Ron Paul Should Leave The Republican Party

[Libertaire]

Originally Posted by motivez

Until the party starts showing some signs of moderating their social policies and showing a return to caring about fiscal discipline, I don't see why he doesn't change to the Libertarian Party myself.

I think he could have done well with a third party run on the LP ticket, but it looks like Barr will pick up a significant chunk of his supporters.. those who don't plan to write him in, anyway.

Is there any news on what he's doing with all that left over money? I think it'd be nice to see him support candidates running for Congress (probably the House is more likely to see results than the Senate at this point) who share his philosophy.. it's better than sitting around just getting him re-elected every few years, and having more people in Congress who share his beliefs would put pressure on the GOP to start making that shift

What I thought was odd was that Paul's main differences with the LP were borders and abortion, yet they nominated a pro-life/pro-border security candidate, Bob Barr.
Ron Paul has said on numerous occasions that his message wouldn't have got out through the LP, but through the medium of trying to influence the RP he could get his message out. He was right.
I dare say that if it weren't for Ron Paul, most people would not have even heard of Bob Barr v.2008.
What about Paul's money? I don't know the campaign finance rules regarding this, but the Campaign for Liberty seems to be Ron Paul 2008 reformed. One of its strategies is to promote "candidates for public office who share our commitment to freedom."

[motivez]

Cool then, I'm glad to see it going to uses that his supporters would most likely agree with instead of sitting around in his coffers doing less 'good'

I think if the LP really focused all of their energy on getting people elected to the House in some key districts they could use that as a spring board to become a true national party, but until they show people that they've governed on that national level, it's going to be extremely hard for mainstream America to take them seriously

[Libertaire]

Originally Posted by motivez

Cool then, I'm glad to see it going to uses that his supporters would most likely agree with instead of sitting around in his coffers doing less 'good'

I think if the LP really focused all of their energy on getting people elected to the House in some key districts they could use that as a spring board to become a true national party, but until they show people that they've governed on that national level, it's going to be extremely hard for mainstream America to take them seriously

One concept that the media and a lot of voters had a hard time grasping about Ron Paul was that he talks morality and means it. Most had never seen a member of government behave that way. Myself included.

I agree with you on the LP. The truth is that it's hard to get libertarians (little l) organized. Many of them don't even vote. Ron Paul had broader appeal than Libertarian (big L) candidates have had in the past. He appealed to social liberals and social conservatives alike. He made a significant impact.
The Libertarian Party does need to get a foothold on local elections instead of focusing on the national ones. They need to get out of this 'one size fits all' mentality. For instance: A Libertarian in Vermont may not be of the same mould as one in Alabama. They have to be more willing to accept that there are different, but consistent, paths to lesser government. I like to use certain figure heads as an example. One could be more of the Ayn Rand mould, yet the other be more like Murray Rothbard. They both had similar goals, but understood human behavior in different ways. The LP has to be willing to accept that.

[kombayn]

^Agreed. The Libertarian Party had a big divide once Bob Barr was elected as the Ruwart-Supporters were pissed. Quite a few prominent members in the LP have left recently too. It's just like the Ron Paul supporters, they break to Bob Barr or a lesser to Chuck Baldwin. But still a substantial chunk of them. I think Bob Barr needs to stop playing to RP supporters, he needs to go after Conservatives. That's the bread and butter, he needs to push hard for them. Ralph Nader needs to push extremely hard to the Progressives. Both can make a nice splash this year. I'm talking 3 to 5%

[Libertaire]

Originally Posted by kombayn

^Agreed. The Libertarian Party had a big divide once Bob Barr was elected as the Ruwart-Supporters were pissed. Quite a few prominent members in the LP have left recently too. It's just like the Ron Paul supporters, they break to Bob Barr or a lesser to Chuck Baldwin. But still a substantial chunk of them. I think Bob Barr needs to stop playing to RP supporters, he needs to go after Conservatives. That's the bread and butter, he needs to push hard for them. Ralph Nader needs to push extremely hard to the Progressives. Both can make a nice splash this year. I'm talking 3 to 5%

I'm most likely voting for Barr, but I really wish he would make a bigger deal out of key Ron Paul issues like monetary policy (like Baldwin does) and foreign policy. Barr is someone who once lived in Iran. He should speak out more about that and the history and origin of the Iranian situation. He needs more Pauline advisors.
On the recent state-by-state online Zogby poll Barr is at 6%. It breaks down like so:
"Bob Barr receives the support of 7% of voters who identify themselves as conservative or very conservative voters. Barr gets 43% of libertarians and 11% of independents." Source
Like you said, it would behoove him to appeal to the Ron Paul supporters and libertarians in general.