Joe Sansone sent me an e-mail with a link to this Jack Cafferty speculation on the possibility of a third-party run by Ron Paul.
I find such speculation tedious for a reason I've stated before: There are only two types of people who talk about third-party candidacies: Real smart people and real stupid people. The smart people propose a third-party candidate as a spoiler. Stupid people think the third-party candidate could actually win.
I agree with Joe's observation:
Isn't it interesting how the media monopolies keep asking the same question about running as a third party candidate and hyping a poll about Ron Paul as a third party candidate. They don't hype polls showing him doing well in the GOP primary and in fact ignore them. Why in hell would a guy in first place in Iowa in the GOP primary be thinking about running as a third party candidate? More importantly why would the media keep asking that question about a front runner? Unless of course it is to further the lie that he can't win the nomination and sucker Paul into a third party run so they can black him out like they did Buchanan. They can't black him out after Iowa and New Hampshire. How do you black out the guy with the most delegates??? Since Paul is the front runner shouldn't everybody else be thinking about a third party run?
As for Ron's refusal to rule out a third-party candidacy, Joe's right to ask why other candidates aren't asked that question.But if you think about it for half a second, why would Ron want to do so? The threat of a third-party candidacy could be a useful tool to keep the RINOs in line. The mainstream party would love to shut Paul up, but they'd sure start acting nice if they thought he could provide an alternative to the rather lackluster Mitt Romney. ron would have to be stupid to give up that leverage. And he's not stupid.