In a long interview with Stephen Dubner, Ron Paul answered several questions about involvement with alternative parties, among many other subjects discussed. This is from part one of the interview:
Q: Even before the primaries, you said you would not run in the general election. Why specifically did you not run?
A: I was running for the Republican nomination, and I would have run in the general if I had won. I had little interest in running third party due to the inherent biases against such efforts. I also signed legally binding agreements not run third party in 2008 if I failed to win the G.O.P. primary. That was the cost for ballot access in several states, 11 total I believe. So even I had wanted to, it would not have been possible to run in the general after I lost the primary.
Q: Do you think people who relate more to the libertarian ideals of the Republican Party have a role to play in the Republican Party of the moment, and do you see a role for them in the coming (hopeful) rebuilding of the Republican Party?
A: I certainly hope so. The Republican Party has traditionally been the party of liberty and limited government. Republicans like Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan had very libertarian qualities. If the G.O.P. gets back to its roots, they can appeal once again to liberty-minded Americans.
Q: Do you think the efforts of the libertarian-minded are better spent forming a third party or joining the actual Libertarian Party?
A: I never try to tell people exactly what to do, so that’s up to them. However, I think the fact that I have remained in the Republican Party shows where I stand.
Q: What do you think are the most important steps to seeing greater access for third-party candidates? Is the root of the bipartisan problem more national or local in scope?
A: Bipartisan dominance exists at all levels, but it’s even more pronounced at the national level.
The biggest obstacle, I think, is inclusion in the national debates. To take part, you basically have to be a Democrat or a Republican. Unless that changes, a national third-party presidential candidate has little chance.
Q: Did Bob Barr’s failure to appear at your press conference endorsing the third-party vote cause a rift between you and him? Are you still friends with him?
A: That’s old news as far I’m concerned. I’m more interested in focusing on positive things Americans can accomplish moving forward.
11 responses so far ↓
1 Steve Rankin // Nov 14, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Interesting that he refers to the Republican Party as “they.”
Ron Paul evidently has no fear of being disciplined by the House GOP Conference for endorsing Chuck Baldwin.
2 citizen1 // Nov 14, 2008 at 6:37 pm
What could they do do him they all ready do not give him any chairmanships.
3 Galileo Galilei // Nov 14, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Amazing! An elected federal official who actually answers your questions.
4 G.E. // Nov 14, 2008 at 7:14 pm
That’s a lie and he knows it.
5 Arthur DiBianca // Nov 14, 2008 at 7:27 pm
G.E. is absolutely right. Many Republicans, especially RLC people, harbor this bizarre fantasy that the Republican Party was like an early version of the Libertarian Party until a few decades ago. Wrong. It never was.
Of course, it’s possible to pick out a few Republicans throughout history who were relatively libertarian, just like it’s possible to pick out some Democrats throughout history who were relatively libertarian.
6 G.E. // Nov 14, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Only there were a LOT, LOT, LOT more of them on the Democratic side up until the Progressive Era.
7 Galileo Galilei // Nov 14, 2008 at 8:30 pm
“G.E. // Nov 14, 2008 at 7:14 pm
The Republican Party has traditionally been the party of liberty and limited government.
That’s a lie and he knows it.”
That is not a lie, it is rhetoric. Aristotle would be proud of Paul.
8 G.E. // Nov 14, 2008 at 9:04 pm
It’s propaganda. Hitler would be proud, too.
9 JimDavidson // Nov 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm
I think the failure to answer the last question, is Ron still friends with Barr, speaks volumes in its silence.
10 Steve Rankin // Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 pm
#2: They could strip him of his seniority, just as the House Democrats stripped John Bell Williams of Mississippi and Albert Watson of South Carolina for backing Goldwater in ‘64.
Watson had little seniority, but Williams lost his committee chairmanship. Mississippi had voted 87.1% for Goldwater, and John Bell was looking toward the ‘67 governor’s race, which he won.
11 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 15, 2008 at 6:46 am
blah blah blah. Is Ron Paul capable of not sounding like a broken record? Why bother interviewing him, you will find your answer to every question in media archives.
I’d vote for him again, but his rhetoric is getting on my nerves now.
Leave a Comment