Ron Paul for U.S. Senate?

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) announced Thursday that she would retire from the U.S. Senate in 2012 at the end of her current term. One of the candidates that might replace her is Ron Paul. Should Ron Paul run for U.S. Senate in 2012?

What should Ron Paul do in 2012?

  • Ron Paul should run for President (84%, 5,979 Votes)
  • Ron Paul should run for U.S. Senate (13%, 966 Votes)
  • Ron Paul should do something else (please post a comment to elaborate) (2%, 109 Votes)
  • Ron Paul should only run for reelection to the House (1%, 103 Votes)

Total Voters: 7,158

This poll is now closed. It was open from January 14 until February 10, 2011.

  • Jeff H.

    He should found a new political party to give long-term structure and voice to his beliefs. His followers and money-raising ability would provide an outstanding foundation for it. A lone voice in the House or the Senate will never get the media attention and public interest that a new (organized and coherent vs. Tea Party) political party would receive.

    He’s not going to win the presidency, and a new political party would be a much longer-lasting “bully pulpit.” I do *firmly* believe that he would win a senate bid, and I *really* do not want to see Dewhurst in the Senate for the next 30 years. But at 75 years old, I think he should spend his remaining viable years enrolling a new generation of politicians to offer his ideology to the American people. He could also probably do it and still stay in the House as chair of the fed committee.

    Running for President would be a waste of time and would be anti-climactic. Launching a new political party would be a way to leverage his political assets into something truly great.

    America needs a viable third party. He should pitch/frame it as a *moderate* party that unites the socially-liberal and fiscally-conservative interests of most Americans in a single party. Aim for the middle by offering to get government out of the economy and out of the bedroom.

    • fred the protectionist

      It’s called the Libertarian Party and they get about half a million to 1 million votes per election.

  • Joe

    Ron Paul, please run for president. You totally rule. I’d gay marry you if I could, but we need you to run for president first.

    also @mark you trippin, blood.


  • Andrew

    Ron, please run for president again!! I have a strong feeling you will win. So many people look up to and want you to run for president. Look at the polls!! All my family and friends will vote for you as will I. I know you will change this country for the better. I will back you up on whatever you choose but i hope that is for president.

  • matt

    Run for president so I don’t have to write you in.

  • Paul

    Go for the PRESIDENCY again, AS A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE–which would mean he would have to start NOW. Preferably a new party, and definitely not the Libertarian Party again–not a political message party, but rather a political expediency party–clean, fresh, with clarity of voice. His new party would form in great great numbers overnight (you know it would!). There’d be tons of energy in it, including tons of young energy. I can see the youth who voted for Obama switching to Paul as long as he’s not running as a Republican–the pull of their liberal education indoctrination is just too strong for them to ever consider a Republican.

    The voice of the Paul’s new party would be very loud in the political arena. He needs to make it to the general election this time as a viable candidate, not just a write-in. The primaries would not be enough of a vehicle for his message–it only hits half the voting population. And anyway, Romney has the nomination–he’s the party darling. It’s practically a done deal. It would be fun to watch Ron Paul in the Republican debates again–and winning the polls again–but he would remain a Republican anomaly and the rest of the country would just be entertained by his Republican run if they noticed him at all. How about a general election Presidential debate instead with Paul against Obama and Romney? It’s Ron’s time on the stage of U.S. history. It’s now. Think Perot 1992, except unlike Perot, I truly believe Paul has A GENUINE CHANCE OF WINNING!

    RON PAUL 2012!

    • fred the protectionist

      Ross Perot (not a free traitor) got 20 million votes, Ron Paul (free traitor) barely squeezed out 1 million. And that was almost 20 years ago with a lower population.

  • roamerx

    I’m not sure if he’s electable….even if he is what can one man do as president of the empire? Paul needs to lead a movement, not the bureaucracy.

  • Spaniard

    Global hopes lie in the U.S.A. yet. Your country can still grab everyone’s attention amidst these convulsive times and you have a last chance to put things in place – that is, you better sit Mr. Paul down on the presidential chair so there will be worthy an example for us the rest of the world to look upon. You can do it if properly executed, but, since you must do it as well, I am sure you united american citizens will do your best to achieve this monumental task.

    As someone wrote earlier:

    “The problem is, that people know nobody of the Campaign for Liberty besides RP. He needs to bring in a few new faces to make it a broader movement. Ron has the power and profile to do this. Rand was a good start but from my point drinking a bit too much tea…”

    In other words – it is time to use all resources available but it is not wise to ascribe to any particular movement (for he would face the same destiny than the chosen movement would and, let’s face it, since it won’t pose as a choice of preference for at least half of the country the Tea Party is not going to impose anything on anyone, much less a Presidential candidate). Much more intelligent would be having some other prominent politicians, activists and civil representatives who share the main bulk of Paul’s principles, were these to be economic or else – the governmental panel with the likes of Nader, Ventura, Kucinich, Napolitano; the forefront of the party with the likes of David Icke, Gerald Celente, and some other as diverse as bearable.

    And, at last but not at least, it is absolutely necessary to set an agenda that includes something else than cutting the strings that private corporations have attached to both legislative and executive powers. It is mandatory that the agenda is exquisitely crafted to minimize sterile disputes (e.g. global warming) and to gather the most common concerns (economy – energy, food, water, transport, commerce) amongst the most people possible.

    It should not be the roll of any government to police and educate its society’s behavior , but it is vital for anyone in order to vote some other to know what the one asking for the vote stands for and what possible solutions does the wiser think will suit the situation better. Dr. Paul has an unsurpassable record on some principal issues – such as foreign affairs, free market capitalism, monetary economics, civil rights and civil liberties- but he definitely lacks some visibility with regards to some other substantial issues -such as environmental crisis and both their causes and consequences to energy, food, transport and commerce).

    It is false that people will not face their problems if these are explained upfront, that is, if these people I am talking about are thinking capable human adults – people that does not fit into this group are totally manipulated humans via very sophisticated propaganda and will not be reachable through any conceivable campaign Dr. Paul would engage in.

    Keep in mind there is a world outside the libertarian movement, and they are FED up too!

    Reach out!

    I’ll post again soon,



  • John

    I suggest that instead Mr. Paul jump in a lake.

    • Nathan

      Typical response for someone who is uninformed of the issues. Please, please choose to begin learning why Ron Paul has chosen to stand on his set of principles.

  • Ron I’m a New Zealander and we have a Merrill Lynch ex fed reserve bank puppet named John Keys as prime minister who nows want to sell of our assets, The country is getting milked by fraudulent loans schemes and our justice system does nothing even when there is clear evidence of document alteration and false disclosure.

    We got the same problems as the people in the us fluoridation of our water, our politicians breaking election promises such as not increasing gst taxes, sending our troops to fight in illegal wars we have no right to be in.

    I believe your not only the US only hope but my country as well maybe our corrupt politicians may back off with you at the helm.

    I know its asking a lot to put so much on one persons back but believe me you have a lot of support here too in New Zealand I have followed you for years and believe you are a man of great integrity and have the best intentions for people of your once great country.

    • fred the protectionist

      flouridated water? Yeah you got to watch out for them UFOS and men in black too, unless it’s Will Smith cause he makes it look good.

      • Nathan

        I suppose there will always be individuals who refuse to learn anything new. For a spectrum of reasons, they choose ignorance over discovering truths that history has to teach us about economics, politics, big government. These are the ones who can’t help but swallow lies spread by the media and junk science promoting things like fluoridation of our water, pasteurization of our milk, the belief in global warming (it was a recurring ice age back in the 80’s), etc.

        But despite stubborn individuals, Ron Paul’s most important impact is that of opening up debate on issues which have long been swept under the rug. People are learning to think for themselves rather than parrot what they heard on TV. People are learning to question whether what’s covered in mass media is really what ought to be covered, realizing that media’s omissions are equally as important as it’s lies.

        I’m all for Ron Paul shifting his influence into the Senate or into the White House. Either way, his most important contribution is simply to get us talking. Unless voters are educated and can think for themselves, putting a new clown in office will make little difference.

        • fred the protectionist

          Disbelief in Global Warming hype is one thing, but the fluoridated water conspiracy or the anti-vaccination conspiracy takes it towards paranoia land.

          • Nathan

            Of course it’s your choice to maintain that opinion. But does that make it true? And does that mean people are wrong who believe fluoridated water, pasteurized milk and certain vaccinations are a bad thing? I wonder what opinion you’d arrive at after doing significantly more research on these topics than you’ve already done.

          • fred the protectionist
  • Death to Zionism aka Nazism
  • Guy

    Definitely President! If you want to talk about monsters pushing their own agenda, just look at the white house today.

    Ron Paul is the only politician I trust. A little over 300 years ago our forefathers fought and finally won our independence from a tyrannical king. Funny thing, now it seems as though we have a government hell bent on pushing their own agenda with total disregard of what the people of this country want.

    Nothing has changed since the election. We still have a president who insists on pushing his own agenda at the expense of the American people.

    It’s time for real change in Washington. Ron Paul is the only likely candidate that can get big brother out of our lives and let us grow and prosper.

  • fred the protectionist

    I’d rather vote for Henry Clay, a real American Senator, not a foreign free trader.

    • fred the protectionist

      Where’s the thumbs up thumbs down thingamabob?

  • Matt

    I don’t think Ron Paul is going to be able to educate the country in economics if it doesn’t want to hear his message. If he has to pick between the presidency and the senate, his best chance at doing the most good is the Senate. He can win the Senate. Asking the whole of the country to abandon their prejudices and firmly held myths just isn’t going to happen. Running for president is a great vehicle for exposing young people to Austrian Economics, but the majority of the country has settled into its Camel vs. Marlboro mentality convinced that theirs is the best choice in spite of the similarity of effects.

  • Stephen M

    I would vote for Dr. Paul whatever his decision. I think he is the smartest
    leader in Washington right now. With the large number of co-sponsors he got in the House on HR 1207. Coupled with his new subcommittie chairmanship on monetary policy. Frankly he may be of greater service to the country by staying in Congress and keep a sharper eye on the Fed.
    But he deserves to be a Senator or President or Congressman as much as anyone. Think about how much more he seems to be getting interviewed and giving speeches these past couple of years since he ran for President in 2008. He may have been much more effective at spreading the message of liberty and limited government as a Congressman these past 2 years than he could have as President. I am afraid that if he had been President these past 2 years he may have been smeared and more negative media coverage. I do believe his last Presidential campaign did gain a considerable following for the ideas and philosophy he stands for

  • Peter

    Ron Paul should get together a team of 3-5 people who agree on his agenda, represent them well, and form with him a presidential competence “team”. This would allow them to gain exposure and position them in a good spots for gaining house and senate seats.
    The problem is, that people know nobody of the Campaign for Liberty besides RP. He needs to bring in a few new faces to make it a broader movement. Ron has the power and profile to do this. Rand was a good start but from my point drinking a bit too much tea…

  • John

    Mark, would you like to give us reasons as to why you believe Ron Paul is a monster? Also, what are Republicans lying about? You do realize that Ron Paul is pretty much a Libertarian and has chastised quite a few Republicans for their thoughts on current Republican thinking, don’t you?

  • Dan

    What we need is Dr Paul in the White House and it can happen with the proper exposure. When he wins CPAC in February he should announce his candidacy and go for it. He is better known today than in 2008 and his ideas are even more popular today. He will need to start early and let more people get to know his message. With the work on the campuses the last few years he certainlty has the young peoples attention, so we will see. One thing is for sure you can bet on the mainstream media to continue and marginalize him and his message. Start early and have the grassroots help spread your word. With our full support he can be a front runner in the republican primary and then anything is possible.

  • d

    Run for President for the much-needed national exposure (get-the-message-to-the-people); but, above all do not lose sub-committee chairmanship of TheFED… stay in the House !!!

  • Mark

    I think that at this stage in this monster’s career, he should go to a remote island in the Pacific. Then he could stop trying to mess up America for his personal gain under the guise of “populism.” I’m tired of these Republican jerks lying to us. Let’s face it–He wouldn’t win a Presidential election anyway. People would come out to vote against the loser.

    • Erik

      @ mark
      What personal gains would Ron Paul make by messing up America?
      Ron Paul is actually one of the only politicians that tells the truth to the people. He has fought hard for more transparency in the fed and he is not the same as most of the queer bashing pseudo Christian Reich members of the republican party.

  • Eric

    At this point in Ron Paul’s career and life, I don’t think the Senate is the best choice for him. Let’s face it, Ron’s getting kind of old and he probably doesn’t have too many years left of political viability (maybe ten years at best). Rather than trading his Chairman position in the house for a junior senate seat, what he needs is the bully pulpit of a presidential campaign. The fight for liberty will be won in the hearts and minds of the people, not in the halls of Washington, so we need Ron out here delivering the message. Another presidential bid (especially now that America is much more receptive to the message) is the best way to do that. And the bully pulpit of the presidency would be all the better.