|Sent on:||Wednesday, May 16, 2012 12:21 PM|
What if Ron Paul ran as a “3rd Party” candidate? – Same thing, different party. He said he “has no plans to do so.” Is the grass greener on the other side? No. Been there done that in 1988. So did Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader and Bob Barr in 2008; and Gary Johnson in 2012. The grass is dead on the other side unless you are rich like Ross Perot. Recall that Perot dropped out while doing well. Whatever/whomever forced him out may force Paul out. Perot was called a “spoiler” by Republicans who were afraid he would take votes and help Clinton win. So will Paul if he tries a “3rd party”. There is no guarantee Paul will get nominated or even be accepted in another party. Even if he was nominated in a “3rd party”, he will not be allowed in the “debates” with Obama unless his poll numbers are high (according to the Commission on Presidential Debates,[masked], www.debates.org). They do not have a problem with Paul. It is the enforcement of the restrictions on power and handouts of our constitution that they hate about Paul and other constitutionalists. The media ignores “3rd party” candidates and constitutionalists. They have been doing this since just after March 1915 when J.P. Morgan decided to buy enough newspapers to control “the general policy of the daily press throughout the country”. - Congressional Record, 2/9/1917. The media chose Obama and Romney and they will make sure Obama wins another term. With their weekly+ “polls”, censorship and careful wording the left-leaning media basically are the voters of presidents. And we let them.
Two parties dominate so to get any where politically you must choose dumb or dumber. Paul still has 2 chances to be nominated as a Republican: get more delegates than Romney (ignore the media on this and everything else) and a brokered convention.