Topic: Ron Paul
Do NOT Write-In Ron Paul! Dr. Paul does not want the job and, more importantly, he does not want you to write him in.by Lojiko
(libertarian)
Monday, October 20, 2008
You and I both love Ron Paul very much. He has been a stalwart of Liberty in this nation for over three decades, consistently voting for (as a representative) and supporting (as a private citizen) causes as dear to our hearts as they are important to the success and survival of our nation. However, when you vote this election season, though I prefer to phrase things in the affirmative, I must implore to NOT WRITE-IN RON PAUL!
The reasons for this are short, simple, and most Liberty advocates will agree they are convincing.
Your Vote Will NOT be Counted
This is the single most important reason not to write in Ron Paul for President. Laws vary from State to State, but the general consensus is that a write-in vote for President can only be counted if the write-in candidate files as a write-in candidate. The other two varieties are that a candidate cannot file as a write-in if they lost the primary and that some States don't allow write-ins for President, period! This makes Ron Paul a no-gainer as a write-in choice given he never won a primary and, more importantly, has not filed as a write-in candidate in any State.
Your vote for President will not be counted if you do - you may as well not even vote if you intend to write-in Ron Paul.
You can find a comprehensive list of the write-in laws in your State at the following link: State-by-State Write-in Laws
Don't blame me, blame your State governments for restricting voter choice. If you hate it, work with the Campaign for Liberty, the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, or other organization (or all of them!) to make your State's ballot measures more inclusive.
There are two exceptions to this: Ron Paul will actually be on the ballot in Louisiana and Montana. [link edited for length]
If you live in these States, I encourage you to read the next section before voting for Dr. Paul.
Ron Paul Does NOT Want to be President
Let's make one thing very clear Ron Paul does not want to be president. He had a chance to drop the GOP, pull a John Anderson (GOP Presidential candidate who later ran as an independent), and continue the fight. You have no idea how many former Huckabee and Romney supporters tell me they would vote for Ron Paul in the general election, if he were running ... he's not. Dr. Paul could have shaken this nation's political foundations, but instead, he dropped out and stayed out.
Even Paul himself has said about writing him in, "I don't think that's very productive. Supporters can do it, of course, but in most of the states it won't count. And if they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!" [link edited for length]
Dr. Paul does not want the job and, more importantly, he does not want you to write him in.
There are Still Plenty of Liberty Candidates to Choose From!
Please, if you love Liberty, vote Barr or Baldwin. Both have their drawbacks, there is no sense in hashing them out here. Pick one you love and vote for him or vote for whomever you want. You just need to understand that if you write-in Ron Paul YOUR VOTE WILL NOT BE COUNTED BY LAW! That's right. Your State will not only not count your write-in vote, they are REQUIRED BY LAW not to count your write-in vote.
Not to mention, Barr and Baldwin are gathering votes for their respective Parties. The number of votes they get in this election could determine whether their Parties have to jump through all the ballot access hoops or not in the election after this one. If you write-in Ron Paul, you will not be helping anyone at all. At least a vote for Barr or Baldwin is a vote for ballot access.
It's unfair, I agree, but there's no time to change it now. We do what we can with the means we have. Barr, Baldwin, and the others are not the quality of candidate that Ron Paul would have been, but he's not running, does not want to be president, and your State will likely not count your vote if you write Ron Paul in.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 51 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Lojiko only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Lojiko 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.
If you must hold your nose while voting for McCain (and vomit afterwards) do so only if it's close in your state. Obama will win my state handily; voting for McCain in my state is a purely symbolic act, and right wing socialism isn't the sort of symbolism I had in mind.
"Sarah will be up for president soon! Yeah!"
Just what we need, another religious right evangelical. Have the past eight years taught you nothing?
I'm beginning to think that it'd be easier to teach sound economics to Democrats than social tolerance to religious right wacko Republicans.
Posted By: charles ranalli
Date: 2008-10-20 23:40:21
i already voted (by absentee ballot) for Ron Paul and i'm very glad that i did.
i don't for a minute believe that Ron Paul "doesn't want to be president". that's just absurd. if that were true he wouldn't have run in the first place.
Ron Paul had a very frustrating experience running as a third-party candidate in 1988 and he simply refused to put himself through that again.
the important consideration is not "can my candidate win ?" or "what does the present local (unfair) law allow?" or "what is presently possible or practical ?" much less "what will people think ?". if everybody had acted according to those standards this country would probably have never come into existence in the first place.
no - the only meaningful and valid question is "what action would produce the best outcome assuming *everybody* made that choice ?" along with this question comes the corollary conclusion that - even if *nobody* else is willing to make the right choice at this juncture - yet the right choice is *still* the right choice - and i still have an obligation to myself and my principles to step forward boldly and make that right choice. then perhaps by God's grace - my example will help others to step forward and do the same. that's the principle that has guided Ron Paul in his historic heroic career in the congress. that's also the spirit that made America what it was meant to be - the greatest country in the history of mankind. moreover - that's the *only * spirit that will save this country from its present onrushing collision course with destruction.
I'll probably vote for Chuck Baldwin. It won't be with great enthusiasm, but on principle. Like many of the states, a write-in vote here will not count. My wife, a life-long Democrat, is perfectly fine voting for Obama, as well as most of this state. John McCain's support of the $700 billion bailout package again shows there is no significant difference between these two candidates. Both want more war in Afghanistan. Both like big government. Both voted for FISA. Any of the other four candidates could not be worse than Twiddle-Dee and Twiddle-Dum.
This is a long process. It's time to start preparing for 2010 Congressional races. The Big Two parties are. I suggest channeling your energies where they can do the most good.
I voted early and wrote in Ron Paul. He's the candidate that I truly really believe in. Baldwin is not on the ballot on my state, and I could not vote for Bob Barr in good conscience. (And Libertarians who do must not have seen him on his media tour, single-handedly ripping to shreds the libertarian beliefs.)
I would have voted for Ron Paul...but apparently the game is so rigged it is like going to a carnival and completely shoot the center of the target out in three shots with a projectile that is too small to do the job...even if you hit it, it won't work. If you vote for any of your OWNERS candidates you are a complete moron...having no choice is not a choice...it is a shame...good luck with your fake freedom waste of time...stay at work...at least you might make a couple of cheap dollars before they won't take them either...when I throw my finger up to you it ain't gonna be purple.
I'm voting for Ron Paul as a write in. Why? No matter whom I vote for, it's a wasted vote. But in a few years down the road and people chat about who they voted for, I will be able to hold my head up high and exclaim "I voted Paul". I will be able to carry that statement around with me for decades. The last thing I want to say is I voted for Obama, or that I didn't vote at all. So I will vote Paul, because I want my grandkids to know who I voted for way back in the ol' days of 08'.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2008-10-21 06:10:20
This election cycle has been a real eye-opener. Before this I had no idea how many people really don't care about the consequences of their actions so long as they FEEL good about it. It is no wonder our country is in such a sad state.
I appreciate the intent of this article but the bottom line is that you can't tell people how to vote. They will vote in the way that strokes their personal ego the most and the outcome be damned. For over a year I've been writing and speaking publicly about what a vote is and how to use it to its maximum effectiveness. Once in a while, someone gets it, but sadly, I've seen innumerable people who are not interested in anything but venting their outrage that things don't work the way they wish they would.
I guess that is why it takes serious hardship, chaos, violence and oppression to spark true popular revolutions. We're a nation of fat, comfortable ignorant victims for the most part who can't pay attention long enough to figure out the most simple mechanisms of voting and government.
We all get what's coming; whether we deserve it or not. It seems to me that most Americans will deserve exactly what is coming...no matter who they vote for. The key is WHY they voted the way they did. I have no problem with someone saying "I want to vote for Bob Barr because I want bragging rights as a Libertarian." I have nothing but disdain for someone who says "I want to vote for Bob Barr because the LP can grow into a Real political party if we all just do it." Same vote, different reasons, one realistic and honest, the other ignorant or misguided.
Charles, I don't think you get it. HE DROPPED OUT! You don't drop out if you want the job. Also, you say he had a "frustrating experience" with his third-party run in 1988 ... so you're willing to vote for a quitter just because you don't want him to get "frustrated"?
I, and many like me, wanted Ron Paul to take this all the way. He didn't. Now we're trying to fight for two Liberty candidates who have a chance of making a difference (Barr and Baldwin), but people like you, Charles, can't get it through your head that your vote will NOT BE COUNTED, Ron Paul does NOT want the job, and that you're hurting chances for Parties that represent Liberty to get on the ballot in the next election cycle.
There is literally no difference between writing in Ron Paul and not voting.
dear mr or miss Lojiko (that's a funny name - is that your real name ? no probably not - you are basically too cowardly to use your real name - aren't you ?)
so mr or miss Lojiko - you think i don't "get it" that my vote won't be counted ??? pardon me - but of course i get it that my vote won't be counted. voting for Barr or Baldwin will have approximately one-half of no effect at all. voting for Ron Paul is "doing the right thing" - although to your materialistic way of thinking - that is a meaningless statement. God bless you - mr or miss Lojiko.
I don't care if the write in wont be counted. In TX we have McCain, Obama, and Barr. I wasn't going to vote for any of those 3. So my choice was to leave it blank or use the write in to signal my disgust and vote "none of the above". So I wrote in Ron Paul yesterday.
I did vote for all the Libertarian candidates for all the other offices.
Seriously Charles, you didn't help anyone, not even Ron Paul or the Campaign for Liberty. No one is going to count those votes, no one will even look at them - NOV 5th, no news org is going to say, "Look how many Ron Paul write-ins weren't counted." You will have no voice at all. You may as well have not even voted for President.
Also, you're not helping Parties like the LP and CP gain ballot access. I have no idea how you can feel so good about accomplishing absolutely nothing.
If he gets elected he'll be there for 4 years. So how long can you hold your breath?
Neither Obama nor McCain is an acceptable choice to freedom loving people. Why be a party to electing either of them? Vote your conscience instead and at least you will know you didn't help to put either of those characters in the White House.
Posted By: charles ranalli
Date: 2008-10-21 08:53:49
dear Lojiko
yes i fully understand that you "have no idea how i can feel so good about " doing what i did.
your perfectly rational explanation about how "no news org is going to say 'look how many Ron Paul write-ins weren't counted ' " reminds me of o'brien's harangue against Winston - how nobody would ever know about his resistance to the torture he was being subjected to. the point is that Winston was "doing the right thing" in so resisting - whether anybody else knew about it or not. (i refer of course to Orwell's "1984".)
fortunately Sonia lolo and Patriot *do* understand what i'm talking about - thank you brothers and sisters.
Well, in California, I'll choose someone else to vote for, but if I lived in Montana or Louisiana you'd better believe I'd vote for Ron Paul. In fact, I wish I lived there, just for that purpose. He is extraordinary in having stuck to his principles. Talk is cheap, in comparison, however nice that talk may be. I did notice that the California mail in ballots have no room for write in candidates, so I will have to go to the poll and file a provisional ballot to vote for Chuck Baldwin. If there are write in candidates, what makes it OK to mail out absentee ballots that don't let you vote for them?
I wrote-in Ron Paul on my absentee ballot even though I know my vote won't be counted. I don't care. I voted for the person I would prefer to be my president. I also didn't vote to stoke my ego -- I voted with my heart. I have no buyers remorse.
Barr or Baldwin would likely be better than anyone else, but it's obvious they won't win either. Republicans and Democrats would call that a wasted vote, and encourage us to choose between Abaddon and Beelzubub. Your argument is no different.
My choice of vote is either going to be Ron Paulor Donald Duck.
If I vote for Donald Duck... it will say (to me) that I don't care... and I do... so my vote goes to Ron....With pride ... and then I'll get to say "I told you so" too, LOL.
A not "wasted" vote is only as good as the system that counts the votes.anyway... Good Luck!
Something that keeps coming up with the responders who say they will vote write-in Ron Paul is how proud it makes them feel to stick to their guns and vote for whom they feel is the best candidate. That would be great if Ron Paul was running and wanted your vote ... he's not and he doesn't.
Ron Paul is NOT running for President. Ron Paul specifically said writing him in would not be productive. You're not making any difference at all by writing in Ron Paul.
Why cast a vote that will literally make no difference when you can cast a vote for someone who IS running, who DOES want the job, who supports Liberty, and whose votes will help get ballot access to minor parties nationwide?
Lojiko you just don't get it. We are not voting because we insist on Ron becoming president, we are voting for him rather than not vote at all. Why would we vote for anybody that we don't want to be president . That is why they have a write in vote option. To make a point.
The whole RP revolution was about standing up against "The Establishment" and the biased corrupt media that chooses our candidates for us. Why would we now give in and allow them take that away from us?
Dr. Paul did not drop out because he did not want the presidency, he dropped out because there was NO possibility anymore that he could get the GOP nomination. Yes, if he run Indy/third party he would probably have received say between 10-25 % but there would still have been NO realistic chance that he could win. He would have had to struggle so hard just to get ballot access and face it, he would also have had no realistic chance to be in the debates, and without that zero chance that he could win. If he did not win, in the media and the losing party would only have blamed him, he would have been portrayed as a spoiler. With almost every radio or TV appearance during the campaign, they would have asked him the dreaded spoiler question, and not about the issues. How many millions of people's money would have been lost? He would also not be able to be on the ballot in 4,5 states, including Texas (sore loser role). Are you aware of this. Also, he would have simultaneously had to fight his congressional seat as an Independent or say a LP or CP, as he would be kicked out of the GOP. With this, his political influence would have had been only till November this year. Consider what political influence Ross Perot had after 1992? Almost zero.
Dr. Paul can much better fight the Fed by being a congressman.
Kipper, you're the one who doesn't get it, b/c your vote will be thrown in the trash. It's like holding a secret protest that no one will ever know about ... what's the point? You may as well not even vote.
At least by voting for Barr or Baldwin there's a chance you could help their respective parties gain ballot access in future elections. Not to mention your vote will actually be counted and listed with other votes. Your write-in for RP won't even have the dreaded "spoiler effect". It will have no effect, period.
Writing in RP is how you can do absolutely nothing and still think you're helping. You're not. RP is not running, he doesn't want your vote, he endorsed someone else, and you're not helping. Is there any possible way I can make it any clearer that writing-in RP is completely and totally pointless?
"You're not making any difference at all by writing in Ron Paul. "
And you're not making any difference by voting for anyone other than obama because obama is going to win.
Do you see how absurd your logic is?
Writing in Ron Paul is the same as voting "None of the above". That is my choice. I'm not voting for evil. I'm not giving legitimacy to any of the choices being forced on us.
ranalli, that is unfair; that is precisely the song I think of when I think of Ron Paul.
Damn. I was going to be so practical and vote for Baldwin. Now I won't know until I get to the poll and have pen in hand.
The thing is, if the Libertarian party is one we should care about having ballot access, why did they pick BARR? I'd have voted for Ruwart or Smith, or probably others... and Baldwin didn't even get the Constitution/Independent party nod in California, that is Keyes. So exactly what party would I be helping achieve access?
I guess I'll find out if I vote for Baldwin or Ron Paul on November 4th.
Spinnikera, Bob Barr is not the LP, but a vote for him can be seen as a vote for the LP in general and dozens of State LPs that are critically dependent on a good turnout in order to gain ballot access.
History will count Ron Paul votes. Historians will wonder why nobody else did. Historical it will be when 10 new Ron Pauls are elected to offices because of it.
{Your write-in for RP won't even have the dreaded "spoiler effect". It will have no effect, period.}
Technically, by voting for Paul, you're not voting for others. Isn't that a net effect in itself?
BTW, in the state of Wisconsin, one can vote for a write-in, AND it will be counted:
---(4) Write−in votes for president and vice president shall be
counted as provided in s. 7.50 (2) (i).---
I'd like to think that if enough folks voted as they wished, less votes would go to the DEMS and GOP. After a while, wouldn't that trend lead to better access for third party candidates?
Isn't the bottom line purpose of voting in the general election to vote for the person you would like to see as President? That's what I'm doing. I was never taught to vote as a means to influence a stradegy. I've heard of such stradegies during the primaries...doesn't sit well with me.
If you want better access for third parties on ballots, then I suggest you get better candidates.
If you vote for anyone that you don't believe in you are selling yourself and your country out.
I will vote NEITHER Obama or McCain.
In Lousiana Ron Paul will be on the ballot AND at least I can say on that day I voted for the best canidate and not the evil of two lessers!
Yes he will loose but at least someone has the message.
So hold your cowardly nose and vote what you believe to be the lesser of two evils, but I say NAY to putting lesser men in high place!
Ron Paul has still won our hearts and minds and help rekindle the fire that many of us Americians have thought dead.
I say that there is a true Awakening coming and just maybe if enough patriots wake up and retake this country by vote or force this Republic just may survive.
I say my flame of liberty is lit and I will spread this fire until it burns in everyone around me.
The trumpet of battle sounds! It is time to retake the country from the spineless!
lojiko U don't get!! "We the People" the Ron Paul movement will not buckle at all. You're not going to convince any of us to change our minds. You said vote for someone who supports Liberty? What do u think Ron Paul has been doing in Congress for the past 20 years? I Live in Cali and I will write in Ron Paul and so will my girlfriend! Remember this, Be the change you wish to see in the world! The grassroots movement, Ron Paul meetups are bigger then ever. When the elections are over you will have not one, NOT ONE Obama or McCain meetup group going out every weekend and supporting the freedom movement. Ron Paul's grassroots movements are here to stay! And their nothing anybody can do about it. We are the most passionate and diligent researchers you’ll will ever meet.
It absolutely amazes me when I talk to a Ron Paul supporter. They know everything about Obama, McCain, Ask them about CFR, ask them about Billdenbergh group, ask them about Fiat monetary system, and ask them about Mises or Austrian Economics. Ask them about Racist Lincoln. Now ask these same questions to an Obama or McCain supporter and see what you get. Trust me when I tell you that you’ll be completely satisfied with a Ron Paul supporter’s response.
Once you really talk to a REAL RON PAUL supporter and understand their position, their no way you can ask them to vote for some else. It's not all about RON PAUL! It's his message of Liberty and less Government that we passionately embrace. And last I checked I didn't know that Freedom can be only writen on a Ballot!!
In that case I'm going to vote for Thomas Jefferson.
He's not running, he doesn't want to be president, my vote won't be counted, my vote won't help anyone at all, and he's dead ... but hey, at least I'll be voting for the person I like the best. =p
I'm a Ron Paul supporter. I like the man, but its the message of liberty that I love.
Please don't confuse the man with the message.
I would love to write in Ron Paul, but in my state, Michigan, it would only count if he had registered as a write in candidate, which he did not.
Both the LP and CP carry on with the message, and if they can garner a certain percentage of votes, they gain ballot access.
This moves the message of freedom forward. Your vote for one of these parties would count for freedom. Even though it will not put them in the whitehouse, it will pave the way for stronger campaigns in future elections.
It will be another step forward to ending the two party stranglehold we have now, so that perhaps in the next election, or the next, we will see a viable third party candidate.
Even if it seems meaningless now, maybe our children will be able to enjoy liberty thanks to our actions in this election.
Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin. I trust Dr. Paul's integrity. Baldwin gets my vote.
Posted By: Libertarian Blue
Date: 2008-10-21 21:28:09
Im sorry how can you endorse Baldwin as a vote for Liberty? Sure the man is against the Patriot Act but he is no better than that Fundy Palin, although Baldwin being a former minister makes him worse. The Consitution Party does not and I repeat does NOT believe in personal liberty. Their social platform is no better than the social policies in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.
Ron Paul did not "drop out." He SUSPENDED his campaign to focus on the Campaign for Liberty. I come from a family of would-be Libertarians. We were active in attending Libertarian meetings all last year. One of my family members was chairman of our local Libertarian group. They resigned after Bob Barr was nominated, and none of us have been to a Libertarian meeting since. Libertarians will get nowhere nominating questionable Libertarians like Bob Barr. As always, it doesn't matter what the party is if the candidate does not represent my views. I will write in Ron Paul because he represents my views. I know he won't get the job. The election process is far too controlled for that. It wouldn't matter if he received millions of votes. They would find a way to say that something went wrong with the election. The powers that be don't want Ron Paul. He is against them. My vote for him will be me standing up and saying, "I don't like what the powers that be have done and are doing to my country." A vote for Bob Barr wouldn't say that.
Incidentally, a vote for Ron Paul will also be a message to the Libertarians: Choose your candidates more wisely if you want to grow the party.
That's a weak response, Tawny. Bob Barr is not the LP. I've been actively involved in the LP since 2001 and there are plenty of questionable characters and plenty more fine, outstanding freedom lovers. How could you abandon all those people who work for Liberty just b/c we decided to take a chance on Barr?
We've nominated true Libertarians for President as far back as I can remember and it's gotten us no where. Our last nominee was more concerned about debating property rights on Mars than he was campaigning. If Rob Kampia, of the Marijuana Policy Project, can stand side-by-side with Barr (given Barr's record on drug legislation), then I felt it was worth taking a chance on him.
Also, consider the fact that the LP BEGGED Ron Paul to be its nominee. It's not like we're not looking for good candidates. Ron Paul, card carrying lifetime LP member, shot us down, not the other way around.
The LP is not one man anymore than Ron Paul is the Campaign for Liberty or Chuck Baldwin is the CP. It's a group and sometimes you have to swallow the occasional bitter pill in order to keep the whole mechanism running. I actually contributed to the "incumbent killer" strategy that cost Bob Barr his seat in Congress, so if I can stand by Barr and my Party, I would think you could be a little more forgiving as well.
If you don't like it, stay active with the LP and change it, don't toss your vote into the trash by writing in Ron Paul. Mary Ruwart is on the LNC now, there is still plenty of hope. But I have little patience for people who just drop everything because they don't get their way.
Toss my vote in the trash? Any vote that doesn\'t reflect my opinions is a vote in the trash. As for the LP, I would suspect my family will stay close and pay attention, looking for ways to influence things. However, despite our activism, we clearly had no choice with the presidential candidate.
As for "We\'ve nominated true Libertarians for President as far back as I can remember and it\'s gotten us no where," what does this mean? That now you are going with a non-true Libertarian to see if it gets you somewhere?
Libertarians should not make the mistake of thinking that "independents" are simply looking for an alternative party to latch on to. Yes, the Libertarian philosophy comes very close to what I want a party to be. Yes, I am willing to support candidates that truly support that philosophy. No, I am not willing to hang on when the party deviates from that philosophy when nominating candidates.
As I said before, it doesn\'t matter what the party is if the candidate doesn\'t represent my views. I gave up on the Republicans when George Bush the 1st chose Bill Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, to head up the committee to write the plan for federalized education. To me that was un-Republican and ably demonstrated that the Republicans and Democrates aren\'t all that different from each other. The Republicans should have been working hard to abolish the Federal Department of Education, not collaborating with a Democrat to make control of education even more deeply federalized. However, I still would have voted Republican if the right person had been nominated. Ron Paul is the closest they have come to having the right person.
I haven\'t given up on the Libertarians, but for this election I will choose another candidate that represents my views. Ron Paul gives me hope. Bob Barr, not so much. I need that hope in these awful times. I will support the man who supplies it. Libertarians and all parties would be wise to realize this isn\'t a game to some of us. Some of us are really hoping to make a difference for our own lives and our children\'s lives. I sincerely hope the Libertarians will be able to pull it together and offer that hope in the future. I would dearly love to be making a choice about which great candidate of at least two or maybe even many offers me the most hope for our future. But for this election there is only one. It is a no-brainer that that man must get my vote.
Tawny, I understand your frustration with this election cycle's LP Presidential nominee and if you don't vote Barr, that's fine with me. At least vote Baldwin or something tho, b/c your vote is going to do absolutely no good at all if you write-in Ron Paul. Refer to my above example of writing in Thomas Jefferson - it would literally be equally effective (as in not at all).
I respectfully disagree, Lojiko. This quote by Ron Paul from an article on this website written by Jim Quinn (Libertarian) (WWRPD - What Would Ron Paul Do?) says it all for me.
"The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are being looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care? When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media? Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be."
Thomas Jefferson can't do a thing about what is going on now. Quite honestly, maybe it is time for Libertarians to put aside party concerns and vote for what is right for our country. They can always pick up party concerns later. Methinks you doth protest too much about Ron Paul. Could it be you see him as a threat to the Libertarians or is it just revenge for his refusal to run as a Libertarian?
I look at it this way. Even if the Libertarians win and Bob Barr is our president, will he have what it takes to fix this mess? If he voted for the Patriot Act, how could he possibly?
Tawny, it's sad that people reject Bob Barr carte blanche becuase of his voting record in Congress while at the same time ignoring what he has done to champion the cause of LIberty since that time.
Barr rejected the GOP in 2004 (unlike Ron Paul)
Barr publicly endorsed the 2004 LP Presidential nominee, Michael Badnarik
Barr did vote for the Patriot Act, but also put the sunset clauses into it before doing so
Barr has been a memebr of the Libertarian National Committee since 2006
Barr has reversed himself and been lobbying for the Marijuana Policy Project since MAR 2007
It's very rare to find someone who's willing to change their position and then be so public about it. [Barr has] definitely increased the credibility of the Marijuana Policy Project. People have to take us seriously when we walk through the door with Bob Barr.
—Rob Kampia, Executive Director, Marijuana Policy Project, May 2008
Barr didn't have to do any of this. He still had a promising career in GOP circles. He rejected that to champion Liberty and it must be pretty disappointing to him that people ignore the man he is, concentrating instead on the man he was, the man he himself rejects.
How are we supposed to convert people to the cause of Liberty if we reject anyone who doesn't have a perfect voting record?
I seriously wouldn't be surprised if Barr quits fighting for Liberty after all the harrassment he has endured by trying to fight for it, from the people he's trying to help. He's not perfect, but who is?
You honest think the Marijuana Policy Project 2007 makes him a heavy weight for dealing with the extremely serious freedom issues facing us in 2009? The right to earn a living, the right to raise our children as we see fit, the right to move about the world unwatched and unhindered, the right to hold onto our own property, the right to pursue your own life and happiness without the government saying "you owe mandatory volunteer service" (an oxymoron if there ever was one) - all of these and many more issue may very seriously challenge the very premise of freedom in the year(s) to come. And Thomas Jefferson won't be able to do a thing but spin in his grave over what we are fast becoming. The party that finds itself still making a big deal about marijuana and not appropriately addressing these other issues may quickly find itself obsolete.
"The times they are a-changing," and not in a good way. Ron Paul understands that, understands it is happening, understands why, understands what it will take to correct it. Believe me, freedom issues abound in this day and age. Any ONE of those issues that effect every one of us completely trumps a drug issue that effects a few.
The Libertarian party should be alerted, also, that that drug issue has kept more than a few people from choosing to be Libertarian. My children's school will not even allow a student Libertarian party on campus because of that one issue. The Libertarians are shooting themselves in the foot with that one. It is time to shelve it, maybe permanently.
I personally wouldn't expect the GOP to change anything. After all, they've got things right where they want them with McCain or any candidate they promote. No, I'm looking for people in our population to be encouraged to vote with their hearts and their heads for who they really believe will do the best job for our country rather than choosing one promoted candidate or the other as "the lesser of two evils." I'm not after the Republicans to change. I'm after major party candidates becoming irrelevant. I'm sick and tired of having my country try to channel me into voting for a choice of two. The media manipulation and the controlled nature of our elections has made the democratic process a farce, as evidenced by how little respect and dignity surround the candidates now. This election feels like a joke, and it has been made even more a joke by the media. It will continue and get worse until the powers that be realize it simply isn't working any more.
Someone who used to work for a federal agency told me once, "You don't get to the level of being a major party presidential candidate until you've jumped through a lot of hoops to win the approval of the shadow government." Isn't it obvious now that that is what is going on? Stand up, America, and take back your country.
Tawny, as with Charles, I sincerely hope you're right and your vote for Ron Paul helps change America for the better. I would be much happier eating crow in a free Republic than having the "satisfaction" of saying, "I told you so," in a socialist wasteland.
We're both working the same cause from different angles. I honestly hope we, Ron Paul voters and other libertarian voters, can pull this off. In either respect, failure is not an option. We must succeed.
And through the course of our conversation, I have come to the conclusion that basically any vote for anybody besides Obama or McCain can send the same message. It would be lovely if all of us who feel this way could throw our support behind one third party or minor candidate (I guess Paul doesn't exactly qualify as "third party."), and unite to put that person in the White House. I suspect, though, that all the votes for those candidates rolled into one still will not make a winning candidate. The public has been successfully blinded and indoctrinated - so many do not see what we see. They very, very gradually (the old frog in slowly heating water trick) got our population where they want us. Reversing it is going to have to be just as slow a process, but every election that has minor candidates getting more votes in total than the previous one is a somewhat of a success. I guess we should see elections not as a war to win, but an opportunity to educate as many as possible. Given enough time we'll accumulate enough numbers to really make a difference, if we don't lose the whole election process to dictatorship or lose the country to global government first.
First, let me say that I am not attacking or disrespecting anyone who is writing in Ron Paul as a protest vote. If that's the dictate of your conscience, then by all means follow it.
But please answer me this: If you truly admire and respect Dr. Paul so much that you will go to the polls, stand in line, and then write in his name on a ballot where you *know* it won't get counted... then why not respect him by honoring his endorsement of Chuck Baldwin?
At the very, very least, you will be helping another third party gain ballot access for the next election.
Before you say Baldwin isn't on the ballot in your state, check out this link - he is probably a "certified" write in candidate - that means, writing in his name *will* count toward the vote totals.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/ba_stats.php
If you're going to do a "write-in" ballot, why not make it count, especially since Ron Paul himself has asked us to?
Tawny, I agree for the most part. When Paul suspended his campaign, the Paulistas factionalized, so now we're supporting several Liberty candidates including Paul.
Ken, I agree with you too. I'll be supporting Barr, but as is obvious from my column, I'm encouraging people to vote for Barr, Baldwin, or whomever ... just not Ron Paul.
I'll think about it. That's all I do these days is think about what I'm going to do. I'm really disappointed that Ron Paul is urging us to vote for Baldwin. My decision was simple until then. I just have to do a lot of research into the Constitution Party because I have been told that they want to turn our nation into a theocracy. That is no more what the founding fathers had in mind than the liberals turning our nation into a socialist nation, and I couldn't support that even though I am a Christian. So, I'm hoping I have been misinformed about the Constitution Party. No election has ever been harder for me, and I've been voting a lot of decades!
I spent some time at the Constitution website. A cursory glance of some of their beliefs did not make me feel unduly uncomfortable. I agree with much they say. However, voting for them won't be any better than voting for Ron Paul. They both require a write-in vote in my state.
I had to do a write-in as well. (I live in Indiana) The poll workers looked at me like I was some sort of dancing eight-legged lizard when I asked how to perform a write-in for an eligible candidate. Oh well! :)
Don't get me wrong - I'm not a huge Baldwin supporter, and like you, Tawny, I'm not overly comfortable with some of the Constitution Party's postions.
I came to my decision this way: First, Baldwin *was* endorsed by Paul. Second, there's obviously no way the Constitution Party is going to come to power in this election, at any rate. Third, I'm all for opening up ballot access for lots of third parties, so by vote will help in that regard. Last, having listened to Baldwin and read as much of his writings as possible, I've come to the conclusion that he's a decent guy who really believes in what he says.
I would've chewed off my left foot at the ankle for a chance to vote for Ron Paul in the general election, just as I had the honor of voting for him in Indiana's primary. Voting for Baldwin was definitely a letdown, but at least my conscience will let me live with my vote.
My next choice would have been Ralph Nader (also a write-in in Indiana) not because I agree with his positions - I don't, in most cases - but I respect the fact that he's an honest guy who says what he believes and stands up for his beliefs without wishywashy political compromises.
I'm hoping ALL the third party candidates place well. I've been encouraging everyone to vote third party - *any* third party - to give the Washington establishment a wake up call.
If you're encouraging people to vote 3rd party, show them this article. This is the best argument for voting 3rd party I have read....it's kind of hard to argue with the author
Bob Barr has no greater chance of winning than Ron Paul, and it's odd that libertarians would argue against voting your conscience. Write-in votes for Ron Paul (especially those that are counted, as they will be in California) speak more directly to neocons than libertarian votes (although I have no problem with people voting libertarian either).
Ron Paul write-in votes WILL count in California. See http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/election_2008/certified_list_of_candidates_writeins.pdf
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-10-27 06:25:45
Lojiko: you keep emphasizing over and over that writing in a candidate is a vote that won't count. My question to you is this: why do you think that any of the votes will count? The only votes that count in a presidential election are the ones cast in the Electoral College. The popular vote is merely a contest to decide who those electors will be. So ultimately, the only votes that count in your state are the ones that side with the winner in that state. It's winner take call. There's no proportional "win."
I guarantee that, unless someone pulls a Roger MacBride this year (and I wouldn't hold my breath for that possibility), all of the electors will support either Obama or McCain. Therefore, voting for any third party candidate for President carries no more weight than writing in a candidate. So there is nothing lost in writing in Ron Paul (or Thomas Jefferson or Donald Duck or None Of The Above, for that matter). It doesn't matter that the write-in vote won't count, because votes for Baldwin and Barr and Nader and all the other third parties won't count either.
In fact, in any given state, ultimately the votes for the second place finisher, whether he be Obama or McCain, won't count either. The only votes that will count will be the electors for that state, and those electors will only be selected by those who vote for the electors' candidate.
So all this talk about votes not counting is a bunch of smoke and mirrors. Any vote against the duopoly counts as a statement. It doesn't really matter whether they count toward who wins the race.
Walt, I wish you'd read the column before giving us your opinion. Specifically the part about helping Liberty-oriented Parties by voting for their respective candidates. Seriously, if you vote Ron Paul, no one will notice and your vote for President will be thrown in the trash.
Go ahead, write-in Ron Paul and as the days, weeks, and months pass with no mention of how many write-ins RP got, and the third parties still have to jump through hoops to get on the ballot, and even RP himself doesn't even bother to say "Thank you.", you can sit back in your easy chair and say, "Well, that was the most useless vote I've ever cast."
Keep that last part in mind ... you will not even receive a pat on the back from your boy, Ron Paul.
Posted By: No Name Supplied
Date: 2008-10-27 20:06:46
If nothing else, Ron Paul gives us a canary-in-the-coal-mine alert as to the state of our precious news media.
There has been an entire blackout not only of his suppressed campaign in the primary, but now of his eligibility as a write-in candidate announced over the weekend by the Secretary of State in California. (Go ahead, check google news. or msnbc.)
I was actually on the fence about voting for Barr or writing in Ron Paul, but the comments here, specifically from Charles, that writing in Ron Paul is the best thing to do. He is who I believe in. In 2004 I voted for the lesser of two evils in my mind without even considering third party options and I regret my vote incredibly. I won't make that same mistake again.
I will also be voting for RON PAUL in Cali and so will my girlfriend and My sister! Remember this Lojiko Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
I live in Louisiana so I'm voting for Ron Paul! If I didn't live in Louisiana or Montana and my write in vote didn't count for Ron Paul then I would vote for Chuck Baldwin, either through pick or write in. I don't think if Ron Paul actually won the nomination he would say "Nope, thanks but no thanks". I think that notion is foolish. Ron Paul didn't switch to another party after the primary because he said in the beginning of his campaign that he would not do that. So, what would that say for him if he went against his word? I believe Ron Paul would like the people to do what they believe in without telling them what to do. I understand your strategic mind, Lojiko, but I'm going to have to follow my heart and mind and agree with Tawny and Charles. Let's not forget the purpose of our vote is to tell our electors, and our nation, who we believe in. Our votes don't choose the president because we are a republic. If our votes decided the presidency then we would be a democracy. Thank god our form of government is not a democracy. Check out this vid for a quick explanation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2_21-CJy9I
I re-registered as a Republican (from Libertarian) in order to vote for ten-term congressman Dr. Ron Paul in the primaries. I already did my part to vote for the best candidate.
With Congressman Dr. Ron Paul out of the running, it is time to pick the lesser of two evils.
Posted By: Elevated Thought
Date: 2008-11-03 22:27:56
Ok, here's the thing, Lojiko, I AGREE COMPLETELY with the fact that writing in Ron Paul is a waste. I agree that RP no longer wants to be president, or never did. But, here's how I look at RP: his general philosophy was to help wake up people, young people in general, and inspire them, giving them a chance to make things right. You see, it's something most truly intelligent leaders try to do, is to not only secure the here and now, but secure the future, because there will always be snakes around trying to mess it up, even if this country were to be free and just, they would be attacking that freedom until they got what they wanted. It's a large chess game, and for the last 150 years or so, after Lincoln, the snakes started winning the chess game again, because they sneak around. We not only need a change in this country, but we need to secure that change by teaching our future generations how to govern themselves and teach their children and so forth how to always watch for those snakes. Now I don't know what is said on all of these replies and I don't really have the patience to read all of them, I am just giving you some of my thoughts on the issue, maybe you agree. Maybe there's possibly a scare in his head of getting a bullet placed there among too much success. That's a little more wild of a theory, but let's face it, after Kennedy got plugged it put a lot of fear in intelligent people's hearts. Now do I agree that he should have stuck with it, or ran Independent? Sure I do, and there's ways to protect yourself when you get into office, one being somehow making yourself a great martyr if your life was taken away. And anyways, it shouldn't stop anyone from being president. Now is it a great dissapointment that he dropped out the way he did, sure it is, maybe he knows some things we don't; or maybe he is lacking in some way; or maybe, like I said, his only real intention was to help people wake up some.
Lojiko,I understand your take on the election,I've even voted that way myself,in the past. However here in Montana we had the opportunity to cast our votes for Dr.Paul,I was not voting for who I thought would win(I knew that Obama would,frankly I believe it was already decided before any of us cast our vote),I was voting for the man I thought would do the best job,and really isn't that how we should be voting? It seems to me we have got where we are in this country by holding our nose and voting for the lesser of two evils,and we have gotten just exactly who we voted for,evil. If you redraw the lines because the situation has changed or because you won't win by standing on principle,haven't you just compromised your honor,or is that a extinct concept these days?
When I meet my maker,I'd have had a hard time explaining why I voted for someone other than the man I believed in my heart to be the right man for the job. I hope everybody on here voted their conscience.
I would like to know what Dr. Paul would do if, as he advocates, the SEC and all other financial regulatory government arms, would disband.
Does he really believe that total free market forces are enough to prevent economic disaster?
In the 1920's such 100% laissez fair policies led to huge ecomomic problems, as well as a serious swing to the other side( far left, rise of communism, etc.
That's the best evidence we have that SOME government management is needed.
Even in this day of total information for all", the stability problem is still with us. Widespread of info from the internet, talk radio, etc. still will lead to "no information", ie- "White Noise" for most. And the predictible result is disastorous instability of society.
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.
