Article Image
IPFS News Link • Politics: Republican Campaigns

Why Ron Paul is still in the presidential race

•, By Peter Grier

First off, Mitt Romney has pretty much won the GOP nomination. That means the single-digit chance Congressman Paul had of sitting in the White House has now fallen to a number perilously close to zero.

Second, the trail is long, and the days are hard. Food is bad and sleep is limited. It can be tough to find the time to get in a good walk in the morning and an afternoon bike ride, as Paul likes to do.

“When I don’t get my adequate amount of exercise I get very grouchy,” admitted Paul last week during an interview with John Stossel on Fox Business News.

But Paul remains in it, if not to win it, then to promote his ideas. He’s long said that he wants to build a political movement as much as anything else, and if you look at his upcoming events, they remain heavy on appearances at colleges, which remain his most fertile ground for winning converts.

10 Comments in Response to

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

No, you don't thank me ... you should thank the IRS for catching Larken Rose as a tax cheat [synonymous to catching a crook] and for throwing the culprit in jail -- a lesson to other would-be tax evaders, and also you should thank Annonymous75 for exposing him as a dangerous sociopath. My advice to you is that if you believe that what you and Larken Rose are doing are the same as you just mentioned, you don't need to implicate others. Just speak for yourself. Except yourself, nobody wants to be compared to Larken Rose as a tax felon, an ex-convict and a proven pyschopath on record.  If you are really sincere in what you just said that what Larken Rose had been doing and what you have been doing are the same, you can go the nearest police station and confess that like Larken Rose you have been cheating the IRS ... that you have not been paying your federal taxes for many years! For surrendering voluntarily, the IRS might give you extenuating circumstances and reduce your fine and jail term. ... Now you can go ahead -- you may thank me for this friendly advice.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Oh, by the way, JV, there is a lot of stuff about the basics of Government that never gets said. Or if it is said, it is usually outside of concise, to-the-point form. Lot's of the things that I say and write at least bring up ideas in the minds of readers.

I may be wrong about some things that I say, and I may express some things in ways that people do not understand clearly. But what I say gets people thinking along lines that they may not have thought in before. This is the same kind of thing that Ernie and Powell and Larken are doing.

Now, I want to thank you, JV, a whole lot, for all of your criticisms of all 4 of us, and of all the folks who do the same kinds of point-making that we do. Because if we didn't have folks like you around, with the critical views that you express - whether or not those views are sincere methods in your eyes for keeping America strong - we would not be bringing up the many points that we do about how things are operating, both within Government, and among the people.

So, thanks again.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Since Ron Paul is part of the Federal Government, does this mean he is demonizing himself? How foolish. Government is as Government does.

The only way the United States Government changes is through Governmental action. People outside of Government may attempt all kinds of methods for moving Government officials to change Government. But it is the Government officials that ultimately do the changing of Government. This means that it is Government that changes itself.

The election process is one of the few - and probably the major - ways that Government accepts changes from the outside. Since the election process is a legal and lawful method that Government uses to change itself, nobody working within that process can demonize Government. Nobody working within that process can harm or destroy government.

The harming of government comes about when people and officials within Government do not follow Government processes. When Government people break their Oath of Office, that is when government is being harmed.

Now, compare all the major Government officials, the President, Senate, House, and Judicial, people, and their Oath of Office and their actions in office, compare this with what the Constitution and the laws say should be done in Government. And make the comparison with regard to both the legalism of the Constitution and laws, and also the SPIRIT of the Constitution and laws.

When you do this, you will find that Ron Paul is way more of an upholder of Government than virtually all of the rest of the major governmental officials in office.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

When Lincoln said in his Gettysburg Address, "...and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth," what was he talking about? Wasn't he expressing for all to hear that the people are self governing?

Now, I don't agree with a whole lot of what Lincoln did in office. And I probably wouldn't agree with a whole bunch of his personal philosophy, but the, above, line from his Gettysburg Address is where Government should be.

We the People don't need Washington, D.C., in our lives. D.C. in our lives destroys the Government. Which Government does it destroy? The government of the people, by the people, for the people.

The Federal Government's job is to protect us from enemies outside our land, and from those within our land. We are not one of our enemies. But when Federal Government steps into our affairs, Government itself is becoming our enemy. Why? Because it is destroying the self Government of the people, a thing that Lincoln said should not perish from the earth.

If you are among those that like the Federal Government messing in your affairs, then you are asking for a position wherein someone else governs you rather than you being self governing.

The point is that Ron Paul is attempting to get Federal government out of our lives so that we can be self governing. This means that Ron Paul is for Big Government, big Government where it is supposed to be, with the people, not in Washington, D.C..

Have you called your Senator this morning to find out if you should wear the green socks, or the red ones?

Vote Ron Paul 2012. If he is not on the ballot, write him in. Record the event with your cell-cam.

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

As if you are denying that Ron Paul is a known [notorious is the appropriate word, maybe?] critic of the U.S. Federal Government. If you think that he is not a hostile critic of the U.S. Federal Government and an activist "enemy" of our existing System of Government --- i.e. get rid of the Fed, income tax, etc., which is impossible but possible to the "enemy" of the State as anti-Government protesters he incites against the Government march down the street – then let’s stop this discussion.

I will grant further for the sake of argument, that Ron Paul is not the "enemy" of the Government he demonized, and granting furthermore that he is not saying in public that those who are with him should rise in arms against the Government that he publicly and severely criticized to the point of open rebellion, does he have any control of his followers the New Hampshire newspaper described as angry and violent revolutionary supporters from the "lunatic fringe"? If you say he can, then end of the discussion.

I need someone with a RATIONAL mind who can discuss with me this issue to find out if Ron Paul’s perennial failure or everlasting defeat in running for president is merely SYMBOLIC of his supporters’ "desire" to create a nationwide "Movement" under his name. I always hear this ridiculous claim that he is there NOT to win but only to create a "Movement" for his "ideas" and "beliefs" which of course the American public rejects ["unelectable"].

Having said that, I do maintain the proposition that for him to create such "Movement" is impossible because out-of-control followers from the "lunatic fringe" will see to it that the FBI and the agents of the Homeland Security will do their job in rounding them up one by one until none is left standing, for the protection and safety of the American public, and for reason of national security. The passage of the National Defense Authorization Act into law had already prepared the U.S. Federal Government law enforcement authorities to precisely do this task – believe me.


Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Enough journalistic qualities are there so that one would almost think that something logical is being said. Note: "... by the time he creates an anti-Government movement... ."

If this is being applied to Ron Paul, it is difficult to see in what way. After all, Ron Paul is running for a Government office in the Governmentally prescribed way. In addition, his whole platform is based on keeping Government in the area that it is supposed to be in, a legal and lawful area. So, Ron Paul's movement is a movement to make Government more Government, if that is possible.

Such silly talk. Talk that suggests RP is anti-government. Or is it silly after all? Maybe it is being spoken on purpose, for an entirely anti-American purpose... an attempt to destroy the American Government. You know, the American Government that Ron Paul is trying to build back up and strengthen.

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Your opinion is as good as everybody else, but not as good as mine. If what Ron Paul is running for and what he was saying all those years while he was a candidate for president in every presidential year for decades now are what the people like, he would have at least won a presidential nomination for president. But he always either failed or become a drop-out even before the national convention to choose a candidate begins – he is always rejected by the general public. What does that mean to you?


Of course as usual, you can always grab a truckload of your own meanings from Cloud 9, for all I care!


But to me it is simple -- the people didn't want Ron Paul at all, or like his ideas, notwithstanding whatever you say or want to say to rationalize the people’s total rejection of him as a do-nothing politician in Congress! On the contrary, and precisely because of  his so-called “ideas”, didn’t the Media, specifically the New Hampshire newspaper call him and his ideas and beliefs “odds” coming from the “lunatic fringe”?  C’mon, no politics – just the honest, plain truth of what I am saying to you.


Of course you would always say he did not win because of this, that, and that … you would always find something to blame. But that doesn’t work – the people treat your kindergarten-like excuses simply as garbage, and you still don’t get.  It is hard for you to accept the truth that Ron Paul is “unelectable” candidate for president mainly because of what he stands for, and because of his “weird ideas” that the American people consider inimical to their interest.


I have expounded on this impossibility for him to become President of the United States many times which is your eternal fixation, like the impossibility of the crow turning white! But it couldn’t reach heads that are buried under the sand.


If his perennial loses or rejection of the people in those presidential election years makes him a glutton for punishment, the more that the people will look down on him, especially on his handlers who no doubt have their own ulterior motive and are looked down with contempt.


In the campaign trail, you can hear the quivering voice of an old man when he speaks with emotion draining him out like a spent battery. Ron Paul is the oldest running candidate, and his nerves are failing because of old age. A beaten man can only take so much indignity before he loses his pride and self-respect. Being used by others only for commercial purposes like getting publicity, ads and contributions while donors have no idea where the campaign fund is going is so grossly unchristian, to say the least!


On the other hand, if his political oddity is merely considered as symbolic of creating an anti-Government “Movement”, I reiterate the last paragraph of my comment below: To create a "movement" ... What movement ... by the time he creates an anti-Government movement, the FBI Watch List will be a kilometer long that the Government has to do something about it -- round them up one by one until none of them is left standing. Why do you think we are passing more national security laws [i.e. the latest is NDAA] aside from a truckload of them already existing?


Figure it out!


Read again the title of this article. Can you find a better answer than this?



Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

In America, ever since the Constitution was put in place, freedom of speech has been one of the top freedoms. It has always been especially so with regard to politics. The important thing about the freedom of speech has always been, the freedom to speak, rather than what is being said.

If the Obama crowd gets up and says, blah,blah, blah, this, that, and the other... that's okay. Why? Freedom of speech in America.

If the Romney crowd gets up and says, blah,blah, blah, this, that, and the other... that's okay. Why? Freedom of speech in America.

If the Ron Paul crowd gets up and says, blah,blah, blah, this, that, and the other... that's okay. Why? Freedom of speech in America.

But if someone gets up and uses his free speech to say blah,blah, blah, this, that, and the other, and... Ron Paul is bad when he uses his freedom of speech... you gotta wonder if that someone is against the Ron Paul philosophy... or if he is against freedom of speech, thereby being against America.

Again, when someone is against the basic freedoms that make America, and especially the freedom to speak and the freedom to run for political office, you need to ask if that someone isn't against America. It sounds a little like he might be a Commie parading as a journalist.

Comment by Sam Weathersby
Entered on:

Wow!! Some fool is calling us the lunatic fringe.  Considering the apparent 'progressive' Spooky Dude source, I am taking the bilge water drivel as a compliment, 'left' handed as it is.

Getting the fed govt back to the Constitution; cutting spending, ending undeclared war, returning state rights & personal freedom; repealing the 'Patriot' Act, the indefinite part of the NDAA, auditing the 'Fed', sound $$...

Yeah. Those are lunatic fringe alright.

 Accusing Ron Paul of stealing $ is a low thing, snail trail time. 

 This numbnuts needs to go back to Media Matters & report a big FAIL!

 That this clown leaves no citations is not new. Radical lib 0 supporters from the left do that all the time. Drive by lies are the stock in trade for Rules For Radicals land.


Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Why Ron Paul is still in the campaign trail even though at this point he is considered as resigned or a dropped out?

One, for the money. This is obvious. There is no law against pocketing "donations" so long as you are not caught. I blocked the incoming e-mail, still it keeps coming asking for donation.

Two, as a spokesman of dissenters from the "lunatic fringe", he has to stay for a little while as a way of thanking followers for their support and contributions!

All other reasons like "picking up delegates" are hogwash! Picking up delegates when he is definitely quitting the presidential nomination race makes no sense. What for?

To create a "movement" ... What movement ... by the time he creates an anti-Government movement, the FBI Watch List will be a kilometer long that the Government has to do something about it -- round them up one by one until none of them is left standing. Why do you think we are passing more national security laws [i.e. the latest is NDAA] aside from a truckload of them already existing? Figure it out!