Christine Smith Supporting Ron Paul

It looks like another Libertarian Party presidential hopeful, Christine Smith, has jumped on board the Ron Paul bandwagon. From Smith’s Christmas message:

But the most important thing I can do for liberty right now is to support Ron Paul.

He has done more for the cause of liberty than any other politician in our lifetime. I have already appeared on several radio shows for the sole purpose of sharing Dr. Paul’s key issues—and why he’s gaining such widespread grassroots support. I love discussing and sharing Ron Paul’s powerful message and campaign because he is proving there is hope for America. I have never felt more encouraged about the possibility of our nation being saved from its downward spiral than I do now. I deeply respect Ron Paul for his courage and hard work, and I’m doing anything I can to help. I’m doing and will do everything possible (radio appearances focused only on Dr. Paul’s campaign, phone, person-to-person, & internet) campaigning for Ron Paul. I know that supporting Ron Paul now is more important than anything else I could possibly be doing - so that’s where I’m putting my energy now!

Of the announced Libertarian Party candidates, Smith’s statement comes closest to matching the level of support offered by Steve Kubby. Barry Hess clearly supports a Ron Paul presidency, but his campaign hasn’t made it to the starting gates yet. Wayne Allyn Root has offered very kind words about Ron Paul, but disagrees with him on certain key issues. I’ve no clue about Mike Jingozian’s or Daniel Imperato’s view of Ron Paul or his campaign. George Phillies and Robert Milnes are openly antagonistic towards Paul’s campaign.

25 Responses to “Christine Smith Supporting Ron Paul”

  1. Hugh Jass Says:

    I almost forgot about Barry Hess’ campaign. I wasn’t really sure f he was running; I didn’t see his name on Politics1. Okay, so that makes four Libertarian candidates I can support: Hess, Smith, Kubby, and Paul.

  2. Alexia Says:

    If Paul gets the nomination, I hope the LP will pressure him to force at least one viable third party candidate on to the debate stage.

    Preferably the Green party, or maybe the socialists. A party that will take votes away from the Democrats.

  3. DenisL Says:

    Thanks are due to Christine and the other candidates.

    The goal here is to get someone good elected, and barring that, getting the maximum amount of publicity or educational value out of ALL of the libertarian campaigns in 2008. Not sure how to do that except that Ron Paul sure does get a lot of leverage out of his campaign. Even more than Ed Clark and the Koch brother did in 1980 when 3rd party John Anderson helped dampen their effect. And of course Reagan was talking the talk, but Reagon never really did walk the walk once Bush senior got control of his administration. He did back Volkcer so he could politically break the back of inflation. I do not see that happening with Bernanke.
    Ron Paul breaking 10% in a national poll would really really help. He is on track. A lot more money in the bank would do wonders for Ron Paul as well but I predict this will come ONLY if he does well in Iowa and in New Hampshire.
    Looking ahead for the perfect political storm to help Paul. Perhaps on the economic front it is possible; I am curious if there is a way to spin 15+%inflation, a stock market fall of 30%, 10% unemployment, 10% home owner foreclosures, $150 oil, $5 per gallon gasoline, and gold above $1000 per ounce, ALL spun into something that will help the Constitutional/libertarian cause. All this in the next few months is not likely but who knows. It is highly likely by 2010 and 2012.
    I am not sure how to use these things to our advantage unless we all buy gold and end up much wealthier for the next election, when gold is above $2000 per ounce! That is if you have the money to buy the gold now. We could do worse than to look at Dr. Paul’s gold stock investment portfolio.

  4. Jacob Katzenberg Says:

    Christine Smith and Steve Kubby also disagree with Ron Paul on some issues, such as abortion, immigration and gay rights.

  5. johncjackson Says:

    I am confused. I thought she was some “purist” who was attacking other candidates and Libertarians for not being libertarian enough.

    Ron Paul isn’t sufficiently libertarian for my tastes. I somewhat consider him an OK compromise. But I am finding all these people who dont believe in compromise (supposedly) compromising to support RP

  6. Brian Says:

    Libertarians need to rally around Paul or else they’re going to be forever marginalized. Paul is the first Republican to really reach out to libertarians on the drug war, spending, and foreign policy, and it’s still not enough for most libertarians. The LP should formally endorse Paul and not run any candidate for President, and instead work within the GOP and recruit some people to flush out Congress. Until then, the LP is a joke and it will be on the outside looking in as usual.

  7. johncjackson Says:

    I agree the LP is mostly a “joke” but that has nothing to do with Ron Paul.

  8. Richie Says:

    I like Christine Smith. She has a certain energy to her that none of the other LP candidates have. If it wasn’t for Ron Paul, I would be supporting her.

  9. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    John C. Jackson: “I am confused. I thought she was some “purist” who was attacking other candidates and Libertarians for not being libertarian enough.”

    You have reason to be confused. Smith’s “Christmas message” is itself confused and confusing. I’ve explained why this is so.

    The more I hear from Smith, the more she comes across as an opportunist who’ll say whatever she thinks is expected to get the nomination. Want fluff? She’ll give it to ya! Want purism? She’s yer gal! Prefer Ron Paul’s pragmatic lack of purism? Smith’s on board!

    For the record, Paul is my preferred candidate (on whatever party he runs on), followed by Karen Kwiatkowski.

    After that, I was leaning toward Phillies, though his anti-Paul remarks may shift me to Kubby. Although I really don’t care at this point. Just so long as it isn’t Root or Link.

  10. Robert Milnes Says:

    Yes, I’m antagonist towards the Ron Paul campaign/phenomenon. He’s in a position to ruin everything. He can’t win & even if he did he’s a one man show. Yet he could run indy & become a spoiler ironically electing warmongering republicans by taking anti-war democrat votes. Worse yet, he could run LP & ruin any chance for the progressive alliance strategy. I guarantee very few greens/leftists would vote for a Ron Paul/Walter Williams ticket. Way too rightist. & I doubt if Paul & the Ronulans would do much outreach to the left except to take as much of the little they have in donations. Then add insult to injury by taking their votes too? We can do without Ron Paul. I can’t wait until Free of Ron Paul Day February 5 Super Duper Yahoo! Tuesday. NEVER AGAIN vote republican. PS. In my opinion Smith & Kubby instantly disqualified themselves by supporting Ron Paul.

  11. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    RM: “Yet he could run indy & become a spoiler ironically electing warmongering republicans by taking anti-war democrat votes.”

    What antiwar Democrat votes? Where are these vaunted antiwar Democrat votes? The same votes that installed the current pro-war Democratic Congress?

    RM: “he could run LP & ruin any chance for the progressive alliance strategy. I guarantee very few greens/leftists would vote for a Ron Paul/Walter Williams ticket. Way too rightist.”

    I disagree. I think many left-leaning youth are excited by Paul. Such leftist sites as has recently run pro-Ron Paul pieces., no., yes.

    Nor do I think Williams will be his veep. Williams is a columnist who hasn’t shown any interest (that I’m aware of) of running for veep. For all you know, Paul might run indie and choose Kucinich as his veep. Or Kwiatkowski.

  12. Alex H. Says:

    It truly does stupify me that someone can call themselves a libertarian and not support Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the best thing that has ever happened to the Libertarian Party. His message is on national television and has become the best advertisement for Liberty in 40 years. I find it repulsive, ignorant, and just pathetic that anyone calling themselves a libertarian can not be thankful for what he has done. The Libertarian party after this election will grow enormously after this campaign, and true liberty will eventually be restored to America and all of humanity.

  13. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    Alex: “Ron Paul is the best thing that has ever happened to the Libertarian Party.”


    Alex: “The Libertarian party after this election will grow enormously after this campaign,”

    I doubt it. You see, the LP has a strong and vibrant gift for missing every opportunity (often by the very people who claim that “it’s a political party” whose “sole purpose” is to “get votes.”

    Had the LP taken a loud and vocal antiwar stand in 2002, had it courageously suffered the smears and lies of the prowar crowd, then the public would have remembered and rewarded us in 2004, 2006, and 2008. We would have owned the antiwar issue by now.

    Instead, the LP waffled, not wanting to be “divisive,” wanting to appear “responsible” to the beltway statists. Hence, we remain a joke today.

    The Ron Paul phenomenon is but a glimmer of what the LP itself might have been had it loudly embraced and led the antiwar movement in 2002. Instead, the LP fumbled both on principle and on pragmatic politics.

    I predict that, despite the LNC’s correct decision reaching out to Paul, the LP will somehow manage to fumble the growth opportunity offered by the Ron Paul phenomenon.

  14. Robert Milnes Says:

    Thomas M. Sipos, yes, the very same. Just because the dems didn’t end the war doesn’t mean the votes weren’t there. Not MANY leftists. Some support RP/RP. Actually I can put a percentage on it. The Libertarian Vote 20% max -13% reliable=7% leftist crossover. Agreed, Williams might not be vp. Kuchinich would approach a progressive alliance ticket but what makes you think Pul would select Kuchinich vp? Alex H.= deluded.

  15. rhys Says:

    I am a Republican that is also a hard-core libertarian. If the world were perfect, I would just be a Libertarian, but I can’t give up my ability to vote in the primary. I vote for LP members.

    Paul’s campaign is an opportunity for Libertarians to really affect change. Much like the religious right in the 80s, now is the perfect time to use the Libertarian Party mechanism to invade the Republican Party and push it toward LP ideals. All of the mainstream Republicans are tied in the polls. The vote has never been spread so thin in the Republican Party. A strong group of organized members wields more power in this election than they have in over 70 years!

    This is the election in which the LP can make its power known - not by winning, but by shoving the nomination process toward a strongly libertarian candidate. It is important for our nation and for the LP that they use the influence and organization that they have earned and fought for to push this nation toward the LP’s stated goals - the opportunity has never been better.

  16. Robert Milnes Says:

    rhys, what are you a government plant? No, the LP may have come from the GOP but now it is an independent entity. There is no going back. There is no LP moving to support RP/RP Ronulan takeover of GOP. It is not going to happen with or without the LP. You think all those neocons & evangelicals etc. are just going to roll over and/or disappear? The fault is Ron Paul. He is the dinosaur fossil not evolving with the LP. We do not need him. We do not need that unproductive struggle.

  17. Jay Matthews Says:

    “Worse yet, he could run LP & ruin any chance for the progressive alliance strategy.”

    Robert, please tell us when you make comments like this one they are meant to be tongue-in-cheek and not serious statements.

  18. Robert Milnes Says:

    Jay Matthews, no, sooner or later this RP/RP thing will fizzle out & the lp & greens will have figured it out.

  19. Jay Matthews Says:

    Assuming that response was meant to indicate the above statement should be taken seriously how can you logically make such a statement when by your own admission the GP has no interest in your strategy. RP has nothing to do with the lack of support for your p-a strategy. To suggest if RP wasn’t in the race your strategy would be gaining a foothold is absurd.

    You are asking GP voters to vote for the LP candidate. (Even if your LP candidate was a “leftist libertarian” which one could argue isn’t a libertarian at all.) You might as well ask LP voters to vote for the GP candidate. The problem is the platforms are too far apart.

    Regardless, constantly blaming RP for your p-a strategy not being more popular makes for fun reading.

  20. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    Robert Milnes: “The fault is Ron Paul. He is the dinosaur fossil not evolving with the LP. We do not need him.”

    Fossil? Right now, the Ron Paul movement is many times larger than the entire LP. Paul’s the big news story, the one that the public is excited over, not the LP. And that’s not Paul’s fault, it’s the fault of the LP’s own ineptitude.

    Robert Milnes: “what makes you think Pul would select Kuchinich vp?”

    I don’t know that it’s likely. But it’s a real possibility (among many others). Kucinich has said that he’d consider Paul as his running mate on the Democratic ticket. Reports are the the respect is mutual.

    As for a “progressive-libertarian” alliance, I don’t know what that means, other than that there’s some stuff on the LP agenda that liberals like. Sure, we should reach out to liberals, but not to the exclusion of paleocons and Constitutionalists.

    IAE, the big issue is the need to dismantle the Empire. End our current wars, prevent future wars. And libertarians (albeit not liberventionists), paleocons, and liberals all agree on that.

    Other than that, my wish list includes replacing the income, corporate, estate & gift, and capital gains taxes with a national sale tax. It’s not as good as no tax, but it’s an incremantalist shift in a freer direction. I don’t know how liberals feel about a national sales tax.

  21. Robert Milnes Says:

    Jay Matthews, “...your own admission the GP has no interest in your strategy.” I deny ever saying this. Where is the quote of me saying this? Yes, if RP was not in the race, I contend that the p-a strategy would be getting better traction than it is because everyone is diverted directly or indirectly by RP/RP.AND the REAL libertarian candidates would be getting more support. Yes, the LP voters would be asked in kind to vote for gp candidates where they appear on ballot and there is no lp candidate. It is a matter of practicality not blind support for each others entire platform.

  22. Robert Milnes Says:

    Thomas M. Sipos, Fossil refers to his age & consequently his current relevence. OK maybe there is some sort of RP/Kuchinich connect. But K. is not going to get the dem nom. &he is not radical enough anyway. Paul is too radical. I would be interested in a blue ribbon radical study of the tax system.

  23. Jay Matthews Says:

    Robert, about 2-3 weeks ago I asked you if you contacted the GP brass about your p-a strategy and if so what was their reaction. You stated (I’m paraphrasing) they didn’t express much interest.

  24. Robert Milnes Says:

    I’ve had very little communication with green party brass. I have had negative response from Gregg Gerritt. I may have mentioned that. I may have said I haven’t heard of much interest from green brass but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

  25. Jay Matthews Says:

    That’s the response I was referring to.