Ron Paul Dumps Republican Party

Ron Paul Recants The GOP, Just Says No To Keynesians

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/31/2012 08:26 -0400


As we anticipate more demand-rigging, pump-priming, can-kicking experiments from Bernanke today, Ron Paul just came out with his latest stream of truthiness (via Bloomberg):

• *REP. PAUL SAYS BOTH PARTIES KEYNESIANS, GOP 'NOT HIS
  PARTY'
• *REP. PAUL SAYS FED PRICE FIXING
• *REP. PAUL SAYS FED FLOODING MARKET WITH MONEY

Indeed, what is the opposite of 'between a rock and a hard place' when deciding on just who will provide 'change' in November.

I wish he'd come right out and do it/say it!

Is an independent run possible at this point?

I saw a TV ad yesterday from Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party's presidential nominee who was wooing Ron Paul to run as his VP candidate.

That is a very smart thing for Gary Johnson to do. He would get all the Ron Paul supporters plus a whole lot more disaffected republicans. It isn't over for Ron Paul. He's not endorsing Mitt for Brains. Also, as he was due to fly out of St Petersburg, the TSA was giving him and his family some harassment before allowing them to get on the plane.


Hatha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

Is an independent run possible at this point?

---

Yes, but most unlikely. Paul is tired and no doubt discouraged. The people are not ready for his message and his leadership. There will have to be much more misery and suffering under the new anointed one before a critical mass of people will say enough is enough. It will probably be too late at that point. Frankly, I think we have already passed beyond the point of no return, economically, fiscally and politically.

Here's the Bloomberg Video cited by Durden, sorry no embed.

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/ron-p...hCKVxx6VA.html

An indy run is not feasible at this point, too many sore loser laws and too late in the game. But joining up with the LP would sure poke a stick up the GOP's ass :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

Is an independent run possible at this point?

---

No. Too many varying state rules.

If RP did it, I might consider voting that ticket. Maybe they could switch positions (Gary Johnson VP, Ron Paul Pres.)?

Personally, I don't think Ron Paul would do that.

I'll vote GJ either way, if Ron got on board that'd be even better. The only reason I'm even voting is out of spite, hoping that the numbers (IF reported honestly) will send a BIG FY to the GOP. After this though I'm done and will be un-registering.

If that happened, Obama would win, and the Libertarian Party would get by far the biggest victory in its history (I would guess 10-20% of voters, maybe even a bit more).

GJ/LP will still get a HUGE bump in votes even if RP isn't on the ballot, there's a huge segment of RP'ers, indy's, D's and some R's that are defecting. Yeah, they'll blame the RP'ers but they know they lost it all on their own and probably on purpose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libertytree

I'll vote GJ either way, if Ron got on board that'd be even better. The only reason I'm even voting is out of spite, hoping that the numbers (IF reported honestly) will send a BIG FY to the GOP. After this though I'm done and will be un-registering.

---

In 2008, I wrote in Ron Paul's name. (As well as the primaries in 2008 and 2012). But voting for Gary Johnson as the headline name on the Libertarian ticket might actually be a better strategy this time around. More of an expression that the two-party system is a corrupt bank-owned scam. Good idea LT. Hold off on un-registering; this may be a strategy to build upon.

We're voting for Johnson too. In fact, I was just about to put my new bumper sticker on my car that the campaign sent us after making a contribution:).

Why doesn't the Constitution Party get more traction here? Seems to fit our general ideals a bit better than the Libertarian Party, who seem to only want to support supposively reformed Republicans.

I'm now voting for Virgil Goode, Constitution Party.The Libertarian Party wants to let everybody do whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt or bother someone else, even if it is morally wrong,..... baby killing, queers marrying, etc. The impression I got from Ron Paul was that he was personally against these things. The states rights he promoted made me think that possibly there could become a state that I would want to live in.

I'm all for letting people do their own thing as long as it doesn't hurt someone else. In that sense, I could be a libertarian. The sad fact is that the Libertarian party supports abortion and that definitely hurts someone else.

I understand that there are a lot of pro life libertarian candidates, but Johnson is not one of them. This time around, I'll probably just stay home.

I hope the mindless sheep republicans are happy with where their voting strategy has gotten them. Not one of the top three parties fielded a pro life candidate this time. It was supposed to be a flagship issue for these people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goldleaf

I'm now voting for Virgil Goode, Constitution Party.The Libertarian Party wants to let everybody do whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt or bother someone else, even if it is morally wrong,..... baby killing, queers marrying, etc. The impression I got from Ron Paul was that he was personally against these things. The states rights he promoted made me think that possibly there could become a state that I would want to live in.

---

Wouldn't it be nice to live in a state that reflected how you thought? That's how it was set up by the founders unless I'm very mistaken. All 50 states could drive in the best direction for themselves and we'd all have a choice. Me, I prefer to let God sort out the morals as I'm not fit to judge anyone and they're not fit to judge me. The majority of my voting life has been with the LP for that very reason but that's not to say that I agree with everything that hard core libertarians think either.

At this point, why do you people even concern yourselves* with 'voting'?? ??? lol

*I defy you to name ONE good reason for 'voting' (other than for county offices).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnight rambler

At this point, why do you people even concern yourselves* with 'voting'?? ??? lol

*I defy you to name ONE good reason for 'voting' (other than for county offices).

---

I reckon that it's just one of the old remnants that even us "types" have held onto, for better or worse, right or wrong. At this point I wouldn't even put up an argument to try and defy your challenge except for the small caveat that it made me feel a little better for some stupid, strange reason, even though I know I know better.

On a related note...Let it not be said that millions of us didn't try to work within the system only to have the system tell us to fuck off and when the SHTF I can act accordingly with a very clean conscious. After what I've witnessed this go round I understand that there are NO rules and I will make my own up as I see fit when I see fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libertytree

On a related note...Let it not be said that millions of us didn't try to work within the system only to have the system tell us to fuck off and when the SHTF I can act accordingly with a very clean conscious. After what I've witnessed this go round I understand that there are NO rules and I will make my own up as I see fit when I see fit.

---

Why not make it reciprocal? Tell them to fuck off. Remove yourself from the voting rolls. I think eventually, many millions will figure that one out and do it. No harm in being an 'early adopter'.

Hatha

J. Ventura had the best idea of doing away with parties all together.

Would that be Libertarian, or Puritan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horn

J. Ventura had the best idea of doing away with parties all together.

Would that be Libertarian, or Puritan?

---

but then how would the millions of mindless masses know who to vote and cheer for without a trusty R or D next to their name as a point of reference :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horn

J. Ventura had the best idea of doing away with parties all together.

Would that be Libertarian, or Puritan?

---

Neither. It would be a good idea. The only viable option is to go to a multi-party system and depend on coalitions. My hope is that the Republican party basically just killed itself, which could lead to another party or two.

'Voting' is political allegiance to this system. Do you morally align yourself with the 10 Planks? Because that is what you live under.

No one man is going to or can change this system. It will take 100 million INDIVIDUALS to decide to start living their lives responsibly and without Government handouts OF ALL KINDS.

I will repeat it: If you vote or are registered to do so you fully support the Communist Manifesto, you fully support the DEATH of the Individual and you fully support the abolition of Private Property, because those are the tenents of this system.

Do the right thing, and politically GET OUT of the United States.

It's time to revive the Anti-Federalist party.

Dead Rabbits 2016

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sui Juris

'Voting' is political allegeince to this system. Do you morally align yourself with the 10 Planks? Because that is what you live under.

No one man is going to or can change this system. It will take 100 million INDIVIDUALS to decide to start living their lives responsibly and without Government handouts OF ALL KINDS.

I will repeat it: If you vote or are registered to do so you fully support the Communist Manifesto, you fully support the DEATH of the Individual and you fully support the abolition of Private Property, because those are the tenents of this system.

Do the right thing, and politically GET OUT of the United States.

---

If that is true, then so is using Federal Reserve Notes, owning a passport, driving on interstate highways, etc.

"...And no one could buy or sell anything without that mark..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

Neither. It would be a good idea. The only viable option is to go to a multi-party system and depend on coalitions. My hope is that the Republican party basically just killed itself, which could lead to another party or two.

---

Well, the Tea Party was born, but was quickly co-opted by the GOP and money powers. How is that not going to happen again? We can call the parties whatever we want, but the only ones that will ever be in the face of the voting cattle will be the ones supported by those with the printing presses. Watch out, here comes the Libertarian Express.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VX1

Well, the Tea Party was born, but was quickly co-opted by the GOP and money powers. How is that not going to happen again? We can call the parties whatever we want, but the only ones that will ever be in the face of the voting cattle will be the ones supported by those with the printing presses. Watch out, here comes the Libertarian Express.

---

True, what a disappointment. But, the Tea Party is not a political party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horn

J. Ventura had the best idea of doing away with parties all together.

Would that be Libertarian, or Puritan?

---

He endorsed Gary Johnson you know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWLRm5E8rmk

I'm seriously looking at Gary Johnson. I don't give a fuck about abortion personally. It's none of my business. I know he wont win, but it's a protest vote.

The point is to show our Masters how unhappy we are with our slavery. Maybe they can throw us a carrot or an apple into our pen to calm us down. My slave collar is sweaty on my neck today by the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

Neither. It would be a good idea. The only viable option is to go to a multi-party system and depend on coalitions. My hope is that the Republican party basically just killed itself, which could lead to another party or two.

---

Or go with an Original Founders party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democra...publican_Party

I think it should be called the "Less Government For Reals Party". That way the Elite will have a harder time explaining away when they infiltrate it and have their Uber-Statist Warmonger plants always win elections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnight rambler

At this point, why do you people even concern yourselves* with 'voting'?? ??? lol

*I defy you to name ONE good reason for 'voting' (other than for county offices).

---

The problem with not voting is that you get lumped in with the huge group of people who are just too fucking lazy or uninformed to vote, so your non-vote will get interpreted as such. In fact, the opportunity to vote legitimately is a good thing, but the problem is that it's legitimacy has been corrupted. By voting for a party outside the corrupt entrenched Republicans and Democrats, you are expressing that you value your right to vote, but you refuse to comply with the stranglehold two-party paradigm by bothering to take the time and effort to vote against it.

Look at it this way. Your action is going to be interpreted as supporting one of these four groups:

% of Republican Slaves
% of Democrat Slaves
% of People Refusing to submit to corrupt two-party slavery
% of Stupid Lazy People

You don't want to be confused as part of that last group. With each passing election, you'd like to see a bigger percentage appearing in that third group. That third group is your "candidate", even if it includes votes for Jill Stein, because it represents a movement toward busting up the century-long two-party headlock.

Also, the "not voting" route is too fatalistic. It's inconsistent with the ApocalOptimist philosophy! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shami-Amourae

He endorsed Gary Johnson you know.
...
I'm seriously looking at Gary Johnson. I don't give a fuck about abortion personally. It's none of my business. I know he wont win, but it's a protest vote.

The point is to show our Masters how unhappy we are with our slavery. Maybe they can throw us a carrot or an apple into our pen to calm us down. My slave collar is sweaty on my neck today by the way.

---

I'm starting to like this Gary Johnson idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

Also, the "not voting" route is too fatalistic. It's inconsistent with the ApocalOptimist philosophy! ;)

---

What if you just voted within your state run elections, and nothing for the National Administration/Presidential.

As it is a position dictatorial in nature, to pushing a red button.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

The problem with not voting is that you get lumped in with the huge group of people who are just too fucking lazy or uninformed to vote, so your non-vote will get interpreted as such.

---

The 'vote' of each of these characters in the images below counts every bit as much as yours. lol The joke's on you! lolololololol

http://doctorbulldog.files.wordpress...t-shirts02.jpghttp://bobmccarty.com/wp-content/upl...-mug-shots.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnight rambler

The 'vote' of each of these characters in the images below counts every bit as much as yours. lol The joke's on you! lolololololol

---

And who is assigned to determine who should vote?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

And who is assigned to determine who should vote?

---

The way America started out one could only 'vote' as an 'elector' if: 1) one was a man, and 2) one owned land.

Now 'those *assigned* to determine who should vote' want to include illegal aliens...oops, pardon me, I believe the term is now 'undocumented aliens'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

The problem with not voting is that you get lumped in with the huge group of people who are just too fucking lazy or uninformed to vote, so your non-vote will get interpreted as such. In fact, the opportunity to vote legitimately is a good thing, but the problem is that it's legitimacy has been corrupted. By voting for a party outside the corrupt entrenched Republicans and Democrats, you are expressing that you value your right to vote, but you refuse to comply with the stranglehold two-party paradigm by bothering to take the time and effort to vote against it.

Look at it this way. Your action is going to be interpreted as supporting one of these four groups:

% of Republican Slaves
% of Democrat Slaves
% of People Refusing to submit to corrupt two-party slavery
% of Stupid Lazy People

You don't want to be confused as part of that last group. With each passing election, you'd like to see a bigger percentage appearing in that third group. That third group is your "candidate", even if it includes votes for Jill Stein, because it represents a movement toward busting up the century-long two-party headlock.

Also, the "not voting" route is too fatalistic. It's inconsistent with the ApocalOptimist philosophy! ;)

---

I've thought those same things but anymore I'm thinking they'll just report the same ol' byline "the LP got .0001% of the vote" nothing to see here move along, you wasted your vote etc.. When we can see how openly the system is rigged and how little anyone cares to look even just a little it's damn disheartening. The crap the GOP pulled was in full view of everyone and what happened? NOTHING! The silence is deafening and that silence is pure complicity...what else can explain it? And to imagine that all this happened in this age of technology! This shit would have been yelled from the rooftops a 100 yrs ago and the scum would have been called to account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midnight rambler

The way America started out one could only 'vote' as an 'elector' if: 1) one was a man, and 2) one owned land.

---

I don't think the "man" thingy is going to go over too well these days.

I think the original idea was "one vote per responsible family". Right now a lot of couples cancel each other's votes (and that is probably by design).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnQPublic

I don't think the "man" thingy is going to go over too well these days.

I think the original idea was "one vote per responsible family". Right now a lot of couples cancel each other's votes (and that is probably by design).

---

Well, that's the root of the problem, isn't it?