Why not just run as an Independent spelling out what you truly are and stand for? Wouldn't you have a better chance that way because you know the Republicans are not going to nominate a Libertarian? So what's the point?
2007-08-08 07:04:14 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Coragryph--I was thinking of Ron Paul, but asking in general. Some of his statements appeal to me; some not. But I just wouldn't classify him as a Republican & thought maybe it would be better for him to run as a Libertarian of Independent.
2007-08-08 07:37:12 · update #1
I meant Libertarian or Independent. I hate spelling & grammatical errors.
2007-08-08 07:38:15 · update #2
Libertarians have a specific platform -- http://www.lp.org
And if you agree with that platform -- regardless of anything else -- you can seek nomination by that party.
It's not uncommon for candidates to be nominated by multiple parties -- if the candidate's platform is in harmony with those parties' goals.
But are you talking about one person in particular?
2007-08-08 07:09:17 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Most conservative Republicans have much Libertarian leanings (as most Libertarians have much Republican leanings). Paul is a Republican (Republican congressman from Texas), and has a size-able Republican following throughout the country. He may differ from many of the Republican candidates on many issues but that does not make him any less of a Republican, or any less right to run for office in his Republican party.
I am not sure what you mean directly by "better chance". I do not give much chance to the Libertarian Candidate. If a Libertarian wants to be President any time soon...he will have to win either the Democratic or Republican nomination. The Republican Party is the better option of the two for most Libertarians.
While Paul has quite a upward fight to get support, it is not entirely impossible that he could get that support. Actually he is probably doing better than he expected he would and he is getting his message out to the mainstream (whether he wins or loses), and effecting the debate. In the Libertarian Party it much more difficult to reach most of America with a message.
2007-08-08 08:00:53 · answer #2 · answered by Calvin 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Letite, you seem all hot and bothered about Ron Paul.. why?
To answer your question, he believes that he is the true conservative, and that the Republican party is the true conservative party. The only time he ran as a libertarian was once in 1988 when he had a lot of support from the libertarian party. Becuase Ron Paul's philosophy of constitutional liberty sits well with the libertarians, he received a lot of support from the libertarian party, and he was nominated on the libertarian ticket. He was never a member of the libertarian party, and always a republican since the beginning.
2007-08-08 10:37:19 · answer #3 · answered by Think Richly™ 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Isn't it stupid that someone with actual integerity decides to run, not to benefit himself or bc he's bought of buy corporates sponsers but to genuinly help You.. the middle class American... and then he's turned around and being attacked???? what do you expect from a country that voted Bush in twice...
Your obsiouly talking about Ron Paul and if you want to take shots at him atleast have the backbone to state his name in the question... As for what he truly is.. why don't you get informed... although he generally takes more of a liberal stance in his party as does Dennis K. for the democrats... He has said time and time again, that he is more republican... Why is that because he wants to restore the values of our constituion like our founding fathers wanted.. Paul isn't a reflexive contrarian--he doesn't oppose just to oppose. Rather, he has a core set of principles that guide him. They happen to be the same principles envisioned by the framers of the U.S. Constitution: limited government, federalism, free trade and commerce -- with a premium on peace.
When most members of Congress see a bill for the first time, they immediately judge the bill on its merits, or if you're more cynical, they determine what the political interests that support them will think of it, or how it might benefit their constituents.
For Paul, the vast majority of bills don't get that far. He first asks, "Does the Constitution authorize Congress to pass this law?" Most of the time, the answer to that question is "no." And so Paul votes accordingly.
If your under the impression that all republicans are supposed to be neo-cons like Bush/Guiliani, thats where you are wrong... Frankly I think its pathetic that you can't seem to see what is best for you, your family and the rest of the nation... why judge someone on their party?? why not the issues??? whats your point just bc he's against the war, he can't be a republican... How about this.. before he is anything he is AN AMERICAN!! he looks out for the best interests of AMERICANS!!
Ronald Reagan once said that libertarianism is "the very heart and soul of conservatism" (Reagan was great at communicating the princples of limited government, if less great at actually implementing them). Of all the candidates so far declared, only Paul can credibly lay claim to the legacy of the Reagan-Goldwater revolution.
2007-08-08 11:10:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. For the most part, Republicans ARE Libertarians.
But Ron Paul is no libertarian. He is a clear Democrat. Libertarians are usually hawkish on foreign policy and armed forces. Ron Paul seems to be marching in exactly the opposite direction.
Ahcho N., another such person would be Mike Bloomberg-a lifelong Democrat who became a Republican to become mayor of NYC.
2007-08-08 07:30:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Not at all. The first rule of politics is "Get elected!" Then you can pursue your agenda. No one running as a Libertarian, Green, Free Soil, et cetera, is likely to get elected.
2007-08-08 07:07:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Why wouldn't we nominate a Libertarian. He will beat Billary hands down.
2007-08-08 10:34:04 · answer #7 · answered by Beauty&Brains 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Probably not, because his views are closer to the views that the republican party was founded on, not what it has become.
2007-08-08 07:06:39 · answer #8 · answered by crushinator01 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I don't know. We Republicans are getting somewhat desparate. If you look at polls, there are more undecided than for any of the frontrunners.
2007-08-08 07:07:26 · answer #9 · answered by DAR 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I've known a few democrats who changed parties just to get elected then they changed right back. Now they are getting death threats. Serves them right. (one was the ex-husband of my girlfriend).
2007-08-08 07:33:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋