Chamblee54

When PG was assembling the previous post , he found a Michael Medved link redirected to Town Hall. While visiting this rancid repository of wingnut wank, PG saw a link to this story: Ron Paul: ‘I Won’t Rule Out Third Party Run’.
It seems as though the Doctor was on the Sean Hannity show recently. Mr. Hannity asked the Doctor about third party rumors, and the politician would only say ” I have no plans”. To those familiar with talkshow game playing, this means that Dr. Paul is playing the media game again. The odds are he will not run as a third party candidate. If that were the case, then PG wouldn’t have anything to write about, and you could just look at the pictures. (Pictures today are from The Library of Congress ).
Third party candidates do not win, but they can determine who will win. In 1992, Ross Perot got enough Repub votes to swing the election to Bill Clinton. In 2000. Ralph Nader got enough votes in Florida to throw that states electoral votes into chaos. If we had a plurality based popular vote for POTUS, there is no telling what would happen. (Which might be why neither major party wants to change the system.) When the rocket science of the electoral college is considered, a few percentage points in the right state could make the difference.
How a Ron Paul third party would play out is a good question. Dr. Paul is UGLY. Compared to BHO and Mitt Romney, he looks like a mad scientist. There is a possibility that the ugly people of America will feel solidarity with Dr. Paul, and vote the pretty candidates out.
The “conventional wisdom” is the Ron Paul would take votes away from the Republicans. PG is neither conventional nor wise. There is a good chance that a Ron Paul Third Party run would hurt BHO. (Maybe he could name the party after his son’s namesake, the Ayn Party.)
BHO has disappointed many of his followers. People who voted for hope and change, but have gotten bailouts and drone strikes. The one percent supported BHO, and has profited from the arrangement.
The one thing that PG likes about Ron Paul is his opposition to the wars in Stan Land. BHO was kinda sortof opposed to these wars, when he was a candidate. Since his election, he has repaid the merchants of death who contributed to his campaign. The possibility that a pacifist might give up on BHO is real.
The dissatisfaction with the status quo typified by the occupation movement goes beyond the liberal/conservative paradigm. People want real change, not a cosmetic shuffling of the political party in charge. Ron Paul has numerous flaws. However, he would offer a choice to the glamor saturated BHO supporters.