Will someone please explain to me how Ron Paul's strategy is supposed to win?

[Buck Laser]

The dedication and pure ideology of the Ron Paul folk on DF is admirable, but I just cannot understand how losing every single republican primary is supposed to result in final victory. No matter how I look at it, it looks like fairy dust politics to me.

I know a couple of people have expounded scenarios that are supposed to lead Paul to the nomination, but it hasn't been explained to me in terms that I can understand. Furthermore, it just doesn't look to me as if the electorate show much interest in it. So please, enlighten me!

[Keith Hamburger]

If you haven't got it by now, I doubt that one more explanation will help, but, here goes ...

First, very few of the delegates to the national convention are obligated in any way. They can actually vote how they please, no matter what the primaries, conventions or caucuses in the state say.

Second, we all know that the media is going to turn on McCain. If they can't hold out until after the convention, he doesn't stand a chance of even getting the nomination, let alone winning in November. If they make it past the convention, McCain will be brutalized and can't win against the democratic nominee. If they don't hold out until after the convention, the nominee will be Paul or Huckabee. It is highly doubtful the mass media will get behind the evangelist.

Third, Paul's is a battle of ideas and principles. Even getting the message out is of value.

Fourth, there are candidates already this year that are following the true conservative, libertarian, platform of Ron Paul. It is likely that many of them will win seats in the House and Senate in November.

Becoming president is not the only measure of "winning". Increasing the penetration of the libertarian message to at least 10% can be considered a significant victory in itself. Someone worked up some numbers that Paul received about .3% of the total media on this election thus far and averaged from 7-10% of the vote. Most voters never even heard his message, and when they did it was often distorted. The vast majority of those who heard his message, and have not already completely bought into the myth of omnipotent government, have supported him.

That, in itself, is a significant accomplishment.

Keith

[Elrathin]

First, very few of the delegates to the national convention are obligated in any way. They can actually vote how they please, no matter what the primaries, conventions or caucuses in the state say.

Keith


Now, given the history of all the elections in the past 50 years, can you show me where this has happened with a candidate so far behind in the polls? Just one.

The likelyhood of that happening for Ron Paul is close to 0. I'll tell you what, I am will to bet $100.00 that Ron Paul WILL NOT get the Republican nominee. Do you feel so much confidence in your candidate to make that bet? I'd be willing to set up a section with any moderators here for real info and an address to mail my $100.00 to so they can hold it along with yours.

Tell me, do you believe that strongly in Ron Paul to make such a bet?

[Tharagor]

It doesn't matter. Even if he, by some strange twist of reality, wins the nomination, he doesn't have the remotest chance of election.

He's obviously a Libertarian, not a Republican. He hasn't the slightest chance of winning a national majority unless he can get a lot of partially computer literate cronies in charge of the electronic voting memory cards.

[Elrathin]

It doesn't matter. Even if he, by some strange twist of reality, wins the nomination, he doesn't have the remotest chance of election.


Given the situation I believe he has almost 0 chance of getting the nomination for Republicans. As for electability, I think Ron Paul stands a good chance as a third party candidate.

His main base from what I can see are third party supporters and swing voters which outnumber the hard liners IMO. If it is Hillary/McCain Ron Paul would stand a good chance as a third party candidate, but he has already voiced that he will not run as a third party candidate so we will never know.

I would wager to say Ron Paul stands a far better chance then Perot did before Perot backed out, then came back in.

[Buck Laser]

So I guess it is fairy dust politics. There ain't gonna be any nominee selected at the party convention other than the ones who have the votes. Hoping for a Paul miracle is as likely as Kucinich pulling a miracle on the democratic side.[/b]

[Tharagor]

I would wager to say Ron Paul stands a far better chance then Perot did before Perot backed out, then came back in.


Maybe, maybe not. Either way, he still will not win.

[Truth_and_Power]

I don't think he has any chance of winning, but I voted my conscience. All of the peaceniks that voted for a warmongering democrat will have to live with their choices. As for me, I choose to stand up and be heard.

[micfranklin]

Since he can't win now the least he could do is make his constitutional principles more popular, that way people will start questioning the government more.

[Truth_and_Power]

I know I personally got four people to switch parties and vote for him. So that's 5 minds influenced by ron paul's campaign in my circle, that I know of. Whether or not he is winning, he IS making waves, a lot of people know about ron paul and like what he is saying.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Ron Pauls message has won over many people who are open minded and politically interested, and those who aren't partisan loyalists. He is also pretty good at explaining things in a way that most people can understand, regarding economic issues.

I hope he stays in until the end, and keeps spreading the message.

[AnnEsthesia]

I am sure the Republican voters would be thrilled if their delegates decided to go renegade and vote for Ron Paul instead of the candidate their constituents picked...

[Osborn F. Enready]

It would be unusual Ann, but these are rather unusual times in politics, world affairs and economic situation.

[Tharagor]

If they did, the delegates would lose a lot of standing in the party. They are, after all, elected by the party.

Either way, Ron Paul has little to no chance to win the nomination or the presidency.

I'd hate to see the damage a true libertarian, as Ron Paul clearly is, would cause to our economy. It could be as bad or worse than the damage our mounting debt could cause..

[AnnEsthesia]

If they did, all of the people who had voted for another candidate would vote democratic in protest.

[micfranklin]

I am sure the Republican voters would be thrilled if their delegates decided to go renegade and vote for Ron Paul instead of the candidate their constituents picked...


Oh they'd be pissed beyond belief. But at the same time it serves them right for becoming a shitty party in the first place.

[Tharagor]

Unfortunately, some people, like my mother in law, will vote Republican regardless of who the candidate is.

She calls McCain a Democrat but instead of sitting out she plans to vote for him just to make sure a Democrat doesn't get elected.