I met Bob Barr yesterday.....

[ZzzImAsleep]

Apparently he teaches a class at my college. I didn't even notice him on the elevator until someone next to me said something about it.

I asked him what he thought about Ron Paul. He said he likes Ron Paul's message, but he thinks he is not a very good speaker.

I said I voted for Paul on Super Tuesday and that I was going to be writing his name in come November if I had to. He replied that I should vote for him instead, and that he is running as a Libertarian.

We then started talking about Mike Gravel, and how he thinks that Gravel's big government stance does not fit with the Libertarian party.

After he had to leave I went back to what I was doing. (I missed my floor cause I was talking to him :p )

I am still going to be voting for Ron Paul this November. Sorry Barr. :D

[Kade]

I've met him a few times.

He is an asshole.

[Rhys]

He just wants to be a big fish in a small pond.

[TruthAtLast]

I haven't met him so I'm not sure if he is an asshole. I've seen a couple videos and he seems to be fairly intelligent and able to communicate well. I haven't completely written him off yet but since I can not write in anyone in my State I have to either find someone to vote for or not vote at all.

So the questions is, what helps the Movement? Republicans losing? Another 3rd party gaining ground even if they don't win? Maybe that itself will start to send a message and give some legitimacy to elements of our platform. I haven't decided yet and until the Convention is over, I'm not sure I'll be able to. One thing I know for sure, I will not vote for McCain.

[CountryboyRonPaul]

So the questions is, what helps the Movement? Republicans losing? Another 3rd party gaining ground even if they don't win? Maybe that itself will start to send a message and give some legitimacy to elements of our platform. I haven't decided yet and until the Convention is over, I'm not sure I'll be able to. One thing I know for sure, I will not vote for McCain.

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us. The way I see it Obama and Hillary are a little bit worse than McCain (not by much).

A 3rd party gaining ground would always be beneficial, but it's a long term goal.

If Barr is on the Ballot and Ron Paul is not, I will vote for Barr.

Sorry, we use Diebold in my District, so unless we can change that before Nov. there's no way I'll be able to write in Ron Paul, and I'm willing to bet 98/100 people who say they will write in Ron Paul are in the same situation as me. :mad::(

[yongrel]

He explicitly asked you to vote for him instead of writing in Ron Paul?

Asshole.

[Rhys]

if we take over our states, we can eliminate Diebold in them. States run elections.

[Mithridates]

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us.

I do. Because if you think about it the other way, Republicans winning this time around with McCain as the nominee would send a strong signal that big government, nation-building and all the rest is a winning formula. Losing this time around will bring about a period of reflection that maybe hey, when you say you're the party of small government and fiscal responsibility...that you actually have to _be_ the party of small government and fiscal responsibility, or risk getting thrown out of office.

[Stallion]

He explicitly asked you to vote for him instead of writing in Ron Paul?

Asshole.

That bothers me a bit as well. It now seems he is riding Ron's coattails to some level of notriety. I liked the idea of Ron passing off the torch to someone else in this election cycle...but the more I read about Bob Barr, the less confidence I have that he is the right person.

[amy31416]

He explicitly asked you to vote for him instead of writing in Ron Paul?

Asshole.

Agreed. He doesn't measure up to Ron Paul standards, he's too much of a coward and doesn't take a true stand.

He doesn't deserve our financial support or our vote.

[Stallion]

I really wish Chuck Baldwin would anounce his candidacy for the CP. I think we could all get behind him. He may not be Ron Paul, but he is alot closer than Barr.

[Caulfield]

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us.

Republicans losing the election BECAUSE of Libertarians sends them the message that if they deny their libertarian roots, they won't win again.

Republicans winning with a neo-con McCain says they can abuse fiscal policy and true-conservative voters without retribution.

Out of any announced candidate thus far (aside from Ron Paul, who will not be on the ballot in Nov.), Barr has the most credibility with disgruntled GOP voters, and the most in common with Paul's message.

Why write in Ron Paul's name when it won't count when you can vote for Barr who will send the GOP a message they won't soon forget. You want to do something for the Movement, and for the revolution? Teach Republicans that they can't win without their conservative/libertarian roots.

[FireofLiberty]

I met him one time and gave him cheese I made using my girlfriend's breast milk.

[me3]

I met him one time and gave him cheese I made using my girlfriend's breast milk.
When you have the BJ Lawson sig, you're representing BJ Lawson online. At least from where I stand, that's how it seems.

[Stallion]

When you have the BJ Lawson sig, you're representing BJ Lawson online. At least from where I stand, that's how it seems.

LOL, I thought it was kinda funny...:D

[Rhys]

Republicans losing the election BECAUSE of Libertarians sends them the message that if they deny their libertarian roots, they won't win again.

Republicans winning with a neo-con McCain says they can abuse fiscal policy and true-conservative voters without retribution.

Out of any announced candidate thus far (aside from Ron Paul, who will not be on the ballot in Nov.), Barr has the most credibility with disgruntled GOP voters, and the most in common with Paul's message.

Why write in Ron Paul's name when it won't count when you can vote for Barr who will send the GOP a message they won't soon forget. You want to do something for the Movement, and for the revolution? Teach Republicans that they can't win without their conservative/libertarian roots.

Republicans will lose cause of the war. Why vote for Bob Barr when he's the least of 4 evils? I'm sticking with Ron Paul. When the GOP loses, not if, they'll sum it up to "change", "war" and the need for socialism. it's pre-planned. Vote Ron Paul! (I shouldn't have to say that on the rpforums.)

and giving people titty milk cheese is only more gross than making it! omg lol

[jonsmallberries]

When you have the BJ Lawson sig, you're representing BJ Lawson online. At least from where I stand, that's how it seems.

I believe the OP was referring to a part Barr played in some Borat episode/movie. It was a joke.

[angelatc]

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us.

I absolutely think a Republican Party loss would benefit us. They keep telling us that only a moderate can win, but I disagree. I think it is the moderates that do us more harm than the Democrats could ever hope to.

Really, who ever ran on a middle-of-the-road wishy-washy platform like McCain and won? Bill Clinton, the last Democrat we elected, had to move to the right to make himself electable. And he was running against Bush the 1st, a guy brought in specifically to make Reagan look moderate. "Read my lips - no new taxes!" turned into leftest taxes....and he was promptly ousted.

I'm not old enough to remember Nixon's platform, and Ford didn't really stand a chance because of the mess that Nixon left.

I think the the current Republican Party is useless. The best we can hope for them is to be a spending stopper. They don't mind spending themselves, but they don't want them Democrats to spend. Fine - if that's what it takes to make the government stop then so be it.

Republicans will not be losing this election for any reason other than they have abandoned their principles and deserve to be handed their hats. The conservative base isn't going to beat feet to the polls to vote for McCain.

[BenMuldowney]

I asked him what he thought about Ron Paul. He said he likes Ron Paul's message, but he thinks he is not a very good speaker.


Bob Barr said Ron Paul was not a good speaker and he is? I watched barr sunday and had to staple my eyes open. Barr is better than the 3 stooges but Ron Paul is the pinnacle candidate for constitution lovers, i like his speaking style.

[JS4Pat]

The way I see it Obama and Hillary are a little bit worse than McCain (not by much).:(
What type of high powered microscope are you using to make that determination? :)


I really can't tell who would be worse...

[Just Come Home]

Bob Barr and Ron Paul doing well helps the movement.

[Just Come Home]

When you have the BJ Lawson sig, you're representing BJ Lawson online. At least from where I stand, that's how it seems.

In that case, Brett Sanders needs to remove the stick from his butt.

[Bradley in DC]

He just wants to be a big fish in a small pond.

I suspect he would prefer to be a big fish in the ocean. :D

[Rhys]

I suspect he would prefer to be a big fish in the ocean. :D

that's why he's feeding on the LP.

[CountryboyRonPaul]

If Republicans lose, the media, and all the talking heads will simply blame it on Bush/Iraq and the perceived notion that these are right-wing ideals.

Hell, the past 4 years have been nothing but Liberals hyping the idea that Republicans are evil extremist right-wing war mongers.

I doubt the talking heads will let the un-informed public believe that Republicans lost because they weren't Conservative enough.

But, I do partly agree with everyone's arguement. We have been cast aside by Socialists in the party of Capitalism. I don't however think Obama/Hillary would be any better for freedom than McCain.

Maybe your right though, maybe the party will eventually have to concede and tell their lackeys to start acting more conservative and less moderate so that they can win again.


What type of high powered microscope are you using to make that determination?


I really can't tell who would be worse...

Yeah, it's hard to determine who is more liberal, but...
Assuming that both Dems will continue the war for an undetermined amount of time, and increase spending presumably by a similair amount to that we are already spending on the war to fund a "Universal Health Care" program, I see both Democrats as being slightly worse on inflation.

Not to mention the likelyhood for more Clintonista style Interventionism and Foreign Aid with both candidates.

At least McCain has Don Luskin for an economic advisor. ;)

Whether or not he would heed his warnings would be the determining factor as to how bad for the Economy McCain will be. Somehow I doubt McCain would keep Luskin around after he got into office, unfortunately. :(

For those who think I'm promoting McCain, I am NOT, and never will. Just defending my assertion that Democrats still do suck a tiny bit more.

Honestly, whether Reps lose, and whether Dems suck more than Reps doesn't matter anymore to me. I'm voting either Libertarian, Constitution, or Ron Paul in the unlikely event that I get a chance for a write-in. I will continue to spread the message of Capitalism, and why it's important that it succeeds, with or without the Republican party.

[RonPaulFever]

I've met him a few times.

He is an asshole.

Is he a repulsive, hate-inspiring kind of asshole like Cheney, or a feisty, no-nonsense, likeable asshole like Joe Biden?

[Jeremy]

The only reason you should write-in Paul is if he's a registered write-in candidate... otherwise you aren't really voting... they don't count them. In other words... who knows what will happen between now and November. There's a chance RP may not want to register.

[JMann]

He explicitly asked you to vote for him instead of writing in Ron Paul?

Asshole.

He is running for office, if he didn't ask people to vote for him he wouldn't be doing his job. If he is a serious candidate he will ask everyone he meets between now and the general election to vote for him, regardless of who the person supported before he joined the race.

For those of you holding on to Paul, I got a little secret- It is over.

[Chibioz]

I like Ron Paul's speaking style as well. I think maybe he is a little wordy for the average person but I think he is fantastic. I'm here to back Paul. I'm voting for Ron Paul no matter what.

[Yom]

I do. Because if you think about it the other way, Republicans winning this time around with McCain as the nominee would send a strong signal that big government, nation-building and all the rest is a winning formula. Losing this time around will bring about a period of reflection that maybe hey, when you say you're the party of small government and fiscal responsibility...that you actually have to _be_ the party of small government and fiscal responsibility, or risk getting thrown out of office.

Yup. It's not about all Republicans losing, just the neocons.

[0zzy]

You guys piss me off. He's an asshole, but you give no reason. People think he is somehow bad cause he suggest voting for him rather than Obama or McCain, that you don't /have/ to write-in Paul if a Libertarian is in the race. Yep, asshole. I mean really.

I have yet to hear a reason why I shouldn't support his candidacy. Someone give me a real reason. I find him to be an articulate speaker and defender of civil liberties, why is that bad?

[TruthAtLast]

Sorry, we use Diebold in my District, so unless we can change that before Nov. there's no way I'll be able to write in Ron Paul, and I'm willing to bet 98/100 people who say they will write in Ron Paul are in the same situation as me. :mad::(


Yep, i'm in the same situation.

[latkinson6]

I hope RP wins, I have my doubts. But a libertarian press, nomatter who, is better
than the "3" running now. I'd support Forest Gump over any dem or neocon.

www.bobbarrforums.com (http://www.bobbarrforums.com)

[Nash]

Agreed. He doesn't measure up to Ron Paul standards, he's too much of a coward and doesn't take a true stand.

He doesn't deserve our financial support or our vote.

Why would you write in Ron Paul if he's not even going to bother running in the general?

Why doesn't Bob Barr deserve our financial support or our vote? What don't you like about him?

If you guys continue to make this movement a cult of personality then the movement will die with Ron Paul. Is that what you really want? This rejection of every other candidate not named Ron Paul is a grave concern to me and it should be to everyone on this board. We're done past this election cycle if people aren't more accepting of people willing to take on the banner.

Ron Paul is not going to run for President again. We need to support candidates who will.

[TruthAtLast]

You guys piss me off. He's an asshole, but you give no reason. People think he is somehow bad cause he suggest voting for him rather than Obama or McCain, that you don't /have/ to write-in Paul if a Libertarian is in the race. Yep, asshole. I mean really.

I have yet to hear a reason why I shouldn't support his candidacy. Someone give me a real reason. I find him to be an articulate speaker and defender of civil liberties, why is that bad?

i agree. We are trying to compare Barr to Ron Paul. Well if Ron Paul isn't in the General Election, then what will help the Movement? Writing in Ron Paul if you can, and if it counts would be useless because the vast majority of states can't do write ins, so are we saying that Ron Paul supporters just shouldn't vote at all? Or do we vote for the next best thing? I haven't done a lot of research on Barr yet, but I'd have to imagine that we'd be better off voting for him than our alternatives.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. I completely understand Ron Paul's reasons for not committing to anything right now. But after the National Convention is over I hope Ron Paul does something and either endorses someone or runs on someone's ticket, or SOMETHING.

[TruthAtLast]

Why would you write in Ron Paul if he's not even going to bother running in the general?

Why doesn't Bob Barr deserve our financial support or our vote? What don't you like about him?

If you guys continue to make this movement a cult of personality then the movement will die with Ron Paul. Is that what you really want? This rejection of every other candidate not named Ron Paul is a grave concern to me and it should be to everyone on this board. We're done past this election cycle if people aren't more accepting of people willing to take on the banner.

Ron Paul is not going to run for President again. We need to support candidates who will.

don't worry Nash, there are a lot of people who feel as you do and are in this for Liberty and Freedom no matter who is running.

[Barney]

if we take over our states, we can eliminate Diebold in them. States run elections.

Very sound logic!

First step in the Revolution is to get a fair count.

Even if we managed to win the war of ideology, it can still be subverted by vote fraud. First, take back the vote count.

[xd9fan]

K.I.S.S
I say just focus on Ron Paul

[Crickett]

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us. The way I see it Obama and Hillary are a little bit worse than McCain (not by much).

A 3rd party gaining ground would always be beneficial, but it's a long term goal.

If Barr is on the Ballot and Ron Paul is not, I will vote for Barr.

Sorry, we use Diebold in my District, so unless we can change that before Nov. there's no way I'll be able to write in Ron Paul, and I'm willing to bet 98/100 people who say they will write in Ron Paul are in the same situation as me. :mad::(

Diebold or not. They BETTER find a way for us to write in a candidate if RP not on the ballot, because my right to vote depends upon it. I would not put ANY of those other horrid people in any office but Unemployment...if my vote even counted...

[Rhys]

don't worry Nash, there are a lot of people who feel as you do and are in this for Liberty and Freedom no matter who is running.

that's why we'll end up all following some manchurian candidate off a bridge just like the lemmings we insult daily.

And why do you guys support Bob Barr just cause he's Libertarian? The only Libertarian Party member I know thinks Ron Paul is crazy.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Well, I don't think Bob is a good speaker

[Caulfield]

And why do you guys support Bob Barr ... ?

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/

[Rhys]

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/

he sounds ok but that doesn't mean i believe him. it's just so convinent to say all that yet not give RP any credit or lip service

[tajitj]

He was on Cavuto today.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yO-6WzKDVGw

All the negative talk about Barr is really unfair. If want to fade out and be a small footnote in history go ahead and write in Dr. Paul and go around bashing Barr.
We need to get real. Depending on what Barr says in the coming weeks, it will be now or never. It is possible to support Barr and continue trying to get Dr. Paul elected. It brings light to our issues that we will be fighting for in Sept at the convention.

[Rhys]

He was on Cavuto today.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yO-6WzKDVGw

All the negative talk about Barr is really unfair. If want to fade out and be a small footnote in history go ahead and write in Dr. Paul and go around bashing Barr.
We need to get real. Depending on what Barr says in the coming weeks, it will be now or never. It is possible to support Barr and continue trying to get Dr. Paul elected. It brings light to our issues that we will be fighting for in Sept at the convention.

this is a joke. he's just ignoring Ron Paul like everyone else. "nobody's talking about this stuff or debating it." it's a classic squeez and I aint down.

[TruthAtLast]

that's why we'll end up all following some manchurian candidate off a bridge just like the lemmings we insult daily.

And why do you guys support Bob Barr just cause he's Libertarian? The only Libertarian Party member I know thinks Ron Paul is crazy.

I'm not a Republican or Libertarian or Constitutionalist or ANYTHING. But I do believe is certain core ideals and civil liberties. Many people (not saying you Rhys) want to wait until the PERFECT candidate comes along and ONLY support that person and no other. They'll be waiting for awhile, even Ron Paul isn't perfect.

Not only can one person NOT fix this country alone, but by narrowing the thinking that much, it virtually assures that no steps are ever made towards the end goal.

Some people are so darn stubborn in their views that they'd rather sit uncompromisingly with their hands folded than participate in taking small steps needed to make REAL change.

I'm not saying I'm going to support Barr or that he is the perfect candidate. I haven't made up my mind yet and I think things need to play out over the next few months.... but I will support SOMEONE that is actually RUNNING in the darn General Election. Am I suppose to NOT vote?

I CAN'T write in anyone in my district and even if I could, why not write in some Freedom loving person that no one knows? Hell, I could write in my own name. It would serve the same purpose and would be equally useless.

Maybe there will be another candidate that is better aligned with my views than Barr by the time the General Election comes around, but if I had to choose between voting for McCain, Obama, Hilary, and Barr... you had better believe that I'll be voting for Barr.

Is this forum really about a cult Ron Paul following or is it about the Message of Freedom?

[Rhys]

I'm not a Republican or Libertarian or Constitutionalist or ANYTHING. But I do believe is certain core ideals and civil liberties. Many people (not saying you Rhys) want to wait until the PERFECT candidate comes along and ONLY support that person and no other. They'll be waiting for awhile, even Ron Paul isn't perfect.

Not only can one person NOT fix this country alone, but by narrowing the thinking that much, it virtually assures that no steps are ever made towards the end goal.

Some people are so darn stubborn in their views that they'd rather sit uncompromisingly with their hands folded than participate in taking small steps needed to make REAL change.

I'm not saying I'm going to support Barr or that he is the perfect candidate. I haven't made up my mind yet and I think things need to play out over the next few months.... but I will support SOMEONE that is actually RUNNING in the darn General Election. Am I suppose to NOT vote?

I CAN'T write in anyone in my district and even if I could, why not write in some Freedom loving person that no one knows? Hell, I could write in my own name. It would serve the same purpose and would be equally useless.

Maybe there will be another candidate that is better aligned with my views than Barr by the time the General Election comes around, but if I had to choose between voting for McCain, Obama, Hilary, and Barr... you had better believe that I'll be voting for Barr.

Is this forum really about a cult Ron Paul following or is it about the Message of Freedom?

no, it's about setting up the framework and organization needed to elect Ron Paul Republicans everywhere. It's not about voting for Ron Paul. It's about getting other people to vote for Ron Paul. Bob Barr is a left turn going to nowheresville. That's probably too why he's been propped up to run.

[Eric21ND]

It's all for not since Ron won't run 3rd party. This movement might end up being a flash in the pan.

[Caulfield]

no, it's about setting up the framework and organization needed to elect Ron Paul Republicans everywhere. It's not about voting for Ron Paul. It's about getting other people to vote for Ron Paul. Bob Barr is a left turn going to nowheresville. That's probably too why he's been propped up to run.

If Barr beats the margins in the general elections, and sends the Republicans a message that they can't win without the libertarian vote, it'll do more for this country than 1,000 Ron Paul's would ever do.

Honestly, has Ron Paul accomplished anything in his 10 terms in Congress other than a spectacular voting record? Paul had a chance to do what Barr could do, but settled for a longshot chance at a speech at the RNC, and is sitting on top of $5 million of people's hard-earned money that he has yet to use, or shown any plans in using.

It wouldn't half surprise me if he turned over that $5 million to the RNC for an exchange of time to make a speech.

[0zzy]

Some of you are the most stubborn purist in the world.

"OMG OMG HE DIDN'T SAY RON PAUL!"
Mathematically, Paul is not in the race. Get used to it. Paul will not be the GOP nominee. Stop crying.

You can't live life being "Ron Paul or no one!" or, as it seems to be, "Ron Paul or someone who gives Ron Paul props every 2 seconds!"

Seriously, people are looking at his issues and saying, "HEY MAN WHY NO PROPS TO PAUL! THAT'S ALL PAUL BABY!" Wtf kind of person do you think he is? He just magically learned everything from Paul? Should Paul write next to his issues "Props to X, Y, and Z. Currently I know all I know from Lew Rockwell, so props to him." This ain't no rodeo, this is a campaign.

Some of you guys are unbelievable.

[Nash]

He was on Cavuto today.

It is possible to support Barr and continue trying to get Dr. Paul elected. It brings light to our issues that we will be fighting for in Sept at the convention.

Yes that's why I don't understand the bashing here. We're not allowed to like both candidates? Just because you vote 3rd party in the general doesn't mean you have to leave the Republican party or leave the Ron Paul revolution.

Support Ron Paul and then once the convention is over go out in November and if Barr is the nominee vote for him.

For that matter vote for any Libertarian candidate since Ron Paul won't be an option.

Note writing his name in doesn't even "send a message" because they won't count those votes unless there are enough of them to make a dent and since there won't be it will never get reported by the media anyway.

If Bob Barr gets 5% or more that WILL be reported. It's a big deal.

Disclaimer: Just for the record if I HAD to pick between them I'd choose Ron Paul over Bob Barr because Paul has a better voting record. The point here is that we don't have to choose and as far as I'm concerned Paul's campaign is basically over and officially ends at the convention. I choose to support someone beyond that.

[TruthAtLast]

It's about getting other people to vote for Ron Paul. Bob Barr is a left turn going to nowheresville. That's probably too why he's been propped up to run.

We can't get someone to vote for a guy that doesn't run and isn't on the ballot in the General election. This isn't and never has been about Ron Paul (he says this himself yet people fail to listen to him).

People who cling to Ron Paul and not his MESSAGE are falling into the same trap of loyalty to a Party or to a Candidate rather than ideals. This is the single largest problem the country faces. It is THAT mentality that is at the root of it all.

[TruthAtLast]

Yes that's why I don't understand the bashing here. We're not allowed to like both candidates? Just because you vote 3rd party in the general doesn't mean you have to leave the Republican party or leave the Ron Paul revolution.

Support Ron Paul and then once the convention is over go out in November and if Barr is the nominee vote for him.

For that matter vote for any Libertarian candidate since Ron Paul won't be an option.

Note writing his name in doesn't even "send a message" because they won't count those votes unless there are enough of them to make a dent and since there won't be it will never get reported by the media anyway.

If Bob Barr gets 5% or more that WILL be reported. It's a big deal.

Disclaimer: Just for the record if I HAD to pick between them I'd choose Ron Paul over Bob Barr because Paul has a better voting record. The point here is that we don't have to choose and as far as I'm concerned Paul's campaign is basically over and officially ends at the convention. I choose to support someone beyond that.

+1,000,000

[yongrel]

I don't support Barr for the following reasons:

-He doesn't have the record to back up what he says. I tore Romney apart for flip-flopping, and I won't ignore Barr's similar actions just because I agree with what he says now. He strikes me as thoroughly insincere.

-Despite being passionately libertarian, I do not support the LP. It's a waste of time. It is essentially a think tank full of bickerers that want to run for President, which calls itself a political party.

-From the three personal acquaintances of mine who have met him, the unanimous opinion is that he is just unpleasant to be around.

[yaz]

+1,000,000

+ sideways eight

[RedLightning]

I don't support Barr for the following reasons:

-He doesn't have the record to back up what he says. I tore Romney apart for flip-flopping, and I won't ignore Barr's similar actions just because I agree with what he says now. He strikes me as thoroughly insincere..

I have to ask what is flip flopping and what is genuinely changing your mind? When someone flip flops its generally to get more votes. He would have an easier time running as a Republican for president with his old views then as a Libertarian with his current views.


-Despite being passionately libertarian, I do not support the LP. It's a waste of time. It is essentially a think tank full of bickerers that want to run for President, which calls itself a political party.


What are you going to do write in Ron Paul? (not that I have a problem with that) They don't even count those votes. You don't have to support the LP, just the candidate if you like him/her.

[porcupine]

He explicitly asked you to vote for him instead of writing in Ron Paul?

Asshole.

Yes! How dare he ask for anyone to vote for him instead of a candidate who won't even be on the ballot and will have less of a chance of winning than even him! How dare he talk to voters at all! :rolleyes: You know that's what candidates do right?? They ask people to....vote for them....instead of the other candidates........?? Yeah it's called "running for office."

I'm not sure if I'll be voting for Barr, but I won't be writing in anyone. I supported Ron Paul not because of the man but because of the message. I have loyalty to liberty, not to Ron Paul. I'll vote for the best candidate with the best chance of winning.

[porcupine]

if we take over our states, we can eliminate Diebold in them. States run elections.

I don't think we can take over statess. I think we can take over a state if we work really hard at it (http://www.freestateproject.org/).

[Rhys]

I don't think we can take over statess. I think we can take over a state if we work really hard at it (http://www.freestateproject.org/).

I dunno. I'll keep working on my state for now. I haven't given up on the Republic. The president of the union can only do so much, and the congress can only do so much more... and for proof look at Montana's governor saying f-u to the federal government.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I would urge everyone to vote for Obama.

For anyone to believe that McCain is better than Obama, you are just not very studied on the two. If McCain wins, we send this country to WW3 without a doubt. And i don't believe America will win that war. The world is itching to put the USA in it's place, and McCain provocative attitude will only encourage them to do it. If Russia and China want to attack the US together, along with most of the middle east, I don't see the USA winning.

Obama is a socialist, yes, but 4 years of heading towards socialism is more preferred than McCains Armageddon.

TIM RUSSERT: So we could have two wars at once?
SEN. McCAIN: I think we could have Armageddon.
- John McCain, on the Iran crisis. April 2nd 2006, on Meet The Press.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

The president of the union can only do so much, and the congress can only do so much more...

Pull your head out of the sand... You're talking like it's still 1999.

[Rangeley]

If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I would urge everyone to vote for Obama.

No way.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I would urge everyone to vote for Obama.

For anyone to believe that McCain is better than Obama, you are just not very studied on the two. If McCain wins, we send this country to WW3 without a doubt. And i don't believe America will win that war. The world is itching to put the USA in it's place, and McCain provocative attitude will only encourage them to do it. If Russia and China want to attack the US together, along with most of the middle east, I don't see the USA winning.

Obama is a socialist, yes, but 4 years of heading towards socialism is more preferred than McCains Armageddon.

TIM RUSSERT: So we could have two wars at once?
SEN. McCAIN: I think we could have Armageddon.
- John McCain, on the Iran crisis. April 2nd 2006, on Meet The Press.

Might as well vote for Josef Stalin. I bet that's his secret idol.

[TheEngineer]

Republicans losing the election BECAUSE of Libertarians sends them the message that if they deny their libertarian roots, they won't win again.

Republicans winning with a neo-con McCain says they can abuse fiscal policy and true-conservative voters without retribution.

Out of any announced candidate thus far (aside from Ron Paul, who will not be on the ballot in Nov.), Barr has the most credibility with disgruntled GOP voters, and the most in common with Paul's message.

Why write in Ron Paul's name when it won't count when you can vote for Barr who will send the GOP a message they won't soon forget. You want to do something for the Movement, and for the revolution? Teach Republicans that they can't win without their conservative/libertarian roots.

I agree with this 100%. Additionally, Barr has good connections with the MSM (unlike any past Libertarian candidate). Even if he can't get in all the debates, he'll get his message out there sufficiently to peel away enough libertarian Republicans to ensure that they won't win. The GOP will have to respond by rejecting (or at least moderating) their big government social stands.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Yeah, Barr needs to run if Ron Paul is absolutely not on a Presidential ticket. If for no other reason than he's guaranteed to help bring down McCain, and is just palatable enough for a good number of Ron Paul supporters. If there is any hope to follow Ron Paul's GOP reform efforts, McCain CANNOT win this one.

A McCain victory means continued domination of the party by the neo-cons, no Ron Paul Republican running in the 2012 GOP primary (at least, any credible campaign--McCain or his VP would be nominated for President automatically), and even further tarnishing of the GOP label in the eyes of the American people. By the time four years of McCain are through, a Republican with twice the shining record of Dr. Paul's would be ignored out of knee-jerk outrage by the average voter. We can't let this monster in. I'm not willing to vote Obama to keep him out, so a third party candidate like Barr is the only choice.

[Nash]

I don't support Barr for the following reasons:

-He doesn't have the record to back up what he says. I tore Romney apart for flip-flopping, and I won't ignore Barr's similar actions just because I agree with what he says now. He strikes me as thoroughly insincere.

While he certainly has flip flopped on some issues it's not like what he's saying now is super popular with the general public. I don't think he's necessarily doing it for political gain I really think the guy has just changed his mind.

Also he joined the LP 4 years ago. He's not exactly a Johnny come lately on the whole liberty thing in terms of the presidential race.

Another thing regarding the Liberty movement. There aren't that many of us. We're gonna have to accept and encourage reformed people into our movement. That's the only way to grow it.




-Despite being passionately libertarian, I do not support the LP. It's a waste of time. It is essentially a think tank full of bickerers that want to run for President, which calls itself a political party.

I agree with you and that's why I'm a registered Republican instead of a Libertarian. Fortunately for us we can still vote out of party in the general. This is especially important this year since my party's nominee is a warmongering liberal.



-From the three personal acquaintances of mine who have met him, the unanimous opinion is that he is just unpleasant to be around.

I've never met him so I can't argue with that. He's a pretty accomplished speaker though.

[m72mc]

Apparently he teaches a class at my college. I didn't even notice him on the elevator until someone next to me said something about it.

I asked him what he thought about Ron Paul. He said he likes Ron Paul's message, but he thinks he is not a very good speaker.

I said I voted for Paul on Super Tuesday and that I was going to be writing his name in come November if I had to. He replied that I should vote for him instead, and that he is running as a Libertarian.

We then started talking about Mike Gravel, and how he thinks that Gravel's big government stance does not fit with the Libertarian party.

After he had to leave I went back to what I was doing. (I missed my floor cause I was talking to him :p )

I am still going to be voting for Ron Paul this November. Sorry Barr. :D

When Ron Paul speaks, I get exited.
When Bob Barr speaks I fall asleep.

[jbuttell]

Well, I don't see how Republicans losing would help us. The way I see it Obama and Hillary are a little bit worse than McCain (not by much).

A 3rd party gaining ground would always be beneficial, but it's a long term goal.

If Barr is on the Ballot and Ron Paul is not, I will vote for Barr.

Sorry, we use Diebold in my District, so unless we can change that before Nov. there's no way I'll be able to write in Ron Paul, and I'm willing to bet 98/100 people who say they will write in Ron Paul are in the same situation as me. :mad::(

Ok, hear me out. Anything is possible yeah? Like, a libertarian winning... Ok, now considering what's most likely to happen based on history - the Libertarian candidate will most likely not win. With that said, why would you NOT vote for Ron Paul - even as a write in? I'd bet Ron Paul in this situation may likely get far more writins than an actual libertarian candidate on the ballot this year. Barr voted for the Patriot Act - despite him regretting it, I remain highly skeptical of where he truly stands.

[ClayTrainor]

If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I would urge everyone to vote for Obama.



This is an example of exactly what not to do!!!!

CFR is CFR... obama, hillary and mccain are all the exact same candidate in my opinion.

vote obama, vote mccain, who cares, u'll get pretty much the same shit anyways.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Ok, hear me out. Anything is possible yeah? Like, a libertarian winning... Ok, now considering what's most likely to happen based on history - the Libertarian candidate will most likely not win. With that said, why would you NOT vote for Ron Paul - even as a write in? I'd bet Ron Paul in this situation may likely get far more writins than an actual libertarian candidate on the ballot this year. Barr voted for the Patriot Act - despite him regretting it, I remain highly skeptical of where he truly stands.

Write-in votes don't count and are not reported unless Ron Paul were to register as an official write-in candidate in each state. I can't see him doing this, so it's a complete waste. Just as you never hear votes counted for Mickey Mouse or George Washington, you won't have any write-in votes for Paul counted unless he's registered.

[porcupine]

I dunno. I'll keep working on my state for now. I haven't given up on the Republic. The president of the union can only do so much, and the congress can only do so much more... and for proof look at Montana's governor saying f-u to the federal government.

I agree that there is a great deal of liberty to be won at the state level and a state can really stand up to the federal government. That's why I support the Free State Project. I disagree with you though. I think our federal government is a lost cause. If we want freedom, we'll have to unite and work to make one small place free. Freeing this entire country is just too big of a task I think :(

[Conza88]

Agreed. He doesn't measure up to Ron Paul standards, he's too much of a coward and doesn't take a true stand.

He doesn't deserve our financial support or our vote.

Like I said a few days ago. FK Barr.

Ron Paul till I die! :D

[TruthAtLast]

With that said, why would you NOT vote for Ron Paul - even as a write in? I'd bet Ron Paul in this situation may likely get far more writins than an actual libertarian candidate on the ballot this year.


Because I CAN'T write him in even if I wanted to and about 90% of the Country also can't write in candidates. So assuming writing in ANYONE was off the table because it isn't even an option, then what? Do I not vote or do I vote for someone other than McCain, Obama, and Hilary? I'm not saying it MUST be Barr but what are my choices? Ron Paul isn't running. Ventura isn't running. Barr IS. Maybe that changes after the Convention. I hope it does. But if it doesn't, I have no choice but to vote for the man that will at least help the Movement move one step closer (no matter how small that step may be).

[Thor]

You guys piss me off. He's an asshole, but you give no reason. People think he is somehow bad cause he suggest voting for him rather than Obama or McCain, that you don't /have/ to write-in Paul if a Libertarian is in the race. Yep, asshole. I mean really.

I have yet to hear a reason why I shouldn't support his candidacy. Someone give me a real reason. I find him to be an articulate speaker and defender of civil liberties, why is that bad?

I will give you a reason. This is a second hand story, but true. My wife worked for the Rural Telecomm Assoc or maybe it was when she worked for the Retail Association, don't recall which, and there was a bill / issue they were backing and were trying to get support for legitimately, not by buying support.

Anywho, after the issue / bill passed, Barr had the balls to call up the office where my wife worked and ask for money from them because he supported the bill and then he got pissy when they told him no. From that day on my wife really disliked him and knew he was just another slime ball in DC.

And I grew up in GA and he was always in the news for something good or bad or whatever. Did not care for him much then either. He comes across as untrustworthy.

Can you imagine RP doing something like that? Never.

[Danny Molina]

As long as Mr. Barr has the (L) next to his name he's not going anywhere.

[Rhys]

As long as Mr. Barr has the (L) next to his name he's not going anywhere.

QFT

[jbuttell]

Because I CAN'T write him in even if I wanted to and about 90% of the Country also can't write in candidates. So assuming writing in ANYONE was off the table because it isn't even an option, then what? Do I not vote or do I vote for someone other than the McCain, Obama, and Hilary? I'm not saying it MUST be Barr but what are my choices? Ron Paul isn't running. Ventura isn't running. Barr IS. Maybe that changes after the Convention. I hope it does. But if it doesn't, I have no choice but to vote for the man that will at least help Movement move one step closer (no matter how small that step may be).

What's to stop you from writing him in? Respectfully, you know how to use a pencil right? Of course it doesn't necessarily add up to anything - just like how I was forced to file a provisional ballot on Feb 5th - I knew it would likely not count, but I did it anyway. I've voted Libertarian in the past, I knew they wouldn't win - but I did it anyway. It's a protest vote.

I feel what's most important is that you cast your ballot. Why you have to vote for someone other than Ron Paul who has virtually no chance of winning - I'm not certain. I suppose the only value you may have by voting for 3rd party this round, is to potentially influence the 3rd party %. But you're not even claiming to stand for any particular party (like the libertarian) so your ballot will just get dispersed through some random 3rd party candidate.

I'm not suggesting you do this every election - but Ron Paul is exceptional - why not go out with a bang? Either way, your vote won't go toward any of the Repub/Dem candidates. So whats the difference?

I'm not saying you're wrong - I just am not seeing the value in supporting a 3rd party candidate unless they're exceptional. I've yet to see anyone even come close to Ron Paul's character.

[jbuttell]

Obama is a socialist, yes, but 4 years of heading towards socialism is more preferred than McCains Armageddon.




McCain is a socialist too. So is Bush. The similarities don't end there. I don't understand how people consider themselves Ron Paul supporters and then turn around and assume that just because it's a Democrat we're talking about (Obama) they'll lead us away from war. Democrats don't have a great record either when it comes to foreign policy - and seem to adore the UN even more than Republicans.

Don't be fooled into thinking you're helping by voting Obama. You're just being played. Best learn now than later.

[Kludge]

Dr. Paul wouldn't be counted as a vote against the "establishment", and - in history, he's still a Republican, a member of the party of Neocons.

Voting Libertarian sends a message to politicians and others that many people AREN'T voting Republican because they support Pre-Lincoln thinking (no... I'm not talking about slavery >.>).

Writing in Dr. Paul will have no effect, and I'm willing to stake $100 that he will not win with a write-in campaign, nor will he be mentioned in the media.

[billyjoeallen]

It's likely that Dr. Paul will endorse Barr after the Republican convention. I will vote for Barr if RP endorses him. If not, I'll write in the good doctor.

[twister5400]

I am from down here in Georgia, and I've heard rumors from some folks about why he may be running for president on the libertarian ticket, and it is certainly to gain some notoriety. Several months ago, I heard that there was a growing contingency in Georgia that want him to try to run for governor. This would be a strategically smart move to jump in the race. He could gain some support and possibly get some speaking time on television. Then he could possibly run for governor... I wouldnt hold it against him or nuthin... and i'd love to have him as my governor...

just throwing that out there

[hypnagogue]

If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, I would urge everyone to vote for Obama.

For anyone to believe that McCain is better than Obama, you are just not very studied on the two. If McCain wins, we send this country to WW3 without a doubt. And i don't believe America will win that war. The world is itching to put the USA in it's place, and McCain provocative attitude will only encourage them to do it. If Russia and China want to attack the US together, along with most of the middle east, I don't see the USA winning.

Obama is a socialist, yes, but 4 years of heading towards socialism is more preferred than McCains Armageddon.

TIM RUSSERT: So we could have two wars at once?
SEN. McCAIN: I think we could have Armageddon.
- John McCain, on the Iran crisis. April 2nd 2006, on Meet The Press. Agreed. Socialism's ills pale in comparison to the hateful warmongering McCain promises. Personally, if it looks like McCain may beat Obama (I believe he'll be the nominee) I will have to vote for Obama simply to avert disaster. If it seems likely that Obama will defeat McCain then I'll submit what is essentially a protest vote against the two parties for whomever I can find most in line with the Liberty, Sane Foreign Affairs and Financial Reformation agendas. Bob Barr is an option. We'll have to wait and see who's actually going to be on the ballot.

[Kludge]

I can't imagine that any nations would dare war with us, especially when all we're doing is going into nations to kill anti-American people, establish "democracy" and "liberate" oil.

Would any sane country put people's lives at risk to stop us?

And surely, no country would dare try to invade us with gun laws as lax as they are.

[ZzzImAsleep]

Agreed. Socialism's ills pale in comparison to the hateful warmongering McCain promises. Personally, if it looks like McCain may beat Obama (I believe he'll be the nominee) I will have to vote for Obama simply to avert disaster. If it seems likely that Obama will defeat McCain then I'll submit what is essentially a protest vote against the two parties for whomever I can find most in line with the Liberty, Sane Foreign Affairs and Financial Reformation agendas. Bob Barr is an option. We'll have to wait and see who's actually going to be on the ballot.

A vote for Obama is a vote for socialism. Sure it might "pale in comparison" to the fascist Republicans but that does not mean it is good.

It is like choosing between voting to be stabbed and voting to be shot.

[tonyr1988]

Agreed. Socialism's ills pale in comparison to the hateful warmongering McCain promises. Personally, if it looks like McCain may beat Obama (I believe he'll be the nominee) I will have to vote for Obama simply to avert disaster. If it seems likely that Obama will defeat McCain then I'll submit what is essentially a protest vote against the two parties for whomever I can find most in line with the Liberty, Sane Foreign Affairs and Financial Reformation agendas. Bob Barr is an option. We'll have to wait and see who's actually going to be on the ballot.

1) There's a good chance that Obama's the most interventionist out of the big 3 left (yes, even moreso than McCain). He probably won't invade Iran (although he didn't take a nuclear firststrike off of the table), but he'll plunge us into "nation-building" (ex: IRAQ) operations like crazy.

Do you know why he's against the Iraq War? Because it's bad? No. Because it's interventionist? No. Because it's expensive? No. He's primarily against the war because it makes people think that nation-building is bad - he's against the war purely for political reasons. He's saying "Iraq is bad because it makes interventionism unpopular."

2) Socialism sucks. Don't underestimate the power of an angry America+Democrat control of Congress/Presidency. I have little doubt that we would have national health care. The problem is that it would make our national debt even worse, the dollar fall even faster, etc - everything Paul has spoken out against. It would be a permanent program that would be detrimental to the future of our country.

[angelatc]

I can't imagine that any nations would dare war with us, especially when all we're doing is going into nations to kill anti-American people, establish "democracy" and "liberate" oil.

Would any sane country put people's lives at risk to stop us?

And surely, no country would dare try to invade us with gun laws as lax as they are.

You must not realize exactly how many people China has. Guns or no guns, they could send wave after wave after wave after wave after wave....

[DaveH]

I like Ron Paul's speaking style as well. I think maybe he is a little wordy for the average person but I think he is fantastic. I'm here to back Paul. I'm voting for Ron Paul no matter what.

For those of us who agree with Ron Paul's message his speeches are inspiring.
But way too many people have his messages go right over their heads because they can't equate his message to their everyday lives.
He's akin to the preacher always pointing out sins but never telling anyone how to overcome sin.
Paul needs to be able to explain how doing certain things will benefit the average joe on the streets. Sadly, he doesn't do that very well.
BTW, I've heard Barr speak. He's a no nonsense, in your face, tell it like it is kind of speaker. Ask him what time it is and he don't spend thirty minutes telling you how a clock works before he gives you the answer.
I don't trust him, but I'd vote for him because I trust him more than the triplets who are running now.

[TruthAtLast]

What's to stop you from writing him in? Respectfully, you know how to use a pencil right? Of course it doesn't necessarily add up to anything - just like how I was forced to file a provisional ballot on Feb 5th - I knew it would likely not count, but I did it anyway. I've voted Libertarian in the past, I knew they wouldn't win - but I did it anyway. It's a protest vote.

I feel what's most important is that you cast your ballot. Why you have to vote for someone other than Ron Paul who has virtually no chance of winning - I'm not certain. I suppose the only value you may have by voting for 3rd party this round, is to potentially influence the 3rd party %. But you're not even claiming to stand for any particular party (like the libertarian) so your ballot will just get dispersed through some random 3rd party candidate.

I'm not suggesting you do this every election - but Ron Paul is exceptional - why not go out with a bang? Either way, your vote won't go toward any of the Repub/Dem candidates. So whats the difference?

I'm not saying you're wrong - I just am not seeing the value in supporting a 3rd party candidate unless they're exceptional. I've yet to see anyone even come close to Ron Paul's character.

If I vote on in the General Election my county uses Diebold, so there is no paper ballot and no pencil will be any good except to poke all of the neocons standing in line. If I mail in a provisional ballot, they wont count or report those write-ins anyway. So it is the same as me NOT voting.

To say that Barr can't win is to use the same argument that Ron Paul can't win. At least Barr will be on the ballot. Maybe you're right. Maybe BOTH can't win, but at least my vote for a third party (even if they don't win) can not only be counted and reported, but can also show that I am not in support of the Democrat or Republican choices. Maybe it helps blaze a path for future third parties, who knows.

What we SHOULD have in this country (like many other countries) is the option to vote "no confidence". I don't associate myself with any party because there is no party that really represents everything I believe, but the Libertarian party does represent SOME of the things I believe so unless there is a better independent alternative by that time by the GE comes around, I will have no other choice. If Ron Paul ran Independent or another candidate ran that had Ron Paul's endorsement, of course I'd vote for them if they were able to get on the ballot.

[Kludge]

You must not realize exactly how many people China has. Guns or no guns, they could send wave after wave after wave after wave after wave....

But WHY? China is controlled by a sane, liberty-progressing government. Even if we had a POTUS shitty enough to see benefits in attacking Iran or similar, would China risk men and women and their economy (which is globally accepted as the likely front-runner soon) because we're killing off Americans and Anti-Americans in the Middle East?

At worst, the UN would sanction us and/or slap our wrists with a "vote of no confidence".

[BKom]

Bob Barr is a jacka$$. I hated him when he was a congressman, and I still hate him now that he's had a "conversion." Isn't it funny how people only have conversions after they can't actually do us any good anymore?

He can rot in hell with the rest of those of his anti-freedom ilk. I am so glad I left the Libertarian Party almost 20 years ago. It never got anywhere and is now going there even faster.

[Kludge]

It never got anywhere and is now going there even faster.

So we're going somewhere faster now?

[spacehabitats]

As far as who is worse... I think all three are different forms of CFR poison.
I really don't think McCain will start WWIII but he must NOT win in November because...

1) It would be the death knell for what has been the party of refuge for the semi-clueless (and with a semi-decent platform, even though they let their leaders blatantly ignore it) , the GOP.

2) It would mean that we would have to take over the Democratic Party between now and 2012. Why? Because no matter how bad things get between now and then, there is NO WAY AN INCUMBENT GOP PRESIDENT WOULD NOT BE RENOMINATED.

3) With a Democratic-controlled congress AND President it will be far easier to elect a Republican president next time around, after the coming economic disasters of the next four years.

4) Well, I don't think we need anymore reasons. John McCain MUST NOT WIN IN NOVEMBER!!!!!!

[Soccrmastr]

We're reforming the GOP. Lets please stick to voting for RP since he a republican. The movement cant just move over to the libertarian party. They've never gotten anything done close to the scale we have.

[Nash]

We're reforming the GOP. Lets please stick to voting for RP since he a republican. The movement cant just move over to the libertarian party. They've never gotten anything done close to the scale we have.

Ron Paul won't be on the ballot in November. Ron Paul won't be running for President after the GOP convention. Voting for Bob Barr doesn't mean you have to leave the GOP nor does it mean you don't support Ron Paul.

[Bro.Butch]

I apologize to everyone ! Please retract every word I have writing in favor of Bob Barr, new evidence has been brought to my attention in the past 48 hours. Quite frankly I am shocked and sadden.

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/articles/48/no-way-to-treat-a-friend/
THE SMOKING GUN:Still the Drug Warrior Bob Barr in his own words

I had hoped to overlook his non-libertarian leanings in hopes of large vote totals at the polls, I can no longer do so, Not only is he still Pro Drug War, he advocates Foreign Aid and Intervention. All this while a sitting LP NatCom member. Excluding the bad "fair" TAX stance, that's three "MAJOR" strikes against Bob Barr, IMO HE'RE OUT!! We don’t need these views a top the LP representing the Party to the nation. He also needs to be voted off the LP natcom as quickly as possible.


I want to believe in a "big tent" LP, however I can't agree with placing persons opposed to basic Libertarian beliefs in positions of prominence within the Party. In no way possible should such a person receive the LP POTUS nomination. Let new members grow in liberty, before placing them upfront as a "voice" of the LP.

Looks like no Ron Paul love for C.I.A. Bob Barr afterall: This from the man who started the
R(3VOl)UTION LOGO

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?InfoNo=032158


Also
The one very, very, very bad idea that Barr and Gravel share is the fraudulent “fair” tax. For details, see
http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2006/12/30/first-of-the-lpa-reposts-the-fraud-tax/

http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2007/06/02/immigration-hysteria-fair-tax-police-state-ussa/

please also read the links inside those articles.

Tom also summarizes some of the problems here

http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/tom-knapp-attacks-the-fair-tax/

[free.alive]

A Republican win gives a mandate for liberal Republicans, or the Republican Left, to decide the course of the party. They will get all the Party positions, will decide the criteria for Republican candidates, will decide the platform, rules, you name it. They will restructure the rules all over to prevent what is happening this year to ever happen again. Expect some form of the Dems' super-delegates, etc.

Hillary and Obama will be terrible for us; but McCain will be no different. The benefit to us is that if McCain wins, the one party not wholly dominated by socialism will be our only answer to a liberal, fascist Republican who will get two terms. If McCain loses, then 4 years from now (if we've successfully taken over the party) we can run Liberty-loving candidates that will win because freedom, if it's an option, triumphs over tyranny.