At this point, it will take something like a miracle for Ron Paul to win the Republican Party's nomination for President. Miracles can happen, of course, and have done so before--but, if this one doesn't, then Ron Paul supporters like myself will have to consider other options...

It appears that some of my fellow Ron Paul supporters are leaning toward Barack Obama. I don't understand this at all, unless perhaps they view Obama as the lesser of two evils compared with McCain. I have a hard time judging which one is worse, myself--they both seem rather nightmarish to me.

I'm sure that many of my fellow Republicans, perhaps including a few fellow Ron Paul supporters, will vote for John McCain. My mom, for one, is all for McCain as being the lesser of two evils in her eyes. But I can't bring myself to vote for someone who, even more than Dubya, has spent his career fighting against practically every conservative/libertarian principle in which I believe. Sorry, John---you've earned my opposition, not my support.

Some folks may write in a vote for Ron Paul. Dr. Paul himself has discouraged this--but, at least in my perspective, I don't see anyone better than him running, although some come close. Dr. Paul has so far refused to endorse other candidates, although he has noted that Bob Barr (L-GA) is saying things that should be said and that Chuck Baldwin (C-FL) has views very close to his own.

Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party's nominee. For me, the LP's platform seems closer to my understanding of government's proper role than the CP's platform--but I think that votes should be for individuals, not parties. Among third-party options, Barr has advantages of a larger party, better ballot access, more name recognition, previous experience in Congress, and the fact that he's already polling at 6% among voters. Barr's Congressional record is better than most but still leaves some to be desired, such as his support both for the drug war and for the PATRIOT Act; however, he claims that his views have changed; however, politicians aren't exactly known for their honesty (although there are delightful exceptions like Dr. Paul). Barr's past CIA employment, along with his lack of condemnation for Establishment groups like the CFR, are causes for concern for some people. I felt disappointed that his campaign website did not provide more clear and detailed information on his positions.

Chuck Baldwin is the Constitution Party's nominee. I've been reading his NewsWithViews columns for a while now and, in general, have been rather impressed with his understanding both of political principles and of what's going on in our world. I was likewise very impressed with what I read about both his positions and his proposals on his campaign website, which was far more informative than Barr's. But, of course, unlike Barr, he has a smaller party backing him, less ballot access, less name recognition, no previous experience serving in public office, et cetera. I'm eager to hear him speak in Utah next week.

All things considered, unless Ron Paul is miraculously nominated, I'm presently leaning toward voting for Chuck Baldwin for President in this year's general election. But my mind is still far from settled on this matter. So, what does everyone else think about these candidates? Whom are you supporting, if anyone, at present?

I like the Constitution Party candidate, Chuck Baldwin.

It seems that I received some bad information about relative party sizes. The CP is actually bigger than the LP; in 2006, the CP had 366,937 registered voters while the LP had 200,000+ registered voters. Thanks to Stori Misbach for the correction.

The CP is the largest third party based on registration. The LP is the largest third party based on votes.

I have a hard time comprehending any RP supporter voting for McCain or Obama. Who can really tell who will screw up the country less? A friend and I were talking about the problem of voting for the lesser of two evils and one of the things is is that those numbers give the candidate legitimacy. And, when they do horrible things, you carry a share of that guilt.

Here's one person's opinion on this subject...

NewsWithViews: "Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin?" by Mary Starrett

I heard Chuck Baldwin speak last week in our part of Utah, focusing particularly on immigration and abortion and North American integration. He also said that CFR membership would be an automatic disqualification for his Cabinet. I was very impressed. As I've continued to study both him and Bob Barr on the Internet, I've been leaning increasingly in his direction. He lacks experience yet seems more reliable about supporting libertarian/Constitutional principles.

I've attended two speeches by Chuck Baldwin. He's the only remaining candidate who claims he will begin a process of withdrawal form Iraq. He's the only presidential candidate remaining in the race who claims he will never execute a war unless against another nation without a formal declaration of war from Congress as the Constitution requires.

Dr. Baldwin promises to do all in his power as president to end abortion, Obama doesn't, nor does John McCain. Mr. Obama has written two books that tell us something about his mind, soul, and politics. Some of this was reviewed in an article in THE NEW AMERICAN magazine, in the May 26, 2008 issue, in an article simply titled: Barack Obama. In one of those books, The Audacity of Hope and Dreams From My Father, Senator Obama describers the hopes and dreams of those who seek state intervention in reasonable-sounding words: "Although they didn't expect government to solve all their problems, and certainly didn't like seeing their tax dollars wasted-- they figured that government should help." But, as Gregory A. Hession, J.D., pointed out in his article, "...government cannot provide help to some without hurting someone else. That is, government cannot give to 'Peter' without taking from 'Paul.'"

The National Taxpayers Union has ranked Obama as the more liberal of the the two democratic contenders, Obama and Clinton in a January 2008 study.

Obama approves of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), but just wants to reform it. Barack Obama supports the Millennium Development Goal that UN supporters approved back in 1999 that would require even more unconstitutional foreign aid from America to other nations, that is international welfare or socialism with we American taxpayers footing the bill.

What will Obama do to end the war? He promises to bring troops home from Iraq in 16-months. Similar to Chuck Baldwin.

Will he keep the Council on Foreign Relations members out of his cabinet as Chuck Baldwin has promised to do if elected? I'm surprised any supporter of Dr. Ron Paul, would shift from his principled stands to adopt Senator Obama as their choice because as straight forward and easy to read as Congressman Paul is, Senator Obama seems to be equally hard to pin down on his stances and vague. Not a good sign to those who love plain truth.

Today, Dr. Paul spoke at the National Press Club and urged Americans to support one of four third-party candidates (Barr, Baldwin, Nader, or McKinney) who had signed a policy statement that he had written. You can read these remarks here, this policy statement here, and CNN's coverage of this event here. Enjoy! :D

I understand that Bob Barr is attempting to recruit Ron Paul to serve as his Vice-Presidential candidate. As for myself, I'd like more proof that Barr is genuinely libertarian now, rather than just his word alone. Also, I don't want to see Ron Paul lose his House seat. Aaron H. wrote this blog entry today about Barr.