LP news updates

Paul Farris wants Ron Paul to run on the Libertarian Party ticket:

Now is the time to demand Ron Paul be on every ballot in America come November 2008. The Libertarian Convention is 22-26 May in Denver. Now is the time for Ron Paul to put his name in the hat for a sure presidential nomination and have his name placed on every ballot from Hawaii to Maine, Alaska to Florida. Supporters lets inundate Ron Paul and his lovely wife, Carol, with calls and letters urging them to please, for the sake of the republic, to run on the Libertarian Party ticket so the people at least can cast a vote for freedom in good conscience. It’s up to all of us to take action and contact Ron Paul! No is not an option.

Justin Gardner thinks Bob Barr could pick up the Ron Paul vote:

Looks like the Libertarians are going to field a candidate who could actually have a voice in the conversation this year…thanks to the groundwork laid by Paul.

Travis County, Texas County Commission candidate Wes Benedict and presidential hopeful Wayne Allyn Root held a joint fundraiser. Here is Patrick Barton’s description of the event:

I was very impressed by this event. The combination of a strong turn out with the energy from Benedict and Root made for a very enjoyable few hours. It is exciting to see so many people passionate for liberty gather and express their enthusiasm for tackling the election process and their eagerness to spread the message of personal freedom. This event was a great reminder that the Libertarian message is a positive message and one of hope for a better future.

Bob Barr spoke in Atlanta at an Americans for Prosperity event. From the AJC:

Among the speakers was former Congressman Bob Barr, a potential Libertarian presidential candidate. Barr did not talk about his plans, although, after listing the three remaining Republican and Democratic presidential contenders, he added, “This is the best we have to offer the American people? This is the best choice? I don’t think so.”

14 Responses to “LP news updates”

  1. citizen1 Says:

    The LP could nominate someone who is as close to Ron Paul on the issues as possible. I encourage the LP to nominate Chuck Baldwin. He is closer on the issues to Ron Paul than any of the current front runners.

  2. The Dylan Says:

    While having a fusion ticket for Chuck Baldwin intrigues me and I would proudly support it, I think it would make more sense to co-nominate Bob Barr. But sharing a presidential candidate would seem to me a very good idea.

    Unfortunately, while the Libertarian Party brings together citizens from across the broad spectrum of society, the Constitution Party will always nominate a clone of Howard Phillips and therefore, we Libertarians will not always be able to join forces with a party of such narrow appeal.

    This is the disgusting game of politics, folks. It’s all about diplomacy and compromise. One should have bedrock principles, but seek political change that draws support from others WHO ARE NOT LIKE YOU!

    The Constitution Party would serve us well if we didn’t have all these public offices to fill…

  3. Deran Says:

    LOL. Dr. Paul has already announced he is taking the left over cash from his GOP nomination campaign and open a publishing company to promote his ideas. That doesn’t sound like a man looking to run for president in Nov., that sounds like a capitalist planning an investment?


  4. Stefan Says:

    Dr. Paul is campaigning full steam till the RNC. He does not need so much money and there is always more money bombs that can be organized. The issue with him running as a third party candidate is that some 4-5 states (including Texas) would not allow him to be on the ballot box, once he has already run under another party banner (GOP in this case). One wonders what the regulation of the states would be if he is to run as an Independent and fusion candidacy of the CP and LP.
    In any case, the RNC nomination is not decided until September and a lot can still happen, as has already started to (see Nevada state GOP, McCain “slip-ups” etc.).
    I think Paul will also make his decision dependent upon how he is received at the RNC. He could theoretically still get the nomination. In case not AND if the GOP does not show any intention of reforming back to its roots, he could reconsider and re-evaluate his role. At this stage, it would not make any sense strategically and otherwise for him to leave the GOP, which would also mean he
    leaves all the “Ron Paul Republican candidates” in the dark. He will have a lot of leverage if many of them win their respective primaries.

    Dylan: as you say, some sort of cooperation between the CP and LP (and perhaps also the Nader faction and Greens) would be important, for this election cycle as well as the future.

  5. Tom Yager Says:

    Ron Paul for the Libertarian nomination? Ain’t. Gonna. Happen. He’s already declared that he will not run as a third party candidate this year.

  6. Rock Howard Says:

    Just a quick note about the “sore loser” laws that supposedly prevent Ron Paul from running as a Libertarian. It is true that we have such laws in Texas, but that does not mean that they apply for the Presidential race. Recall that when you vote for a Presidential candidate you are not really voting for that person, but instead are voting for a slate of electors who will vote in the Electoral College. That slate of electors has not run for and lost some other parties’ primary and therefore they may well be eligible for the general election ballot.

    Many state imposed ballot access restrictions do not stand up for federal races. This may well be one of them. I would enjoy seeing a comment on this matter from a true election law expert and not just a dabbler like me.

  7. NewFederalist Says:

    You pretty much nailed it, Rock. Richard Winger has already covered this over at Ballot Access News. Both the CP and the LP should have drafted Ron Paul. That would increase vote totals and awareness. The CP didn’t and the LP won’t so again we get a choice of tweedledee and tweedledum with unknowns and underfundeds also in the mix getting ignored. SIGH

  8. darolew Says:

    Election law is pretty irrelevant, Ron Paul isn’t going to run as a third party.

    “I think it would make more sense to co-nominate Bob Barr.”

    I feel the need to point out that the CP convention has already happened—Chuck Baldwin is their nominee for 2008.

  9. Alex Peak Says:

    I would love to see Ron Paul run as a Libertarian.

    No, I don’t think Bob Barr could win the Ron Paul Revolutionary (RPR) vote. Barr’s support for continuing the war on drugs will not make the RPR happy. Ron Paul had stated that we need to do away with the entire war on drugs, whereas Barr tells Hannity that it would be crazy for states to decriminalise heroin and cocaine. The RPR will also strongly oppose Barr’s support for the FairTax. Finally, the RPR will have great difficulty voting for a guy like Barr who tries to defend his USA PATRIOT Act vote.

    Alex Peak

  10. Stefan Says:

    If Paul is to run as a Libertarian, he would have to give up his congressional seat (no power in DC anymore), some in the LP will have resistance, just as there is some resistance towards Barr from some (pro-choice), he would not be able to be on the ballot in Texas and some other states and enjoy much less media coverage than even up to now. He would have to answer to the people that donated 1 million to his congressional campaign for nothing. He would also desert all candidates running under the RP GOP flag, which is the majority of them. If he does not win, he will have NO or much less influence in the GOP than he ever had (he would have much stronger influence in the GOP since the past year and his support is growing). If he does not win the nomination, he will be without any influence: you will only hear from him till November, after that very very seldomly. And he does still have a chance to win the GOP nomination and would nullify all efforts of meetup-groups up to now.

    Apropo Barr: He would be able to get most of the RPR vote, plus more, just as Paul would be able to get much more support from the GOP, Independents and Democrats if he would run in the primaries now than now. Many GOP would have voted for him if they knew about him before and/or thought he has a chance to win the nomination, a substantial number of Democrats did not register in time as Republicans in order to vote for Paul or were not allowed to vote, same with Independents.

    In his interview about the drugs Barr was stating his personal opinion about all hard drugs, he left it open to the states, not the federal government to decide.
    This is consistent with the issue regarding abortion also. Paul has also indicated there would be a difference with regard to his platform if he would run as a presidential candidate vs a governor candidate. The same with regard to Barr: he is now against the federal war against drugs, as presidential candidate, and if he would run for say the governor of Georgia, he would be for the legalization of medical marijuana and against that of certain hard drugs or for hard drugs only under subscription from a pharmacy. Both Paull and Barr are staring now with medical mariuana legalization, which is a good starting point.

    Apropo fair tax, Barr has indicated that this is not an absolutist dogma for him, it is a negotiable issue: important is the shrinking of government as well as reducing of the deficit, which is needed before you can start to reduce taxes. The elimination of the IRS is common with both Paul and Barr.
    Barr stated repeatedly that his vote for the Patriot Act was a mistake, and has worked actively to get that undone. He wanted to indicate that he had had serious reservations and objections towards the Patriot Act when he was congressman also, he only agreed to supporting it under certain reservations and that it would be a temporary issue. Paul has indicated that as president he would probably start to take away certain passages in the Act and gain consensus on that, before trying to scrap it totally in once.

    I do think Barr would be able to makes some inroads into the GOP establishment that Paul would not have been able so soon (given the negative media perception created) and with Mary Ruwart as VP candidate especially, the Lp can make inroads within the Independents, soem Democrats as well as Greens. I do think Barr with his work with the ACLU etc. would be able to get support from Independents and Democrats as well, but perhaps not as much as Ruwart would. Ruwart would not be able to get so much support under the conservative wing of the GOP again. Both of them are avid Paul supporters. One has different accents as a politicians and they make a perfect combination IMHO, e.g. the one enhance the shortcomings of the other.



  11. Peter Orvetti Says:

    As far as Barr goes, I would be interested in hearing the views of some Libertarians who are members of groups once at odds with Barr—gays and lesbians, Wiccans, etc. I was struck by the fact that Rob Kampia, whom Barr once called a “druggie” during a congressional hearing, is reportedly planning to vote for Barr in Denver. Will others once at odds with Barr do the same?

    For whatever it’s worth, I think Mary Ruwart is still most likely to emerge as the presidential nominee, with Barr second most likely, followed by Root, then maybe Kubby. I don’t think Gravel is seriously in the running.

  12. Justin Grover Says:

    I’m not defending Barr’s possible presidential run, but he certainly didn’t seem to hate “the gays” back when we interviewed him at CLC in October. Video is here:


  13. citizen1 Says:

    Ron Paul will not run as anything other than a Republican in this election cycle. There was an effort to draft Bob Barr to seek the CP nomination but he refused. I do not know how aggressively this was pursued. This leaves us with the only possibility for a fusion ticket being Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin is the only one in the race that can really bring together the Ron Paul supporters.

  14. Thomas Says:

    And it’s voters like Alex Peak that are going to be the problem in ever getting a real opposition movement the attention of the mainstream. It doesn’t take much of a long hard look at the field to see that Bob Barr has the best chance of getting that kind of recognition yet because we can’t settle for anything less than a candidate of the purest variety you’re never going to be noticed. Maybe it’s time to forget about how pure a track record is and focus on the importance of voting for the best vehicle to get THE MESSAGE out there. Barr has apologized and made peace with his past mistakes and from all appearances seems genuine in his passion for getting the message of limited government and increasing personal freedom to the American voting establishment and thats enough of a step forward for now. As for voters who just plan on writing in Ron Paul all I have to ask is would you rather vote for Paul or vote for a candidate Ron Paul might actually vote for?

Leave a Reply