Is Being a Republican Hurting Ron Paul's Chances?

By Nick Poma, published Sep 17, 2007
Published Content: 278  Total Views: 91,859  Favorited By: 43 CPs
Rating: 4.6 of 5
I was sitting here going through the myriad of Ron Paul videos and online opinion pieces when I got the idea to try to email a video sample of why Ron Paul should be President. The first reply came back rather rapidly. The main idea of the response was that while Ron Paul touched on many truths, my friend stated that he felt that Ron Paul was fake just like the other politicians making their bid for the Whitehouse.

I wasn't quite sure of what to make of this. I mean I have been listening and following Ron Paul for some time and I do not see anything fake about him. In fact, Ron Paul has been one of the most steady and reliable men in the Congress that I can recall. Therefore, I was left with the enigma of why someone would believe that Ron Paul is as fake as the rest of the politicians.

It is my belief that many Americans are conditioned to believe that all politicians are liars and it does not matter which party they hail from. The bias is automatically generated when the idea of politics is brought up. So what is it that has brought Americans to this point of Sinicism? Well, it comes from years of people witnessing the behavior of politicians. In many instances, the American people have been left feeling that the politicians have not been acting in the people's best interest. It seems as though this feeling of disenfranchisement has only increased in recent years.

America has for the most part become that which the founding fathers did not intend it to be, a two party system. It is a corrupted system, which does not rely on the true character of the individual running for office, but instead how much money that person can raise. The American people have also been manipulated into dividing themselves into two groups. This is the Republicans and the Democrats. Of course there is a sprinkling of third parties, but there again the American people have been brainwashed into believing that if you vote for a third party then, "You are throwing away your vote."

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
 
I disagree with Lenora Murdock's assertion that thrid party candidiates "main purpose" has been to split the vote among the undecided. Their "main effect" may have been to draw away voters, but it was not their intent. Their purpose is to offer an alternative to the entrenched condidates and policies of the Republicans and Democrats. Since each person decides who is "best" in a race, their effect against the vote may be perceieved as good or bad, letting either the "best" or "worst" squeek through the 3- (or more) way race. The benefit they bring to any race is to widen the range of discourse and expose the electorate to more, and often better focused, discussion of platforms, qualifications for office, and peripheral but important issues that are often avoided by the two main parties. I voted for Ron Paul as a Libertarian and still find him one of the most principled candidates in the field. I wish him the best.

Posted on 09/18/2007 at 2:09:00 PM

 
Excellent article. Very interesting reading. I agree with Lenora about the main purpose of the third party candidates. Thanks for sharing this article.

Posted on 09/17/2007 at 7:09:00 PM

 
I've found myself in agreement with Ron Paul on a lot of issues. Third party candidates' main purpose has always been to split the vote among the undecided of either paryt, thereby making the election difficult to predict, or wiping out the next best candidate. It is odd that people have a hard time voting for a third party candidate.

Posted on 09/17/2007 at 3:09:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
 
Most Commented On