The Montana Secretary of State has told Ron Paul that his request to be removed from the ballot arrived too late, so he will definitely be on the November ballot as the Constitution Party nominee, along with Michael Peroutka for vice-president.
Paul’s letter, dated September 10, says, “It has come to my attention that I was nominated by the Constitution Party of Montana as its presidential nominee. While I certainly appreciate the Constitution Party of Montana’s nomination, and all the hard work of its members, I am writing to respectfully request that you remove my name from the ballot in Montana as I did not seek nor consent to this nomination.”
This could help Obama if Paul actually gets endorsed by a few special interest groups. It could hurt Barr’s totals as well. I just wish they had put Barry Goldwater, Jr. on the ticket instead of Michael Peroutka.
But hold on it is not too late for the Sec. of State to say that Ron Paul votes wouldn’t count since he withdrew his support. So it is important question: Will the vote count or will it not count? Anyways if you want to vote for Chuck Baldwin you still can as a write-in.
One can assume that since he did write a letter wanting to withdraw from the race, that his votes shouldn’t count. Maybe Paul can file a lawsuit to have his name removed.
If Ron Paul filed a lawsuit to remove his name, he would almost certainly win. In 1960 the Florida Supreme Court said Governor Orval Faubus could remove his name from the ballot (the National States Rights Party had petitioned for him as their presidential candidate). And in 1968 the New York State Court of Appeals (the highest state court in that state) ruled that Eugene McCarthy could remove his name from the ballot as an independent. Both courts said people have a common law right not to be forced to be a candidate against their wishes.
But I doubt Ron Paul wants to spend the money on a lawsuit. The state must count his votes because he is a candidate. The state doesn’t recognize that he withdrew. They said not only was he too late, but even if he hadn’t been too late, they have no provision for withdrawal for presidential nominees.
Since spring of this year, Ron Paul has been playing cute instead of campaigning as a man of principle. He should be in or out. He is hurting the other parties he claimed to be helping at his news conference. It really is all about promoting Ron Paul now, and not about Liberty.
Dr. Paul: You should file a lawsuit to have your name removed from the ballot in Montana and do what it takes to be removed in Louisiana as well. If you were sincere in the battle for liberty, if you were sincere at your press conference on Sept 10, you would get yourself off those ballots.
“This could help Obama if Paul actually gets endorsed by a few special interest groups.”
Ain’t gonna happen. Ron Paul isn’t about special interest groups. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT.
“if you were sincere at your press conference on Sept 10, you would get yourself off those ballots.”
Gee, I thought the LP beef was that he wouldn’t run all out. Why does ‘the battle for liberty’ require that one particular party win?
spinnikerca Says:
September 16th, 2008 at 9:16 am
“Gee, I thought the LP beef was that he wouldn’t run all out. Why does ‘the battle for liberty’ require that one particular party win?”
1st: Only the Libertarian Party is working for Liberty. Nader and the Greens are socialists and the “Constitution” party is a theocratic party of would-be christian mullahs.
2nd: “United we stand, divided we fall” is still sound advice.
3rd: Bob Barr was correct NOT to join Ron Paul with the non-libertarian minor party oppostion.
whether the votes count or not – they won’t be going to McCain. There’s a new ARG poll coming out with a 2% McCain edge in Montana in the mythical 2 person race. Paul being on the ballot could affect the votes of double that, easily.
I am a life-long Libertarian. The Republicans couldn’t have set the Libertarian Party up better if they had wanted to with the whole Ron Paul run. Ron Paul gave many Libertarians hope for a national platform for our views of limited non-interventionist government.
What does Ron Paul do? He takes our money, our volunteer time then stabs us in the back. First he wouldn’t go all out and run again as a Libertarian for President. Continues to give out false hope all the way through the primary season. Signs of betrayal start at the March on Washington where Libertarian money was taken but no Libertarians were represented on the podium, only Constitution Party reps. The same snub happens at the Rally for the Republic, no Libertarian leadership invited to share the podium it was a Constitution Party event. And now this crazy 4 way endorsement which really was a way to give Chuck Baldwin a boost. The Libertarian volunteer hours and money that could have been spent by Libertarians on the Libertarian Party’s ballot access was thrown down the rat hole of the Ron Paul candidacy.
Where did the 35 million go? It certainly hasn’t gone on a serious run for the white house by Paul. It will go into the coffers of the Constitution Party for promotion, and into the pockets Paul’s many relatives in the form of staff salaries. Don’t be surprised if soon the Republican Party has a big kiss and make up with Ron Paul. He has almost single handily managed to do significant damage to only major thorn in the Duopolies side for the past 35 years.
Wouldn’t it be a kick in the head if Barr is the honest one. If Barr has genuinely realized that the wars on other countries and on the American population over drugs is bankrupting this nation and robbing us of our civil liberties? Barr doesn’t have the principled voting record like Paul. And he has the ex-cia connections. Yet by standing up to this splitting of the vote and pointing the finger at Paul essentially saying, “the emperor has no clothes.” Has Barr finally albeit to late for Libertarians to re-coop this election cycle shown his sincerity in becoming a Libertarian? The jury may still be out on that one.
Help your state Libertarian party maintain ballot access and support the candidates who need vote totals to keep the Libertarian Party on the ballot. This can mean supporting the Governor’s ticket in your state if you can’t bring yourself to supporting Barr. But whatever you do don’t skip election day simply because the presidential election seems unworthy of your vote.
Coming back to the LP – I disagree.
ExRon Paul supporter, if you are implying the money Ron Paul got was from Libertarian party members, why was it many multiples of the amount all Libertarian party presidential candidates have made since the party began, put together? I am certain some Libertarian party members contributed, but that most came from elsewhere. Certainly most of his 1.2 million votes in the primary had to come from elsewhere. And as someone who maxed out on his campaign and contributed to local efforts as well (and will contribute to the Montana campaign) I assure you I think I’ve gotten my money’s worth. I’d have loved it if he ran for the general, but understand that throwing away his Congressional seat is a price none of the other third party candidates face.
I didn’t say all the money that Ron Paul got was from Libertarians. However, a respectable amount of money did come from Libertarians. I gave the Ron Paul campaign more money than I personally have given to all the Libertarian candidates combined since I have been a Libertarian. I know of many fellow Libertarians who switched parties, gave time and money like never before only to attend the events I listed and feel totally snubbed. Paul let his self-interest get in the way of securing ballot access for a third party.
The guy is 72 years old on a fat wad of cash. It isn’t like Paul needs to keep his seat or face poverty should he retire. And you act as though Paul is the only candidate in the history of presidential runs that would have hurt their careers by running for President. Honestly, if Bob Barr would have relocated to a more friendly political district and remained Republican. Barr would have had an excellent chance of winning back a congressional seat. Those chances are hurt by switching to the Libertarian Party and running for President.
If Paul had run Libertarian or Constitution Party as their Presidential candidate his influence could have secured a third party on all but possibly Oklahoma’s ballot and maybe even pulled that one off as well. He would have had the best chance at reaching the 15% threshold and secured a spot in the Presidential debates. That would have been a Ross Perot major big deal without the Ross Perot bankroll.
So what does the freedom movement have for all its money now? A half-hearted attempt at a Presidential run and a lone voice in congress that will not give opposition to the two major parties on a national platform. Whoopee, I am not represented an have no one to vote for president, that I am thrilled about supporting. Why? cause Paul chose to scatter his support to the four winds just like Barr complained.
I would have even had more respect for Paul if he had just come out and supported Baldwin. At least then he would have potentially given his supporters a future rallying point. Or if he didn’t have a press conference at all but urged his followers to flood into the Republican Liberty Caucus as a single rallying point to drag the Republican party kicking and screaming back to its genuine conservative/libertarian roots.
I have to agree with Barr this time. It seems it was a lack of courage and possibly greed that kept Paul from picking a united course of action. Certainly, he would have lost some supporters but which ever course he chose would have had the best chances of becoming the vehicle around which the majority of his supporters could have rallied.
Rip the Paul blinders off isn’t his desire to be removed from the Montana ballot actually supporting McCain? Cause Paul being on the ballot will hurt McCain more than any other candidate. Like I said in my previous post just wait and see there will be a kiss and makeup with the Republican party after this election. Paul has managed to suck dry the will of the opposition and left it poorer than when he started his run for the Republican nomination.
#11
Yes. You hit the nail on the head.
I would like to see a complete audit of the Ron Paul 2008 presidential campaign expenditures. He had no significant advertising campaign, and it looks like millions were paid out in sweetheart deals to certain insiders.
Perhaps it was just totally incompetent management. His 1988 Presidential campaign squandered its money as well, but that was mostly bad campaign management.
Coming back to the LP Says: “Dr. Paul: You should file a lawsuit to have your name removed from the ballot in Montana and do what it takes to be removed in Louisiana as well. If you were sincere in the battle for liberty, if you were sincere at your press conference on Sept 10, you would get yourself off those ballots.”
I disagree and if Ron Paul were to do this, I would take it as a slap in the face to the Montana CP who is putting principle over politics into practice. Let’s hope and pray others will follow the lead of Jonathan Martin and Rick Jore.