GOP plan to dump paul
 

http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-...es-100307.html


I say barring people from joining your party who would help nominate the only person who can possibly win the general election for you this year is a winning strategy.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]


http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-...es-100307.html


I say barring people from joining your party who would help nominate the only person who can possibly win the general election for you this year is a winning strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul does not have the best shot of winning the election for Republicans. I wish it were true but its not.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Still, if he decided to run as an independent, which side do you think he'd syphon votes from?

[ QUOTE ]
"That means that only Republicans can vote in the Presidential primaries for a Republican candidate."

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what they're saying, but it seems to me that could have been worded a little clearer.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
Still, if he decided to run as an independent, which side do you think he'd syphon votes from?

[ QUOTE ]
"That means that only Republicans can vote in the Presidential primaries for a Republican candidate."

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what they're saying, but it seems to me that could have been worded a little clearer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea. A lot of people would stay home if he isn't on the ticket. Some people here said they would vote Dem. Some might vote Republican. It's hard to tell.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

The article provides absolutely no evidence that Ron Paul's candidacy is the motivation behind this. Which makes sense, since there is no such evidence to be found. And I don't even see how it hurts Paul, since I have seen no indications that he polls significant support among independents either. He'll get 2% either way.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

what does las vegas say about ron pauls chances?

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Nick,

You really don't think that paul would get more votes from independents and democrats being the only person who's been willing to say he'll pull out of Iraq?

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
what does las vegas say about ron pauls chances?

[/ QUOTE ]

6% of winning the nomination on intrade. I know Rudy and Romney have better than a 6% chance of winning the election, let alone just winning the primary.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

The article isn't the best. Independents or Undeclareds as New Hampshire calls them, can still vote in the New Hampshire primary. People who have never voted before can still register at the New Hampshire primary and vote. I believe that people who have never voted in an election before can still register as Republican at the New York primary and vote. The deadlines the article is refering to are the party switch deadlines. So if you had voted Democrat in the past or are a registered Democrat then you have to switch to Republican by October 12th to vote Ron Paul. I think the reason New Hampshire moved the deadline up was because they're going to move their primary up since Wyoming moved theirs to January 5th, not because of Ron Paul. Paul has been as high as 5% in New Hampshire so combined with independents, he might be able to make some noise. He may have picked up some Democrats in the final months of this year so it might hurt him a little bit, but I don't think it's the end all of the campaign.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nick,

You really don't think that paul would get more votes from independents and democrats being the only person who's been willing to say he'll pull out of Iraq?

[/ QUOTE ]

Anti-war Dems will all vote in Dem primary. A higher % of independents who chose to vote in the GOP primary probably would vote for Paul than the % he gets among Republicans. But Paul's support among both groups is so small that he won't be a factor regardless of the voting rules.
I guarantee that no GOP party official in any state is afraid of Ron Paul.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]


http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-...es-100307.html


I say barring people from joining your party who would help nominate the only person who can possibly win the general election for you this year is a winning strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Two points:
1. Ron Paul has less of a shot at winning the general election than does Rudy or Thompson. His views are radical and that does not help him out.
2. The republicans do not have a good recent track record of doing things that would help them win elections.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
His views are radical and that does not help him out.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a sad state of affairs when Paul is a radical while Giuliani and McCain are not.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Why is ending the war and bringing the US closer to financial solvency radical?

Thats the problem with the US public. Fighting in Iraq, and continuing to spend beyond our means should be the radical positions.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Between this and what is going on with the Dems, primaries have become such a joke.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His views are radical and that does not help him out.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a sad state of affairs when Paul is a radical while Giuliani and McCain are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

hadn't thought about that
so true, so sad

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His views are radical and that does not help him out.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a sad state of affairs when Paul is a radical while Giuliani and McCain are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, Ron Paul is more radical, i.e. he is much more consistent. In Paul's case he is consistent about defending liberty and limiting the proper role of government in a free society. Radical doesn't necessarily mean "bad."

Giuliani and McCain aren't consistent about anything other than being political whores like almost all other politicians. It's a sad state of affairs that a (more) consistent defender of liberty is considered too "radical" in a derogatory sense to be electable.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Getting beyond just Ron Paul here, why would/should either party want/let non-members of the party to vote in their primaries? The whole purpose of the primary is for the party to pick a nominee for the general election. Allowing non-party members allows for serious skewing/distorting of the vote.

Ron Paul is actually a pretty good example of this. While Paul is a republican, he is more more like a libertarian than a republican. Even on this forum, we hear people all the time talk about how his support is difficult to capture because it doesn't come from typical Republicans, but rather it comes from unregistered "republicans" or libertarians, or the millions of anarchists. I have no problem (in fact I think it is better for the party) if Republicans want to disallow these people from their primaries.

The whole thing reminds me of a prank I helped organize in college. The College Republicans were holding their "election" for president of the organization at their general meeting. We brought in a large number of ultra-liberal students to the election to join the club and vote in one of the liberals as president of the org.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]


http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-...es-100307.html


I say barring people from joining your party who would help nominate the only person who can possibly win the general election for you this year is a winning strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been a libertarian for close to 30 years, and while I'd love to believe that Ron Paul could win a general election, I see no evidence in just talking to people that a libertairian would not be crushed in the general election. I really doubt Harry Browne would've won many States in either '96 or '00 even if he had been the GOP nominee.

Trust me. I wish it were different, but the truth is, the vast majority of people think big government is a good idea.

That said, Ron Paul as the GOP nominee would be a good way to at least shape the debate properly for the future.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
The whole thing reminds me of a prank I helped organize in college. The College Republicans were holding their "election" for president of the organization at their general meeting. We brought in a large number of ultra-liberal students to the election to join the club and vote in one of the liberals as president of the org.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet jesus do I hate when this happens. This actually happened to a local chapter of the Green Party. A bunch of libertarians came out of nowhere and elected themselves to all the positions because they had a hole in their constitution. Very random stuff.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The whole thing reminds me of a prank I helped organize in college. The College Republicans were holding their "election" for president of the organization at their general meeting. We brought in a large number of ultra-liberal students to the election to join the club and vote in one of the liberals as president of the org.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet jesus do I hate when this happens. This actually happened to a local chapter of the Green Party. A bunch of libertarians came out of nowhere and elected themselves to all the positions because they had a hole in their constitution. Very random stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's totally stupid (I know), but it highlights why the primaries SHOULD be restricted to party members.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The whole thing reminds me of a prank I helped organize in college. The College Republicans were holding their "election" for president of the organization at their general meeting. We brought in a large number of ultra-liberal students to the election to join the club and vote in one of the liberals as president of the org.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet jesus do I hate when this happens. This actually happened to a local chapter of the Green Party. A bunch of libertarians came out of nowhere and elected themselves to all the positions because they had a hole in their constitution. Very random stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's totally stupid (I know), but it highlights why the primaries SHOULD be restricted to party members.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, in this case, the primaries should be totally funded by the parties themselves, instead of using taxpayer-funded voting machines, personell, and locations.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

Or maybe this is a great reason why a "party" system is a ridiculous way to determine who should be in charge?

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The whole thing reminds me of a prank I helped organize in college. The College Republicans were holding their "election" for president of the organization at their general meeting. We brought in a large number of ultra-liberal students to the election to join the club and vote in one of the liberals as president of the org.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet jesus do I hate when this happens. This actually happened to a local chapter of the Green Party. A bunch of libertarians came out of nowhere and elected themselves to all the positions because they had a hole in their constitution. Very random stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's totally stupid (I know), but it highlights why the primaries SHOULD be restricted to party members.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, in this case, the primaries should be totally funded by the parties themselves, instead of using taxpayer-funded voting machines, personell, and locations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Re: GOP plan to dump paul
 

[ QUOTE ]
The republicans do not have a good recent track record of doing things that would help them win elections.


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you on this, the republicans are very adept at winning elections, just look how far they got before stuff started to catch up with them.