Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Revolution and the Republican Party Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_future_of_the_revolution#18247 Post contents: I am grateful for the many thoughtful comments and thought I'd offer a few quick responses. First, I'm not as interested in the Republican Party per se as I am in the entire of a movement based on more than one candidacy. I would rather have some influence through even just a handful of congressmen -- Ron Paul, Walter Jones, Jimmy Duncan -- than having no elected officials but an exciting protest candidacy. If Paul is going to be a Republican congressman, I would rather he have at least some influence in his party than have none as a protest candidate. I do, however, agree with Jeff Albert that a Paul or Jones primary defeat changes the calculus. Second, I don't think a third party based on the defection of a single political leader can only be effective if it has influence on one of the major parties. It would require a mass defection supported by multiple political leaders. Ron Paul can't do it by himself. Third, Joe Allen is right about Ralph Nader and Meet the Press. I wrote this piece before Nader's appearance. I also believe Nader and Pat Buchanan got to debate on one of the Sunday shows before the 2000 election. As a sitting member of Congress and former Republican presidential candidate, Paul as a third-party presidential hopeful would probably get more media coverage than, say, Michael Peroutka. But he'd get much less than the major-party candidates. Finally, I am still not clear on what benefit we would get out of a Paul third-party candidacy other than someone for whom we could cast a protest vote. But aren't there other people we could support as a protest candidate without losing a congressman? Sent at: 2008 07 24