18 thoughts on “Ron Paul on the ballot in Montana

  1. NewFederalist

    Why didn’t he do this months ago? He could be on every state ballot on both the CP and LP line. I really think less of him for this. He supposedly is such a good friend of Baldwin. Why would he allow this to happen to a friend? Makes no sense to me.

  2. Fred Church Ortiz

    Why didn’t he do this months ago? He could be on every state ballot on both the CP and LP line.

    Because actively pursuing a third party run would damage his standing in his House caucus. In LA and MT, he can sit back and just let it happen – plausible deniability that would be unavailable to him should he have accepted the CP and/or LP nominations.

    He supposedly is such a good friend of Baldwin. Why would he allow this to happen to a friend?

    Montana already decided to dump Baldwin, independent of anything Paul could have said or done. Better they put RP on the ballot than Alan Keyes.

  3. Sivarticus

    The Constitution Party will get far more votes this way than with Baldwin in MT. It’s probably a good thing in the long run. And a much better choice than dumping Baldwin for that loser Keyes.

  4. Conquistador

    As I posted on BAN, the Constitution Party of Montana is actually unaffiliated with the national Constitution Party. Therefore, they didn’t dump Baldwin, they simply decided against endorsing him.

  5. SovereignMN

    In case anyone was wondering:

    Montana Caucus results on Feb 5, 2008:
    Candidate Votes Percentage
    Mitt Romney 625 38.39%
    Ron Paul 400 24.57%
    John McCain 358 21.99%
    Mike Huckabee 245 15.05%

    Montana non-binding primary on June 3, 2008:
    Candidate Votes Percentage
    John McCain 72,551 76.18%
    Ron Paul 20,452 21.48%
    No Preference 1,786 2.93%

    Peroutka received 1764 votes in Montana back in 2004.

  6. SovereignMN

    Last Rasmussen poll from Montana shows McCain leading Obama 45-44. Paul could be a big spoiler there, although it is “only” 3 electoral votes.

    Last Rasmussesn poll from Louisiana shows McCain leading Obama by 17 points. Paul most likely won’t be a factor there but as Trent mentioned, he could get 5% and qualify a new party.

  7. richardwinger

    Louisiana, since 2004, has made it fairly easy to qualify a new party. It doesn’t need to worry about polling 5% for president. It just needs 1,000 registrants.

  8. Trent Hill


    Quite aware of that. As I said, the qualification of the party isnt the true reason this started. There are thousands of people in Louisiana who want to be able to vote for Ron Paul–and wouldnt vote otherwise. We Ron Paul activists were treated like shit during and after the GOP Caucuses–this is our way of saying: “We wont go away. You have to court us, or suffer losses. We will not lie down, we will draw blood.”

  9. Trent Hill

    Im not keen on the VP either. Of all the people they could have picked that would have attracted attention–why Peroutka?

  10. Trent Hill

    He was one of the ringleaders,yes. But the defecting state CP’s didnt really have a problem with Baldwin–he also voted for disafilliation,albeit through clinched teeth.

  11. Peter Orvetti

    This from Politics1:

    GOP Congressman Ron Paul will see his name appear on Presidential primary ballots in November in two states: Montana and Louisiana. The Constitution Party of Montana, which is feuding with the national Constitution Party over the issue of abortion, has placed Paul on the Montana ballot as the party’s nominee instead of official CP nominee Chuck Baldwin. In Louisiana, a group of Paul supporters have succeeded in placing him on the ballot there under the label of the fictional Taxpayers Party. Montana is a hotly contested swing state this year, while Louisiana is fairly solid McCain state. Paul refused to make a deal with the RNC to grant him a prominent speaking slot at this week’s national convention in exchange for Paul endorsing McCain. Instead, Paul held a rival convention across town from the GOP convention.

Leave a Reply