Ron Paul rejects McCain, endorses third parties.

[Laine]

Ron Paul rejected endorsing McCain after a final plea for his support, instead he called on voters to reject the two major candidates and to back one of the independents or third party candidates. Nader, McKinney and Baldwin were in attendence at the press conference, however, Barr rejected the invitation and will likely lose support from Paul supporters.

According to the Associated Press, Paul said today that former McCain advisor Phil Gramm called Paul and encouraged him to back the Arizona senator. Paul refused.

Instead, Paul urged voters to back a third party candidate such as Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader or Chuck Baldwin, all of whom appeared with Paul today.* Paul supports these candidates because he believes they agree with him on what he considers to be four key issues: balancing budgets, bringing troops home, protecting personal liberties and investigating the Federal Reserve.

"The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state," Paul said, according to his prepared remarks. He added that the time has come to recognize that "the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard."

"At a time when 60% of the American people are dissatisfied with their presidential choices, this could be the year that third party option bring in a big chunk of the vote," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said in an email to CBS News. "That would really be something!"

The press conference will be on C-SPAN and Nader and Paul appeared on Wolf Blitzer's show today and Nader is scheduled to be on Lou Dobb's show as well. You can watch the C-SPAN coverage online as well.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/librar...ts_id=281024-1

The third party candidates all agreed on several key issues:

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

We support opening up the debates beyond the two parties and the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a private corporation co-chaired by former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic Party. It is time for our Presidential Debates to once again be hosted by a truly non-partisan civic-minded association.

We Agree -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008

 

[dilloduck]

Ron Paul rejected endorsing McCain after a final plea for his support, instead he called on voters to reject the two major candidates and to back one of the independents or third party candidates. Nader, McKinney and Baldwin were in attendence at the press conference, however, Barr rejected the invitation and will likely lose support from Paul supporters.





The press conference will be on C-SPAN and Nader and Paul appeared on Wolf Blitzer's show today and Nader is scheduled to be on Lou Dobb's show as well. You can watch the C-SPAN coverage online as well.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/librar...ts_id=281024-1

The third party candidates all agreed on several key issues:



We Agree -- Ralph Nader for President in 2008

Now why in the hell did Paul run as a Republican ?

 

[Paulie]

Now why in the hell did Paul run as a Republican ?

Come on Dillo, what's republican about McCain? I mean, seriously?

The only thing not mainstream republican about Paul is his foreign policy.

Otherwise, he's more conservative than most members of congress.

With him, you know he would ACTUALLY cut government. I'll wait with bated breath for McCain to cut the bureacracy at all, let alone veto pork that gets stuffed into bills he couldn't possibly risk vetoing for the sake of politics.

But the answer to your question is because he knows the third parties are blockaded by the establishment. He would love nothing more than to see the Republican party return to it's core conservative principles and ACT on them, rather than pay lip service to them during election years. He could have saved conservatism, but I think sadly, conservatism dies as of this election.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Now why in the hell did Paul run as a Republican ?

More money to bankroll his campaign.

DUH!

What'd you buy into that silliness of him being above it all?

 

[dilloduck]

Come on Dillo, what's republican about McCain? I mean, seriously?

The only thing not mainstream republican about Paul is his foreign policy.

Otherwise, he's more conservative than most members of congress.

With him, you know he would ACTUALLY cut government. I'll wait with bated breath for McCain to cut the bureacracy at all, let alone veto pork that gets stuffed into bills he couldn't possibly risk vetoing for the sake of politics.

But the answer to your question is because he knows the third parties are blockaded by the establishment. He would love nothing more than to see the Republican party return to it's core conservative principles and ACT on them, rather than pay lip service to them during election years. He could have saved conservatism, but I think sadly, conservatism dies as of this election.

I think it was pretty poor strategy to try to sneak in under the guise of the present Republican party tho--He certainly didn't fool anyone.

 

[Paulie]

I think it was pretty poor strategy to try to sneak in under the guise of the present Republican party tho--He certainly didn't fool anyone.

How did he "sneak"? He's been a card carrying member for most of his political career.

The man never intended to be president. He ignited a revitalization of conservatism, which is something he had no clue would happen. He had to be talked into even running in the first place.

He believes a third party run would be futile, although I disagree. I think he'd probably get over 10%, possibly more, which could help to make a real name for 3rd parties in the future. He may even get the 15% pre-polling required to participate in the debates.

I hear people all over the place chatting up politics in public places, and so many people mention that they wish he'd have run 3rd party because they hate the two main choices.

How can you LIKE having to pick from McCain or Obama? What a sad, pathetic ballot that is.

You wouldn't like to see others getting to debate McCain and Obama?

 

[dilloduck]

How did he "sneak"? He's been a card carrying member for most of his political career.

The man never intended to be president. He ignited a revitalization of conservatism, which is something he had no clue would happen. He had to be talked into even running in the first place.

He believes a third party run would be futile, although I disagree. I think he'd probably get over 10%, possibly more, which could help to make a real name for 3rd parties in the future. He may even get the 15% pre-polling required to participate in the debates.

I hear people all over the place chatting up politics in public places, and so many people mention that they wish he'd have run 3rd party because they hate the two main choices.

How can you LIKE having to pick from McCain or Obama? What a sad, pathetic ballot that is.

You wouldn't like to see others getting to debate McCain and Obama?

Hell--he got elected as a libertarian from Texas---that outta showed him something ! I'd love to see a 3 party debate and I thought he could be the one to break the barrier. He shoulda known full well that he didnt have a prayer with the mainstream so called republicans. Now where is he ? Throwing a hissy fit from the sidelines when he probably had the best opening a third party candidate ever had !
Bad move Ron

 

[Denny Crane]

It looks like Ron paul is giving the Republicans the same treatment they gave him, so I don't blame him for not backing McCain. Paul was actually too conservative for the Republican party.

 

[dilloduck]

It looks like Ron paul is giving the Republicans the same treatment they gave him, so I don't blame him for not backing McCain. Paul was actually too conservative for the Republican party.

LMAO-----maybe the party but not the people.

 

[Denny Crane]

maybe the party but not the people.

So there is a difference? It seems to me Paul was shunned during some of the primary debates and he really wasn't welcome at the convention, so who are these people you are referring to?

 

[dilloduck]

So there is a difference? It seems to me Paul was shunned during some of the primary debates and he really wasn't welcome at the convention, so who are these people you are referring to?

real conservatives of course. You need to learn the difference. The republican party left them in the dust.

 

[Paulie]

Hell--he got elected as a libertarian from Texas---that outta showed him something ! I'd love to see a 3 party debate and I thought he could be the one to break the barrier. He shoulda known full well that he didnt have a prayer with the mainstream so called republicans. Now where is he ? Throwing a hissy fit from the sidelines when he probably had the best opening a third party candidate ever had !
Bad move Ron

I'm not really sure how one can be a conservative without being a libertarian of some sort. The word libertarian is used by the media as a way to marginalize. They used it just about everytime they referred to Paul during primary season.

But I'm glad we see eye to eye on the issue though. I believe he made the right choice when looking at it over the long run. He was more worried about maintaining his seat in congress. He would have been disqualified from running for it had he ran 3rd party in the general.

He serves a much better purpose casting a vote in congress, than he does losing a general election AND his seat.

I think he hopes his endorsement of the 3rd parties will be akin to him actually running. Not that I personally need his blessing on it, but I'm sure many would prefer to hear him say it himself first.

The main problem is going to be getting the 3rd party voters to unite under one particular ticket, and not spread their votes out over all of them. I'm pretty displeased with Barr not attending. He's got NOTHING without the Paul supporters.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm not really sure how one can be a conservative without being a libertarian of some sort. The word libertarian is used by the media as a way to marginalize. They used it just about everytime they referred to Paul during primary season.

But I'm glad we see eye to eye on the issue though. I believe he made the right choice when looking at it over the long run. He was more worried about maintaining his seat in congress. He would have been disqualified from running for it had he ran 3rd party in the general.

He serves a much better purpose casting a vote in congress, than he does losing a general election AND his seat.

I think he hopes his endorsement of the 3rd parties will be akin to him actually running. Not that I personally need his blessing on it, but I'm sure many would prefer to hear him say it himself first.

The main problem is going to be getting the 3rd party voters to unite under one particular ticket, and not spread their votes out over all of them. I'm pretty displeased with Barr not attending. He's got NOTHING without the Paul supporters.

agreed--they marginalize themselves when it's already tough enough to run against the holy two.
good point about his congressional seat

 

[Denny Crane]

real conservatives of course. You need to learn the difference. The republican party left them in the dust.

I guess that's why he didn't do well in the primaries. There don't seem to be many true conservatives left.

 

[dilloduck]

I guess that's why he didn't do well in the primaries. There don't seem to be many true conservatives left.

get a clue Denny---why do you think a conservative didnt' do well in a parties primary that has left conservatism behind?

 

[Article 15]

get a clue Denny---why do you think a conservative didnt' do well in a parties primary that has left conservatism behind?

*raises hand*

Ooo!!! Oooo!!! I know!!!

 

[Paulie]

*raises hand*

Ooo!!! Oooo!!! I know!!!

By all means, do tell.

 

[Denny Crane]

*raises hand*

Ooo!!! Oooo!!! I know!!!

Shhhhh!!!!!

 

[Laine]

I agree on that Barr has marginalized himself by insulting Paul in a backhanded way. Nader on the other hand went as far as to answer questions about the Libertarians in place of their own candidate LOL. Ron Paul is appearing on shows with Nader, not Barr and that says a lot. Of course I think Paul should have came out and endorsed a single candidate instead of all three, the resources Paul supporters could have mustered to one of the third party candidates would have been significant.

 

[dilloduck]

I agree on that Barr has marginalized himself by insulting Paul in a backhanded way. Nader on the other hand went as far as to answer questions about the Libertarians in place of their own candidate LOL. Ron Paul is appearing on shows with Nader, not Barr and that says a lot.

Maybe the ninnies will learn to stop shooting themselves in the foot by 2012.