Paul Won't Rule Out Run as Independent

[pepperbear]

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-talk/2007/12/post_6.html?hpid=sec-politics


Ron Paul, the Texas congressman stirring up the Republican presidential contest with his libertarian-leaning views and online fundraising prowess, left the door open Sunday to running as an independent, should he not win the Republican nomination.

OK, so who had December 23?

[GoneOffShore]

1. Oh my

:argh: :banghead: :puke:

[Silent3]

2. Would he siphon off more Dem voters or Repub voters?

I'd hope he'd siphon off more Republican voters, but I've heard from too many Democrats who seem to only hear the anti-war side of Ron Paul, and either completely miss or ignore what a complete disaster he'd be in practically every other way that should matter to progressives.

[lvx35]

7. Republican.

I'm sure of it. Some people around here can't get it through their heads that there is a conservative anti-war movement, has been for a long time, and its growing. He could attract members of the libertarian left, so he's not a complete spoiler like Nader, but mostly he's going to attract republicans.

[AndyTiedye]

11. He Would Hurt Us More Than Them

RP would siphon off much of the anti-war vote. Most Repiglickans still support the war.

[existentialist]

3. This is good.

If Ron Paul runs as an independent he will take more Republican votes than Democratic votes.

[Olney Blue]

4. I saw alot of Ron Paul bumper stickers in the red part of Maryland.

I think it will hurt the GOP more than us.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

5. Yikes. He will, by comparison, make Perot appear as a statesman of humility and

gravitus.

Wow. He's hubris walking. MKJ

[cboy4]

6. Oh, there would definitely be plenty of unhappy Dems

who'd vote for Paul in an attempt to punish the party, IMO.

No question about it.

All I know is I watched Paul on Meet the Press and despite some good comments about foreign policy, his opposition to spying on citizens/restoring Habeas, etc., he came across almost batshit crazy and hypocritical about everything else.

[Vickers]

8. He would totally be the Repukes' Nader.

:thumbsup:

[Postman]

9. Hope he does. Syphon off as many kook votes as possible.

Just as Perot did in 1992 without which Clinton would have lost.

[tekisui]

10. A good article in The Nation this week.

Ron Paul is a "paleolibertarian". He is from the Old Right tradition. He is one side of the Libertarian Movement that split. He represents the culturally conservative, but as Scahill points out, has the popularity to rally the CATO, populist Libertarian wing with him, for now. Throw in a few misguided anti-war folks.

Ultimately, he's got a mixed bag of nothing. He will guarantee a Puke defeat, and most likely push the Democratic Nominee to be more strongly against the war.

[Chomskyite]

12. He'll split the Republican party

. . . since he's pitched his appeals to Republicans throughout a very long primary cycle. But I would like to see polls done on how many Democrats would vote for Paul as an Indy in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Nevada, Arkansas, Virginia and New Mexico.