Ron Paul For President

It looks like Ron Paul will run for president again, though this time as a Republican (he ran as a libertarian a while back).  Don't let the "Republican" tag fool you.   He is the same libertarian, but this time he is going to try to shake up the Republican party.  (Here is his web site)

This is great news -- particularly given that the Republicans turned on the libertarian wing shortly after the last election  (presumably they feel they lost because they were not statist enough).  It is thrilling to see a legitimate, non-fruitcake libertarian candidate running on a major party ticket. 

This could make the Arizona primary, which is early in the race, a real event.  Arizona's Republican party nabobs are strong McCain guys.  Pitted against McCain and the party leadership is a Republican rank and file that has a strong Goldwater-libertarian streak and that is a bit tired of McCain's shtick.   This may be the first primary in years (maybe ever) that I have gotten excited about.

  • Rob

    Why is it, that we can't seem to break free from a 2 party system? Maybe it's evident by the fact that people told me I wasted my vote by picking Libertarian candidates in past elections...

  • Eric

    People root for their favorite political party as if it's their hometown football team. I think it's really obscene how people can line up behind a Republican or a Democrat based entirely on their party affiliation, but until there's a nationally known libertarian willing to run for office, I think we're stuck with Republocrats. It'll be a major coup if Ron Paul wins the nomination, but voters are by and large too lazy and ignorant of the constitution to bother learning about a guy that they've never heard of who has these "extremist views." In today's political environment, George Washington is an absolute extremist nutjob while Lenin was a well meaning man of the people- scary, but that's the direction in which we seem to be heading. My guess is that we'll see some joke of a choice like McCain/Lieberman vs Clinton/Obama . . . flip a coin, who cares, you lose either way.

    Hey Rob- what's up mutual?

  • markm

    Rob: Ask them how voting for someone who can't win is more of a waste than voting for someone who is definitely working to take away your freedom?

    1-winner elections with no runoffs greatly favor a 2-party system. The mass media add to the problem by excluding third parties from debates, and often by reporting a 48-46% election as "X won by 2%", leaving it only to those who hunt for the numbers to find out that the "winner" won by a minority... In the 2006 elections, there were a number of Republicans that lost by a margin like that, and who would have won if they'd given the Libertarians and Constitutionalists any reason to vote Republican. Not to mention those who don't bother to come to the polls at all.

  • Eric

    I think the Republicans better prepare to lose more and more elections because of scaring Libertarians and Constitutionalists away from their ticket. I've been a pretty reliable republican voter in the past, mostly because if you put a gun to my head to choose between R and D, the R's come closer to where I stand on the issues that matter to me the most. It used to be my opinion that I'd rather vote for a republican to help keep a democrat out of office. I'm now of the opinion that they're both populists who do only what is required to get and maintain their power. I don't want populists, I want leadership. Forget major candidates, it doesn't matter who wins anymore with the current crop of politicians, so I'd rather use my vote to let the Libertarians know to keep fighting for more recognition because there are supporters out there.