Skip to comments.Reason Ron Paul will not run third party in 2012: Rand 2016
Posted on 01/25/2012 8:20:08 AM PST by packback
A third party run by Ron Paul in 2012 would make the presidential campaign path much more difficult for Rand in 2016, a year when the field will be much stronger than this cycle.
I think the 2016 cycle is likely to bring out the candidates that the Republican Party was swooning over just months ago, namely Palin, Paul Ryan and Chris Christie.
(Excerpt) Read more at milwaukeestory.com ...
Forget Palin and Christie, it’s Rubio I want to see in 2016. Paul Ryan and Rand Paul can fight for the VP slot.
I admit to knowing next to nothing about Rand Paul. I think he’s a Tea Party favorite.
But... his old man is bonkers. And the nut don’t fall far from the tree.
In 2016 Gingrich will win a second term in a Reagan-like landslide. So we are really talking about 2020 here as far as GOP candidates go.
The author of this story assumes that Ron alterPaul is a rational, reasoned and thinking man.
No way to Chris Christie who is Romney II !
Besides, in 2016 our nominee will be incumbent President Newt Gingrich!
I could really get behind Rand in 2016 if the party of stuipid messes up in 2012 and we get four more years of zero.
There are many many reasons he wouldn’t even attempt it, not the least of which it would negate years of his efforts to get the republican party to be the party of less federal government.
I recall Mark Levin saying if RP goes third party, he would do everything in his power to block Rand’s reelection bid.
Charlie ‘I’m a RINO or maybe a Democrat’ Crust would never get nominated by Conservatives.
If Rand shares his father’s foreign policy views, he would be better off running for the Democratic nomination. Ron Paul would take more votes from Obama than he would from the GOP candidate.
I will wholeheartedly support Sen. Rand Paul for president. Wish he was running this time.
RP was asked whether he would run as a third party candidate in the most recent debate. He more or less said no, and added that he’s “not an absolutist”. Some FReepers interpreted this to mean that he could change his mind. I interpreted it to mean that he is willing to work within the existing institutions (which he did in 2008 and so far this year).
Anyway, Gary Johnson is the most likely candidate of the Libertarian Party.
To Levin, this is all just a game, apparently.
Rand ought to wait until he has served a full term in the Senate. And he ought to consider getting some executive experience, say as a Kentucky governor...I’m just sayin’.
I must have missed what Christie said about Newt. What did he say? I think Christie will be the Mitt of the next cycle but way more annoying...haha
His threat was his effort, among a whole list of other things, to prevent RP’s third party run. Why do you say it’s just a game for Levin? Meaning what evidence are you basing your opinion on.
I don’t get Levin, sometimes he is great and sometimes he is unreasonable.
“Anyway, Gary Johnson is the most likely candidate of the Libertarian Party.”
Capital ‘L’ reason.com Libertarians are way too secular for Ron Paul.