Ron Paul Cracks Open the Door…

About 3 minutes and 30 seconds into this interview, Ron Paul is asked if he would consider running as the candidate of a third party.

His answer is not exactly a no…

62 Responses to “Ron Paul Cracks Open the Door…”

  1. disinter Says:

    Why would he waste his time?

  2. Hugh Jas Says:

    he really shouldn’t be even discussing a third-party run until after he’s loses the nomination (if he loses the nomination). Then is when he should be considering it, not now.

  3. Alex Merced Says:

    He was going to say no if you’ve seen him in other interviews when he was asked this question. Although I wouldn’t be surprised us P fans still pushed to get a mass write in on the ballot, which would be sweet if we can pull off a 10% write-in sake just to point out the importance of these issues like the IRS and liberties and such

  4. Dyre42 Says:

    I could see where he might run third party if a particularly hawkish Republican
    were to get the nod.

  5. Ray Hannigan Says:

    He’s stated in absolute terms no… but if you notice he’s not spending his money. He’s raising all of this money as a Republican and is getting all of this media publicity as a Republican and may take the money and go third party. It could be a conspiracy.

  6. Sean Scallon Says:

    I figured this would happen. RP should come flat and say an independent run is not what he’s going to do. If he loses, he’ll go back to Texas and run for his Congressional seat. Republican voters aren’t going to be amused by someone hedging their bets on a third party run.

    No more dead ends!

  7. G.E. Smith Says:

    All the way to November.

    The waste of time would be returning to the cesspool of Congress.

  8. jr Says:

    RP didn’t leave anything of the sort of crack yawl are speculating about, unless you can read his mind and finish the sentence he started before he side-tracked himself. He’s been consistant on the subject, so it doesn’t make sense to jump to conclusions other than what he has stated clearly before. - JR

  9. matt Says:

    I could see where he might run third party if a particularly hawkish Republican
    were to get the nod.

    All of RP’s opponents are startlingly hawkish Republicans, so that’s a yes, more or less.

  10. Jackcjackson Says:

    Ray,
    The Ron Paul campaign is spending $430,000 on radio every 2 weeks and just spent a $ 1.1 million on TV. They also just did a direct mailer to registered Rs in NH. They are spending money. I expect them to spend all cash on hand through the eealry primaries.

  11. Gene Trosper Says:

    This posting and thread is just mere speculation. Until such time as Ron Paul states otherwise, he is running to win in the Republican primaries. All of this rumor and innudendo reminds me of a bunch of gossipy old ladies at a beauty salon.

  12. Nanci Pelosi Says:

    Support the Firefighters and bring them home!!

    It’s plain to see for the American people that the number of fires has gone up since we started fighting fire. The great progressive thinker, Harry Reid, said “The war on fire is lost!” The American people know this, and congress knows this, but our President seems oblivious to these facts.

  13. Nanci Pelosi Says:

    MoveOn.org pressures Congress to stop fighting fire and bring firemen home

  14. Cody Quirk Says:

    Republican voters aren’t going to be amused by someone hedging their bets on a third party run.

    =Exactely, if he’s gonna play mind games with us, then he can count me out!

  15. (Not) Ron Paul Says:

    If you read in the news, the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms have widened their arson investigation, supposedly confirming that at least some of the fires were deliberately set!

    In whiny voice What power or authorization do these two bureaucracies operate on! This should be private organization heading this up. Not some witch-hunt but unconstitutional bureaucracies that use tax payer money that helps unlawful surveillance of Americans!

    Now we hear that there is reward money of at least $250,000. Who’s money is this. It’s not the American people’s obligation to post reward money for the capture or arsonist.

    Now louder whinier voice And what do we expect!! We have been putting out arsonist fires for years! We need to try and figure out what it is that we have done that makes people into arsonist!!

  16. (Not) Ron Paul Says:

    We should mind our own business and not go around putting out fires! Fires have been burning for thousands of years. It’s not the American government’s obligation to around putting out fires in California for God’s sake!

  17. Jeff Wartman Says:

    Austin, I’m not sure where you got the idea that he’s cracking the door on a third party run open. This sounds, more or less, like the weak denials he’s been making in regards to a third party run for his entire candidacy.

  18. Ron Paul Says:

    Look, I have no intentions on running as a third-party run. If I did, the best I could do would be around 10% of the national vote. The last I checked that isn’t enough to win. And ultimately would be a great waste of time.

    Secondly, from this day forward I’m not running for any party. George Washington advised against parties and factions. The same way he did when he discussed intangling alliances.

    whiny voice From now on I’m Ron Paul and I’m running for all the Paulites!!

  19. Bill Wood Says:

    Every time Ron Paul is asked if he will run as a third party candidate he has said no followed by “its to difficult to get ballot access”, “you can’t get into the National Debate”. He has stated that his wife and family are opposed to him running as a third party. He also states he is running as a republican and he’d like to see that party return to its roots. I guess only in politics no means everything but no.

  20. Gene Trosper Says:

    Bill: it’s just that some people don’t understand the meaning of no.

  21. (Not) Ron Paul Says:

    The California wildfires are simply blow-back from us taking California from Mexico!

  22. Austin Cassidy Says:

    I’ve heard the numerous denials. This interview is the first time I’ve heard him sort of qualify a situation in which he’d consider running.

    It’s all in the wording also. If I asked you if you were going to run for President of the United States in 2008… I’m guessing you would say. “No, I won’t.”

    Paul says: “I don’t plan on doing that.”

    That’s as good as “maybe” in political-speak.

  23. G.E. Smith Says:

    Bill Wood - Only in your mind does everything but no = no.

    He doesn’t say no. He never says no. If he meant NO, he would say NO. What he’s saying now is “probably not.” That’s not NO.

  24. TL Says:

    Maybe he’s saving his money for a Jesse Ventura-like blitz right at the end. A Ron Paul action figure! Hey, it could happen…

  25. Asher Heimermann Says:

    Yeah, I don’t understand how you even came up with the title for this post.

    Asher Heimermann
    Wisconsin’s Youth Activist
    http://www.AsherHeimermann.com

  26. Gene Berkman Says:

    Austin, at the Libertarians for Ron Paul site we moderate comments, and remove irrelevant or offensive comments. Perhaps you can remove clearly bullshit comments that are not posted in the name of the real poster. You can probably figure out what I refer to.

  27. Austin Cassidy Says:

    The title of the post references the fact that, while Paul isn’t exactly opening up the door to a third party bid… he’s kind of keeping it cracked with these not-exactly-a-no answers that he’s giving.

  28. Robert Milnes Says:

    Gene Berkman, You get “...irrelevant or offensive comments.” on Libertarians for Ron Paul? I’ve never visited there. Never gave a rat’s ass. moderate=censor.

  29. G.E. Smith Says:

    Milnes - Again, your commie/fascism shows. A forum moderator may moderate your comments all he likes. It is his property. Do you understand property? Censorship is when the government restricts a property owner’s rights to allow or engage in speech on HIS property. Under the Milnesian system, there would be no private property and, thus, everything would be subject to censorship.

    I agree. Posts by Ron Paul and Nancy Pelosi, etc., should be removed. However, let’s not forget that Austin’s time is not our own. Perhaps it would be too onerous for him to do the removing. His property is not ours either. We may hold opinions about whether he should delete some comments or not, but it’s just that, an opinion.

    Gene - The above wasn’t for you. I know you understand that. It was for our “Progressive” eugenicist friend.

  30. Robert Milnes Says:

    GES, under your fascist system, if you don’t own anything, you are nothing.

  31. G.E. Smith Says:

    Milnes - You need to look up the words “fascist.” You call yourself a libertarian? My “system” is that which was put forth by Ludwig von Mises, who fled Europe when another eugenicist like you, and a true fascist (like you), who wanted to establish all kinds of government programs (like you), took over by force.

    My “system” is this. Do not initiate force. That’s it. Engage in peaceful exchanges, voluntarily, for mutual benefit. It takes a truly evil and deranged person to view such a “system” in a negative light.

    Under my “system,” you would always own your mind. Wealth is nothing more than man’s capacity to think. So yes, someone like you, an idiot, would be poor. Luckily, the free market would be so rich that there would be plenty of voluntary social services to take care of your sorry lot.

    Robert Milnes thinks Ludwig von Mises was a fascist. I assume he thinks Hitler, the ultimate anti-Missean, was a “Progressive” like his idol, Theodore Roosevelt.

  32. Robert Milnes Says:

    GES, blather on. The more you speak (write) the more you reveal your pathetic, empty system/ideas. If you refer to Hitler, he was elected. You say your system/ideas is based on von Mises, but maybe you just got it wrong. Your system is one which starts with empowered force (a capitalist “free market” system), hence the use of force is frowned upon, because it has already happened & is unnecessary. Your system is like the one in”The Day the Earth Stood Still”. Do it our way, or Gort’ll getcha. Peace in our Galaxy. or burned out cinders. GES=spacefacist.

  33. G.E. Smith Says:

    Milnes says Hitler was elected, so that makes him okay.

    Wow.

    Here is a guy with zero supporters, seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination, who thinks that Hitler is good but Mises is a fascist.

    Under a free-market system, all one needs to own is his own mind. That alone is enough to allow him to achieve great wealth and prosperity. Under a Milsean Dystopia, the government owns mens’ minds, bodies, souls, property, and genes.

    Under “my” “system,” everyone can do it there own way. Under your “Progressive Fascism,” everyone has to do it the government’s way or they get shipped back to Africa / are not allowed to breed.

    Please do like your identity idol, Gene Chapman, and light yourself on fire.

  34. Robert Milnes Says:

    GES, I said Hitler was elected. You said he “...took over by force.” That does not make him ok. That makes YOU wrong! I wonder whether people reading your drivel can keep track of the misquotes, misinterpretations & distortions you have written about me. Light yourself on fire, you are nonexistant, go kill yourself. Is verbal or written abuse initiation of force? Violence? Isn’t that what you are AGAINST? Pig. Worthless pig.

  35. [email protected] Says:

    Quoth Bill Wood:

    “Every time Ron Paul is asked if he will run as a third party candidate he has said no …”

    I’d be interested if anyone can come up with a single example of that. I have yet to see or hear one. It’s always “I don’t intend to” or “I have no intention of” or “that’s not my plan” ... never “no.”

    In politics, anything but exactly the word “no” means “maybe.” As a career politician, former presidential candidate and 10-term Republican congresscritter, Ron Paul is not unaware of that fact. If he’s not saying “no,” he doesn’t mean “no.”

  36. G.E. Smith Says:

    The written word is not force, Milnesy. Oh, and I don’t think Hitler was ever “elected” in France, nor did the Jews give their “electoral consent” for his murderously “progressive” eugenics program.

  37. G.E. Smith Says:

    Nor have I ever made a threat or advocate violence in any way. I’ve just made some suggestions for you. I’m for choice.

  38. (Geez Not Really) Ron Paul Says:

    People listen to me. Hitler was elected with over 40% of the vote by the German people. Germany is a sovereign country with its own elected representatives. It’s not the responsibility of the American government to go and remove dictators over in Europe-land. We trade with Germany for goodness sake—they make wonderful cars and coo-coo clocks!

    We should be figuring out ways to live peacefully with the NSADP (Nazi) Party and not go interfering with in other people’s affairs.

    I’m the only anti-war candidate here. Let the people of Europe come together and work out their own differences.

  39. (Geez Not Really) Ron Paul Says:

    And I will not be lectured about the attack in 1941, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. I formed a very unique coalition and rapport with those who believed that the attack was an inside job perpetrated by the U.S. government and the current administration.

    The whole charade was enacted to enlarge the size of federal government and to establish the Department of Defense in 1947, which culminated in the biggest travesty in American history - the military industrial complex. Thus it created the largest terror organization ever known: The U.S. Military. All in excited whiny voice

  40. Robert Milnes Says:

    Ernst Roehm was given a choice. A pistol with one bullet was passed to him in his cell. & I “voluntarily” pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court. Surrounded by a U.S. Magistrate then Judge, U.S. Attorney, Federal Defender & U.S. Marshals. The primary evidence against me was words, written in letters. sent via U.S. mail, which conferred jurisdiction. At the time, though, I did not have handcuffs & leg irons on. & I admit I was not “tortured”.

  41. Bill Wood Says:

    Even in the News video linked above when Ron Paul is asked if he would run third party the first word out of his month is no.

  42. Bill Wood Says:

    “mouth” LOL

  43. Bill Wood Says:

    pasted from an earlier third party watch thread, lifted from politics1

    “Congressman Ron Paul, appearing on CNN’s Tucker, insisted he does not plan to make a third party run for President if he loses the GOP nomination race. “I have no intention of doing that. That is not a very attractive thing to do,”

  44. Robert Milnes Says:

    Matt says, “All of RP’s opponents are startlingly hawkish republicans, ...” Not exactly. All of RP’s opponents for the RP nomination are startlingly hawkish republicans. Among his other opponents competing eventually for election victory are the REAL libertarians, campaigning for the LP nomination.

  45. Robert Milnes Says:

    1:20: Interviewer O’Donnell, “If one of them is awarded the republican nomination, will you choose a third party? Will you not back that nominee?” RP: ” No. I don’t plan to run in a third party. That’s not my goal.”

  46. Bill Wood Says:

    Ron Paul’s interview on FOX Business News Oct. 17th (it’s on youtube) He says no to third party run. The host of the show even pushed the issue with him and again he says no.

  47. Robert Milnes Says:

    That makes me an RP/RP opponent.

  48. Robert Milnes Says:

    T.K., Agreed. RP doesn’t say “No.” only. Which would mean NO. He says “No”, followed by some sort of qualifier. Which means MAYBE.

  49. [email protected] Says:

    BIll,

    If Ron Paul meant “no,” he’d either say “no” and nothing else, or “no” with a non-qualified followup. Instead, any and every “no” is accompanied by a statement as to his “plans” or “intentions.” The next time he makes a clear statement that he will NOT run as a third party candidate, period, will be the first time I’ve heard him do so. He’s leaving himself an out, and he’s leaving himself that out for a reason. Stop deluding yourself.

  50. Austin Cassidy Says:

    From Politics1 today…

    “PAUL: In an interview this week with MSNBC, Congressman Ron Paul® pushed open the door for a possible third-party run a bit wider. “No, I don’t plan to run in a third party. That’s not my goal. But if we have a [Republican] candidate that loves the war and loves the neocon position of promoting—,” said Paul, who did not complete his answer.”

  51. G.E. Smith Says:

    Bill Wood - What is wrong with you, man? If he meant NO, he would not say “probably not.” He is saying “probably not.” Here’s my impression of Ron Paul if he really was 100% convinced against running third party: “I will not run third-party under any circumstances. Stop asking me.”

    He’s not saying that. He’s saying “I have no intention,” “that’s not very attractive.” In what bizzaro world does that mean a definitive NO to you?

  52. [email protected] Says:

    ... and while I’m not given to making positive comments on Paul, he’s handling this one about as deftly as anyone could expect.

    For his supporters who are strictly in the GOP/GOP primary process, he hasn’t publicly footsied with the possibility of an independent/ third party run. For his supporters who will support him anywhere, he hasn’t closed the door on an independent/third party run. That keeps him golden with virtually everyone for the moment and leaves him the flexibility to make whatever decision he wants to make. And it doesn’t seem to have hurt his “plain-speakin’, not a regular politician” schtick much.

  53. Trent Hill Says:

    Unfortunately, I dont think Paul will go third party in the event he fails to get the GOP nomination. He always states, quite emphatically, “No, I have no intention of doing that.” or “No, that is a very unattractive option”.

    Remember that Paul doesnt exactly excel is poli-speech.

  54. G.E. Smith Says:

    Ron Paul can honestly say “I have no intention of doing that” because his intention is to win the Republican nomination. He can say “that’s not a very attractive option” because it isn’t. If it were, he wouldn’t be running in the GOP primary.

    I do think Ron Paul will run to November. I think he has about a 6% chance of winning the Republican nomination, and if not, a greater than 50-50 shot of continuing the campaign as an independent / third-party candidate. It isn’t a a guaranteed thing by any means, but I’m confident that his supporters will demand it of him, and if so, he’s at least somewhat likely to oblige.

  55. Trent Hill Says:

    GE,

    We can count on his supporters demanding it. However, a Draft Effort will do us no good. We need him to run—balls to the wall. Not just to have his name used on the ballot, but to see him continue to campaign.

    I think he has better than a 6% chance—closer to a 10% chance, but still relatively small. Unfortunately I think a lot of his support would dry up in the face of a Hillary candidacy (being a third party). A lot of his supporters will not be able to stomach “throwing the election to Hillary”. So we can all agree it is DEFINETLY better to win the GOP primary (except Milnes, who will only agree that Africans belong in Africa and Capitalism sucks). However, should he not win the GOP nomination—he has other options. A TX Senate seat opening up, A “Liberty Lobby” type organization (with more effective leaders and no corruption), or a continueing (and strengthened) seat in the House.
    Any of the above are extremely attractive options too.

  56. (Geez Not Really) Ron Paul Says:

    Stop with the third-party stuff. I do not plan to run under any party other than the GOP. My plans will be after the first of the year to return back to congress and finish out my last term. Yes, I think I am going to call it quits after this term. However, I am considering writing a book for my Paulites.

    Bring our firefighters home! I call on Gov Schwarzenegger to stop funding a hopeless and costly situation. We should mind our business. Not go around putting out fires—that is not the states job! He is giving $10,000 cash grants to help with expenses caused by the fires. Who’s money is he giving away? Who authorized him to give the people of California money from the same people of California!

    The fire is lost and only spreading—it’s time we bring our firefighters home!

    Ron Paul 08!

  57. Gene Trosper Says:

    Like most blogs, this seems to have degenerated into a farce. Too bad, rally.

  58. Robert Milnes Says:

    Gene Trosper, what is your reasonong? Some humor & sarcasm? A trend against demi-god Ron Paul? Relax, the universe is unfolding as it should.

  59. Jay Harris Says:

    I figured I’d weigh in on this…maybe Ron Paul is leaving the door open to support Daniel Imperato for a third party run.

  60. G.E. Smith Says:

    None of your ideas are attractive options. Running to November is the only good option.

    I would rather have Hillary than Rudy or Romney.

  61. Jay Matthews Says:

    Robert, you are no one to be questioning someone else’s reasoning.

  62. free Says:

    hello

    usefull

Leave a Reply