NOOOOOO!!! and don't anyone believe it!! he is third party ticket!!!

edited to add: ending his campaign doesn't mean that he withdrew from the race.

[edit on 7-7-2008 by justamomma]

I am writing Ron Paul in for two reasons.

1: I do not want to vote for Obama

2: I do not want to vote for Mccain


So why would I vote for these presumptive nominees if I honestly do not feel safe voting for either of them. At least with writing Ron Paul in, I will put my mind at rest.

Better than not voting at all

-Kdial1

kdial, I'm not asking WHY you're voting for Paul. Believe me, I understand the attraction. But if he won, would he take the job?

justamomma, how do you know he's the third party ticket? Where are you getting the information?

many sources. most of mine come from insiders that worked w/ ron paul on his campaign, but do a google search and you will see that although he won't be on the ticket, he is still running. i just assume he knows that americans are more interested in being entertained than making rational decisions and thus, while waiting for the elections, why waste time in getting things accomplished where he can.

unlike the other two, ron paul actually has work ethics.

I imagine he would take the position if he won, but let's be realistic here. His name isn't on the ballot, so there's no way he can win. There will be many write ins without a doubt, but the average American doesn't even know who Ron Paul is.

Originally posted by justamomma
if you are right, what is the point?

Well, I believe there is a point. If my first pick isn't running, I will NOT take my vote and go home like a spoiled child. I will pick the person who comes closest to my political views and goals. I don't throw my vote away just because the ONE I want isn't running. I know people feel differently than me on this and that's fine. But this is how I feel about "not voting" to make a statement.

But the way I figure it, this isn't marriage. It's not like I'm settling for less then the ideal, because no matter WHO becomes president, it's going to be less than the ideal.

If Ron Paul isn't running, I'm going to look at the remaining candidates and pick the one who is most closely aligned with my views. Some say that's picking the lesser of two evils, but I see it as picking the best of what is available. And refusing to cast my vote for anyone is just tossing my future away to the hands of people who I really don't trust too much; the American voting public. They haven't been doing too well these last few elections and you can bet I'm not going to just leave it in their hands if I have ANYTHING to say about it.

So, what's the point? The point is that I refuse to throw my vote away. Either by not voting or by voting for someone who isn't running.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by justamomma
if you are right, what is the point?

Well, I believe there is a point. If my first pick isn't running, I will NOT take my vote and go home like a spoiled child.

So, what's the point? The point is that I refuse to throw my vote away. Either by not voting or by voting for someone who isn't running.

this is the reason i edited in " i will still write him " and meant to say [in]. you call it a waste, i call it my right to vote for whomever i see as most fit to LEAD (NOT run... most assume it is to be run and not lead) this country.


maybe the better word was "difference", not "point". my vote is still w/ ron paul. he is the only choice of ppl up there who gets "it".

voting the lesser of two evils is ONLY your "only choice" when you fail to understand how this country was intended to work.

my conscience told me not to vote for president bush, and despite what i had always known (voting republican), i went against the grain (of my head) and found out later why it would have been wrong to vote for him... thus, my conscience is clear from any responsibility of anything he has done while in office.

unless i can see that they are going to work for the people and not for some side interest, i can not, in all good conscience vote for either of the two main candidates.

that's the problem, everyone is settling on that these "lesser of two evils" being their only choice. about time to start accepting responsibility for those choices we make bc once we do, then maybe we take our choices back into our own hands..

you make it as though you are now agreeing w/ what ron paul stood for, but like so many of the obama crowd, you sold out bc you didn't think he stood a chance. am i understanding this correctly? you went w/ the more popular candidate? seems like ya'll are trying really hard to hook ppl into this idea. i have still yet to see anything of substance from any of y'all claiming that he is so great.


you ask "But the way I figure it, this isn't marriage. It's not like I'm settling for less then the ideal, because no matter WHO becomes president, it's going to be less than the ideal."

you are correct.... this ISN'T marriage. they work for us, the ppl. they need to quit protecting us from us or us from them and start helping AND LISTENING in figuring out the problems we are facing.

this is such a flippant choice that we would settle for LESS than ideal? i don't think so.


just IMHO

edited to clarify part of the above.


[edit on 7-7-2008 by justamomma]

I'm using an absentee ballot and writing him in.

I'm sure he won't win, but IF he did then i'm just as sure that he wouldn't turn it down.

As far as 'withdrawing' from the race ... I don't know if he quit OR if he suspended his campaign. Those are different things.

Either way .. I'm still voting for him.

Originally posted by justamomma
you make it as though you are now agreeing w/ what ron paul stood for, but like so many of the obama crowd, you sold out bc you didn't think he stood a chance. am i understanding this correctly? you went w/ the more popular candidate? seems like ya'll are trying really hard to hook ppl into this idea. i have still yet to see anything of substance from any of y'all claiming that he is so great.

I agree with SOME of what Ron Paul stood (and stands) for. Some issues (abortion, gay adoption, drilling, church/state to name a few) I am in total opposition.

I am not sure what you mean by "sell out", but I was already leaning toward supporting Obama BEFORE Ron Paul ended his campaign. So I don't think it applies. He just made my choice easier by pulling out.

It's unfortunate that you used the phrase "like so many of the obama crowd, you sold out". That is a TOTALLY incorrect assumption on your part. And I'm sick to death of the assumptions. Could you have asked instead of assumed?

I'm also not trying to "hook people" into any idea. I asked about Ron Paul because I wanted to understand the likelihood of his campaign (or whatever you call it) being successful. I found myself asking "why are people still voting for Ron Paul? I thought he withdrew..." So I asked about it.

This thread was not intended to be about Obama (or the "Obama crowd") in any way.

I am in the same boat as BH.

I agree with some of the things Ron Paul stands for, on some others, I am strongly opposed.

I was an early Ron Paul supporter because he is an honest, decent man who would shake up the system a bit, something it clearly needs, and because I think he has some very good ideas.

I especially supported his return to a sensible non-interventionist foreign policy, and a less authoritarian approach at home. Those are what political strategists would refer to as my "core issues".

However, he is no longer a viable Presidential candidate - by his own admission.

Bob Barr is the Libertarian candidate AFAIK - but I'm not really a Libertarian anyway, though they've been a strong influence on me. But frankly, as a former Libertarian Party member, I now think Libertarian economics are as much science fiction as Marxism is

Anyway, as the Democratic primary progressed, I began to respect Obama more, for his fresh approach and logical positions on issues.

In fact there are only three issues on which I find myself disagreeing with him strongly - space policy, nuclear power, and gun control - and even on those issues he is far from the worst-case scenario.

However, I expect to see him take a less interventionist policy overseas, and a less authoritarian approach at home - generally the same core reasons I was originally supporting Ron Paul.

Would he accept the job?Yes if only to end the wars.I will vote a write in ballot if for no other reason than protest.I will never cast a vote for a canidate who has voted unconstitutionaly and I don't care if his name is McCain or Obama or mud.

Bob Barr is a viable alternative imo.

If you were going to vote for Paul and now will not then most likely you wouldn't be voting for Obama or McCain so Barr is someone you should look into.