Ron Paul endorses Chuck Baldwin: Why Vote for a Third Party Candidate?

When I first started thinking about this Presidential election, I supported both Ron Paul and John McCain. I saw them both as good options, as I agreed with most of their positions. And the issues they disagreed on were not ones that I cared about. But as I learned more, I slowly began to oppose the War in Iraq. Initially, I supported it for two main reasons:

1. I thought it was a war against terrorism.
2. I believed the people who said it would be a relatively quick and easy war.

It turns out that both of these are false. As a result, I began enthusiastically supporting Ron Paul for President. He received 1.2 million votes in the Republican Primary– more than the combined totals of Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Alan Keyes, and Duncan Hunter (Giuliani received about 600,000).

But McCain won. After Ron Paul suspended his campaign, I thought I might still support McCain. Choosing Sarah Palin definitely pushed me in his direction. Yet learning about the issues that matter to Ron Paul has made me care about things that I didn’t used to. And I’ve learned more about McCain that certainly pushes me away from him. (For instance, he wants to expand the government, whereas I really prefer small government.)

Recently, I’ve started to move towards voting for a third party candidate. Ralph Nader is the most well-known option, but I don’t like him much. Would a third party be better than the two major ones? Yes. And here’s why…

1. Both McCain and Obama support the Iraq War.

That’s a fact. You can look up their voting records. These are also facts:

  • The Iraq War has nothing to do with the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001.
  • It has no Declaration of War, as required by the Constitution.
  • We can’t afford it. Anyone who cares about the economy should care about this point. Billions (trillions?) of dollars do make a difference.
  • There’s an excellent alternative: H.R. 3076 — September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, introduced by Ron Paul. If we’d chosen this route, Osama bin Laden would likely be captured and dead by now.


2. Neither McCain nor Obama would get rid of the Federal Reserve.

Here’s why you should oppose the Fed: 

  • It’s a central bank.
  • It caused the Great Depression.
  • It caused the housing bubble by artificially lowering interest rates in 2003.
  • It’s devaluing the dollar. Inflation and higher prices are merely a symptom of this.
And finally, just in case I might’ve thought Obama was a good option (and for a short time, I did):
3. Obama supports abortion.
Given the following facts, to allow abortion makes no sense:
  • Life begins at conception.
  • The “Roe” in Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey, has since realized that abortion is wrong and is now pro-life.

Historically interesting: Norma McCorvey endorsed Ron Paul on January 22, 2008, stating: “I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v. Wade. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.”


So I hope I’ve established that neither McCain nor Obama is a good option. Ron Paul agrees with me, repeatedly refusing to endorse McCain (even though members of McCain’s staff have called him asking him to do so). He’s a 10-term Republican congressman, but he does what’s best for the country, even if it’s not what the party says.

I had no idea which third party candidate to vote for, until I discovered (via Twitter, no less) that Ron Paul had endorsed Chuck Baldwin. Here’s an excerpt:

The Libertarian Party Candidate admonished me for “remaining neutral” in the presidential race and not stating whom I will vote for in November.   It’s true; I have done exactly that due to my respect and friendship and support from both the Constitution and Libertarian Party members.  I remain a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party and I’m a ten-term Republican Congressman.  It is not against the law to participate in more then one political party.  Chuck Baldwin has been a friend and was an active supporter in the presidential campaign.

I continue to wish the Libertarian and Constitution Parties well.  The more votes they get, the better.  I have attended Libertarian Party conventions frequently over the years.

In some states, one can be on the ballots of two parties, as they can in New York.  This is good and attacks the monopoly control of politics by Republicans and Democrats.  We need more states to permit this option.  This will be a good project for the Campaign for Liberty, along with the alliance we are building to change the process.

I’ve thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the November election.  I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.

Source: Campaign for Liberty Post

When I read this, I knew nothing about Chuck Baldwin. Now I know this:

  1. Baldwin opposes in the War in Iraq, instead supporting the likes of H.R. 3076. Good.
  2. Baldwin opposes the Federal Reserve, instead realizing that only the market can set interest rates to optimal levels. Also good.
  3. Baldwin opposes abortion, instead supporting Ron Paul’s Sanctity of Life legislation, H.R. 2597. Great!
I haven’t decided for sure, but due to support by Ron Paul, Baldwin is currently my top choice.
Both Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle will be official write in candidates in California. This process is officially certified with the California Secretary of State, and includes a full slate of Electoral College electors. These votes WILL be counted, and are officially tallied.
“Ralph Nader actually drew more than 20,000 votes in California in 2004 as a write in candidate.”
I’m not pretending that Baldwin has a chance of winning. But I wouldn’t feel right voting for a president I wouldn’t be happy with. There’s not much difference between McCain and Obama. So why not make a statement about the issues that matter to me by voting for Chuck Baldwin?

4 Responses to “Ron Paul endorses Chuck Baldwin: Why Vote for a Third Party Candidate?”

  1. Dan says:

    Right on! Spoken like a true patriot!

  2. Katy says:

    McCain is the lesser of 2 evils. So I would support McCain, a winable candidate.

    However, in California, it’s pretty much a democratic state. There is little chance for McCain to win. So I will consider voting for a 3rd party, just to make a statement. If I lived in a state where my vote could be a swing vote, I’d vote for McCain.

  3. Chuck Baldwin will be my guest on News Talk Online on Tuesday Oct. 7 at 5 PM New York time.

    Please go to my blog at and click on the link to the show to talk to him.


  4. dil okullari says:

    Why this web site do not have other languages support?

Leave a Reply