1. He is out of step with other Republicans.
Like all Republican presidential candidates, Paul wants to cut federal spending and taxes. But he would go much further than any of the others: Paul would cut a trillion dollars in the first year alone! He would also abolish the Federal Reserve System (established in 1913), which controls the U.S. money supply, issues currency and regulates banking. If his ideas were implemented, we could face a 1930s-style Depression.

Unlike other Republicans, he considers the war in Iraq a mistake, and opposes any efforts to keep Iran from going nuclear. He opposes all foreign aid and military assistance.

Other GOP candidates know all this, but don’t bother attacking him because they believe he has no chance of being nominated anyway.

2. A new group could provide nationwide ballot access.
AmericansElect (http://americanselect.org/) plans to select an independent presidential candidate via the Internet in June of 2012. Ron Paul’s young supporters have the tech-savvy to win this contest.

AmericansElect are now gathering signatures to place their ticket on the ballots of all 50 states. Each potential nominee will select his own running-mate, who must not be a member of the same political party.

3. He has done this before.
In 1988 Ron Paul was the presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party, so running on a third ticket does not scare him. He has repeatedly refused to rule-out doing so in 2012. At his age (76), Rep. Paul is not worried about blowing his chances for a future Republican nomination. (However, his son Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky would lose some credibility as a loyal Republican if he supported his father.)

Although numerous polls show that many (if not most) Americans are dissatisfied with the two-party system and would consider voting for an independent ticket, I doubt that Ron Paul would carry even one state. But all his votes would come from conservatives, so he might draw enough votes away from the Republican ticket to swing some states to the Democrats. That could be enough to re-elect President Obama.

I predict that Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who is now seeking the Republican presidential nomination, will run on a third-party ticket next November. Here is why:

1. He is out of step with other Republicans.
Like all Republican presidential candidates, Paul wants to cut federal spending and taxes. But he would go much further than any of the others: Paul would cut a trillion dollars in the first year alone! He would also abolish the Federal Reserve System (established in 1913), which controls the U.S. money supply, issues currency and regulates banking. If his ideas were implemented, we could face a 1930s-style Depression.

Unlike other Republicans, he considers the war in Iraq a mistake, and opposes any efforts to keep Iran from going nuclear. He opposes all foreign aid and military assistance.

Other GOP candidates know all this, but don’t bother attacking him because they believe he has no chance of being nominated anyway.

2. A new group could provide nationwide ballot access.
AmericansElect (http://americanselect.org/) plans to select an independent presidential candidate via the Internet in June of 2012. Ron Paul’s young supporters have the tech-savvy to win this contest.

AmericansElect are now gathering signatures to place their ticket on the ballots of all 50 states. Each potential nominee will select his own running-mate, who must not be a member of the same political party.

3. He has done this before.
In 1988 Ron Paul was the presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party, so running on a third ticket does not scare him. He has repeatedly refused to rule-out doing so in 2012. At his age (76), Rep. Paul is not worried about blowing his chances for a future Republican nomination. (However, his son Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky would lose some credibility as a loyal Republican if he supported his father.)

Although numerous polls show that many (if not most) Americans are dissatisfied with the two-party system and would consider voting for an independent ticket, I doubt that Ron Paul would carry even one state. But all his votes would come from conservatives, so he might draw enough votes away from the Republican ticket to swing some states to the Democrats. That could be enough to re-elect President Obama.

Gerald S Glazer
_____________________________________________________

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this guest post do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Publictrough.com, its staff, its advertisers, and/or its partners, agents/assigns. Any guest post content appearing on Publictrough.com has not been checked for factual accuracy, and any photos/videos uploaded have not been verified to be copyright-free. It is the user’s/guest poster’s responsibility to post text and/or photos that belong to that user/guest poster and do not violate any copyright or intellectual property laws.

Good news! A new group called Americans Elect (AE) intends to select a presidential nominee by a nationwide on-line vote and put him on the ballot in all fifty states. The organization, headquartered on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC, was founded by mutli-millionaire Peter Ackerman (formerly of Drexel Burnham Lambert) and has 148 employees. AE has already raised over $20 million from just 50 wealthy backers (1). Its board includes former NJ Gov. Christie Whitman and former FBI Director William Webster. NY Times columnist Tom Friedman, who says that the major party candidates are not confronting the real issues, actively supports the group.

AE is now rounding up millions of signatures on petitions to establish AE as a recognized party in all states, so that its ticket will appear on all state ballots. Over 2 million signatures are already in hand, and about a million more will be needed.

Anyone can register as a “delegate” to the AE “virtual convention” in June of next year on the AE website below. In the first round of voting, you can nominate and vote for any legally qualified American to be President of the United States. (2) The top six candidates in this round will be asked to choose a nominee for Vice President, who must not be a member of the same political party, to assure a “bi-partisan ticket.” Then delegates will vote among the six tickets; if any one ticket obtains a majority, it will be certified as that of the AE Party for state ballots. (Otherwise, there will be run-off among the top three, and if necessary another run-off between the top two, tickets to secure a majority.)

Although most democracies in the world have more than two parties with real clout, the history of third party presidential campaigns in the US is not encouraging. Since the Civil War, every president has been either a Democrat or a Republican, and only once did any other party even finish second. (3) The last third-party candidate to receive any electoral votes was Alabama Gov. George Wallace (American Independent), who garnered 46 of them in 1968. Ross Perot, who spent about $63 million of his own money in 1992, took 19% of the popular vote nationwide, but no electoral votes. Our “winner takes all” method of awarding electoral votes is especially disadvantageous to new parties.

Given the long odds against victory, I doubt that any prominent people will participate in the AE Final Six run-off. The requirement that the candidates for president and vice-president be from different parties will effectively prevent AE from endorsing one of the major party tickets. (4) Some AE supporters are touting NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg as an independent presidential candidate, but he has said he is not interested, and I believe him. A more likely nominee would Texas Rep. Ron Paul (whose supporters have the tech savvy to game the AE nominating process), but accepting the AE nomination would put his son Senator Rand Paul (R, KY) in an impossible dilemma, so I doubt that even he would accept.

Somebody is going to win the AE nomination, but he probably will not be a strong candidate, and there is no reason to believe that he will be a centrist. The AE nominee will not win, but just might siphon off enough votes from a major-party ticket to swing some close states the other way as Ralph Nader did in 2000. He just might be back!

Gerald S Glazer

——————————————————————————-

(1) Third Wheel in the New Republic, Nov. 17, 2011, page 8.

(2) www.AmericansElect.org.

(3) In 1912 Former President Theodore Roosevelt ran on the Progressive Party (“Bullmoose”) ticket and finished between NJ Gov. Woodrow Wilson and then President William Howard Taft.

(4) Having a vice president from another party was tried in 1796 and 1864, and turned out badly both times.

——————————————————————————-

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this guest post do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Publictrough.com, its staff, its advertisers, and/or its partners, agents/assigns. Any guest post content appearing on Publictrough.com has not been checked for factual accuracy, and any photos/videos uploaded have not been verified to be copyright-free. It is the user’s/guest poster’s responsibility to post text and/or photos that belong to that user/guest poster and do not violate any copyright or intellectual property laws.

Mr. Cain has done extremely well in recent debates and, other than a few missteps (openly admitting his lack of foreign policy knowledge, for example), has adroitly handled media interviews. Plus, most of his policy positions align nicely with the influential tea party movement:

• National Security: Cain considers protecting the people as the President’s primary duty. Further, he vows to ensure that our military and all of our security agencies are strong and capable.
• Spending: A deficit hawk, he promises that every federal agency, program and expenditure will be reviewed and revised with a keen eye and a red pen.

• Immigration: Cain favors securing our borders, enforcing our laws and promoting the existing path to citizenship.
• Energy: He believes the Left has forced excessive environmental regulations that have stifled domestic energy production and forced Americans to rely too heavily upon foreign oil.
• Health Care: Cain feels the role of the federal government is to encourage economic growth by ensuring conditions that will allow businesses to thrive, not just survive.
• Economy: He wants to repeal and replace Obamacare with patient-centered, free market reforms.

Finally, Mr. Cain’s “999″ plan — which calls for a 9% business flat tax, a 9% individual flat tax, and a 9% national sales tax — truly excites fiscal conservatives. Cain sees this shift from taxes on income to taxes on consumption as the first step to implementing the long desired “Fair Tax,” and alleviating the $430 billion burden that tax compliance, enforcement, collection imposes on the US economy.

Critics on both the right and left worry that Cain’s plan would significantly boost taxes on the working poor, and question the impact a national sales tax would have on strapped state and local governments which rely on the same type of taxes.

Cain’s lack of government experience also concerns many. Washington isn’t a hospitable environment for on-the-job training, particularly with the myriad of social, economic and foreign crises we now face. And, unlike his days running Godfathers Pizza, his “underlings” won’t unquestioningly follow every directive. He’ll have to get up to speed quickly on political power plays, back room deals and, yes, even compromise.

So, is Herman Cain a viable candidate for President of the United States? So far, so good.

But he shouldn’t count his pizzas before they’re cooked.

With poor performances in recent candidate debates and unsatisfactory explanations for controversial initiatives, Governor Perry has gone from a 13 point August lead to a three to seven point deficit in recent polls. In fact, he trails both Mitt Romney and Herman Cain by five points in the 10/2/11 CBS News poll (Romney – 17%, Cain – 17%, Perry – 12%).

Are debate gaffes the only reason Perry’s numbers are declining? While his opponents understandably attack his characterization of Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme,” his executive order mandating that Texas girls receive the HPV vaccine and his ongoing support for providing in-state tuition to the children of illegal immigrants, are these stances why Republican voters are turning away?

Many think his weak debates are a symptom of deeper problems. On a recent “Fox & Friends” appearance, former Republican candidate Mike Huckabee thought Perry “looked dumbfounded” at an immigration question he should have seen coming. Huckabee indicate that Perry’s apparent exhaustion proved the he “is not prepared for the pressure of the presidential stage.”

Perry’s handling of Texas’s economy has also come under scrutiny. Despite the number of new jobs created, 23 states have a lower unemployment rate than Texas (8.2% in August). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 9.5% of hourly-paid workers in Texas are paid at or below minimum wage (the national percentage is 6.0%). Plus, the state’s poverty level continues to increase (from 15.1% in 2009 to 18.4% in 2010).

Others are questioning whether Perry’s strong social conservatism and its influence on his policy making might turn off independent and moderate voters.

Perry is staunchly pro-life and opposes government funding for elective abortions. As governor, Perry signed the Prenatal Protection Act – which explicitly included fetuses in its definition of human life – and another bills that limited late-term abortions, required girls under the age of 18 to notify their parents before having an abortion, and required providers to offer informational brochures to women considering abortion.

Perry has also stated that he believes in the inerrancy of the Bible and that those who don’t accept Jesus as their savior will go to hell. He also describes himself “a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect,” and has expressed support for its teaching alongside evolution in Texas schools.

No one said that running for president would be easy. Especially when your debating skills are lacking, your economic record is uneven, and your religious views are considered extreme by a majority of the electorate.

After finishing second to Michelle Bachmann in the recent Iowa straw poll, and having climbed into third in most polls of republican candidates (behind Rick Perry and Mitt Romney), Paul has become a force to be reckoned with. His poll numbers are improving.

So, why the sudden surge in popularity? Is it due to Paul’s debating skills or slick packaging by his handlers?

Or, could it be due to the electorate’s realization that our country faces some of the most severe economic, monetary, and security problems in its history, and Paul’s proposals for addressing them make more sense than that of any other candidate?

Unlike many of his competitors, Paul is very specific about how he would resolve our country’s many woes. According to his Ron Paul for President website, the ten-term congressman would do the following as president:

On the Economy

• Veto any unbalanced budget submitted by Congress.
• Refuse to raise the debt ceiling so politicians can no longer spend recklessly.
• Fully audit (and then end) the Federal Reserve System, which continues to create money out of thin air to finance future debt.
• End the corporate stranglehold on the White House.
• Reduce gas prices by allowing offshore drilling, abolish highway motor fuel taxes, increase the mileage reimbursement rates, and offer tax credits for the use and production of natural gas vehicles.
• Eliminate income, capital gains, and death taxes.

On Healthcare

• Repeal ObamaCare and end its unconstitutional mandate that all Americans must carry only government-approved health insurance.
• Allow purchase of health insurance across state lines.
• Provide tax credits and deductions for all medical expenses.
• Exempt those with terminal illnesses from the employee portion of payroll taxes.
• Give a payroll deduction to any worker who is the primary caregiver for a spouse, parent, or child with a terminal illness.
• Guarantee that Medicare and Medicaid funds are not raided for other purposes.
• Make all Americans eligible for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and remove government-imposed barriers to obtaining HSAs.

On National Defense

• Secure our national borders.
• Avoid expensive land wars by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who attack the U.S. and plot further attacks.
• End the nation-building that is increasing our debt and sacrificing the lives of our troops.
• Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.
• Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and the tools they need to accomplish it.
• Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.
• Revitalize the military for the 21st century by eliminating waste in the military budget.
• Stop giving rich dictators taxpayer money through foreign aid.

Are Ron Paul’s positions extreme? Some think so.

But, in an age of $1.5 trillion annual budget deficits (with 41 cents of every dollar spent
being borrowed), and a national debt in excess of $14 trillion (with $4 trillion having been added in the last 30 months alone), maybe not that extreme.

The former Massachusetts Governor had won 11 primaries and caucuses, tallied over 4.7 million votes, and secured 280 delegates during the ’08 campaign. And, the Republican party has long been suspected of anointing the “heir apparent” with its presidential nomination.

In 2008, McCain’s campaign was all but broke that summer. Despite Romney’s success in the primaries, McCain was anointed. It’s now Romney’s turn.

Not that Romney’s credentials aren’t impressive. A Brigham Young grad who earned a Harvard law and MBA degree, he become an extremely effective businessman. After a series of successes with Bain & Company, a management consulting firm, Romney co-founded and ran Bain Capital, a private equity firm that grew to be one of the nation’s largest.

Romney then served as President and CEO of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee for the 2002 Winter Olympics, and turned a projected loss of $379 million into a profit of $100 million. He broke the record for the most private money raised by an individual for an Olympic Games, and personally contributed $1 million.

Romney was then elected Governor to Massachusetts — a rare achievement for a Republican — and took a $3 billion state deficit to a $600 million surplus in three years. But one of his self-proclaimed greatest accomplishments as Governor — the Massachusetts Health Reform Law — now haunts him as pursues the presidency.

The law mandated that every resident have health insurance, whether provided by an employer or the government or purchased individually. Sound familiar? It certainly makes Romney’s strident opposition to “ObamaCare” ring hollow.

In addition, Romney assured Massachusetts residents that the plan would provide universal health coverage while controlling costs. In fact, he wrote the following in the Wall Street Journal, “Every uninsured citizen in Massachusetts will soon have affordable health insurance and the costs of health care will be reduced.”

To date, “RomneyCare” has done neither. Between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so, while this year’s projected cost of $1.8 billion is expected to reach $1.95 billion. And over the next 10 years, the plan is projected to cost $2 billion more than was budgeted.

Despite the perceived hypocrisy, Romney continues to call for the repeal of ObamaCare while refusing to admit that the Massachusetts law was a mistake. He maintains that healthcare reform should be done on the state level, and blames many of RomneyCare’s problems on his successor’s implementation of the program.

It’s a tough position for the former Governor to sell, and very likely won’t add to a long string of successes. But, we predict, based upon past nominations, Romney is the one.

Despite his late entry into the race, the August RealClearPolitics.com average of six leading presidential polls showed Perry with a 5 point lead over Mitt Romney, his nearest rival. In fact, the August 25th CNN/Opinion Research poll credited Perry with a 13 point lead (Perry – 27, Romney – 14, Palin – 10, Bachmann – 9).

So, will another former Texas Governor take residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

On the country’s most pressing issue — unemployment — Perry can make an impressive case. Since June, 2009, over 40% of all net new US jobs were created in Texas. The Governor maintains his pro-growth agenda which included tax cuts, incentives for new technologies, strong tort reforms, and investments in education is largely responsible for the state’s thriving economy.

But, Rick Perry has no shortage of critics. Opponents, including many Republicans, point to a number of factors which may trouble conservatives, and ultimately undermine his candidacy:

• Since Perry assumed office, state spending has nearly doubled from $49 billion in 2000 to approximately $90 billion in 2010. This contradicts his “reduce the size of government” theme.
• Despite the number of new jobs created, 23 states have a lower unemployment rate than Texas (8.2% in August).
• Texas’s total debt has increased 281% during Perry’s tenure (from $13.4 billion in 2001 to $34 billion in 2010).
• Perry received $37 million over 10 years from just 150 donors (over a third of the $102 million he had raised as governor). Almost half of those donors received big contracts, tax breaks or appointments during Perry’s tenure.
• According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 9.5% of hourly-paid workers in Texas are paid at or below minimum wage (the national percentage is 6.0%).
• Perry’s overt religious faith and often stated belief in “intelligent design” make many moderates uncomfortable. He is strongly pro-life, opposes public funding of elective abortions, and supports amending the Texas constitution to define marriage as “only a union between a man and a women.”
• The state’s educational performance is poor. Texas has the lowest percentage of adults with high school diplomas, is 49th in verbal SAT scores and 46th in average math SAT scores.
• A former Democrat, Perry served as Al Gore’s campaign chairman in the state of Texas in 1988.

So is Rick Perry the GOP’s best bet to beat Barack Obama in 2012? When all the facts are considered, Republican primary voters may not want to “mess with Texas.”

Five of the most pressing issues a Presidential candidate must address are:

1. How to control, and reduce, the size of the federal government: Federal spending increased from $2.9 trillion in 2008 to $3.55 trillion in 2010. Clearly, the size, scope and cost of government is out-of-control and unsustainable. Our next President must take steps to significantly reduce spending, even at the risk of alienating enough special interest groups, and substantially reduce the size of the federal government.

2. How to protect the country: It’s a dangerous world. We must manage our massive military budget judiciously, and look for ways to economize, but maintain our strength. Maybe we need to be looking at curbing our “policing” of the world, along with the elimination of the was in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

3. How to restore our dollar: As federal spending increased 22% from 2008 to 2010, our budget deficit increased fivefold (from $239 billion to $1.2 trillion!). Soon our total public debt will exceed $14 trillion. This fiscal irresponsibility is severely weakening the dollar, and could threaten its status as the preferred international reserve currency. The President’s ability to control deficit spending will play a critical role in stabilizing the dollar. Maybe we should start with auditing the Federal Reserve.

4. How to improve education: US reading and math scores have been plummeting for years, imperiling our children’s futures and our national competitiveness. The next President must overcome the social, economic and bureaucratic obstacles preventing effective educational reform. Maybe we should start by eliminating the Department of Education and allow states to control their own education systems.

5. How to create jobs: As unemployment continues to hover between 9.5 and 10%, our new President must identify ways to reinvigorate the US economy. Reducing burdensome regulation, eliminating deficit spending and improving our educational system would be great places to start.

What are your thoughts?