PDA

View Full Version : Call me a troll... here's my case... then I'll shut up.




RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 07:33 AM
OK, so I've made a few posts this morning regarding how I think we should continue with our movement, and have caught quite a bit of flack for it. I ask you simply to hear me out, give me your thoughts, and I'll contain the discussion to this thread so that I won't piss any more people off.

I think we have to make a 3rd party announcement before the weekend. Supporters are leaving the cause. They see it as hopeless, and for good reason. Winning the republication nomination, though not impossible, is not within the realm of reasonable probability. To do so would require many things to happen, virtually all of which we have no control over. McCain would have to lose. We may or may not have to win 5 states (which alone is a stretch). Then we have to go to a convention and convince Huck's Army to join us instead of simply awarding their delegates, and likely the nomination, to McCain (whom they've shown support for already). Then there are the other neocons we have to sway to make the threshold. It's just not reasonable to believe that is our best bet.

If Ron were to announce a 3rd party run ASAP it would save his candidacy, and with it, our movement's growth. A 3rd party run is extremely unlikely to put us in the White House, but offers far better prospects that continuing to beat the dead republican horse. Ballot access is difficult, but do-able. The media blackout is nothing new. We have the grassroots organization and support to raise the money and get the message out to the extent that would be necessary for a 3rd party run to work.

We would have to start NOW. If people knew Ron was going to be on the ballot in November, a lot of people who weren't supporters before would join up (as it effectively beats the "he can't win" argument). A McCain vs. Hillary general is tailor made for an insurgent campaign like ours to sneak up and win. Half the republican party hates McCain, half the Democrats hate hillary. If a 3rd party candidate could ever be president, this would be the year for it.

So let's say we try and fail. What's the loss? Ron would lose his seat in Congress. That's a decision he would have to make. Personally I would like to think that he would find the movement to be more important. At the very least we will have had another year to pick up support for the cause, bolster our numbers, develop programs to move the movement forward, etc. If we don't go third party, 90% of the support will be gone before the movement ever got off the ground. We need time, and the only way to buy it is with a 3rd party run.

Please don't attack me. I put this here so that we can have an intelligent discussion. I promise you I am not a "paid troll" as was suggested in another thread. I'm just a concerned revolutionary, trying to plot a plan for success that is viable. Please help.

FreeTraveler
02-06-2008, 07:42 AM
Okay, you've made your case... now shut up.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 07:43 AM
...and you wonder why you're the laughing stock of the political world. perhaps you should practice what dr. paul preaches and listen to people and consider their ideas rather than just being an ass to anyone and everyone whose opinion doesn't mirror your own. you treat everyone like this. even new supporters or supporters of other candidates. do you really think yelling "TROLL" every time someone says anything other than "the campaign is correct, we're winning, life is rosy" is going to win any new support? just don't be an ass and we'd be a lot better off..

qwerty
02-06-2008, 07:48 AM
"In May of 1860, the votes of 233 delegates were required to win the Republican nomination. Abraham Lincoln arrived at that convention starting only with the support of the 22 delegates from Illinois. He went on to win the nomination."



To the subject...

Thatīs not your or my decicion to make, i will respect what Ron Paul does!

Still I will stand behind this message, will spread this message and will be the change i want to see!

This movement wonīt die, we are only beginning, we are now getting "Ron Paul"-people elected everywhere, soon there could be MANY Ron Pauls in the elections!

We must stop speculating, what we must do is CONTINUE SPREADING THIS MESSAGE!

This is the message from the founding fathers, sooner or later people will come to us and demand our rights back with us!

:cool:

MicheleFloyd
02-06-2008, 07:51 AM
I'm pleased to read you still support Dr Paul for President.

Rage, why would running a 3rd party save the campaign? You've said it would help but how would it help? I have grave doubts on whether the Media will give Ron Paul his fair share of coverage just because he goes it alone. Winning over voters would be just as challenging then as it is now. The Democrats in my state went to great lengths to keep Ralph Nader's name off the ballot, and they succeeded. I'm certain the Republicans will do the same. My view is to give it more time. Republicans are still split on who gets the nomination so hope is not lost.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 07:53 AM
To the subject...

Thatīs not your or my decicion to make, i will respect what Ron Paul does!

Still I will stand behind this message, will spread this message and will be the change i want to see!

This movement wonīt die, we are only beginning, we are now getting "Ron Paul"-people elected everywhere, soon there could be MANY Ron Pauls in the elections!

We must stop speculating, what we must do is CONTINUE SPREADING THIS MESSAGE!

This is the message from the founding fathers, sooner or later people will come to us and demand our rights back with us!

:cool:

Thank you for a reasoned response. I agree with you on all of your points. It is Dr. Paul's decision to make. I will support him either way as well. Where we differ is our assessment of the current state of our movement. I think we ARE dying. It's not a popular opinion, but face it, people are fair-weather patriots. John Q. Public who may have joined up before now sees it as stupid and futile. Every day more and more people check out and go back to life as usual. We need to stop the bleeding.

Ron will make the call, but I hold the belief that it is in the best interest of the movement to announce ASAP, generate buzz, get people talking again, re-energize the grassroots, and keep the movement growing. Again, I appreciate your input.

gpickett00
02-06-2008, 07:54 AM
Rage, I agree completely. People can talk about technical delegate rules all day but its not going to spark this movement to tell someone its a "possibility" that there could be a brokered convention. Regarding Lincoln, back then I think its safe to say that the delegates were not as informed as they are now. They were probably more willing to change their vote at the convention. These days, if youre a delegate, you are most likely a diehard supporter because of your knowledge about your candidate. Its going to take a lot to convince the entire movement after getting 4% on super tuesday that we can win the GOP.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 07:57 AM
I'm pleased to read you still support Dr Paul for President.

Rage, why would running a 3rd party save the campaign? You've said it would help but how would it help? I have grave doubts on whether the Media will give Ron Paul his fair share of coverage just because he goes it alone. Winning over voters would be just as challenging then as it is now. The Democrats in my state went to great lengths to keep Ralph Nader's name off the ballot, and they succeeded. I'm certain the Republicans will do the same. My view is to give it more time. Republicans are still split on who gets the nomination so hope is not lost.

More time. That is exactly what a 3rd party run will give us. We have to concede defeat in the republican primary, because as long as that is our "goal", it will look to random individual as though we are failing. Noone wants to join a cause that is failing. If we go 3rd party it will re-energize current supporters, offer new hope, and create a lot of buzz. We don't get free media regardless of what party we're running for. I'm not saying it will win him the presidency, I'm saying it will keep the movement growing. It will keep up hope and optimism. It will keep money coming in. It will salvage what's left of the support we have had and allow us time and opportunity to gain more.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 07:58 AM
Rage, I agree completely. People can talk about technical delegate rules all day but its not going to spark this movement to tell someone its a "possibility" that there could be a brokered convention. Regarding Lincoln, back then I think its safe to say that the delegates were not as informed as they are now. They were probably more willing to change their vote at the convention. These days, if youre a delegate, you are most likely a diehard supporter because of your knowledge about your candidate. Its going to take a lot to convince the entire movement after getting 4% on super tuesday that we can win the GOP.

Finally.. some love in the room ;)

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 07:59 AM
I'm with you, your right on;) the reality is we are going to run 3rd party or this whole run was just entertainment for the masses.

RON PAUL 2008

Redcard
02-06-2008, 08:00 AM
Lincoln was an extreme case. He was a centrist, first of all.. and it was thought he could swing the south back in. And if you look at it, Lincoln's election was so disenfranchising, it split the country, quite literally. If you think Ron Paul can walk in with 20 or so delegates and walk out with the nomination.. when everyone else can kingmake each other.. then , I dunno what to say.

Besides, don't you guys hate Lincoln?

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:01 AM
we are polling better as an independent vs. mccain, hillary, and bloomberg than we are as a republican for the nomination (by over two fold). just think about that....

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:02 AM
Lincoln was an extreme case. He was a centrist, first of all.. and it was thought he could swing the south back in. And if you look at it, Lincoln's election was so disenfranchising, it split the country, quite literally. If you think Ron Paul can walk in with 20 or so delegates and walk out with the nomination.. when everyone else can kingmake each other.. then , I dunno what to say.

Besides, don't you guys hate Lincoln?

Another great point raised. Huck and Romney will both likely have the delegates necessary to crown McCain king at the convention, definitely at least one of them will. What's the chance they're going to back us? Cause, you know, they've been sooooo supportive thus far...

qwerty
02-06-2008, 08:06 AM
Thank you for a reasoned response. I agree with you on all of your points. It is Dr. Paul's decision to make. I will support him either way as well. Where we differ is our assessment of the current state of our movement. I think we ARE dying. It's not a popular opinion, but face it, people are fair-weather patriots. John Q. Public who may have joined up before now sees it as stupid and futile. Every day more and more people check out and go back to life as usual. We need to stop the bleeding.

Ron will make the call, but I hold the belief that it is in the best interest of the movement to announce ASAP, generate buzz, get people talking again, re-energize the grassroots, and keep the movement growing. Again, I appreciate your input.

I disagree!

I claim that easily most of the AMERICANS CAN`T STILL EVEN TELL WHERE RON PAUL STANDS ON THE ISSUES! So, itīs pretty logical that they wonīt vote for him!

Think movement isnīt dying, itīs beginning...The Ron Paul-people are starting to run locally and thatīs the way to spread this message!

Remember sooner or later people will be crying to get a man like Ron Paul elected, The day will come when majority of the people will want their freedom back, if we work hard it could come sooner than we think!

Back to these elections...

I trust on Ron Paul, I think he knows what heīs doing and i will support his decicion. Thatīs why i wonīt waste my time on thinking 3-party run. Instead of wasting my time on that, i will spread this message even harder!

FOCUS ON GETTING ELECTED LOCALLY! TAKE OVER YOUR LOCAL POLITICS!

:cool:

jaumen
02-06-2008, 08:07 AM
OK, so I've made a few posts this morning regarding how I think we should continue with our movement, and have caught quite a bit of flack for it. I ask you simply to hear me out, give me your thoughts, and I'll contain the discussion to this thread so that I won't piss any more people off.

I think we have to make a 3rd party announcement before the weekend. Supporters are leaving the cause. They see it as hopeless, and for good reason. Winning the republication nomination, though not impossible, is not within the realm of reasonable probability. To do so would require many things to happen, virtually all of which we have no control over. McCain would have to lose. We may or may not have to win 5 states (which alone is a stretch). Then we have to go to a convention and convince Huck's Army to join us instead of simply awarding their delegates, and likely the nomination, to McCain (whom they've shown support for already). Then there are the other neocons we have to sway to make the threshold. It's just not reasonable to believe that is our best bet.

If Ron were to announce a 3rd party run ASAP it would save his candidacy, and with it, our movement's growth. A 3rd party run is extremely unlikely to put us in the White House, but offers far better prospects that continuing to beat the dead republican horse. Ballot access is difficult, but do-able. The media blackout is nothing new. We have the grassroots organization and support to raise the money and get the message out to the extent that would be necessary for a 3rd party run to work.

We would have to start NOW. If people knew Ron was going to be on the ballot in November, a lot of people who weren't supporters before would join up (as it effectively beats the "he can't win" argument). A McCain vs. Hillary general is tailor made for an insurgent campaign like ours to sneak up and win. Half the republican party hates McCain, half the Democrats hate hillary. If a 3rd party candidate could ever be president, this would be the year for it.

So let's say we try and fail. What's the loss? Ron would lose his seat in Congress. That's a decision he would have to make. Personally I would like to think that he would find the movement to be more important. At the very least we will have had another year to pick up support for the cause, bolster our numbers, develop programs to move the movement forward, etc. If we don't go third party, 90% of the support will be gone before the movement ever got off the ground. We need time, and the only way to buy it is with a 3rd party run.

Please don't attack me. I put this here so that we can have an intelligent discussion. I promise you I am not a "paid troll" as was suggested in another thread. I'm just a concerned revolutionary, trying to plot a plan for success that is viable. Please help.

For what it's worth, I more or less agree with you. I am voting this tuesday for Paul in the MD Primary... but I don't see a way that he could win the nomination.... we needed to at least win A state by now. I'd love to see a 3rd party or independent run by Paul... I don't, however, think that is going to happen. But I will continue to hope the unexpected and unforeseen, maybe someting will turn this election upside-down yet... who knows.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:09 AM
well, atleast we can all agree that we need to keep working on a local level regardless of what happens with this campaign.

qwerty
02-06-2008, 08:10 AM
original article at http://ron-paul-campaign.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, February 5, 2008
The Super Tuesday Winner

So what is the strategy for Super Tuesday? Who will win BIG on today's Super Tuesday of voting? Will it be Senator McCain? (The crowd begins to cheer!) Will it be Governor Romney? (The crowd continues to cheer!) How about Governor Huckabee? (The crowd cheers again!) Or how about that US Constitutional guy... err... what's his name... Congressman... oh yah, Ron Paul? (The crowd starts to laugh!) -- Yes, sounds familiar, right? And so the media continues to report "who won what" and so on and so forth, with of course, no mentioning of that silly Congressman anywhere.

And as the Ron Paul supporters continue to fight back their tears while questioning, "How can this be? I don't get it! I thought we'd make a dent by now?!!", the Ron Paul Headquarters begins to board the "The Ron Paul Express Train", with nothing but confident smiles, because after all, you need a freight train to carry the message of freedom, and more importantly... ALL THE DELEGATES THAT COME WITH IT!!!

"I don't understand -- what do you mean? He lost the delegates in the states because FOX NEWS reported it that way!" Yes, I know... and they also reported that Al Gore won as President -- or have you forgotten? Isn't it funny how IGNORANT Fox News really is? Well, I say ignorant and maybe that isn't really fair -- so let's just say that they choose to show their viewers what they want the people to see. You see, the results we are seeing on TV is not really what is actually occurring, but the media likes to "dumb it down" for America because it would take too much time to explain how the Delegates really choose their candidate, and so they try and keep it simple. And many people like simple -- because simple is good. Heck, I like simple too. However, sometimes keeping things too simple, as is the case with an election, can be very misleading. Yes I know, it sounds complicated and I was once there myself -- so allow me to further explain.

Have you heard of the expression that all of this is really a "Beauty Contest?" Well, this is true, because nothing is set in stone yet. The reason why the media is keeping it simple is because MANY of the states are a winner-take-all state, meaning if a candidate wins the popular vote of the state, they get to keep all the delegates that come with that state -- however, what the media isn't telling you (because statistically speaking, it's highly unlikely) is that ANY DELEGATE can change their mind and vote for whomever they want when it comes time at the convention -- which is when the voting REALLY MATTERS.

"I see. But I still don't understand the whole primary/caucus thing, choosing delegates and how or why it's important?" Let me break that down for you in a nutshell.

First, let me describe what a Delegate is. Delegates are the people who you trust to do the voting at the GOP convention on your party's behalf, so to speak. So basically, you vote on a delegate who supports the candidate you want to win. Anyone can be a delegate as long they fulfill the requirements set out by the state. If you want to be a delegate (which is important to the Ron paul campaign), you can just announce it at the caucus meeting. But you have to bring enough people to vote for you to be a delegate. The more delegates you have in a district, the better, because then there are caucuses for state delegates -- whereby all the district delegates vote on who will be a state delegates. States are assigned a certain number of "state delegates" to represent the state, which is what the whole "Beauty Contest" is about -- it sort of help determines which candidate will receive those delegates. Since many states are a "winner takes all" -- this means that all the delegates will go to the popular vote winner, whereas some states award delegates by percentages.

A caucus is basically a convention held in districts whereby party members gather to hear speeches made about the candidates. The people that attend the caucus (which can be ANYONE) then vote for delegates to represent the candidates at the party's convention. Each district has a certain number of delegates, which depends on who gets voted by the people. State rules and regulations do vary, as some only allow voters to participate in their party’s primary (such as you must be registered as a republican to vote in the republican primaries), while other states have no party restrictions and allow voters to participate in any single primary they choose. Now this is important to understand -- because the more delegates your candidate has, the better. And in MOST (if not all) situations, the turnout of these caucuses are spread so thin because very few people show up to be a delegate, that someone can utterly "steal" the victory away from the popular vote winner (if awarded by percentage) because they had more delegates in a certain district representing them. An example would be Obama in Nevada, who lost by popular vote, but actually received more delegates because the districts by which he won had more delegates than Clinton did. But we'll come back to this a little later.

Now a primary is what most of us are used to. Voters go to the polls, select their candidate and help determine the percentage of the state's delegates. The person who wins the state (if by the winner-take-all policy) supposedly wins all the delegates too -- but here's the rub... do they really win all the delegates? In a typical situation, this is likely the case. The percentages of a state's delegates are broken down to show how many delegates are from each of the candidates running. For example, in Maine, Romney won the popular vote by a landslide right? Therefore, he is rewarded all the delegates of that state. McCain came in second with Ron Paul coming in a very close third place. However, Ron Paul had A LOT MORE DELEGATES that supported him than McCain did, so realistically speaking, Ron Paul came in second in the delegate count. How is this important? It isn't YET, but patience Grasshopper, and you will begin to see the light.

Ok, so I said I would come back to how someone can "steal" a victory. From what I know, this is how it works -- in a brokered convention, ANY STATE DELEGATE IS NOT BOUND TO VOTE FOR ANY PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. Did you get that? While they were selected to best represent their own candidate, what would happen if their candidate dropped out? Their candidate would likely endorse another candidate, right? And it makes sense that the state delegates would support whomever their candidate endorsed, right? But here's where it gets sticky... would they really support whomever their candidate endorsed? A perfect example of that would have been Giuliani who endorsed McCain after he dropped out -- which should have added to the popular vote count for McCain to easily win the state of Maine since he had Giuliani supporters too, right? But McCain lost to Romney. As I said in a previous article, this is not a typical election and there is clearly no real front runner -- at least not what the media is making it out like.

It is my opinion that people are awake now and are not voting in the typical mannerisms of the past elections. People are very angry right now, confused right now and are still unsure of who they would support -- but more important than that, they now understand that it's ok to change their minds and actually vote who's right for office rather than vote for who's right for the party. If there was a clear front runner, then someone would have an enormous lead by now, yes? But this is not the case. And according to the GOP rules, a candidate must enter the convention in September with 51% of the delegates from all the states or else the election will go to a brokered convention... and that is where the pay off will be, because delegates will now have to make things right by voting. BUT, the question is, "Who will they vote for?"

Is your eyebrow raising? Are you getting it yet?!! You're starting to smirk, aren't you? Yessssss, suddenly, all those supposed state delegates that the candidate "thought" he had in the bag from the states (according the media and beauty contests) now suddenly don't look too promising, because they (the delegates) now have the power, and more importantly, the right to change their mind. Now here's the beauty of it all -- there is NOTHING anyone can do about it.

"Yes, I get it now, but c'mon, what are the odds these delegates will vote for Ron Paul?" Well, there is no guarantee -- but let's look at it this logically... this will likely create negative publicity for the so called "front runner", as this candidate will now be seen BY MANY PEOPLE as being weak, not to mention careless, because HE DIDN'T SEE IT COMING. And nobody wants a weak, let alone careless President. A brokered convention hasn't occurred since God knows how long ago - which is why many people still disagree and say it won't happen. However, I believe the odds are in favor this year for one to happen, as do many others, and here's the funny part... if it does, can you imagine the media coverage on that one? The media, all which completely blacked out Ron Paul, is actually responsible for making it all happen because he slipped in "under the radar."

This is why the likelihood of a 3rd party run by Ron Paul is not realistic nor in the playing cards (at this point.) Statistically speaking, he has a better chance of getting those unsure delegates to vote for him than he would at getting a majority to win during a third party run for Presidency. Third party runs are very expensive and get zero media coverage and aren't likely to be invited for debates -- but winning the Republican nomination gets him the best seat in the house, to relay his thoughts on the issues at hand and to eventually prove to America that he is the best choice for President.

So who's the big winner of Super Tuesday? I think it's more like who's the big WEINER of Tuesday. All Aboooooard!!!


http://www.dailypaul.com/node/34128


This is good one!

:cool:

qwerty
02-06-2008, 08:11 AM
well, atleast we can all agree that we need to keep working on a local level regardless of what happens with this campaign.

Yes, thatīs crucial!

Get elected and change the politics!


:cool:

Exarel
02-06-2008, 08:11 AM
Honestly, the biggest problem i've felt is that the canvassing was started too late. At least for me. I wish i had more time. 3rd party gives that. More importantly though, one of the biggest obstacles is the fact that he is labeled as republican as they are seen today, so they don't research or want to listen. I think people could rally after him as independent. I would certainly continue my efforts.

Bruce4Ron
02-06-2008, 08:11 AM
I'm not convinced a 3rd party run would result in anything much different than what we witnessed last night.

Explain to me why the MSM would entertain us on their shows. THey ignored us before and they'd now have even more (possibly more justified) reasons to ignore us now. Explain to me all of these hidden americans who just want an independent candidate.

Here is the truth. We got single digit percentages last night for half the country. Logic tells you that this same pattern will follow throughout.

The whole purpose of this movement is to do just what the name says. Create a movement. Open the eyes of some Americans who care and will do something about it. We cannot do anything until Ron Paul tells us what the goal is. If the goal is to win the White House then its time he makes a hard decision. He's not a dumb man and he has to realize the delegate count is more of an uphill fight than an independent run.

I want Ron Paul to tell me what I should be doing. Because right now, I have no clue what strategy to implement any longer. Last night was an uppercut to the jaw.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:16 AM
The MSM wouldn't give us anything. They haven't been giving us anything. That's nothing new. Sure a 3rd party run is a longshot. We've been a longshot since the beginning. We probably wouldn't win. BUT, we'd have more time to spread the movement. We'd have renewed hope and energy. People rally behind independent candidacies.

Also, the benefit of not being labeled "R" is greater than many of us believe. I've had many-a-potential supporter tell me they like his ideas but would never consider voting republican after King George.

constituent
02-06-2008, 08:18 AM
ditch the third parties... i hope dr. paul will run full-out independent.

parocks
02-06-2008, 08:18 AM
Neither the Republican nomination victory not a 3rd party victory are likely. I think that almost everyone agrees with that at this point.

Both the nomination and a 3rd party victory are technically possible.

I'd rather Dr. Paul proceed through the nomination process. I'm not an expert on delegates, but it does seem that we're getting more delegates than we're given credit for by the MSM. We seem to do best in situations where the dedication of a small group of supporters can make an important positive difference. That's the Republican nomination process, involving state conventions, delegates and such.

In addition, I really don't want to play the spoiler role, Nader to McCain's Gore, especially if Hillary is the Democratic nominee.

If there's any discussion of a 3rd party, perhaps Rand as the Libertarian nominee?

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:18 AM
Okay, you've made your case... now shut up.

im sorry but he is 100% correct but you can go on living your fantasy world in the gop good luck

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:20 AM
i have no intention of voting republican unless i ts ron paul end of story
the gop made their bed let them enjoy what they made.
they the gop and msm have made a mockery of ron paul, enjoy the gop they have lost this election before it has even begun

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:21 AM
personally, i would love to play spoiler. the republican party deserves to suffer for what it has done to dr. paul. even if it puts hillary in office, it would be worth it. we can't allow the republican nominee to win or it would prove that we had no real influence. the only thing we still have over them is the fear that we will not vote republican in november.

pacelli
02-06-2008, 08:23 AM
I agree that some concrete communication from the campaign, outside of historical quotes, is needed.

I'm an idiot when it comes to the whole 3rd party issue. I'm not experienced enough in politics to make the call one way or the other. I've always been your average mainstream registered republican. I hope that Dr. Paul makes the right choice. I stand behind him either way. This time I will not vote for evil.

I'm also wondering when the campaign is going to begin it's own 'attack phase'. It kills me inside to watch Ron sit by while debate 'moderators' silence him. I just want to smash things when I see that happen.

expatinireland
02-06-2008, 08:23 AM
You are correct that the probability of Ron taking the nomination is low. The front runner will pick one of the other top 2 contenders as a running mate to consolidate support at the convention.

It is Ron's decision but if he wants to go independent or 3rd party he needs to decide soon as we need to get going on the general election campaign right now.

3rd party does not make any sense to me unless it is a new party as the other brands all carry baggage that the media can utilise to marginalise us once again.

If we sit around to see how all the state conventions go we will be wasting valuable time that is needed to canvass to build a large nationwide organisation that can pull off an independent run.

patriot4paul
02-06-2008, 08:25 AM
I don't think you're a troll RageAgainstDC. Matter of fact, I think your ideas are well thought out and very good. Nevermind those who unfairly criticize you. It seems that some people call others "trolls" if they have different ideas. However, all RP supporters have the same goal - to see Dr. Paul become our next President. People should realize that just because our ideas of how to get him elected may be different doesn't mean we're "trolls."

Redcard
02-06-2008, 08:25 AM
I'd rather Dr. Paul proceed through the nomination process. I'm not an expert on delegates, but it does seem that we're getting more delegates than we're given credit for by the MSM.

You know, I've heard this over and over here.

But I've also heard "Wait until New Hampshire." and "We have Louisiana" and "We're going to Win Alaska" and "Montana is ours" and other such things. Look, we have tried to play games, and we've done "better" in caucuses, but we've not WON anything. We got gamed to kingmake Huckabee in WV, and we probably won't get the three delegates there, and we got gamed in Louisiana by a mutlicandidate slate and people who didn't seem to know how to file for a change in party.

So , I'm sorry, but I'm tired of believing in "secret plans" and things like that.

Our credibility is GONE on those. Show me how you can get people to vote for Dr. Paul.

Right now, our best bet is to go third party, take the lib nomination, attempt to get the 5% , and then have more FEC recognition for the libertarian party in 2012 . Remember, if we get 5%, we can enter into the "2 party system" and get funding, air time rights, debate rights, and full primary rights.

Isn't that worth it?

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:26 AM
I disagree!

I claim that easily most of the AMERICANS CAN`T STILL EVEN TELL WHERE RON PAUL STANDS ON THE ISSUES! So, itīs pretty logical that they wonīt vote for him!

Think movement isnīt dying, itīs beginning...The Ron Paul-people are starting to run locally and thatīs the way to spread this message!

Remember sooner or later people will be crying to get a man like Ron Paul elected, The day will come when majority of the people will want their freedom back, if we work hard it could come sooner than we think!

Back to these elections...

I trust on Ron Paul, I think he knows what heīs doing and i will support his decicion. Thatīs why i wonīt waste my time on thinking 3-party run. Instead of wasting my time on that, i will spread this message even harder!

FOCUS ON GETTING ELECTED LOCALLY! TAKE OVER YOUR LOCAL POLITICS!

:cool:

OUR MOVEMENT is just beginning your right:) but the republican party is dying this is a good thing;) we dont need the republican party,our movement will grow,we dont need the republicans and its pretty obvious the republican party doesnt want us,let them die,actually we can call it entertainment

i will stay republican until the day after convention day,but anyone thinking we will win the nomination thru a brokered convention is dreaming, we will not get the nomination ,the gop has done everything possible to make sure it doesnt happen, THIS IS REALITY to ignore reality is insanity..

good luck though within the republican party,it isnt going to happen anyone talling themselves it will,is lying to themselves. the republican party /gop has spoken already ,they endorsed the media blackout and endorsed the trashing of ron paul

RON PAUL 2008

eloquensanity
02-06-2008, 08:28 AM
ditch the third parties... i hope dr. paul will run full-out independent.

Yes I agree

parocks
02-06-2008, 08:28 AM
personally, i would love to play spoiler. the republican party deserves to suffer for what it has done to dr. paul. even if it puts hillary in office, it would be worth it. we can't allow the republican nominee to win or it would prove that we had no real influence. the only thing we still have over them is the fear that we will not vote republican in november.


The MSM has been far worse to Dr. Paul than the Republicans have been.

Remember the Fox debate prior to NH? That was Fox who excluded Dr. Paul, not the New Hampshire Republican party.

Our enemy is the MSM, not the Republicans.

If you think the MSM will mention Dr. Paul within the context of a 3rd party run, you're solely mistaken, unless it's to help Hillary in some way.

By the way, many of us here support Dr. Paul because he is by far the best Republican running.

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:29 AM
i dont need the republican party to take over locally we only have 20% registered in our counties ,running republican is suicide already here.

I'll run independent before i ever put a r next to my name,the republican party has proven one thing to me,ill never vote for a republican other then ronpaul.

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:31 AM
The MSM has been far worse to Dr. Paul than the Republicans have been.

Remember the Fox debate prior to NH? That was Fox who excluded Dr. Paul, not the New Hampshire Republican party.

Our enemy is the MSM, not the Republicans.

If you think the MSM will mention Dr. Paul within the context of a 3rd party run, you're solely mistaken, unless it's to help Hillary in some way.

By the way, many of us here support Dr. Paul because he is by far the best Republican running.

ello anyone home,the republican party endorsed everything by the msm by not taking action for Ron Paul,the republican party is behind every attack they have had on ron paul or lack of standing up for their only republican running

THE MSM AND THE GOP IS GUILTY 100% the republican party is guilty of not being republicans, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS FINISHED DEAD ON ARRIVAL

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 08:32 AM
I don't think you're a troll RageAgainstDC. Matter of fact, I think your ideas are well thought out and very good. Nevermind those who unfairly criticize you. It seems that some people call others "trolls" if they have different ideas. However, all RP supporters have the same goal - to see Dr. Paul become our next President. People should realize that just because our ideas of how to get him elected may be different doesn't mean we're "trolls."

Thank you. I appreciate that.

fedup100
02-06-2008, 08:32 AM
Who is the troll that has sold everyone on this forum that a third party run can't be done or won? I promise you, that is the nightmare the other parties are hoping to avoid. They want him gone and to stay this course, he will be gone. Why will he be gone? He will be gone because trolls have been allowed to destroy the base as far as money.

You have allowed trolls to destroy this board and now most of you are destroying the rest of his supporters with this kind of talk. A third party run is his only option. No, A third party has never won, but times are different now. He needs to take matching funds and spend the next 6 months on getting his view points out. HE NEEDS A INFOMERCIAL DUH DUH DUH!!!!!!!!!!1

It is liking talking to a effin wall, a infomercial is the only way he can win. Perot was 100% correct. For what we wasted on a blimp, we could have put one together.

You know what pisses me off above everything else is the lack of communication with the campaign.....not an effin word about anything, just let people flounder and wonder.

parocks
02-06-2008, 08:35 AM
You are correct that the probability of Ron taking the nomination is low. The front runner will pick one of the other top 2 contenders as a running mate to consolidate support at the convention.

It is Ron's decision but if he wants to go independent or 3rd party he needs to decide soon as we need to get going on the general election campaign right now.

3rd party does not make any sense to me unless it is a new party as the other brands all carry baggage that the media can utilise to marginalise us once again.

If we sit around to see how all the state conventions go we will be wasting valuable time that is needed to canvass to build a large nationwide organisation that can pull off an independent run.

I think, within the context of a 3rd party run, I wouldn't worry about "baggage" that the media would use to marginalize us. I'd worry that they would never mention him on TV at all, ever. He certainly would not be in any debates.

He would be mentioned on TV only enough to take enough votes from McCain to help Hillary win. (Assuming Hillary, it's about 50/50 Hillary vs Obama now).

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:35 AM
Yes I agree

x1,000,000,000

i will not donate anymore of my money until ron paul announces a independent run and im calling hq to let them know. I'm over the republican party done done. I will vote ron paul as i am a delegate . locally i have to explain to everyone why im a republican, the gop is dead in my eyes now ,over and done. the only problem with RON PAULS MESSAGE is he is a registered republican, this has to end now.

republican party is dead in my eyes

sb10
02-06-2008, 08:36 AM
No serious supporter should be getting any flack for debating a 3rd party run versus staying the course. It's a very tough call to make. I enjoy reading ideas from both sides of the debate.

qwerty
02-06-2008, 08:37 AM
x1,000,000,000

i will not donate anymore of my money until ron paul announces a independent run and im calling hq to let them know.

Thatīs the worst thing you can do for Ron Paul and our message....




:rolleyes:

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:38 AM
Who is the troll that has sold everyone on this forum that a third party run can't be done or won? I promise you, that is the nightmare the other parties are hoping to avoid. They want him gone and to stay this course, he will be gone. Why will he be gone? He will be gone because trolls have been allowed to destroy the base as far as money.

You have allowed trolls to destroy this board and now most of you are destroying the rest of his supporters with this kind of talk. A third party run is his only option. No, A third party has never won, but times are different now. He needs to take matching funds and spend the next 6 months on getting his view points out. HE NEEDS A INFOMERCIAL DUH DUH DUH!!!!!!!!!!1

It is liking talking to a effin wall, a infomercial is the only way he can win. Perot was 100% correct. For what we wasted on a blimp, we could have put one together.

You know what pisses me off above everything else is the lack of communication with the campaign.....not an effin word about anything, just let people flounder and wonder.


your the troll for thinking the republican party even cares about ron paul,keep living in your dreamworld
I LIVE IN REALITY
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS FINISHED ,they want nothing to do with ron paul
they want us anti war small government republicans ,to vote for their pro-war big government intrusive republicans,NOT GOING TO HAPPEN,im not selling out for Ron Paul,if you can flip flo[ that bad then good luck enjoy voting for mccain and romney thats insanity

parocks
02-06-2008, 08:39 AM
ello anyone home,the republican party endorsed everything by the msm by not taking action for Ron Paul,the republican party is behind every attack they have had on ron paul or lack of standing up for their only republican running

THE MSM AND THE GOP IS GUILTY 100% the republican party is guilty of not being republicans, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS FINISHED DEAD ON ARRIVAL


The NH Gop supported Ron Paul against Fox.

The MSM has been unfair, not the Republicans.

The MSM is the enemy, not the Republicans.


http://cliffschecter.bravenewfilms.org/blog/23576-nh-gop-drops-out-as-fox-debate-partner-over-ron-paul-etc
CONCORD, N.H.-New Hampshire's Republican Party has dropped out as a partner of a Fox News Channel presidential forum because the network won't let two low-polling candidates take part.

Party Chairman Fergus Cullen said he has failed in attempts to get Fox to include candidates Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter in Sunday's forum.

"Only in New Hampshire do lesser known, lesser funded underdogs have a fighting chance to establish themselves as national figures," Cullen said. "Consistent with that tradition, we believe all recognized major candidates should have an equal opportunity to participate in pre-primary debates and forums."

John P Slevin
02-06-2008, 08:41 AM
OK, so I've made a few posts this morning regarding how I think we should continue with our movement, and have caught quite a bit of flack for it. I ask you simply to hear me out, give me your thoughts, and I'll contain the discussion to this thread so that I won't piss any more people off.

I think we have to make a 3rd party announcement before the weekend.

I agree with you and anyone calling you a troll or giving you flak, telling you to shut up, etc. doesn't have a clue and probably thinks the Republican Party somehow is superior the the D Party.

Whenever ONE of them can point to ONE thing Ron Paul has accomplished in the US Congress, as a Republican, then I'll give their opinions some attention.

MsDoodahs
02-06-2008, 08:43 AM
personally, i would love to play spoiler. the republican party deserves to suffer for what it has done to dr. paul. even if it puts hillary in office, it would be worth it. we can't allow the republican nominee to win or it would prove that we had no real influence. the only thing we still have over them is the fear that we will not vote republican in november.

I do agree with this statement - in terms of causing the GOP to further implode, I'm all for it. Their treatment of Ron is appalling and that party needs to whither and die. They're well on their way to that, as they're about to lose HUGE to the dems.

The thinking that has been fed to the little GOP machine cogs (like my local GOP official) is that the GOP wants a Hillary victory, then she'll screw up the nation and the GOP will win HUGE in 2012. That's crazy and won't happen but the little GOP machine cogs are relatively ignorant and trained to believe their bosses in DC, so they've not questioned that view and have therefore assisted with their treatment of Dr. Paul (think the little assholes nationwide we've seen behave in totally rotten ways - Anuzzi, that guy in SC, etc, etc.).

I'm not at all concerned about the survival of the freedom movement, and those of you who found this movement when you found Ron Paul are why I'm unconcerned.

The movement did not start with Ron Paul's run for the presidency. His run may be what caused you to find it, but it existed long before you found it. The freedom movement will continue.

This run for the presidency has strengthened the freedom movement in a very important way: we are now networked. This is HUGE.

When a freedom champion runs for a local office in say, MN, I will know about it - all this distance away in TX, I will know about it. That will allow me to support his run with the lifeblood of politics: money.

Ron's gift to us is this network.

This network is what has been missing in the past.

We are now unstoppable.

JMO, YMMV.

:)

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:44 AM
Thatīs the worst thing you can do for Ron Paul and our message....eyes:


not my problem ,its the republican partys problem
i registered republican for ron paul,not romney or mccain.
i support ron paul not the republican party, the problem with ron paul is he is a republican,he needs to leave . anyone thinking we are gonna win the nomination in the republican party is dreaming ,Ron Paul is hurting his own message everyday he stays a republican
after caucus last night my loyalty is the message not the party,the republican party has no interest in ron pauls message,


I am helping ron paul ,he doesnt stand a chance the gop has spoken loud and clear
the GOP WANTS US TO IGNORE RON PAULS MESSAGE AND ENDORSE THEIR CANDIDATE that goes opposite of everything ron paul stands for.
I WILL NEVER ENDORSE ANYONE BUT RON PAUL end of story
......

MsDoodahs
02-06-2008, 08:47 AM
The NH Gop supported Ron Paul against Fox.

The MSM has been unfair, not the Republicans.

The MSM is the enemy, not the Republicans.


The MSM is one enemy of freedom, the GOP is another.

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:48 AM
I do agree with this statement - in terms of causing the GOP to further implode, I'm all for it. Their treatment of Ron is appalling and that party needs to whither and die. They're well on their way to that, as they're about to lose HUGE to the dems.

The thinking that has been fed to the little GOP machine cogs (like my local GOP official) is that the GOP wants a Hillary victory, then she'll screw up the nation and the GOP will win HUGE in 2012. That's crazy and won't happen but the little GOP machine cogs are relatively ignorant and trained to believe their bosses in DC, so they've not questioned that view and have therefore assisted with their treatment of Dr. Paul (think the little assholes nationwide we've seen behave in totally rotten ways - Anuzzi, that guy in SC, etc, etc.).

I'm not at all concerned about the survival of the freedom movement, and those of you who found this movement when you found Ron Paul are why I'm unconcerned.

The movement did not start with Ron Paul's run for the presidency. His run may be what caused you to find it, but it existed long before you found it. The freedom movement will continue.

This run for the presidency has strengthened the freedom movement in a very important way: we are now networked. This is HUGE.

When a freedom champion runs for a local office in say, MN, I will know about it - all this distance away in TX, I will know about it. That will allow me to support his run with the lifeblood of politics: money.

Ron's gift to us is this network.

This network is what has been missing in the past.

We are now unstoppable.

JMO, YMMV.

:)

im not in the republican party for republicans. i'm in the republican party because of ron pauls message. the republicans just rejected the message,so i in return reject the republican party. fair game, lets play

werdd
02-06-2008, 08:49 AM
Ron needs to stay in until the bitter end. Pussies quit, Ron Paul will never quit until its over.

expatinireland
02-06-2008, 08:50 AM
. . . This run for the presidency has strengthened the freedom movement in a very important way: we are now networked. This is HUGE.

When a freedom champion runs for a local office in say, MN, I will know about it - all this distance away in TX, I will know about it. That will allow me to support his run with the lifeblood of politics: money.

Ron's gift to us is this network.

This network is what has been missing in the past.

We are now unstoppable.

JMO, YMMV.

:)

+1 excellent

Whoever gets into office is going to have a tough time with the economy as we could very well be on the cusp of a lengthy downward spiral.

The Republicans will be blamed for the downturn however as it was all put into motion on their watch.

Which makes me wonder if we really want the Republican nomination after all?

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:51 AM
I agree with you and anyone calling you a troll or giving you flak, telling you to shut up, etc. doesn't have a clue and probably thinks the Republican Party somehow is superior the the D Party.

Whenever ONE of them can point to ONE thing Ron Paul has accomplished in the US Congress, as a Republican, then I'll give their opinions some attention.

yep i totally agree,you hit the nail on the head

John P Slevin
02-06-2008, 08:51 AM
x1,000,000,000

i will not donate anymore of my money until ron paul announces a independent run and im calling hq to let them know. I'm over the republican party done done. I will vote ron paul as i am a delegate . locally i have to explain to everyone why im a republican, the gop is dead in my eyes now ,over and done. the only problem with RON PAULS MESSAGE is he is a registered republican, this has to end now.

republican party is dead in my eyes

A logical move and one sure to get you some harsh comments on this forum. Stick to your guns. You are right.

qwerty
02-06-2008, 08:51 AM
not my problem ,its the republican partys problem
i registered republican for ron paul,not romney or mccain.
i support ron paul not the republican party, the problem with ron paul is he is a republican,he needs to leave . anyone thinking we are gonna win the nomination in the republican party is dreaming ,Ron Paul is hurting his own message everyday he stays a republican
after caucus last night my loyalty is the message not the party,the republican party has no interest in ron pauls message,


I am helping ron paul ,he doesnt stand a chance the gop has spoken loud and clear
the GOP WANTS US TO IGNORE RON PAULS MESSAGE AND ENDORSE THEIR CANDIDATE that goes opposite of everything ron paul stands for.
I WILL NEVER ENDORSE ANYONE BUT RON PAUL end of story
......

IF YOU DONATE TO RON PAUL, YOU WILL SPREAD OUR MESSAGE! THAT`S OUR GOAL!

I DONīT CARE ABOUT A PARTY, I CARE ABOUT OUR MESSAGE AND IF YOU STOP DONATING TO RON YOU WILL ONLY HURT US!

:rolleyes:

Mithridates
02-06-2008, 08:52 AM
Perhaps the date of publication for Ron Paul's new book is based on an independent run? Otherwise it would be pretty odd to schedule the publishing date for when there are only a few primaries left.

LibertyEagle
02-06-2008, 08:55 AM
...and you wonder why you're the laughing stock of the political world.

Funny thing.... I thought you were part of this movement too. Care to explain?

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 08:57 AM
IF YOU DONATE TO RON PAUL, YOU WILL SPREAD OUR MESSAGE! THAT`S OUR GOAL!

I DONīT CARE ABOUT A PARTY, I CARE ABOUT OUR MESSAGE AND IF YOU STOP DONATING TO RON YOU WILL ONLY HURT US!

:rolleyes:

I have donated 400 already and i have 8,000 in debt. I will donate again once i hear an independent run,plain and simple ,if anyone is to blame ,its the republican party not me. this is the only leverage i have now as a voter. I will donate again the minute he runs for president.


basically last night the colorado gop told us to vote blindly,ignore ron pauls message and vote for the party that runs opposite of ron pau Ron Paul for President once he leaves the republican party.
i will vote for ron paul as my delegate in my county but ,im sorry if people think we are gonna win a brokered convention ,then they are truly dreaming now. The
Colorado GOP has no intention of ever nominating ron paul and the results last night show we will not win anyone over they are already brainwashed for mccain and romney,it will not happen. I'm smart enough to know ,the colorado gop and national gop will not let it happen the last yr is proof enough.


the republican party is braindead , the ron paul message is spreading far wide ,it will get no further then 10-20% in the republican party,we need to spread it outside the party,the republican party is done. they are deaf dumb and blind , super tuesday proved this and my caucus and what was said proved this.To ignore reality will kill ron pauls message. RON PAULS MESSAGE goes beyond the gop and truly its over their own heads.
we dont need the gop anymore to spread his message ,once ron paul leaves the gop ill donate 100 a month,until then the gop is dead in my eyes. our delegate votes will be drowned out by county level thats a fact...by the time we get to convention they will be mccain or romney not ron paul this is a fact to ignore this is to ignore reality

gpickett00
02-06-2008, 09:00 AM
Im 20 years old and I have donated $100 to the campaign. I donated because I was motivated to see Ron Paul win the nomination. I also did a lot around here to do what I could to help RP win Florida. The way I see it, RP isn't going to win the GOP nomination and Im allowed to say that now that I have spent a great deal of time helping him out. Im not going to be motivated by the possibility of a brokered convention to donate any more money. As a college student I am short on cash and the only way I am going to put more money into this is if he runs outside of the GOP. Its not me being a bad supporter, I have given this my all. Its just isn't logical to give away money if he has no possibility of winning or doing better

RoyalShock
02-06-2008, 09:01 AM
How anyone who is trying to forge a path into the future for the movement can be called a troll is beyond me.

Rage's proposal is certainly worth discussion and isn't any less valid than anyone else's thoughts about the future.

That said, I'm not in favor of a 3rd party or independent run. Here's why:

- 3rd parties have too many negative stereotypes to overcome. There is a reason they are considered "fringe" and why their memberships aren't increasing much. Switching parties after losing a nomination will look like a "sour grapes" move and in my opinion, damage the message and movement.

- Even running as independent, the uphill battle to get on ballots, fight the media for time and a slot in the debates will continue to marginalize the candidate and the message.

- Dr. Paul would be better served to turn his attention back to retaining his House seat and continue the fight from within.

I liken this movement - the R[evol]ution - to a war that may take decades to fight and victory is defined by taking back the GOP. We've just lost a major battle and suffered many casualties. I don't want to lose this war because we go on fighting when we should be retreating. Note that I didn't say surrender, but retreat. We lay low, recruit new soldiers, refine our strategy for victory. We use the democratic process to change the landscape (support and elect "Ron Paul Republicans", get involved in the local party) and begin building up for the next major battle, hoping that the GOP will be more susceptible to our primary weapon - the message of freedom, liberty and the Constitution.

So that's my feelings on the matter. But if RP decides to run 3rd party, I'll still be right there supporting him.

MsDoodahs
02-06-2008, 09:03 AM
Im 20 years old and I have donated $100 to the campaign. I donated because I was motivated to see Ron Paul win the nomination. I also did a lot around here to do what I could to help RP win Florida. The way I see it, RP isn't going to win the GOP nomination and Im allowed to say that now that I have spent a great deal of time helping him out. Im not going to be motivated by the possibility of a brokered convention to donate any more money. As a college student I am short on cash and the only way I am going to put more money into this is if he runs outside of the GOP. Its not me being a bad supporter, I have given this my all. Its just isn't logical to give away money if he has no possibility of winning or doing better

You've found the message. That's the key, to me. :)

realist
02-06-2008, 09:07 AM
Rage,

I too agree with your thoughts. I agree in the sense that this is likely his best course to even have a shot in the general... otherwise, he'll be out before then.

Here's where I think your thoughts make sense.

Announcing 3rd party will be news and it will get reported- but it won't be good becuase he has repeatedly denied the intent to do so. Still, some believe all news is good news in a sense.

It will provide a new pocket of hope for some supporters. This new spring of hope will do more for this campaign than todays realities.

If Clinton and McCain are the nominee's, having a third choice on the general ballot could be a wildcard and the outcome would be very unpredictable. McCain has his problems with real republicans and Hillary has her problems with many Dems- so in this case, a different choice could make serious difference.

My problems with this is only one - Ron Paul. If he proceeds in the same manner as he has run until now, it's a waste of time. It hasn't worked, and won't work unless there is a drastic change in the delivery of the message, and the messengers desire to fight for this.

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 09:07 AM
Im 20 years old and I have donated $100 to the campaign. I donated because I was motivated to see Ron Paul win the nomination. I also did a lot around here to do what I could to help RP win Florida. The way I see it, RP isn't going to win the GOP nomination and Im allowed to say that now that I have spent a great deal of time helping him out. Im not going to be motivated by the possibility of a brokered convention to donate any more money. As a college student I am short on cash and the only way I am going to put more money into this is if he runs outside of the GOP. Its not me being a bad supporter, I have given this my all. Its just isn't logical to give away money if he has no possibility of winning or doing better

same here ,im done the republican party doesnt deserve my membership

I'll do my best for Ron Paul,but it has become obvious the movement will not go further in the hillary republican party.

The plan now doesnt include the republican party ,the republican party failed themselves and helped in doing so,by mocking ron paul. well they can mock me now as they lose the election, WHOS TO BLAME ???? THE GOP not msm the gop allowed this to happen they encouraged it to happen ,they can now live with their actions or lack of

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:09 AM
Thatīs the worst thing you can do for Ron Paul and our message....




:rolleyes:

Yeah... i can't agree with that statement.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:16 AM
Funny thing.... I thought you were part of this movement too. Care to explain?

I am a part of this movement. I'm not one of the assholes that chased Hannity around, or jumped down new supporters throats on this forum for having slightly different views, or screamed "9/11 was an inside job" at television show tapings. THEY are the laughing stock, not the movement.

speciallyblend
02-06-2008, 09:16 AM
Rage againstDC ,your right on the money and im calling hq today to let them know.

Ron Paul has to run independent ,either way the republican party is dead , i have no intention of voting republican now after the actions or lack of from the gop and republicans across this country ,they have sealed their fate.

RON PAUL 2008

IDefendThePlatform
02-06-2008, 09:22 AM
OK, so I've made a few posts this morning regarding how I think we should continue with our movement, and have caught quite a bit of flack for it. I ask you simply to hear me out, give me your thoughts, and I'll contain the discussion to this thread so that I won't piss any more people off.

I think we have to make a 3rd party announcement before the weekend. Supporters are leaving the cause. They see it as hopeless, and for good reason. Winning the republication nomination, though not impossible, is not within the realm of reasonable probability. To do so would require many things to happen, virtually all of which we have no control over. McCain would have to lose. We may or may not have to win 5 states (which alone is a stretch). Then we have to go to a convention and convince Huck's Army to join us instead of simply awarding their delegates, and likely the nomination, to McCain (whom they've shown support for already). Then there are the other neocons we have to sway to make the threshold. It's just not reasonable to believe that is our best bet.

If Ron were to announce a 3rd party run ASAP it would save his candidacy, and with it, our movement's growth. A 3rd party run is extremely unlikely to put us in the White House, but offers far better prospects that continuing to beat the dead republican horse. Ballot access is difficult, but do-able. The media blackout is nothing new. We have the grassroots organization and support to raise the money and get the message out to the extent that would be necessary for a 3rd party run to work.

We would have to start NOW. If people knew Ron was going to be on the ballot in November, a lot of people who weren't supporters before would join up (as it effectively beats the "he can't win" argument). A McCain vs. Hillary general is tailor made for an insurgent campaign like ours to sneak up and win. Half the republican party hates McCain, half the Democrats hate hillary. If a 3rd party candidate could ever be president, this would be the year for it.

So let's say we try and fail. What's the loss? Ron would lose his seat in Congress. That's a decision he would have to make. Personally I would like to think that he would find the movement to be more important. At the very least we will have had another year to pick up support for the cause, bolster our numbers, develop programs to move the movement forward, etc. If we don't go third party, 90% of the support will be gone before the movement ever got off the ground. We need time, and the only way to buy it is with a 3rd party run.

Please don't attack me. I put this here so that we can have an intelligent discussion. I promise you I am not a "paid troll" as was suggested in another thread. I'm just a concerned revolutionary, trying to plot a plan for success that is viable. Please help.

Replace the words "3rd party" with "independent" and I agree with everything in this statement.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:22 AM
The book being released so late in the primary season is either a good sign for an independent run, or just bad timing ;)

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:24 AM
Replace the words "3rd party" with "independent" and I agree with everything in this statement.

independent is what i should have specified. i agree that independent is the way to go. 3rd parties carry too much baggage. i had mistakenly lumped the two categories together.

Computer
02-06-2008, 09:26 AM
OK, so I've made a few posts this morning regarding how I think we should continue with our movement, and have caught quite a bit of flack for it. I ask you simply to hear me out, give me your thoughts, and I'll contain the discussion to this thread so that I won't piss any more people off.

I think we have to make a 3rd party announcement before the weekend. Supporters are leaving the cause. They see it as hopeless, and for good reason. Winning the republication nomination, though not impossible, is not within the realm of reasonable probability. To do so would require many things to happen, virtually all of which we have no control over. McCain would have to lose. We may or may not have to win 5 states (which alone is a stretch). Then we have to go to a convention and convince Huck's Army to join us instead of simply awarding their delegates, and likely the nomination, to McCain (whom they've shown support for already). Then there are the other neocons we have to sway to make the threshold. It's just not reasonable to believe that is our best bet.

If Ron were to announce a 3rd party run ASAP it would save his candidacy, and with it, our movement's growth. A 3rd party run is extremely unlikely to put us in the White House, but offers far better prospects that continuing to beat the dead republican horse. Ballot access is difficult, but do-able. The media blackout is nothing new. We have the grassroots organization and support to raise the money and get the message out to the extent that would be necessary for a 3rd party run to work.

We would have to start NOW. If people knew Ron was going to be on the ballot in November, a lot of people who weren't supporters before would join up (as it effectively beats the "he can't win" argument). A McCain vs. Hillary general is tailor made for an insurgent campaign like ours to sneak up and win. Half the republican party hates McCain, half the Democrats hate hillary. If a 3rd party candidate could ever be president, this would be the year for it.

So let's say we try and fail. What's the loss? Ron would lose his seat in Congress. That's a decision he would have to make. Personally I would like to think that he would find the movement to be more important. At the very least we will have had another year to pick up support for the cause, bolster our numbers, develop programs to move the movement forward, etc. If we don't go third party, 90% of the support will be gone before the movement ever got off the ground. We need time, and the only way to buy it is with a 3rd party run.

Please don't attack me. I put this here so that we can have an intelligent discussion. I promise you I am not a "paid troll" as was suggested in another thread. I'm just a concerned revolutionary, trying to plot a plan for success that is viable. Please help.

Third party campaign will give us best shot, probably won't win, but will keep the message alive longer for this election cycle. YOu're right, McCain v. Hillary or Obama gives conservatives no one to vote for, except Paul.

rg123
02-06-2008, 09:40 AM
I think Ron will definitly run 3rd party it's just a matter of when he decides to lay the smack down on the GOP. When he does it will be the end of the gop for this election and quite possibly forever. The biggest mistake in my opinion is the lack of push @ Illegal Immigration which 70% oppose & the Iraq war which 70% oppose. The campaign has run really no ads on neither. No ads showing the reality of what war looks like no matter how offensive it is. No ads showing the constant flip flopping of Dems on the war which neither of the current two will stop. No challenge to any candidates that they will not institute a draft. The war is the main issue and the campaign should be slamming this issue. I believe that as an independent with either the 2 socialist dems or a socialist McCain then conservatives will be left with either voting for no one or voting for Ron as they will just have to be taught that they either try to stop Illegal Immigration or they support the war. Their only chance at limited government would be Ron.

Mastiff
02-06-2008, 09:42 AM
I support an independent run now. We have to admit that the odds are just too low of having any meaningful impact at the convention. I'm not giving up on the GOP long term; the fact that they are so conflicted and dissatisfied with the options tells me that there are still small government conservatives there who are looking for something better. The Republican options are so bad, I don't mind sacrificing 4-8 years to the Democrats so the Republicans can regroup and get their act together. A strong showing by RP as an independent could help them understand what we're hungry for.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
02-06-2008, 09:44 AM
Email the campaign and ask Ron to run independent!

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:46 AM
if we get hillary vs. mccain we could suck up the anti-war vote (it's not hard to slam hillary on her war stance) and the conservative vote (same goes for mccain's conservatism). the stage really is ideally set for an independent candidate to make a serious run. no obama voters will vote for hillary. half the republican base won't vote for mccain. we're already polling higher as an independent than we are as a republican. if it's ever going to happen, it's going to be this cycle, Ron just needs to decide whether or not he wants to be that guy.

rfbz
02-06-2008, 09:47 AM
I agree with RageAgainstDC. If the goal is to keep spreading the message of freedom and limited government, which will do better to keep working toward that goal: dropping out of the race or running 3rd party? Running third party means RP will be getting a lot more attention because it will have an impact on the general election. This will give him a chance to keep spreading the message.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 09:50 AM
if nothing else, 5-10% in the general (which is where we ARE POLLING) will send one hell of a message to the GOP establishment.

Gadsdenfly
02-06-2008, 09:51 AM
It is up to Ron Paul of course but I would support him if he decides to drop from the Republican race and pursue the Libertarian Party nomination which he would most likely secure with ease. The LP has a national organization and ballot access in place all over the country. It is ready for someone like RP who has gained national stature to step in and take advantage of the years of organization building. I think this is the best course to capitalize on the energy, time, work and the money raised so far. Whatever he does I think he has done a tremendous job bringing so many more people towards liberty.

Computer
02-06-2008, 09:53 AM
I agree with RageAgainstDC. If the goal is to keep spreading the message of freedom and limited government, which will do better to keep working toward that goal: dropping out of the race or running 3rd party? Running third party means RP will be getting a lot more attention because it will have an impact on the general election. This will give him a chance to keep spreading the message.


This is true

expatinireland
02-06-2008, 09:59 AM
It is up to Ron Paul of course but I would support him if he decides to drop from the Republican race and pursue the Libertarian Party nomination which he would most likely secure with ease. The LP has a national organization and ballot access in place all over the country. It is ready for someone like RP who has gained national stature to step in and take advantage of the years of organization building. I think this is the best course to capitalize on the energy, time, work and the money raised so far. Whatever he does I think he has done a tremendous job bringing so many more people towards liberty.

We won't poll any better running Libertarian than we are now. A total waste of time and treasurer imho.

Mastiff
02-06-2008, 10:02 AM
It is up to Ron Paul of course but I would support him if he decides to drop from the Republican race and pursue the Libertarian Party nomination which he would most likely secure with ease. The LP has a national organization and ballot access in place all over the country. It is ready for someone like RP who has gained national stature to step in and take advantage of the years of organization building. I think this is the best course to capitalize on the energy, time, work and the money raised so far. Whatever he does I think he has done a tremendous job bringing so many more people towards liberty.

I don't think I'll support a Lib run, only indy. Libs have way too much baggage, and justifiably. We don't need to be associated (any more than we are) with people obsessed with drug legalization, open borders and all the rest. Ron Paul is uniquely on the libertarian/conservative boundary and we need to keep that.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 10:04 AM
We won't poll any better running Libertarian than we are now. A total waste of time and treasurer imho.

Actually, Ron as an unspecified 3rd party vs. Hillary, McCain, and Bloomberg as independent puts him at 10%, and tracking north. I know this, it's my job ;)

RoyalShock
02-06-2008, 10:04 AM
Now I'm feeling like a flip-flopper.

Assuming the general election will be Hillariously vs. McPainful (sorry, getting some Super Tuesday frustration out), an independent run might draw just enough conservatives and anti-war types to the Revolution to get legitimate attention. There is still no hope to win (Hillary will win in a landslide), but the message could get through.

Just please stay away from 3rd parties!

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 10:06 AM
we don't have any polls with Ron as an independent, only unspecified 3rd party (due to the libertarian run before). in those situations he is polling much better than he ever did as a republican. i doubt a switch to independent would make any difference at all. if anything it might be worth a point or two.

Mastiff
02-06-2008, 10:10 AM
we don't have any polls with Ron as an independent, only unspecified 3rd party (due to the libertarian run before). in those situations he is polling much better than he ever did as a republican. i doubt a switch to independent would make any difference at all. if anything it might be worth a point or two.

No no. People will look up "libertarian" on the internet and get all the crap that is not Ron Paul. It's like if a guy ran as Green, I wouldn't even look at him because I automatically think those people are crazy. I'd check out an independent every time.

parke
02-06-2008, 10:11 AM
We dont need a third party run. We have the money to stay in it until September, broker the convention and make a larger impact on the Republican party. We need Ron in Congress if we cant get him into the white house.. We need Ron to continue to lead this movement.

Redcard
02-06-2008, 10:12 AM
No no. People will look up "libertarian" on the internet and get all the crap that is not Ron Paul. It's like if a guy ran as Green, I wouldn't even look at him because I automatically think those people are crazy. I'd check out an independent every time.

As opposed to what?

Looking up Ron Paul and getting forums and people talking about CFR, the JOOS, 9/11, the NWO, the Amero, Alex Jones, and what not?

Bad news, mate. He's going to get that no matter where he goes, because its the crowd he hung with/hangs with. The negative influence of his name will still be a weight.

The question is, looking at the positives only, what gives us more positive.

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 10:24 AM
As opposed to what?

Looking up Ron Paul and getting forums and people talking about CFR, the JOOS, 9/11, the NWO, the Amero, Alex Jones, and what not?

Bad news, mate. He's going to get that no matter where he goes, because its the crowd he hung with/hangs with. The negative influence of his name will still be a weight.

The question is, looking at the positives only, what gives us more positive.

true, but i still think independent beats third party. i was just stating that we didn't have polls for independent, not that i thought it was better to go 3rd party. either way, it'll keep him in the race. we need to get the message out.

Redcard
02-06-2008, 10:27 AM
Yeah. THe reason I'm up on 3rd party is because if we hit 5% as a 3rd party.. then it means a HUGE crack in the wall of the 2 party system. It'll literally become a 3 party system.

RoyalShock
02-06-2008, 10:30 AM
Yeah. THe reason I'm up on 3rd party is because if we hit 5% as a 3rd party.. then it means a HUGE crack in the wall of the 2 party system. It'll literally become a 3 party system.

Didn't the Reform Party hit 5+% (much more, actually) in two successive elections?

Where are they now?

Redcard
02-06-2008, 10:41 AM
Didn't the Reform Party hit 5+% (much more, actually) in two successive elections?

Where are they now?

No. They didn't.

In 2000, they hit .4%
In 1996, they hit 8.4%, but.. for some reason, they didn't try to claim any of the money in the following presidential election
In 1992, Perot had the lead, but dropped out.

My First Name Is Paul
02-06-2008, 10:42 AM
The only reason I began supporting Ron Paul is because he believes in the principles that I believe in AND he seemed to have a real shot at getting elected. The reason he had a shot was because he was going for the Republican nomination. I always assume that the Libertarian candidate has the same views as I have, but I don't bother supporting them because I have better things to do with my time on this Earth.

A third party attempt will not only fail to accomplish its stated goal, it will lead its supporters to a dead end, just as the above poster alluded to with the example of the Reform party. The last cause that was strong enough to unite anyone to form a lasting third party was the abolishment of slavery. Sadly, the liberty cause has not generated the same results.

DeafPalmdale
02-06-2008, 10:42 AM
I think it would be better for Ron Paul to go for Independent because it would welcome anyone whether they are Republicans, Democrats, Libertians, Constitutionists, etc. They may not want to vote for McCain or Hillary as long as Obama and Huckabee are not in Vice President position.

WATYF
02-06-2008, 10:46 AM
Rage, I agree completely. People can talk about technical delegate rules all day but its not going to spark this movement to tell someone its a "possibility" that there could be a brokered convention. Regarding Lincoln, back then I think its safe to say that the delegates were not as informed as they are now. They were probably more willing to change their vote at the convention. These days, if youre a delegate, you are most likely a diehard supporter because of your knowledge about your candidate. Its going to take a lot to convince the entire movement after getting 4% on super tuesday that we can win the GOP.

I agree with half of your position, but completely disagree with the other half.

I don't think Lincoln had a chance back then because people were less knowledgeable. I think Lincoln had a chance because people were actually capable of thinking back then. Today, people support a candidate with an ignorant fervor that can scarcely be explained half of the time. They latch on to one candidate, usually based on one or two "hot-button" issues, and then defend that candidate with any amount of circular, spaghetti logic and head-in-the-sand denial of facts that is necessary for them not to have to admit that they picked the wrong candidate.

As such, I really don't see this whole "brokered convention" thing going our way. I don't however support a third party run either, unless Ron is willing to establish a new party and try to convince a substantial portion of the country into switching to that party as their "main" party.

In other words, if RP plans to run as an "independent" just so he can get in the general election of 2008, then I think that's a bad idea. It'll be a "flash-in-the-pan" approach that will probably end with him just siphoning single (possibly lower double) digits, mostly from the republicans. If, however, Paul realizes that the republican party is lost and decides to start a new, sustainable, long-term party that can build its support over the course of several elections and eventually come to power, then I can see some merit to that idea. This actually happened in Canada in recent years, so we know it to be a viable option.


WATYF

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 10:47 AM
The only reason I began supporting Ron Paul is because he believes in the principles that I believe in AND he seemed to have a real shot at getting elected. The reason he had a shot was because he was going for the Republican nomination. I always assume that the Libertarian candidate has the same views as I have, but I don't bother supporting them because I have better things to do with my time on this Earth.

A third party attempt will not only fail to accomplish its stated goal, it will lead its supporters to a dead end, just as the above poster alluded to with the example of the Reform party. The last cause that was strong enough to unite anyone to form a lasting third party was the abolishment of slavery. Sadly, the liberty cause has not generated the same results.

think about it this way, it's either an independent run or the movement effectively becomes internet-niche-only (and thus, in all reality, fades off into the sunset). i mean come on, it's our only shot. ron is *not* going to the the republican nominee. the damn gop themselves don't want him, they arent going to let it happen. if you supported him because he was percieved as being electable, but didn't support another candidate you agree with because you assumed they weren't, that's your own shortcoming. if you care so much about electability, then you should obviously support an independent run. he certainly isn't electable if he isn't running in november...

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 10:50 AM
I agree with half of your position, but completely disagree with the other half.

I don't think Lincoln had a chance back then because people were less[/b knowledgeable. I think Lincoln had a chance because people were actually capable of [b]thinking back then. Today, people support a candidate with an ignorant fervor that can scarcely be explained half of the time. They latch on to one candidate, usually based on one or two "hot-button" issues, and then defend that candidate with any amount of circular, spaghetti logic and head-in-the-sand denial of facts that is necessary for them not to have to admit that they picked the wrong candidate.

As such, I really don't see this whole "brokered convention" thing going our way. I don't however support a third party run either, unless Ron is willing to establish a new party and try to convince a substantial portion of the country into switching to that party as their "main" party.

In other words, if RP plans to run as an "independent" just so he can get in the general election of 2008, then I think that's a bad idea. It'll be a "flash-in-the-pan" approach that will probably end with him just siphoning single (possibly lower double) digits, mostly from the republicans. If, however, Paul realizes that the republican party is lost and decides to start a new, sustainable, long-term party that can build its support over the course of several elections and eventually come to power, then I can see some merit to that idea. This actually happened in Canada in recent years, so we know it to be a viable option.


WATYF


starting a formal alternative party is a great idea, but not something that could be done in this election cycle. i would certainly like to see that made a long term goal of the movement, though.

sharedvoice
02-06-2008, 10:55 AM
I don't think we should be speculating about anything at this point. I will respect Ron Paul's decision. I am confident that he already has a contingent strategy in mind. One thing is for certain. He is going to continue this fight, as will the rest of us regardless of the outcome.

TheEvilDetector
02-06-2008, 10:57 AM
Sadly, I predict 8 years of Hitlery rule.

Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton

Done, Done, Done, Done, Done, Soon, Planned, Planned, Planned, Planned, Planned

you get the picture

Sad

Very sad.

jointhefightforfreedom
02-06-2008, 10:59 AM
Rage, i am for a 3rd party run as well IMO it would force the media to give exposure or at the very least expose the fact that "MSM elects the president not the people" and hopefully wake up some more sheeple!

Wht has really disturbed me in this election is hearing people discuss why they choose thier candidate i have been hearing things such as:
I like his/her personality!
Him/her speaks well
She is a woman
he is black
and a whole slew of other reasons other than the issues and why they could do the best job!
It's like the sheep are voting for American idol not the president!
THE COLD WAR IS BACK ! ALIVE AND WELL INSIDE THE US!
IS OUR COUNTRY TURNING SOCIALIST(democrats)?

Rahl
02-06-2008, 11:17 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6015291679758430958&hl=en

RageAgainstDC
02-06-2008, 11:26 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6015291679758430958&hl=en

ummm.... anyone else thinking VP?!?!?!

WRellim
02-06-2008, 07:48 PM
So let's say we try and fail. What's the loss? Ron would lose his seat in Congress. That's a decision he would have to make. Personally I would like to think that he would find the movement to be more important. At the very least we will have had another year to pick up support for the cause, bolster our numbers, develop programs to move the movement forward, etc. If we don't go third party, 90% of the support will be gone before the movement ever got off the ground. We need time, and the only way to buy it is with a 3rd party run.

Well, we would lose a LOT of things besides simply Ron's seat in Congress.

We would lose ALL possibility of getting ANYONE ELSE like Ron Paul elected to Congress either. (And believe me, with a potential McCain-coattail LOSS staring the GOP in the face they will do ANYTHING to hedge their bets -- including running and possibly even financially supporting some "off-brand" candidates for office in Dem vulnerable districts).

And, we would lose ALL of the work being done by THOUSANDS of individuals around the country who are at present working their way INTO the party in order to change it from within.

Oh, I know, most of you really don't care about that -- mainly because its NOT an effort many of you have been willing to make... or indeed even support. But it IS the way to win especially with a McCain driven LOSS (even GOP deep establishment types see that, witness "The Mouse That ROARED" blog article).



As to Ron himself thinking the "movement" is more important. I think he DOES, but he sees it as a LONG TERM movement like the Goldwater/Reagan transition.

He does NOT see it in the terms that you do -- indeed, his whole heart and effort have really never been completely behind this run. Witness the hands-off approach to the campaign (in his congressional campaigns and the 88 run I am told that he was directly involved in a much more substantial way) -- and the minimal retail campaigning in the past few months.


As for the rest... there is NOT another "year" to pick up support. The election day is in VERY early November -- may as well say the end of October for all practical purposes. It is already nearly MARCH. That means a total of 7 months. Seven, not twelve... SEVEN. And most of the effort would have to go to REALLY DIFFICULT TASK of getting him on the ballot with VALIDATED signatures in as many states as possible.

Plus one is then facing not only the money raised by the candidates themselves, but the whole machine of BOTH parties, all of the PACS, and once again the INattention and dismissal of the media (you think they've been dismissive of his primary run? You ain't seen NOTHING YET... the SOLE word they would use is "spoiler" and "thief" as in "who will Ron STEAL votes from"... is the criticism valid? No. But that never stopped the media before.) And a presence in the debates? You're kidding right? Not gonna happen.

A third party run is the equivalent of the movement committing suicide -- and LITERALLY setting us back another TWENTY YEARS.

Lord Xar
02-06-2008, 07:57 PM
...and you wonder why you're the laughing stock of the political world. perhaps you should practice what dr. paul preaches ,,,,,,, etc..

I grabbed out the beginning of your post. I am rather curious as to the line bolded.

You referred to that person and his association with Ron Paul in the third person. You didn't say "why we're the laughing stock.." you said "Why YOU'RE the laughing stock.."

Clearly, you are not "one of us" but an outsider. So, the question begs - if you are not consdiered one of "us" and come bearing opinion/advice, what is your intent?

That is no "slip", you were talking as an argument pretense, thus you were creating battle lines. You are clearly on one side, us on the the other. So, whats your deal?

dan barry
02-06-2008, 08:18 PM
I agree with the original post. However, Ron Paul knows whats best,...and until he announces a 3rd party run we should support him as a Republican. But shit, 3 of my friends told me yesterday that they are now giving up on Ron Paul and our now backing Obama. So the poster is right. We need to make a quick bold decision right NOW, before we lose any more confused supporters. I will support Ron Paul till the end of my life no matter what. So eat shit haters.

Joe H in Indiana
02-06-2008, 08:32 PM
OUR MOVEMENT is just beginning your right:) but the republican party is dying this is a good thing;) we dont need the republican party,our movement will grow,we dont need the republicans and its pretty obvious the republican party doesnt want us,let them die,actually we can call it entertainment

i will stay republican until the day after convention day,but anyone thinking we will win the nomination thru a brokered convention is dreaming, we will not get the nomination ,the gop has done everything possible to make sure it doesnt happen, THIS IS REALITY to ignore reality is insanity..

good luck though within the republican party,it isnt going to happen anyone talling themselves it will,is lying to themselves. the republican party /gop has spoken already ,they endorsed the media blackout and endorsed the trashing of ron paul

RON PAUL 2008
Perhaps this belongs on a different thread, but could a few of you please define "our movement". I have been a Libertarian since thee 70's and supported Ron Paul in 88. I also supported the decisions in the past not to run LP candidates against him in his home district. There are many libertarians supporting Ron Paul, but his campaign is not solely or even predominantly driven by libertarians. So what exactly is this movement you see growing? Is it build around Dr. Paul the man? Is it inclusive of libertarianism or separate? This is not a criticism, I'm just interested in what I've gotten myself into.

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:33 PM
check out my sig and pledge! it's JUST IN CASE...

all J's in IL for RP
02-06-2008, 08:52 PM
I agree with the original post. However, Ron Paul knows whats best,...and until he announces a 3rd party run we should support him as a Republican. But shit, 3 of my friends told me yesterday that they are now giving up on Ron Paul and our now backing Obama. So the poster is right. We need to make a quick bold decision right NOW, before we lose any more confused supporters. I will support Ron Paul till the end of my life no matter what. So eat shit haters.

You should have been propagandizing your friends all along about the "don't waste your vote" canard. Sounds like their support for Paul was soft. Now you have your work cut out for you to recover those votes. If he's the best candidate, you vote for him. Plain and simple.

And don't go chasing the 3rd party mirage. The fight over policy is in the republican party, against the neo-con wing. Abandoning the party is abandoning the fight. Some of the inveterate 3rd party posters on this board are trying to dilute Paul's forces so that the neo-con's can become further entrenched.

literatim
02-06-2008, 09:04 PM
Keep this trash out of Grassroots Central.

Opulen
02-06-2008, 09:08 PM
Cong. Ron Paul knows best. we must follow our leader.

BigRedBrent
02-06-2008, 09:10 PM
Forward this to every supporter everywhere as soon as possible:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1201693

Russellk30
02-07-2008, 12:46 AM
The MSM has been far worse to Dr. Paul than the Republicans have been.

Remember the Fox debate prior to NH? That was Fox who excluded Dr. Paul, not the New Hampshire Republican party.

Our enemy is the MSM, not the Republicans.

If you think the MSM will mention Dr. Paul within the context of a 3rd party run, you're solely mistaken, unless it's to help Hillary in some way.

By the way, many of us here support Dr. Paul because he is by far the best Republican running.

Isn’t it entirely possible that the MSM would see Paul as a spoiler? Isn’t that helping Hillary?

Staying in the Republican race will make the movement stagnant. Jumping into the general election right now will create an entirely new level of enthusiasm.

Russellk30
02-07-2008, 12:49 AM
Keep this trash out of Grassroots Central.

Dont you ever have anytig good to say? All I ever see from you are insults directed at peoples intelligence and allegiance.

At this point I think your motivation is in question. Do you really think such a bad attitude is going to draw more people into the movement?

I think you are smarter than that. I think you know exactly what you are doing.

LukeNM
02-07-2008, 12:55 AM
No 3rd Party or Independent run, thank you! You will figure out sooner or later as to why!

morerocklesstalk
02-07-2008, 01:03 AM
No 3rd Party or Independent run, thank you! You will figure out sooner or later as to why!

Oh boy! Can't wait!!!

More secrets. Please.

RoyalShock
02-07-2008, 09:48 AM
No. They didn't.

In 2000, they hit .4%
In 1996, they hit 8.4%, but.. for some reason, they didn't try to claim any of the money in the following presidential election
In 1992, Perot had the lead, but dropped out.

According to this link:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html

In 1992 Perot got 19% (I think he dropped out, then got back in)

In 1996 he got 8.5%

Clearly, the Reform party had 5+% in successive general elections. Now they are a non-factor. The candidates list on their website include 3 people, one of whom is running for a township clerk.

RageAgainstDC
02-07-2008, 09:50 AM
No 3rd Party or Independent run, thank you! You will figure out sooner or later as to why!

oh god, another guy with secrets. let me guess... the billionaires back?!?!?!?!

Bruno
02-07-2008, 10:13 AM
The bottom line is that Ron Paul has been in this game for a long time and knows how to play it best. We should follow his lead and see where he takes us. If he feels the time is right for a 3rd party run, he will do so.

Keep up the support, keep waking people up with the Red pill as opposed to the Blue, and it will all pay dividends.

There certainly is a possibility that if he did choose to run 3rd party, many Democrats would be more likely come over to Paul that way than to vote for him as a Republican.

It is important to have open discussions, but the choice is Dr. Paul's to make.