Juan Williams, an award-winning journalist who worked for National Public Radio 2000-2010 and is now a political analyst for Fox News Channel, writes here that Ron Paul might conceivably be the Americans Elect presidential nominee.
Juan Williams, an award-winning journalist who worked for National Public Radio 2000-2010 and is now a political analyst for Fox News Channel, writes here that Ron Paul might conceivably be the Americans Elect presidential nominee.
Pingback: Juan Williams Suggests Ron Paul Could be Americans Elect Presidential Nominee | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
That would be lovely.
Yeah, I think there is a great chance of Ron Paul running as an Independent or third party candidate if he doesn’t get the GOP nomination. And if that turns out to be the case then at this point in time Republicans have a choice: Ron Paul or Obama. They either nominate Ron Paul or risk his running an Independent or third party candidacy and siphoning off votes from the GOP candidate and handing the election to Obama.
Ron might not personally want to run as an Independent or third party candidate but if his supporters strongly seek him to do so, he usually humbly honors what his supporters want. And if you combine that with the fact that he is not running for re-election to congress, that he is all in for the 2012 campaign, and that he thinks it is an extremely critical time in this country with the economy and all, then this becomes a stronger possibility.
I’ve been thinking that this is a strong possible scenario for a couple of months now. And now the headlines are confirming this to me: “Buchanan: GOP Risks Third Party Revolt with Romney Candidacy” (NewsMax, Oct. 19 – http://thirdpartypolitics.us/blog/2011/10/22/buchanan-gop-risks-third-party-revolt-with-romney-candidacy/), “Ron Paul won’t rule out a run as an independent” (RT, Oct. 28), “Budowsky:”Ron Paul should run for president as a third-party candidate” (The Hill, Oct. 28).
So Republicans, you have a choice. Even if you don’t agree with Ron Paul on everything, you should still support him since he is the most honest, has the most integrity, doesn’t flip-flop, has predicted and has the real solutions for the economic crisis, will actually balance the budget, has never voted to raise taxes, supports the very principles that made America the freest and most prosperous country and on and on.
Having recently taken the Americans Elect’s Issues Quiz, I have found that based on many of the answers of others, Ron Paul doesn’t have a chance among those who have currently signed up. That’s not to say that if he wanted it, he could double the AE membership overnight and get it. But then, based on AE rules, his VP would have to be a Democrat. Can you name one who would be willing to run with him? [The only one I could think of is Mike Gravel of Alaska.]
Personally, I think the candidates will be a DINO running with a RINO, with former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer playing the RINO role.
The Americans Elect rules don’t require a Republican to have a v-p who is a Democrat. The Republican presidential candidate can have someone who is neither a Democrat nor a Republican; a Republican presidential candidate is only barred from choosing another Republican.
Yes, Ron Paul, a sure fire way for AE to get 8% of the vote.
Two years of work, millions of dollars, all aimed at a maximum 10% of the vote.
Do you really thing the AE folks only plan has been to get 8% to 10% of the vote?
If so, which of the other two candidates did they plan to foil?
I think AE’s plan was for greater possibilities.
A Ron Paul candidacy would seem to favor Obama’s re-election.
Stray very far into Ron Paul’s ideas and you’ll find some issues that are very odd for 90% of American voters.
Bottom line, Ron Paul has less than a 0.2% chance of actually being elected. That is 1 in 500
I love all this pre-election third party talk. It’s like foreplay for a gelding.
@4 Actually Larry, the byrules of AE state that the prez nominee would have to nominate somebody from ANOTHER party as his VP, not from the OPPOSITE party. SO therefore, Ron Paul could nominate somebody from the Libertarian Party or the Boston Tea Party as his veep nominee.
@5, @8: My mistake – maybe I read that as an example somewhere. Although I agree with @6 that they should choose someone else (with perhaps Paul as Veep) if they want to really make a difference in the results.
Also, Del, given that the St. Louis Cardinals came from 10 games back in late August in the WILD CARD race to win the World Series, anything is possible.
Actually, the AE rules provide that not only must the president and VP nominees not be from the same party, they must be “persons of differing ideological perspective or positions.” In other words, Paul couldn’t choose a Libertarian running mate unless that person’s views were substantially different from his own. On the other hand, a ticket consisting of a Democrat and a Republican would be considered balanced, so if he could find a Democrat with libertarian views, Paul could select that person as his VP.
See http://static.americanselect.org/sites/files/official-documents/Draft%209-30-11%20Rules.pdf on page 17, Rule 8.0.
Count me in the “not going to happen” category, too.
But… hmm, I’d actually consider voting for a Roemer/Gravel ticket.
Why would anybody WANT to be the A.E. nominee if their running mate would just contradict them on important issues? That’s intensely stupid.
12 –
“Intensely stupid?” Why, don’t you know that that is part of the “genius” of the Electoral College as created by the Founding Fathers? In their infinite wisdom they decided that the person getting the second highest number of electoral votes would become vice president.
Genius, that, huh?
Just because people have different partisan affiliations does not necessarily mean that they disagree on most important issues.
Remember, in 2004, Senator John Kerry seems to have wanted Senator John McCain to be his running mate. And in 2008, John McCain seemed to want Senator Lieberman to be his running mate, although he gave up on that idea when a leading Republican Party attorney claimed (erroneously) that if McCain chose Lieberman, that West Virginia law would keep the ticket off the ballot.
And in 1864, the Republican Party dumped the incumbent Republican vice-president, Hannibal Hamlin, and replaced him with a Democrat, Andrew Johnson. And in 1840 the Whig Party chose a Democrat, John Tyler, for vice-president.
And in 2008 the LP nominated two Republicans! 😉
This is a lame article by Williams. It completely lacks the obvious that Paul would run as the Libertarian nominee. Its farcical that Williams suggests that AE would be a perfect vehicle for Paul as if AE is a “third party” catchall for anyone who doesn’t win a Rep or Dem. Doesn’t even sound as if Williams has done any research on AE.
15 –
In one of the Democratic presidential debates of 2003, Juan Williams asked Carol Braun a question which included the contention that Howard Dean’s policy on gun control was that populous states needed gun control because they had greater populations of people of color. That was an outrageous lie, Williams knew it when he asked it, and it was a cowardly lie to boot since he could have put the question directly to Dean himself.
Juan Williams is not stupid. He works for Fox. Therefore his job is to advance a right wing political agenda. The interesting question is how floating a Paul/AE nomination helps defeat Obama.
Brad –
In one of the Democratic presidential debates of 2003, Juan Williams asked Carol Braun a question which included the contention that Howard Dean’s policy on gun control was that populous states needed gun control because they had greater populations of people of color. That was an outrageous lie, Williams knew it when he asked it, and it was a cowardly lie to boot since he could have put the question directly to Dean himself.
Juan Williams is not stupid. He works for Fox. Therefore his job is to advance a right wing political agenda. The interesting question is how floating a Paul/AE nomination helps defeat Obama.
Someone above said it’s “genius” that our founders wanted people to run with the guy who came in 2nd in the Presidential race…no it’s not. Either was slavery, I might add. Just because the founders did it doesn’t make it “genius”.
There is no wgreater an incentive for people to assassinate a President than to have a VP waiting in the wings who they agree with (the President’s rival), and a sitting President they do not agree with. Hence, we changed the stupid set-up to avoid the idiocy of having a rival a heartbeat away from the office. Lincoln made this mistake running with Johnson, a Democrat. How’d that work out for Lincoln? Right…not “genius” at all.
If you want an Obama Shoe in Put Ron Paul for Americas Elect .He will divide the conservative vote between Romeny or Cain and give President Obama a cake walk to re-election
However if you want someone who is truly revolutionary and not afriad to admit and WILL take votes away from Obama vote For Stewart Alexender President . If you want a real end to corprate control of the election proceess !
True Foe,
Agreed. Williams floats an idea (very faulty) that doesn’t help Obama get defeated. Will Fox News (ha…”news”) now fire Williams?
If Ron Paul were to run at the head of the Americans Elect ticket, he might just win the election with President Obama and Mitt Romney/Herman Cain splitting the Bankster/Neo-Con vote.
Americans Elect Paul/Ventura 2012!
19 –
13 was intended as sarcasm.