GordonUnleashed

Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul

July 19th, 2007 by Steve

In the form of an open letter, I provided some advice to the Libertarian Party presidential candidates on another blog the other day:

Here’s a simple fact of life: Libertarians love them some Ron Paul. Get over it - and then overcome it.

The one of you who can figure out how to become number two in the hearts and minds of 72 percent of Libertarian Party members is likely to win the LP nomination. And if no one can figure out how to do this, I’ll predict that NOTA or some variation thereof will be the LP nominee for 2008.

It looks like Steve Kubby did listen. In addition to the linked press release, here’s some of Kubby’s interview with Paulie Cannoli:

PAULIE CANNOLI: I’ll cut right to the chase. You’re giving this interview to announce your support for Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. Why?

STEVE KUBBY: Well, let me get the endorsement in first! I support Ron Paul for the GOP’s presidential nomination, and for the presidency. I’m asking my fellow freedom activists to do so as well. If Dr. Paul wins the Republican presidential nomination, I’ll withdraw my candidacy for the LP’s nomination, ask the LP to nominate “None of the Above” at its national convention next year, and go to work as a volunteer on Dr. Paul’s general election campaign. And I’m urging my fellow Libertarians to approach this in the same way. But at the same time, I’ll continue preparing to give the LP the best presidential campaign I can give it if that doesn’t work out.

Now … why? Believe me, this was a tough decision. I am not, and have never been, a Republican. For me, the Libertarian Party has always been, and remains, our last best hope for achieving freedom through the American political process. And until recently my position was that the Libertarian Party needed to stick to its own guns, stake out its own territory. But sometimes a special situation comes along. And this is a VERY special situation. [snip]

PC: What makes it special. Or rather, what makes it more special now than it was a week ago or a month ago?

SK: I declared my candidacy for the LP’s nomination last August. Ron Paul declared his candidacy for the Republican nomination in March. According to the 2nd quarter FEC reports that came out this week, he’s raised more money each and every day since then than I have over the entire course of my campaign.

Also, in the last couple of days, there’s been an interesting move in the establishment Republican blogosphere. All of a sudden Ron Paul’s opponents are predicting that he’ll come in second in next month’s Iowa Straw Poll. They’re predicting that because they’re afraid of it … but they wouldn’t be afraid of it if they didn’t think it was likely.

And last week, Libertarian Lists released the results of a poll they did. The poll’s methodology isn’t perfect, but it looks reasonably honest and representative. That poll says that 70% of LP members support Ron Paul, and that the “front runners” in the LP race — George Phillies, myself, and Wayne Allyn Root — are only pulling 2% to 3% each.

Here’s a sampling of the first few comments the blog interview has received:

You get big points in my book for this.
It takes a good man to do what he just did. My hat goes off to Mr. Kubby. I solute him.
Thank you Steve Kubby. Your perspective on this campaign is very similar to mine. Ron Paul is our best hope at this time. Lets rally for him and help him win. If he doesn’t get the Republican nomination then we will be ready in the Libertarian Party, too.
God Bless You, Steve Kubby.
I am in that 70% backing Ron Paul. I found out from the Michael Badnarik email list that Ron Paul was going to run back in January. (I actually filled out the libertarian list survey too)
Thank you, I’ve considered myself a libertarian for a long time as well.
I’ve long been impressed with Steve Kubby, but this announcement only enhances my impression of him. Much like Dr. Paul, he obviously doesn’t have an ego to get in the way of doing what is most beneficial to the cause of liberty.

Speaking of the survey, I saved a copy of the results about the time Kubby made his announcement. As there are a couple of days left to participate (link here), it will be interesting to see if he gets a bump within the Libertarian Party as a result of endorsement of Ron Paul. I’ll bet he does.

Posted in National Politics, Libertarian Party, Libertarian Movement

11 Responses to “Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul”

University Update - Ron Paul - Permanent Link to Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul wrote on 07/20/07 at 12:49 am :

[…] Clark Link to Article ron paul Permanent Link to Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul » Posted […]
Joe Cochran wrote on 07/20/07 at 7:44 am :

I guess with all the Ron Paul frenzy I haven’t given the LP Candidates their respective time, but Mr. Kubby has earned a large amount of respect from me, so much so that at this point, if Paul doesn’t get the nomination, Kubby has my vote.
Jason Gatties wrote on 07/20/07 at 8:50 am :

I’m in that 30% that does not support Ron Paul’s campaign. I’m not going to sit here again and explain why, as I have all over the net and at local meetings. Just know that my reasons will be realized by all after he fails to gain the republican nomination and we as libertarians…basically…are left with our dicks in our hands…
Larry wrote on 07/20/07 at 9:01 am :

The LP convention is in May and the GOP Convention is in September, right? That’s a problem the guys in the LP have to figure out how to sort. I’m not USamerican, but I’m following RP campaign and have followed the LP’s campaigns since 2004. So I’m not pretty sure I have a full understanding about the convention processes on both parties and how that can affect strategy.
Fascist Nation wrote on 07/20/07 at 11:23 am :

1. It is about time LP candidates cease fearing Paul. Yes, he is taking money away from their primary. So what? Yes, it makes it harder to run in the LP for the nomination. [And get on the ballot, which is the real problem isn’t it?.] But,…

2. Paul, while going from impossible to improbable of winning the nomination to now having a fair chance of winning. IMHO. But this is still big odds against him, but still lots of time. Bottom line though is Paul will probably not be the nominee.

3. He will however, rallied the troops, raised the libertarian issues, and I can guarantee you that at least 85% of RP supporters have no intention of giving either the R or the D who emerges their vote.

The will either stay home and clean their guns, or they will vote for a third party candidate who continues Paul’s messages, and clean their guns.

4. Which means it would be a mistake for the LP not to have a candidate ready to go. [And while the failure of the LP to raise money or members might be placed at the feet of the Paul candidacy, I would say instead that it rests with those who violated the bylaws to gut the platform who are responsible for their own situation. After all, removing all those things that made the LP different from the R’s & D’s was what would usher in supporters and money. I guess Paul is as good as excuse as any for that failure.]

5. Which also means the LP candidate needs to have a pair, and not be wishy-washy on freedom issues. You can grab Paul’s supporters and hs money givers if it is perceived you actually stand for something other that determining which was the wind blows [which is an accurate description for a majority of the LNC].
Alice Lillie wrote on 07/20/07 at 12:40 pm :

I am a Kubby supporter who has been wondering exactly what to do ever since Ron threw his hat into the ring, and especially since the Libertarians overwhelmingly support Ron. They would *both* make an ideal candidate.

Now that Steve has spoken about the situation I am less confused, but still in the wait-and-see mode.

The important thing now is, I think, will the Paul movement have enough momentum to land him the GOP nomination, and if he does will our (L.P.) bylaws change so we can endorse him?

But we have our convention before we will know that. That means a catch 22. So, what will happen? Should we nominate Steve (or another L.P. candidate) or nominate Ron? Or move the convention to fall so we will know what the GOP will do?

Quite a situation. At least I am comfortable with either Kubby or Paul.
Thomas L. Knapp wrote on 07/20/07 at 1:58 pm :

Alice,

You write:

“The important thing now is, I think, will the Paul movement have enough momentum to land him the GOP nomination, and if he does will our (L.P.) bylaws change so we can endorse him?

But we have our convention before we will know that. That means a catch 22.”

[NB: I am writing here ENTIRELY by way of expressing my own opinion, and IN NO WAY in my role as Steve Kubby’s communications director. I am NOT speaking for the campaign here.]

Actually, we will almost certainly know long before the LP’s national convention whether or not Ron Paul will be the Republican nominee.

We’ll know in early January whether it’s POSSIBLE for him to be the GOP nominee. New Hampshire is a big indicator. Its voters lean libertarian, it’s a small state where a campaign with limited funds can reach a high percentage of those voters, and it has several organized libertarian presences capable of swaying elections. To put it bluntly, if Paul can’t come in first or a strong second in New Hampshire, there’s just no way he’s going to carry the nomination. If he DOES do well in New Hampshire, he MIGHT have a chance (and that chance will be enhanced if he does credibly well in the Iowa caucuses and the South Carolina primary).

The other states continue to move their primaries up, closer to New Hampshire’s. By mid-March, there’s probably a 95% chance that there will be a clearly chosen nominee. By the end of April, more like a 99.99% chance.

There hasn’t been a real convention floor fight in either of the major parties in half a century. The rules have been tweaked over time to keep that from happening. Most delegates are bound by their states’ primary votes, and unless the recipient of those votes releases his delegates, they are required by the convention rules to vote for that candidate on the first ballot. In 1980, Ted Kennedy had strong support versus Jimmy Carter at the Democratic convention. Carter had won the primaries, but the Iran hostage crisis had shattered confidence in him. Delegates asked to be released from their first-vote obligation … but Carter refused to release them, and that was the end of that.

By May of 2008, one of three situations will obtain:

1) Ron Paul will clearly be the nominee;

2) Ron Paul will clearly NOT be the nominee; or

3) No candidate will have the required majority of delegates in pocket for a first ballot victory, and Ron Paul will have carried majorities in five states (that’s the minimum requirement for him to receive floor time at the convention) so that he can pitch for second-ballot votes and try to break out of the 2- or 3-candidate muddle.

I’d put the chances of #3 at something like one in a thousand, if not lower. The major parties hate to have blood on the floor at their conventions. Those conventions are structured to be coronations and PR events at which known results are ratified, not battlegrounds on which issues are settled (the LP is very different in that respect).

If the GOP nomination is in doubt as of the opening of the LP’s 2008 national convention, print this comment out and bring it to Denver for me — with some ketchup, because I’ll eat it.

Regards,
Tom Knapp
Kris Overstreet wrote on 07/20/07 at 3:18 pm :

Kubby supports Paul?

Well, for me that puts him on my permanent shit list.
Fascist Nation wrote on 07/20/07 at 3:35 pm :

I think this may be what Newt is positioning himself for, the savior of a brokered convention. [Or a Veep nod. Or, 2012.]
Sean Haugh wrote on 07/21/07 at 2:12 pm :

This just smacks of trying to find the biggest parade and getting in front of it. I don’t think it’s too much to ask of anyone seeking the LP nomination to say and act like they are the best candidate no matter what the other parties do. There are a host of ways to acknowledge how great Ron Paul is and how much we’re rooting for him from a position of strength and self-assurance. This not one of them.

I know this comes from the narrow perspective of being one of those people who will have to do the work of implementing whatever decision the convention makes at both the national and state levels, but I resent the heck out of the blissful ignorance of the ballot access and other legal headaches Kubby’s suggestions would cause.

None of this is to be taken as endorsing or opposing any candidate, just practically speaking this whole problem would evaporate if Ron Paul were willing to accept our nomination. No matter how I feel about that, I’m pretty certain our national convention delegates would give him our nomination on the first ballot if he wanted it. Heck, they might just do it anyway. Now that scenario presents the kind of legal headaches I would enjoy much more - striking down “sore loser” statutes and expanding the law supporting fusion candidacies in various states - because then at least there would be the possibility of short term success and long term gains.
GordonUnleashed » Blog Archive » Prediction: WAR just lost the Libertarian Party bid wrote on 07/23/07 at 12:16 am :

[…] Eric Dondero. It was so full of praises for Congressman Ron Paul that I thought he was going to follow Steve Kubby’s lead and endorse Dr. Paul. Then came this portion which reads like Dondero did write it: Look at […]

TrackBack URI

Rants, Opinions and Blogosphere Banter

Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul

11 Responses to “Kubby explains his endorsement of Ron Paul”

Leave a Reply

About

Archives

Categories

Meta