If no republican nomination for Ron Paul: should he run independently?

Filed under: News, Politics | By: Daniel
Posted on: January 13, 2008 | 25 Comments

Ron Paul independent
Ron Paul still has every chance of getting the Republican nomination, but what if he did not get it for one reason or another.

He is nick named “Ron Paul President of the web” because he seems to be the most popular online, now if he is stopped running for US President because of no Republican nomination…what next?

Should Ron Paul then run independently?

If you add the costs of both Republican and Democratic campaigns together for the political conventions, general election and Presidential primary election… wikipedia reports that it could be a $1 billion election in 2008.

They also said “a candidate will need to raise at least $100 million by the end of 2007, to be taken seriously”.

Should Ron Paul decide to run as an independent if he does not win the Republican nomination?

What would you do to see Ron Paul as US President?

CLICK HERE to keep updated with the latest news, share a comment or problems with products and services. Follow us on twitter or read more news.

Comments

25 Responses to “If no republican nomination for Ron Paul: should he run independently?”

  1. Ed says:

    A run as an independent is a Don Quixote pursuit of a windmill, which not only ends in a failed and mocked candidate, but also relegates his ideas to the ash-heap of political history. For goodness sake, look at the recent past, John Anderson, Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan none of them made a dent on their parties and set back their cause, in contrast, William Bryon Jennings, William Taft, and Barry Goldwater stood on principle, abet while losing elections, their ideas lived on and changed their parties for the better. Burke reminds us that it is reform within the system, not revolution that is the solution. The question for his supporters, is it about Ron Paul, i.e a “cult of personality” or is it about his ideas, you must pick one, as one of Paul’s favorite philosophers always use to say “you can’t have your cake and eat it too”. Moreover, Ron Paul is a sitting member of the House of Representative, stage 2 of the Ron Paul Revolution should take place in the Congress, since constitutionally all the power to makes all of the changes that Ron Paul wants to make reside in Article I of the constitution, not with the President under Article II.

  2. tim says:

    Minnesota gave Jessie Ventura the governor’s seat when the democrats, republican, and media said he had no chance. The people spoke. Let the people speak in 2008.

  3. Gene says:

    No, only billionaires can afford to run as independents.

  4. Haigh says:

    Well stated Ed. And from the ranks of the RPR members of congress may come Dr. Paul’s successor. This is important to freedom’s future because Ron Paul running in 2012 is even less likely than his running as an Independent in 2008.

  5. Abul says:

    It is too early to tell now. Ron Paul supporters, campaign staff and of course Dr. Paul himself will address this issue when the time comes.

  6. Brad says:

    Why are we not discussing issues and policy rather than hypotheticals.

    Focus on what is Now, not what might be.

    I vote for virtue; I vote for Ron Paul !!!

  7. Ty says:

    Congressman Ron Paul is a sitting member of the House of Representative’s, stage “2″ of the Ron Paul Revolution should take place in Congress, Constitutionally, The power to makes all of the changes that Ron Paul wants to make reside in Article I of the Constitution, not with the President under Article II.

  8. Ty says:

    Congressman Ron Paul is a sitting member of the House of Representative’s. Stage “2″ of the Ron Paul Revolution should take place in Congress. Constitutionally. Changes that Ron Paul wants to make reside in Article I of the Constitution, not with the President under Article II.

    Ty.

  9. Steve G. says:

    As a proud and true American (not a camp follower of GWB & Co.), I absolutely RP should run as an Independent, hell, I gave from my hard earned salary (tiny as it is). All he needs is a well known running mate to gather real attention. Someone with real name power. Kurt Russel is a known Libertarian, so is Clint Eastwood. I know, I know, Hollywood is anathema to libertarians, but they do have name recognition and most people love these guys. So, I say why not? Can we convince these two great actors to come on board? Help me out here people, start the push for those in hollywood who are on our side to speak up! We need every red blooded American who believes and can stand to speak out!

  10. Steve G. says:

    “Only billionaires can run?” We can give billions ourselves. Us, the little people, or do you forget the Boston Tea Party where we gave over 6 million in one day with small donations?

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

 
More
 

Consumer Reviews By Category:
Computing, Electronics, Entertainment, Home & Garden, Motoring, Photography, Sports

Companies and PR Firms

Need a product reviewed, email the details.