PDA

View Full Version : Indy run




colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:07 PM
it's obvious that Ron Paul will win 90% of the remaining states. And then there will clearly be a brokered convention and Ron Paul will win.

What is insane and stupid to think is that Ron Paul has ANY chance in hell of succeeding as an iNDEPENDENT candidate. People that believe that are trolls and are giving up and have never and will never really support Paul, and they are stupid and offer no evidence.

Whereas, just look at the abundance of evidence that he can win the GOP Nomination...

And besides, sticking with and "changing" the GOP is way more important that getting Ron Paul in the Whitehouse. And also, having Ron Paul in the House of Representatives is way more important than mounting an independent bid for president--because the independent bid isn't certain.

You say you want proof that Ron Paul will win the Republican Nomination, well fine, you idiot troll satanic person that says you will support Ron Paul as an independent and give thousands more, get signatures, and canvass until your feet fall off and phone explodes (you obvious non-supporter of Ron Paul). Well, here's your evidence...

Just go back and find all the posts that say:

"Why RP will win in IOWA"
"Iowa picks corn, New Hampshire picks presidents"
"Iowa picks corn, New Hampshire picks 100 years in Iraq
"New Hampshire: 92% stupid"
"Stupid old people in New Hampsire!!!!!!"
"Why Ron Paul will WIN in Nevada"
"Romney Bussed out the Mormons in Nevada"
"Why Ron Paul will win in Montana"
"Every Mormon in Montana came out!!"
"Don't give up hope! RON PAUL WILL GET 1ST IN NORTH DAKOTA"
"Arabs will give Ron Paul 2nd place or better in Michigan"
"Stupid socialist union members in Michigan"
"Ron Paul will win Alaska"
"Stupid Alaskans on Welfare"

and if you still doubt the cause after all that evidence, just look what's up now:

"Ron Paul to get 1st place in Washington...Guaranteed...For Reals this time!!!!!"


www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com (http://www.ronpaulwhitehouse.com/) <--pledge here.


Face it, the GOP has rejected us. There is no plausible path to the nomination after today, none. The next stage in our ideological struggle to save this country is to undertake an Independent run for the White House. I realize there are a lot of naysayers on this issue. Some people think it's insanely hard to do and that it cannot be done. I submit the following points to argue otherwise. If you agree, please help me spread word about the site and make sure to signup today. :D


Ballot Signatures:
We need to gather about 800,000 signatures nationwide to get on the ballots. We have a wonderful precinct captain system to help accomplish this, and I've read reports that to hire collectors to do the job would cost about 3 million dollars. It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that we cannot collect these signatures.

Sore Loser Laws:
Only four states in the country present possible issues with Sore Loser laws: Texas, Ohio, South Dakota, and Mississippi. There may be legal grounds to dispute these laws. More information here (http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/01/12/sore-loser-laws-dont-generally-apply-to-presidential-candidates/) and here (http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/20/do-sore-loser-laws-apply-to-presidential-candidates/)

Votes:
Polling done by Rasmussen a week ago showed that Ron Paul would garner between 7-11% of the vote in four-way matchups that included Bloomberg, Paul, and the GOP/Dem nominees. More info here. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/will_michael_bloomberg_ron_paul_run_third_party_ca mpaigns_in_2008)

Debates:
Perot got in them before, no reason we cant pull it off as well. If the polling above is true, then the media might actually let us in. Double digit support is the key, and it looks like we might be able to manage that.

A New Era:
We've learned some important lessons and made some mistakes, but the campaign activities have improved at the official level, and the grassroots got their much needed wakeup call that our attention starved methods are not very effective. We still have powerful weapons at our disposal, namely the 24 hour news cycle, new media, high name recognition, record high voter dissatisfaction, etc... Most importantly, we have the winning message and the dedication to spread it. Educating people takes time, we shouldn't give up yet.

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:08 PM
evidence for an iNDY run to be posted in this post...


**********

Paul has said repeatedly that he will not run 3rd party. Why would he lie to us like that?

No he hasn't!

He is absolutely right--and honest--to say that he "has no intention of going iNDEPENDENT or Third Party" because, right now (at least before today's results), his only intention is to win the Republican nomination. He 100% fully intends (or intended) to wholeheartedly run and try his best to win as a Republican while he is running as such, and he says so. He has NEVER, EVER said "I will not run iNDY". He has never, ever said "I will never run iNDY". But IF it becomes clear he cannot win the nomination, then he can go independent.

I would be very, very, very sad if he didn't go iNDY. He could win it, especially against Hillary (and she seems like the chosen one (it's all about the superdelegates).

Actually, I will say this... If it appears that the GOP will be utterly, hopelessly lost, as in completely abandoning constitutional and conservative ideals like protection of civil liberties, small, limited government, national sovereignty, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, then maybe Ron Paul and his 10% base that exists now should all sign up under the banner of a new coalition, maybe it could be a party, maybe call it the Conservative Party. That way we go into the contest for the General election with some orginization--and if it catches on maybe it could beat down the Republican Party that so many conservatives are fed up with. Also, any Ron Paul Republicans could join the Conservative Party (or whatever it is) and could run for Congress and state seats under its banner in the upcoming election, especially if they don't make it in their primaries.

We could create "the Conservative party" with our email, fundraising, and canvassing lists--and, of course, with our delegate lists. Although I still don't know if that would be better than iNDY. The reason I say that is because we might alienate the Libertarians and Constitution party folks, whereas we wouldn't if we went iNDY--but they are only like 4% of the voting public if that. "Conservative Party" (or another name possibly) would get us the Buchananites and many others I'm sure.

We WILL win iNDY.


Ron Paul said that he will continue to run as long as he continues to get support: canvassing and financing. He's not stupid. He will be able to see when continuing to run Republican will be a futile waste. Then if he has the support he mentioned, he will have to keep going. Key points:

1. A brokered convention is not going to happen.

2. Canvassing is done for in half the states as of now, unless he goes iNDY. If he goes iNDY, on the other hand, we would have 8 months to canvass and get 200,000 plus precinct captains.

3. ...:

my dad said he'd donate another 500 to Paul (IF he announces 3rd party) (he donated 200 on Dec. 16th--but that was when it seemed like he REALLY could maybe, possibly win the Nom. I would donate 500 the day he declares (even though it will hurt financially), whereas I can't afford to give anymore (I gave just over a 1,100 in Q4 to the cause--so shut up) for his Republican run; and gramps would probably wager another 1776.00

The 2nd and 3rd tier, broader-base of supporters aren't (many or most of them) going to donate MORE--if they already have once--because TO THEM it is obvious or at least nearly certain that he's not going to get the Nom from the Republican party (I'm not saying I believe that--but they DO). However, they would be very willing and enthusiastic about supporting him in an iNDEPENDENT run.


**********
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/poll-an-independent-president/

July 20, 2007, 5:08 pm Poll: An Independent President (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/poll-an-independent-president/)

By Megan Thee (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/author/mthee/)

In a New York Times/CBS News Poll taken last week, half of Americans said a president who is neither a Republican nor a Democrat could govern effectively.
And with 6 in 10 Republican primary voters and almost 4 in 10 Democratic primary voters saying they are not satisfied with their party’s current slate of candidates for the presidential nomination, the political environment could be ripe for an independent candidate to break into the race.
[THAT'S HALF]
Michael Bloomberg, a newly minted independent who says he’s not intent on making a run for the White House even though he just switched affiliations, is largely unknown by most Americans. Six in 10 registered voters said they haven’t heard enough about him yet to have an opinion; 9 percent view him favorably; 9 percent unfavorably; and 18 percent said they are undecided.
The current poll suggests that Americans are significantly more optimistic about the chances of a third-party president meeting with success, than they were in 1995 before the Bill Clinton-Bob Dole-Ross Perot contest. In the summer of 1995, just 30 percent of Americans said an independent president could govern effectively and 61 percent said such a president would encounter serious problems dealing with Congress.
Forty-four percent of those polled recently said such a president would have trouble dealing with Congress.

Independents and Republicans are significantly more supportive of a third-party president than are Democrats. Similarly, younger Americans are more open to the idea of an independent president — as respondent age increases, the incidence of those saying an independent could govern effectively decreases.


**********
Yeah--we couldn't get on the ballots WITH SEVEN MONTHS TO DO SO?! Whatever. What a bunch of crap. How the F did Perot do it? We have way more grassroots than he did. And DON'T SAY, "With his billions." He spent 65 million--look on wikipedia. What cost $65000000 in 1990 would cost $107,402,877.98 in 2007. source: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi


You know what's really "never gonna happen"? The Republican nomination. So for people that want ONE THING and one thing only--Ron Paul to be in the whitehouse--an iNDY run must be discussed. For all you that care more about "changing the GOP", fine--you can continue to argue your point that that would be better than a Ron Paul win in the General.


An independent run is virtually impossible.
The ballot access battle is ridiculously difficult and would never happen
if Ron Paul tried to go independent.

With the sheer numbers of grassroots supporters already keyed in
the feasibility of undercutting the MSM stranglehold in the general election exists.
The organization does not cease to exist - who wants to abandon hope?
Not while we are still organized - that would be nuts.
Let us keep this thing together - no matter what.

The biggest part of making a third-party run is already in place.

The only realistic choice is to go with the Libertarian Party.

I won't vote for anyone but Ron Paul, no matter what happens.

But all this is still premature - let's wait for the results.
It is only a few hours until all the rest of the cards are on the table.


**********
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287190,00.html
FOX News Poll: Third Party President Good for Country

Thursday, June 28, 2007
By Dana Blanton
http://www.foxnews.com/images/foxnews_story.gif
E-MAIL STORY (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287190,00.html#)
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION (http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,287190,00.html)NEW YORK — Nearly half of Americans think it would be good for the country if an independent candidate (http://javascript%3cb%3e%3c/b%3E:siteSearch%28%27independent%20candidate%27%29 ;) won the 2008 presidential election, according to the latest FOX News Poll. And despite acknowledging the improbability of the candidate winning, a majority says they would consider voting for an independent for president.
Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from June 26 to June 27. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
More than twice as many voters think it would be good for the country if an independent candidate were to win the White House in 2008 than think it would be bad (45 percent good, 19 percent bad). In addition, there is rare partisan agreement on the issue as 42 percent of Democrats and 44 percent of Republicans think electing an independent candidate would be good for the country, as do 56 percent of self-described independents.
• Click here to view full results of the poll. (pdf) (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/062807_release_web.pdf)
Furthermore, a 67 percent majority says they would consider casting their ballot for an independent — including more than 6 in 10 Democrats and Republicans.
Even so, most people believe independent candidates have little chance of success: 31 percent of voters think a qualified independent has a reasonable chance of winning a presidential election, while a 63 percent majority thinks it’s unlikely.
(Story continues below)
Advertise Here (http://foxnews.adsonar.com/)
Advertisements

Related
Column Archive
FOX News Poll: Third Party President Good for Country (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287190,00.html)
FOX News Poll: Bush Approval Rating Hits New Low (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287195,00.html)
FOX News Poll: Jobs More Important Than Endangered Species (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,282392,00.html)
FOX News Poll: Clinton, Giuliani Seen as Top White House Candidates (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,282354,00.html)
FOX News Poll: Public Says Enforce Existing Immigration Laws (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,282375,00.html)Full-page FNC Poll Archive (http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,86,00.html)"It appears that many voters believe a vote for a candidate who has little chance of winning still is not a wasted vote," said Opinion Dynamics Vice President Lawrence Shiman. "A substantial percentage of both parties are willing to consider supporting independent candidacies regardless of the candidate’s chances of winning."
Given the amount of attention to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s party affiliation switch from Republican to independent, and the subsequent speculation about him entering the 2008 race, the poll asked people how they would vote in a 3-way race.
The recent media coverage fails to move the numbers much from earlier in the month. Bloomberg’s 7 percent support is unchanged, and obviously puts him far behind the major party front-runners Democrat Hillary Clinton (39 percent) and Republican Rudy Giuliani (37 percent).
Paris Better Known Than Romney, Thompson
Among the presidential hopefuls, Giuliani is not only one of the best known, but he also continues to be viewed the most positively, receiving a 54 percent favorable rating. Most voters are also familiar with Republican candidate John McCain — 47 percent have a favorable opinion of him and only 5 percent don’t know him.
Republicans Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are much less well known than the other Republican and Democratic candidates. In fact, more people say they have "never heard of" Thompson, Romney and Bloomberg, than Paris Hilton — only 7 percent of Americans were unable to express an opinion of her.
Today, even though one in five Americans (22 percent) say they have never heard of Romney, that represents a noticeable improvement from earlier this year when 43 percent didn’t know him (Jan. 30-31, 2007). However, as many voters have an unfavorable opinion of Romney (26 percent) as have a favorable opinion (25 percent). His favorable rating is 39 percent among Republicans.
Thompson’s name recognition is also picking up — 32 percent say they have never heard of him today, down from 53 percent in March. His favorable rating is 30 percent overall and 46 percent among Republicans, with 16 percent of all voters holding an unfavorable view.
For Bloomberg, 20 percent have never heard of him, an improvement from 35 percent last month (15-16 May 2007). Bloomberg’s current favorable rating is 23 percent, with 24 percent holding an unfavorable view. Attitudes toward Bloomberg are similar among Democrats (25 percent favorable) and Republicans (22 percent favorable).
The Democratic contenders are well known to voters, as majorities are able to offer an opinion on each of them. About half of Americans have a favorable view of John Edwards (49 percent), Clinton (46 percent) and Barack Obama (46 percent). Al Gore’s favorable rating is 48 percent.
For a political comparison, President Bush’s current favorable rating is 37 percent and virtually all Americans express an opinion.
For a popular culture comparison, 7 percent of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of Paris Hilton (73 percent unfavorable) and 7 percent have never heard of her.
Standings in the Primaries
In the race for the Republican nomination, Giuliani retains the leader spot at 29 percent followed by McCain at 17 percent, Thompson at 15 percent, Romney at 8 percent and Newt Gingrich at 8 percent. Giuliani is up 7 points from earlier this month, though still 10 percentage points down from 39 percent in February.
Among Democrats, Clinton strengthens her front-runner status with the support of 42 percent (up 6 points), followed by Obama at 19 percent (down 4 points), Gore at 14 percent and Edwards at 10 percent.
When Gore is taken out of the mix, Clinton’s standing improves to 47 percent, Obama 21 percent and Edwards 13 percent.
Where People Are Learning About The Candidates
Television clearly is the most popular place to get information about the presidential candidates, but there are certainly many other options these days. The poll finds that 88 percent of voters are getting information about the candidates from television coverage, 69 percent from newspapers and 51 percent radio coverage.
Internet news sites are a source for 38 percent of Americans, which is distinguished from these specific online sources: 11 percent say they use blogs, 7 percent YouTube and 4 percent use MySpace to learn about the candidates.
About twice as many Americans think Conservative radio talk shows (38 percent) have more influence on politics these days than Liberal Internet blogs (17 percent).
Finally, 53 percent of voters today think it is too early for the 2008 presidential candidates to be campaigning — up from 47 percent who thought so four months ago (February 13-14).


**********

trey4sports
02-06-2008, 08:09 PM
i agree, an indy run is probably the best way to keep the movement going

theantirobot
02-06-2008, 08:13 PM
The Goal Is The Presidency, it doesn't matter how we get there. Its a REVOLUTION!

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:13 PM
i agree, an indy run is probably the best way to keep the movement going

Ban trey4sports! He doesn't support Ron Paul! He has obviously lost hope for the movement! He must have never supported Ron Paul! You better post a donation confirmation number or you will be banished!

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:18 PM
iNDY! see my sig...

and see this poll which addresses this issue (Republicans are not are base): Already Republican or only did so for Ron Paul? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1198612

Thank you for the good, reasoned post. Great info. But I disagree with you saying that we will lose "substantial support". We don't have substantial support. We have like 8% support--at the VERY most (average it out--and be realistic--you will agree it's 8% at the very most--and it's way too late for a brokered convention).

I disagree and don't think we get support mainly from christian/republican types--I think that is unique to your experience--and besides, that ground obviously isn't that fertile compared to other, broader ground--just look at our results, even in Michigan, your example. But, also, I absolutely have never thought we would get our support from pot smokers, truthers, etc.

Our support comes, and will come in a HUGE way if we go iNDY, from people who are anti-war, pro-constitution, and most importantly TIRED OF BEING LIED TO, TIRED OF LOBBYISTS, AND HUNGRY FOR THE TYPE OF STATESMAN ONLY RON PAUL IS.

People will vote for Ron Paul for his record that is so amazing, and so different, even if they disagree with some of his stances. Proof: The same exact thing made me, my wife, my father-in-law, father, grandpa-in-law, and on and on (including many family members I never proselytized to!) choose Paul: HIS HONESTY--the fact that he's not a "politician" like ALL the others. Once they hear that he has never gotten lobbyist money, never changed his stances, AND ONCE THEY HEAR HIM SPEAK, they are hooked.

But not the GOP sheep--the pro Iraq war types. That is why we have to get out of the GOP.

If we go iNDY, we will also get all the anti-war GOPers. Plus, we might get more GOPers than that if McCain is the nominee--because of immigration and character (he cheated on his wife and is married to his mistress now).

Plus, we haven't got to capitalize on running anti-war ads, especially with veterans in them supporting him. We need to make a much bigger deal about the amazing amount of money he raised from military members (more than all the Republicans put together) in ads, etc.

We also haven't capitalized on his being an Obstetrician for 30 years, and so much more. His name recognition is extremely dismal--we need a fresh start with exposure in every state--not just those left in the GOP race.


A note of caution about this thread.


I've done A LOT of work for the campaign in Michigan and have met many different supporters. I can say with certainty that in Michigan, the majority of Ron Paul supporters are Republicans or disaffected Republicans. The majority are also Christians.

These boards are NOT representative of who is voting for us.

I'd estimate (from Michigan) we have about 65% of some type of Republicans making up our voters and about 75% Christians. The number of truthers that support Ron Paul is also very low I'd estimate about 10 to 15 percent. Again this is from my experience in Michigan.

If you looked at these forums, you'd think the majority were liberal atheists, and that may well be true about these forums, but now out in the real world.

I'd also like to add there are major discrepancies between the average Ron Paul voter and the "hardcore supporters"

Atheists, marijuana activists, peace activists, and truthers make up a disproportionate part of our "hardcore" supporters.

This is all very important and you need to think about the big picture. If we run independent, you can expect everyone on the forums and all the hardcore supporters to still supporter Ron Paul, but we're going to lose a substantial chunk of our base. If you think that people who already vote for Ron Paul won't vote for the Republican nominee, you haven't been talking enough to our casual voters, and believe me we have MANY of them...

Joe3113
02-06-2008, 08:21 PM
I trust Dr Paul to know what's best.

Rob
02-06-2008, 08:27 PM
i agree, an indy run is probably the best way to keep the movement going

Just like Perot's movement? What happens if we lose?

AFM
02-06-2008, 08:27 PM
The DOCTAH will decide

affa
02-06-2008, 08:27 PM
colecrowe -

consider that your posts will NOT affect Ron Paul's strategy one iota. It's already in place, we just don't know it yet.

Therefore these continuous posts are just helping to create arguments and division. Anyone here over the past few days KNOWS that you, Maytheronbewithyou, and several others support a indy run. I could also name people on the other side.

We get it.

Ron Paul is gonna do what he's been planning to do. Let's stop arguing about it in the dark.

colecrowe
02-06-2008, 08:29 PM
I trust Dr Paul to know what's best.


Of course... we can't FORCE him too :)


But he only ran in the primaries because of the overwhelming requests and pleas from spporters.

That's ALL we are are advocating.

We have hope, and we will not give it up!

blakjak
02-06-2008, 08:30 PM
If the choice is between Independent/Third Party or Paul not an option in the general election - I give support for getting Paul on the ballot.

Please don't kill me, I'm relatively young.

BigRedBrent
02-06-2008, 08:31 PM
Forward this to every supporter everywhere as soon as possible:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1201693

ronpaulyourmom
02-06-2008, 08:31 PM
Ron Paul is gonna do what he's been planning to do. Let's stop arguing about it in the dark.


That doesn't mean it's not a good idea to send a message to the campaign. The pledge website gives them raw data to better understand their starting point and make a more informed decision. The idea that there is some grand master plan is a bit off imo, because things change and the campaign has to adapt. For example, as it stands right now, a brokered convention is very unlikely.

I wonder if they plan to exclude Paul from the feb 28th debate. That might be the launching pad if they do.

pazzo83
02-06-2008, 08:32 PM
Ban trey4sports! He doesn't support Ron Paul! He has obviously lost hope for the movement! He must have never supported Ron Paul! You better post a donation confirmation number or you will be banished!

Dude, wtf censorship laden state did you come from? You think RP supports this type of authoritarian behavior?

ronpaulyourmom
02-06-2008, 08:33 PM
Dude, wtf censorship laden state did you come from? You think RP supports this type of authoritarian behavior?

He's being sarcastic.

UK4Paul
02-06-2008, 08:33 PM
No killing, please. :)

trey4sports
02-06-2008, 08:33 PM
Just like Perot's movement? What happens if we lose?

perot was polling 40% before he dropped out and then made a half-ass attempt to re-enter the race. so i would say yes, a 3rd party win is possible. However the main reason i want Dr. paul to run indy is because theres no way in hell we can win the GOP nom. even if we somehow get the majority of delegates in the convention we simply wont win the nomination. the GOP will fight tooth and nail to keep us out. They would rather the democrats win than Dr. paul just because hes not a big government shill.
We need a way to shock the sheep out of hibernation mode, i dont have the answers and i PLEDGE to continue fighting for Dr. paul but i sincerely doubt that we can make much progress in the GOP.

ronpaulyourmom
02-06-2008, 08:40 PM
Just like Perot's movement? What happens if we lose?

It begs the question Rob... is there a difference? John McCain will spend more money on national defense and keep entitlements in line to accomodate his voting bloc, seniors. The democratic nominee will spend more on national healthcare and keep entitlements in line to accomodate the biggest voting bloc (and growing) in the country, seniors.

Either way the government spends a shitload more money. This basic underlying point means that in the end we'll end up in about the same position. If the republicans cut taxes, it'll just hurt the dollar and we get screwed. If the dems raise taxes it'll wash by virtue of us receiving some services we used to pay for and the dollar maintaining a little strength. Neither party respects civil liberties, so I mean forget about that right now...

I have no qualms about how my vote for Ron Paul will affect the race strategically, because I understand that I'm voting for a bunch of centrist big spending authoritarian clones.

nodope0695
02-06-2008, 08:46 PM
I don't know about killing pro-third party morons, but gagging, tar and feathering come to mind...maybe waterboarding? Just kidding.

An idependent run at this juncture would be stupid and pointless. For now, he is still in the GOP race, and that is how it should remain. He can still do debates against the other candidates, whereas if he were indy, he'd NOT get to debate the other candidates.

You think he's marginalized now? If he went indy, he'd be even MORE marginalized and even more ignored. We haven't come this far to switch affiliation. While I MIGHT change MY party affiliation, I will STILL vote for Ron Paul, even if that means writing him in. In fact, I might take a sharpie permanent marker with me and write his name right onto the Diebold touch screen.

HollyforRP
02-06-2008, 08:50 PM
I think if he has to, he should run as libertarian instead of independant. Those who run as independant have a hard time even getting their names on the ballot.

If he run as a libertarian, he will probably have a better chance.

Rob
02-06-2008, 08:57 PM
It begs the question Rob... is there a difference? John McCain will spend more money on national defense and keep entitlements in line to accomodate his voting bloc, seniors. The democratic nominee will spend more on national healthcare and keep entitlements in line to accomodate the biggest voting bloc (and growing) in the country, seniors.

Either way the government spends a shitload more money. This basic underlying point means that in the end we'll end up in about the same position. If the republicans cut taxes, it'll just hurt the dollar and we get screwed. If the dems raise taxes it'll wash by virtue of us receiving some services we used to pay for and the dollar maintaining a little strength. Neither party respects civil liberties, so I mean forget about that right now...

I have no qualms about how my vote for Ron Paul will affect the race strategically, because I understand that I'm voting for a bunch of centrist big spending authoritarian clones.

I'm voting for Ron Paul no matter what. I'm speaking in bigger terms. If he runs IND he'll lose his Congress seat. It will also be a blow to our movement's (and that's what we have) chances of getting Ron Paul Republicans elected.

all J's in IL for RP
02-06-2008, 09:16 PM
colecrowe -

consider that your posts will NOT affect Ron Paul's strategy one iota. It's already in place, we just don't know it yet.

Therefore these continuous posts are just helping to create arguments and division. Anyone here over the past few days KNOWS that you, Maytheronbewithyou, and several others support a indy run. I could also name people on the other side.

We get it.

Ron Paul is gonna do what he's been planning to do. Let's stop arguing about it in the dark.

Consider the psychological effects on the support base of having to constantly deal with posts along these lines.

colecrowe
02-07-2008, 02:51 PM
Consider the psychological effects on the support base of having to constantly deal with posts along these lines.

This keeps us hopeful and excited. What is psychotic and psychologically damaging is the belief in a fairy tale called the brokered convention.