GOP contender will not rule out third-party run
GOP hopeful Ron Paul on NBC's Meet The Press Sunday.
WASHINGTON (CNN) - Texas Rep. Ron Paul refused to rule out a third party bid Sunday if he fails to win the Republican Party presidential nomination.
When Tim Russert of NBC’s 'Meet the Press' asked the Texas congressman if he’d consider an independent bid, he replied: "I have no intention of doing that."
When pressed by Russert to state unequivocally that he would not, Paul demurred. "I deserve one weasel wiggle now and then, Tim!"
Paul lost to Phil Gramm in the 1984 Texas Republican primary for the U.S. Senate. Four years later, he ran for president as the Libertarian Party nominee.
The Republican presidential contender - who has an intensely loyal national following - is pulling in record fundraising sums, prompting speculation that he may continue his White House bid even if he does not fare well among Republican primary voters.
Paul is currently averaging single-digit showings in most recent surveys of GOP voters nationally and in early-voting states.
During the Sunday interview, Paul criticized the Civil Rights Act, pointing out that Barry Goldwater opposed it. But he would not say he whether would vote against the legislation today. "I get more support from black people than any other Republican candidate, according to some statistics," he added.
Paul also contended that the Civil War had been unnecessary because the United States would have gotten rid of slavery eventually.
From CNN Politics
- Elon Musk meets with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Hakeem Jeffries
- 10 Cards Charging 0% Interest Until 2024
- Untitled
- Man who threatened to detonate bomb near US Capitol pleads guilty
- Court releases video of attack on Paul Pelosi
- What to know about George Santos and his campaign finance issues as questions grow
Finally a blog on Dr. Ron Paul on CNN. unfortunately its all misquoted and taken out of context. Also CNN only brings up the sam old reaped question over and over again. Why not mention what he discussed on foreign policy issues CNN? I really do like you guys but you pick and chose some of the lamest things to right about. Please dont make me remove you from my Home Page.
thank you cnn for your unwaivering support in providing execellant motivation to the ron paul supporters by continuing to misquote him at every turn. these attempts to place him in a bad light serve as an inspiration to his supporters to re-double their campaigning efforts. it is laughable at this point and you serve the campaign well by providing comic relief to the grassroots supporters working every day to get the word out about ron paul. keep up the good work cause everyone needs a good laugh every now and then.
I feel bad for the people that write these tickers. Are they really too stupid to report accurately? Or are they just doing their job?
This was an awful piece of journalism. You actually work as a journalist professionally?
Please find a new career.
why should he rule it out,
the democracy isn't the sole property of the democrat and republican cartels.
why should he rule it out?
democracy isn't the sole property of the democrat and republican cartels
Mark-
I am saying the South at that time was not willing to cooperate with the North period. Whether it be Kansas as a Free State or "buying slaves".
Even many in the North were uncommitted to freeing the slaves. Did you know the Emancipation Proclamation came about as a result of the North getting their butts whipped time after time? It was a last ditch effort by Lincoln to win the war.
Regardless, this is the least of Paul's problems. Personally, I was disappointed. I wish someone with this message could communicate it and implement it successfully. Paul is not that guy.
And to whomever said that they are voting for Paul to "save the Republic", is doing nothing but wasting their vote.
Find a candidate with similiar ideas. The only guy I know who has the "original" Reagan philosophy, prior to him becoming a "traitor" (I know he said he never called Reagan a traitor, and I believe him)is Thompson. He is all about weak federal and strong state governments.
If you voters want a guy who espouses smaller, less invasive government,, take a look at what Ron Paul supports. I've never been a republican, but this guy has what it takes to make me reconsider.
To the rest of you folks who are comfortable with the goverenment doing your thinking for you and don't mind paying the price of OUR freedom,,,Go ahead on,, support one of the other power grabbing weasles running.
As an example,, housing prices are declining all over the country. What does government do? They access properties at higher than before the mortgage crunch and tax accordingly! Is this what government is supposed to do? I've read the constitution and bill of rights and I think not.
He could...its called the Libertarian party...which he has always been a member of....remember – take in his whole message – eliminating the CIA, the FBI...the Department of Education – 90% of his ideas are good...10% are insane....yes...exactly what this country doesn't need
What blatant lies!!! Ron Paul did NOT say the US would have gotten rid of slavery eventually, in fact he said the US was the ONLY westernized country who still had slaves at the time, which is quite an embarrassment. What he said was that there was a better way to end slavery than to have 600,000 Americans killed. He said it would've made more sense to buy the slaves and then SET THEM FREE. CNN, you need to take this completely inaccurate story off the ticker.
All we need to complete the circus of a Ron Paul third party bid would be a Al Gore Green Party run and a Mayor Bloomberg run. Hopefully his constituents will do the world a favor and not re-elect this clown.
Nice intentional misquote with the strikethrough fascists!
Disgusting.
The strike-through on the word "weasel" was cute. Does anyone mention the word "weasel" when Clinton fails to commit to a stance on the issues?!?!
Cant offend those who sign your paycheck though. If you actually engaged in journalism, you wouldn't have the pretty title of "Associate Political Editor," would you Rebecca?
If I wanted to be as cute as you, I would have put a HTML tag to make that read: ASSOCIATE
thank god for ron paul
Actually any third party venture by Ron Paul would be pretty much irrelevant. Because of his unrealistic stance on Iraq and his irrational isolationism, he would take just as many (if not more) votes from the democratic candidate as he would the republican candidate. Do you really think all of his internet donations are coming from republicans? HA! The lion's share is coming from anti-war democrats trying to sabotage the republican nomination process. However, when you look at the polls, it doesn't appear to be working very well. Right now the only candidate that Ron Paul is probably depriving of supporters is Dennis Kusinich.
Does Ms Sinderbrand still have a job as 'Associate Political Editor'?
Rebecca Sinderbrand, I understand the difficulty of reporting Paul's comments clearly in a short space, but this is shoddy. Instead of writing "would have gotten rid of slavery eventually," it would have been more accurate to write, "could have gotten rid of slavery another way."
Let me say one thing, for everyone who has looked at this and cried 'bad journalism'...
There is a thing called the Associated Press Stylebook. For every person who decries this article, I suggest you do some research on the topic. Her article is clear, concise, and does not break any of the fundamental principles. And with the way he said it, I heard Weasel. Unless there was a transcript after the show, or the show was scripted, she was not in the wrong.
As for the rest of it, she did what any actual reporter would do. She gathered, disseminated, edited, and produced a piece, and for something that probably won't go any farther than the Ticker. And she did it within reasonable boundaries and with integrity.
Do your research before you cry 'hit piece'. Oh, and while you're at it, do your research on your favorite candidate, and stop acting like children. And please, if you want to say something is 'bad journalism', learn some grammar and proper usage, you hypocrites.
Ron Paul will be the 2008 "spoiler" and responsible for a Hillary win (12/25/07). You may quote me on this in January 2009 if not before (wink, wink)!!
Go Hillary44 08! http://hillaryis44.org/
Having read many comments from regular Americans about Ron Paul I believe there is no doubt the Ron Paul revolution will prevail. The majority of the comments are pro Paul and that makes me ecstatic to realize how close we are to being the America our forefathers intended us to be. Ron Paul will get the nomination!
God Bless Ron Paul
Brian Glenn
AS SOON AS SOMEONE DOES WELL IN THE
CAMPAIGN, HE GETS A TARGET ON HIS
BACK. RON PAUL WAS JUST AWARDED HIS
TARGET. HE HAS GRADUATED FROM "TO BE
IGNORED", TO "WATCH OUT FOR THIS GUY.
MAKE HIM LOOK BAD OR HE WILL WIN".
HE CAN'T BE BOUGHT. HE WANTS TO
PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY (SEE H.R.219).
HE WANTS YOU TO KEEP YOUR WHOLE PAY CK.
HE WANTS TO END THIS WAR AND BRING ALL
TROOPS HOME FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD.
IT'S COSTING A TRILLION A YEAR. AND
HE WANTS TO CLOSE OUR BORDERS.
SOMETHING NEITHER THE REPUBS OR THE
DEMS HAVE DONE WHILE IN CONTROL.
READ THE CONSTITUTION. THE FEDS ARE
INVOLVED IN TOO MUCH UNCONSTITUIONAL
STUFF. RETURN STATES RIGHTS. WE ARE
FACING BIG BROTHER.
VOTE FOR RON PAUL TO SAVE THIS COUNTRY.
I just have one comment.
Where did this Fruit Cake come from?
After talking around with people of all stripes I've started to reconsider Ron Paul's overall viability in a general election. I'm starting the think now that Paul might be able to put together a winning coalition around the issues of isolationism and immigration. With Hillary Clinton's inability to make a firm stand on the illegal immigration issue, and her unwillingness to commit to a withdrawl from Iraq, Paul can draw on the one popular GOP strength while pinning Hillary into the GOP's greatest weakness (immigration and Iraq respectively). It's tentative, and I still doubt he'll survive the primaries, but Ron Paul could prove to be a formidable candidate.
Rebecca, do you have an agenda against Ron Paul? Ron criticized the Civil Rights act NOT because of race issues, but because it was an act that had certain points that gave up certain private liberties. Why would you leave out the he specifically stated that it was NOT a race issues but an issue of personal liberty?
And then Rebecca, you leave out Ron Paul's comments on the civil war, in which he states that 600,000 people shouldn't have died. Is it wrong for Paul to try to imagine a way to free slaves rather then war?
Rebecca, this is a biased article and it should be corrected and adjusted to portray Ron Paul's real views. Instead its tightly edited to hide the truth, and to reveal your personal views. Luckily smart American voters will see through this.
Dr. Ron Paul knows he has the responsibility to run to serve our country.