the vice presidency has frequently been used to launch bids for the presidency. Of the 13 presidential elections from 1956 to 2004, nine featured the incumbent president; the other four (1960, 1968, 1988, 2000) all featured the incumbent vice president.
Yes, Ron Paul would be 77 if he assumed the presidency in 2013 -- but McCain will be 72 this August, and Reagan was 77 when he finished his second term.
And who ever said this movement was about Ron Paul, anyway
John "Bomb Iran" McCain would be a disastrous president. Possibly even worse than our current Mad King George. Associating Ron Paul with the militarist would do neither Paul nor the movement any good. Nor would doing anything to get McCain elected do the the country any good.
Rick, yes, McCain would be disastrous, but so would Obama or Clinton. But if Obama or Clinton are impeached, removed, or die, the replacement will probably just as disastrous. If McCain is impeached, removed or dies, and Ron Paul is VP, the replacement will benefit the entire country.
There is also a good possibility that McCain will be off the ticket by the time of the general election, as well.
With the public funds scandal already I think there is a high probability that McCain could be impeached fairly quickly. I think there are enough Democrats that don't like him for being a republican and enough republican's that don't like his stances and anti-party attitude that there would be support for a quick impeachment; after the first 100 days.
VP4RP, that would never happen. If the public funds scandal becomes a big deal, it'll stop him from getting elected in the first place. There's no way that the Democratic nominee will let that slip by once they finish beating the stuffing out of each other. That entire issue will get wrapped up by November.
In addition, an impeachment of McCain after 100 days would be a huge political mistake. First of all, it would be a mistake for the Republicans because they would lose massive amounts of face. If that scenario takes place, they'll have nominated a candidate that's so bad that he gets impeached after 100 days (that's the popular perception at least). Admitting to doing that is essentially admiting defeat in the eyes of the public. Until McCain starts launching nukes, we won't see any major Republican defections as far as an impeachment vote.
Congress in general would be lambasted for trying to impeach McCain after 100 days. 100 days in, he's usually still got the popular mandate. The public will see it as an elitist Congress trying to overrule the will of the people. There will be a huge amount of outrage against all the congressmen that vote for impeachment. For that reason, lawmakers will only vote for an impeachment if the President does something really bad - something that pisses the public off. I doubt that something will turn up in 100 days that could piss the public off to that level.
Anyways, onto the broader topic.
While electing Ron Paul to the VP spot is a neat idea, I don't think it's the right move to make. It's feasible and it will provide publicity and a platform for our issues. However, it will have large drawbacks.
Currently, our movement is seen as a movement of nutjobs and kooks. What will either of these moves do to debunk these notions? Nothing - it will only serve to make the public afraid of us instead of (or in the Democrat's case, while) laughing at us. We'll be seen as corrupters of democracy.
Remember, the public is politically ignorant. They hardly understand the much of primary and caucus system itself - they assume that their votes are directly being tallied to delegates selected by their choice. If they find out on Convention night that not only have their primary votes been ignored, but that the candidate (or vice-presidential candidate) with the popular mandate is being overturned, they'll go crazy. I wouldn't be surprised to see bloodshed.
First of all, I imagine that the party will find some way around these rules if it looks like we might pull it off. Second of all, we will anger all the Republican party officials, and they will be keen to get back at us in whatever way they can. Most importantly, we will convince the public that not only are we nutjobs, but we're very dangerous nutjobs.
So, while I appluad efforts to get Ron Paul candidates to the convention, I do not think we should try to overturn the popular mandates of the Presidential or Vice Presidential nominees. However, having Dr. Ron Paul speak at the convention and changing the platform to the fullest extent is enough of a success for me.
At this point, I'd rather have Ron Paul be the Secretary of the Treasury under an Obama administration. With the war stopped, maybe we could get some fiscal control back in this country (OK - not likely, but Obama actually seems to have a brain so maybe there is hope?)
Obama may want the fiscal conservative vote and publicly picking Dr Paul before the election would ensure a victory. I don't think Democrats could care less about Secretary of the Treasure so it probably wouldn't hurt the vote on that side
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 RP4VP, all rights reserved.