Fox News Juan Williams: 'This is The Age Of Ron Paul, Don't Discount A Third-Party Presidential Run'

Fox News Juan Williams drops a hint: A third-party Ron Paul presidential run...?

'People don't understand the power of his supporters.'

Source - Raw Story

Fox News contributor Juan Williams on Sunday said that this was the “age of Ron Paul” during a panel discussion about the Republican presidential primary race.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), a libertarian, has gained an enthusiastic following for his strong views on limited government, free market economics and non-interventionist foreign policy. In the 2008 Republican presidential primary, his views clearly made him an outlier, but — thanks in part to the tea party movement — many of his economic positions have now been adopted by mainstream Republicans.

Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume said that Paul obviously had the most passionate supporters, which was understandable considering he was a “very nice” and “thoughtful” man with interesting ideas. But he warned some of those ideas were “way too exotic for mainstream America.”

“I think the Republican Party has to worry that when all is said and done, he might figure, ‘well, I can’t make it in this party, this party is not for me,’ and if he goes third party in the Fall, he is not going to be taking votes away from Barack Obama,” Hume said.

“You know I think this is the age of Ron Paul in so many ways,” Williams added. “I think he is the father of the tea party, his son is in the Senate, I think you’re exactly right. People don’t understand the power of Ron Paul.”

---

As part of its pre-debate coverage, Bloomberg posted this video entitled Republican Candidates' Own Words: Ron Paul.

Related story:

• Jon Stewart Annihilates The Corporate Media For Ignoring Ron Paul's 2012 Campaign Success (Daily Show Video)

Comments

[frank]

how can you think that Ron Paul will not take votes from Obama? do you not understand that the occupy wall street crowd is made up of people that are disgusted with both parties , and see them for what they are, different sides of the same coin? we have all had enough of this empty rhetoric and unfulfilled promises from both parties. if Ron Paul were nominated by the republicans it would be a landslide victory for them. if they do not pick him it is only because they would rather lose than make a true change. they support as does Obama. the two things that we all want to end . i.e. the wars and the corrupted monetary system . they will not even address these issues . they try to ignore them and muddy the waters with a bunch of non issues like gay marriage.

frank

[randall]

Even if a third party run hurt the Repugs, they would deserve it for the way they treated one of the few true statesmen that we have in Washington.

[Bush sucks]

While Paul is more likely to get Republican votes than Democrat votes because of his views on the economy, I don't think the "he is not going to be taking votes away from Barack Obama" statement is accurate.

I, for one, would support Paul over Obama because I share his views about civil liberties and ending the wars - 2 things Obama has repeatedly shown he doesn't want to touch with a 10ft pole.

Absent Paul, I'm likely to go for a 3rd party candidate, and absent a 3rd party candidate, I'll have to hold my nose and pick Obama as the lesser of 2 evils - at least he's only 95% as bad as Bush while the likes of Perry are perfect Bush clones.

[Something Polish]

Pierce:

>Herman Cain?...when he was asked which former Federal Reserve chairman he would approve, Cain answered "Alan Greenspan," and did so, I am sure, just to see if Ron Paul's head would explode.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/new-hampshire-debate-2011-6512225

[DailyBail]

Pierce is on fire...that was hilarious.

Snip:

Across the street, Newt Gingrich was posing in the middle of a clutch of fratboys. Newt is something of a legend among that type, probably due to his courageous early work in ensuring that students at Tulane would be able to maintain their easy access to porn. College kids don't forget the people who fought for their rights the way that the young Newt did. The man was the Thomas Paine of skin mags.

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/new-hampshire-debate-2011-6512225#ixzz1aZyq1eqr

[DailyBail]

Frank & Bush Sucks

I agree with you. Paul would take votes from Obama without a doubt, in fact I think he would stand a pretty good chance as a 3rd party candidate. He would have a better shot as the GOP nominee in a 2 person race, but I wouldn't discount him in a Troika, given his stark opposition to the policies of the other 2.

[Something Polish]

I disagree. Paul's only shot would be as a 3rd party candidate, running as the one guy not in Wall Street's back pocket and siphoning votes from both parties. What with his own fervent supporters, the harmonic convergence of OWS people and Morman-hating Teabaggers, and perhaps a few fortuitous populist lightning strikes, it's not out of the realm of "just might-could happen." If he got the Republican nomination, the Big Money would line up exclusively behind Obama faster than you can say "Holy fucking shit is that a lot of dough," and that, combined with the Media marginalization of Paul (just ask Jon Stewart), would be that. And if Paul did run as a 3rd party monkey wrench, it would recall Hunter Thompson's awesome run for sherrif of Pitkin County, Colorado, in 1970. (Note: Unlike the Powers here, I'm not a bit Ron Paul guy, just calling 'em likes I sees 'em.)

Pierce is still a National Treasure and is virtually always en fuego. Best line from the piece may well have been:

"...Charlie Rose, a man who never has asked a question that has cost him a dinner reservation,..."

[Something Polish]

...er..."Morman" should be "Mormon" and less-obviously, "bit" should be "big"...

[DailyBail]

Pierce is still a National Treasure and is virtually always en fuego. Best line from the piece may well have been:

"...Charlie Rose, a man who never has asked a question that has cost him a dinner reservation,..."

---

Yep, I laughed at that one as well.

[DailyBail]

And as for my support of Ron Paul, it's not the free market mantra that matters to me - I back him for 2 main reasons...Ending the wars and fighting the Fed. And he's the only candidate who would do both.

[Something Polish]

These are good reasons to support Dr. Paul. Tell you what, since he could reproduce HST's Freak Power campaign as much as a national act could possibly do 42 years later, I'll picket for Paul if he adopts some of Thompson's awesome platform:

"It will be the general philosophy of the sheriff's office that no drug worth taking shall be sold for money. My first act as sheriff will be to install on the sheriff's lawn a set of stocks to punish dishonest dope dealers."
but also
"Thompson relented a bit before the election, saying he would refrain from taking mescaline while on duty."

And while we're on the subject:
"Perhaps the most clear description of Freak Power came from one of the many campaign posters written by Thompson: "This is the real point: that we are not really freaks at all -- not in the literal sense -- but the twisted realities of the world we are trying to live in have somehow combined to make us feel like freaks. We argue, we protest, we petition -- but nothing changes." "

Reads like an OWS sign; word.

[Dr. Pitchfork]

SP, I AM a big Ron Paul guy, but in the spirit of finding common ground, I have to say I was very disappointed to hear him blame the CRA for helping to cause the housing bubble.

Boy, what I wouldn't give to see Yves Smith moderating this cat fight (and given full authority to "refudiate" fact-free bull shit)...

[Something Polish]

Dr. P:

I can dig it. No one's perfect, not even Mojo Nixon.

Personally, I was hoping for Matt Taibbi to moderate these events.

[dogismyth]

Who gives a fuck what Juan Williams has to say. He's a nobody that has offered nothing useful in his entire career.

I'm also sick and tired of hearing how Ron Paul is going to save us all, and the system.

Good gawd. Only YOU can save us....each of you. How many years have you been putting your faith behind political leaders? Decades? Centuries? And where has that gotten you.

We need a reset. The current system will be scrapped one way or another.

[Dr. Pitchfork]

Taibbi and Smith it is, then. That would be awesome. And Larry Wilkerson for foreign policy stuff.

[jon]

This is for the people who are not aware yet. Most of the comments that are against Ron Paul and talk about Democrats, Republicans, libertarians, left, right, tea party are by government shills. Everyone is voting Ron Paul, but the media is attempting to make you people believe that their is competition. There isnt. Anyone who talks about Dems or Repubs is bogus. Ron Paul = Constitution= freedom= end wars = end fed = end corruption from the two party dictatorship

[lg]

I think Ron Paul would also draw a lot of independent votes, ones that went to Obama last time hoping for change that never came. So it really isn't clear who he would take more votes away from if he was a 3rd party candidate. If Paul got the Republican nomination he would still be a formidable candidate even if Obama got a boost in campaign contributions from the donor class that wants to keep things as they are. He presents a clear policy choice, not a personality choice, and the corporate media would not be able to completely obscure that fact and might even be forced to point it out. As a third party candidate, his message would be harder to get out because the MSM could turn the focus to the supposed "differences" between the main party candidates and treat his candidacy as a sideshow. Even so, 20% or more of the total vote would still be possible, which could win some western states.

@dogismyth Ron Paul supporters don't believe in saviors. His appeal is based on his policy positions, something no other candidate can claim. He, and they, have been consistent over the years and he adopted them in the face of overwhelming conventional wisdom to the contrary. In better times, most people don't listen to Cassandras; but as things have deteriorated and people seek reasonable explanations for our condition, his views make a lot more sense to more people. He is the one candidate whose policy positions regarding the most important issues we face (wars for empire, the Fed, civil liberties and rampant corporatism) makes sense to us. Adopting his policies would be the reset you want, and achieved within the current system of government. Continuing our current course will produce increased economic hardship and the internal tensions that brings. I don't like to think of where that can lead us.

[dogismyth]

LG - Our current and future course is already etched in stone. If you think things are gonna get better or change significantly in your lifetime, you may be mistaken.

Policy changes take years / decades. Ron Paul has very few Congressional supporters because no one wants to risk cutting their own throat. Paul will get in only if they let him. And he can be removed just as easily like Kennedy. Your ideal world is not their world. They (those in the shadow) are much more ruthless than you apparently want to believe.

[lg]

@dogeysmith-I agree with your take on this. The people in the shadows are ruthless and will do whatever they can to derail any opposition to their plans. I am not naive, nor do I believe Ron Paul will magically solve anything by himself. If he was allowed to take office, he would face opposition at every turn and could well be killed. I still believe it is important to support him for his positions and to maximize public exposure for them, even if not much is ultimately achieved by his candidacy. The source of opposition to any real policy change is now hidden by the spectacle we call elections. Narrowing candidates down to Paul and one other would draw a much clearer line between his positions and those of people in the shadows. The efforts to discredit him, and those doing it, would become more and more obvious to people who are really trying to understand what is happening in this country and any assassination plot would probably make as much sense as the latest terrorist plot blamed on Iran. I want the crime syndicate that runs our country to be forced to go to greater and greater lengths to discredit Paul. He seems to be able to handle it, and the more crap they throw at him the more obvious it will be to more people what is really going on, who is behind it and how they do it. Will we ever get sufficient awareness to reach critical mass? I'm doubtful, but still want Paul to succeed enough to force their hand. I didn't mean for my first post to sound like a Pollyanna; I don't really feel that way.