'The Revolution's Future' is at the Convention! Here Is How We Will Win!

[IPSecure]

'The Revolution's Future' is at the Convention!

Here Is How We Will Win!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KJABfBN6ew


Previous Post: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=123952

[hillertexas]

that gave me goosebumps.

We CAN do this.

[nate895]

At first I thought you had stolen my post. :D

[IPSecure]

At first I thought you had stolen my post. :D

Appreciate the original link!!!

[mmink15]

I'm uneducated on this part of US history.
Was Goldwater expected to lose at that RNC?
Can we get that kind of crowd reaction for McCain(Rockefeller) and Ron Paul(Goldwater)?

[bucfish]

Yes WE CAN GET THAT REACTION!

[Doktor_Jeep]

hear hear!

[nate895]

I'm uneducated on this part of US history.
Was Goldwater expected to lose at that RNC?
Can we get that kind of crowd reaction for McCain(Rockefeller) and Ron Paul(Goldwater)?

It was expected to be a lot closer than it was.

[colecrowe]

In 1964, he fought and won a bitterly contested, multi-candidate race for the Republican Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29)'s presidential nomination. His main rival was New York Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_A._Rockefeller), whom he defeated in the California primary

[colecrowe]

Many Republicans at the time angrily turned against Goldwater, claiming that his defeat had significantly set back the party's chances of future national success.

...

His defeat allowed Lyndon Johnson and the Democrats in Congress to pass the Great Society (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Society) programs, but the defeat of so many older Republicans in 1964 [like 2008, obviously--I see the Dems getting AT LEAST 65% of the house and over 55% of the Senate] also cleared the way for a younger generation of American conservatives to mobilize.

Goldwater is the politician (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician) most often credited for sparking the resurgence of the American conservative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_in_the_United_States) political movement in the 1960s.

[colecrowe]

1964 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964) Republican presidential primaries[34] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater#_note-33)
Barry Goldwater - 2,267,079 (38.33%)
Nelson Rockefeller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Rockefeller) - 1,304,204 (22.05%)
James A. Rhodes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Rhodes) - 615,754 (10.41%)
Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cabot_Lodge%2C_Jr.) - 386,661 (6.54%)
John W. Byrnes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Byrnes) - 299,612 (5.07%)
William Scranton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Scranton) - 245,401 (4.15%)
Margaret Chase Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Chase_Smith) - 227,007 (3.84%)
Richard Nixon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon) - 197,212 (3.33%)
Unpledged - 173,652 (2.94%)
Harold Stassen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Stassen) - 114,083 (1.93%)
1964 Republican National Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Republican_National_Convention)[35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater#_note-34)

Barry Goldwater - 883 (67.51%)
William Scranton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Scranton) - 214 (16.36%)
Nelson Rockefeller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Rockefeller) - 114 (8.72%)
George Romney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Romney) - 41 (3.14%)
Margaret Chase Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Chase_Smith) - 27 (2.06%)
Walter Judd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Judd) - 22 (1.68%)
Hiram L. Fong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_L._Fong) - 5 (0.38%)
Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cabot_Lodge%2C_Jr.) - 2 (0.15%)

[Flirple]

I just came across this article: http://www.nolanchart.com/article2934.html
It it the author proposes that we would have a much much bigger impact if we scrapped the DC march and instead focused on combining the march with our presence at the convention in Minneapolis. And I got to say, I fully agree.

[Signzit]

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2007/dec07/07-12-26.html
Will a Dark Horse Take the Republican Reins?

by Phyllis Schlafly, December 26, 2007

Although the next presidential election won't take place until November 2008, and the nominating conventions won't convene until next August and September, the media have been covering the candidates all through 2007 as though they were running a horse race. What is it about presidential politics that evokes horse-race metaphors?

The media have designated and re-designated the Republican "front-runner": McCain, then Romney, then Giuliani, then Huckabee. The media are also speculating whether Hillary will lose her front-runner status to Obama.

Next summer, the presidential nominee of each party will take the "reins" of his party, and hopefully then of government...


A relatively new book (2003) of political history called "Dark Horse: The Surprise Election and Political Murder of President James A. Garfield" may provide the model. Kenneth D. Ackerman tells the fascinating story of how the 1880 Republican National Convention in Chicago deadlocked, with three sets of delegates unwilling to abandon their first choice, and a totally unexpected non-candidate dark horse named James A. Garfield was nominated on the 36th ballot and then elected President.

Senator James G. Blaine of Maine was the first major name placed in nomination, soon followed by New York powerhouse Senator Roscoe Conkling's nomination of war hero General U.S. Grant for a third term. The third major contender was Treasury Secretary John Sherman, nominated by his friend and campaign manager Senator-elect James A. Garfield.

The first ballot on Monday, June 7 produced Grant, 304; Blaine, 284; Sherman, 93; and a handful of votes for minor candidates. All were well short of the 379 votes needed to win.

Over the next four hours, delegates cast 18 ballots, every one with a full roll call of states. They broke for dinner and then came back to cast 10 more ballots, despite the heat, the tedium and the hard benches on which they sat.

All three blocs seemed equally determined to stand by their man. After those 28 ballots, Grant's total of 304 votes had grown to 307, Blaine's 284 had shrunk to 279, and Sherman's 93 to 91.

When the convention resumed on Tuesday morning to cast the 29th ballot, Sherman's total jumped to 116, but that boomlet faded on the next ballot.

The break came on the 34th ballot, late in the alphabetic roll call of states, when Wisconsin suddenly announced "Sixteen votes for James A. Garfield." Sitting in the Ohio delegation, Garfield jumped to his feet and tried to make a point of order that he had not consented to have his name placed in nomination, but the convention chairman gaveled him down and refused to let him speak.

The 34th ballot totaled 312 for Grant, 275 for Blaine, 107 for Sherman, and 17 for Garfield. On the 35th ballot, Indiana and Maryland switched to Garfield, giving him a new total of 50 votes.

The roll call for the 36th ballot became high drama. State after state switched to Garfield. Then Maine announced that all its votes had moved from Blaine to Garfield.

When the balloting reached Ohio, Sherman ceded his support to Garfield, who then won the Republican nomination with 395 votes.

Could Republicans be so divided going into the 2008 Convention that a dark horse could win the nomination?