Why Ron Paul (Probably) Won't Leave the GOP

Reader Comments
Back to blog

And I shall join you.

chad of IL 11:14AM November 05, 2011

You dunderheads at USN&WR ought to proofread Ms Kim's reports:
"four states ... Texas, Mississippi, South Dakota, Ohio, and Texas"
How in tarnation do you allow this? Unless at your publication, four IS five.

jon in san jose of CA 1:54AM November 05, 2011

If Ron Paul is the Libertarian party's ideal candidate, then why not support him in his bid as a Republican candidate. His Libertarian views haven't changed since he ran in 1988.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Libertarians-for-Ron-Paul/293721443980929

Brandon of KY 7:39PM November 02, 2011

On the ballot or not, I'm voting for Ron Paul

JT of CO 1:27AM November 02, 2011

Doesn't matter. I am voting for him in the primary and in the election regardless whether he gets the nomination. I won't be guilty of electing the next poison liar into office. This ridiculous notion that me voting for Paul is a vote for Obama is stupid. I don't want any of the other Republican candidates to be the president any more than I want Obama in office again. They are the same person run by the same special interests groups on issues that matter. Look at how much has stayed the same since Bush!

GySgt Ski of PA 1:23AM November 02, 2011

Ron Paul doesn't have to run as a third party, nor worry about getting on ballots.
If he is not the Republican nominee... we are WRITING HIM IN ANYWAYS!!

1berty4All of TX 12:28AM November 02, 2011

The only reason Ron Paul is not running on a third party ticket is because he himself said he was not. Being that he's not a waffler, his decision will remain.
Whomever started that rumor doesn't understand that Ron Paul doesn't need to switch to the independent party. He's doing just fine on his own, and as the dust settles in the GOP campaign, there is one man standing: Ron Paul.

Mariangela of MA 12:03AM November 02, 2011

XFIFTYONE you nailed it like I would like to have done. I even thought of writing an email to the RNC telling them as much. I wrote in Ron Paul in 08 and went to bed knowing he wouldn't win, but that was fine by me and I slept well knowing I voted for the person I truly believed in, not someone sold to me by the D/R media machine. If the Republicans don't nominate Ron, they are dead in the water. He could garnish more independents and disaffected Democrats than any other. If any other candidate was even remotely stronger, they would have more support, but they are simply more of the same.

Jonathan Peterson of PA 11:14PM November 01, 2011

Why is it that the only time I hear about Doctor Paul running third party is when some media types ask, "Is Rpn Paul going to run third party?" Why doesn't the members of the fourth estate ask something meaningful such as, "How will cutting a trillion dollars in government spending help the economy?"

John of IA 9:30PM November 01, 2011

Why should Ron Paul leave the Republican party? He is leading it in the issues, which is turning it around. It was on the path of self destruction, and I think that the Bushes were the conductors. But now that the words of Ron Paul have been vindicated over and over, and people know he has been right all along about the economy, the endless spending on endless wars, the drug and food wars of prohibition on the public, the wars on the liberty of the citizens, he is leading on the issues, and making the other candidates look like criminal banking cartel butt buddies too.

Karizma of KS 7:50PM November 01, 2011