Why taking over the GOP is fruitless

[nate895]

Let's take a trip back to the year 1992.

Pat Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush for his party's nomination. Buchanan had many of the same positions as Congressman Ron Paul, and garnered two million more votes. What happened? Since he garnered so many votes, and he endorsed Mr. Bush, he got a speaking slot at the convention. The party never made the same mistake again. The Buchanan Brigades attempted a takeover, they were unsuccessful, with many more people than we have (3 million as opposed to 1.2 million).

In 1996, Buchanan went for it again. He had even stronger showing, even winning several states. He went to the convention and they refused to even let him speak there, they refused to let any conservative speak at all. They shut them out of the party, and with more than 200 delegates, Mr. Buchanan was still forced to hold a rally very similar to our rally in order to get his message out. He left the party, realizing they will never let him in. Only problem he had, he didn't have enough money. If you can give a third party money (something which all current third parties lack), they will be able to compete.

Before we look at the merits of a third party, let's look at two successful takeovers of the party. The conservatives of Barry Goldwater. They took over the party long enough to see their guy nominated, that was it. End of the road for them. Then the Christian right under Pat Robertson. You can see how far their concerns went, and they still are considered in moderate control of the party, for a couple of decades.

According to studies, an LP dollar is worth two times a Republican dollar as far as votes go, and every third party beat the Democrats and Republicans (except Nader) as far as votes per dollar go in the Presidential election. With Barr poised to get maybe 1.5 million in funds, and poised to get even more votes, he is going to be able to rake in more votes than dollars spent, something that only Socialists can claim from 2004.

2004 Finance:

George W. Bush (R) $367,227,801 / 62,040,610 = $5.92 per vote
John Kerry (D) $326,236,288 / 59,028,111 = $5.52
Ralph Nader (i) $4,566,037 / 463,653 = $9.85
Michael Badnarik (L) $1,093,013 / 397,265 = $2.75
Michael Peroutka (C) $729,087 / 144,498 = $5.05
David Cobb (G) $493,723 / 119,859 = $4.12
Walt Brown (SPUSA) $2,060 / 10,837 = $0.19


Let's assume we formed a new third party, and we had the effectiveness of the LP dollar. With the same turnout as 2004, it would take ~31,000,000 votes to be recognized as a major political party by the FEC, on the same level as the GOP and Democrats. That means it would take ~$85,525,000. It would take at least that much to take over the GOP. We have already spent $35,000,000 with only a few PCOs to show for it. If we spent as much money as McCain did to win the nomination this time around to takeover the party from here on out (which is highly doubtful we'd succeed with that little money) we'd still equal the amount spent if we went for a new party. We'd also have an advantage the major parties don't have, we have never had any corrupt politicians, and we can keep them out of the party for the most part. Also, our convention in 2012 might get more viewership if we have already won several seats in 2010 simply because our convention actually means something, and we actually get to vote and not have everything decided beforehand (unless RP runs, of course, then it'd be decided beforehand).

[newyearsrevolution08]

The current republican party and the one that used to be the republican party are two separate things. I don't even look at this party as mine right now BUT someone who hijacked it and once we get it back WILL be the true republican party.

Of course it is worth taking back.

Everytime someone takes something from us by force should we just start another party versus actually fighting for what is ours simply based on previous bullshit stats and polls?

They stole it from us and we need to take it back. The republican party needs to become what it was supposed to be and leaving it the way it is would be OPPOSITE of the revolution and what we need to do.

1 party system that will not "democratically" dictate the constitution based on a majority vote or start wars without a declaration.

It would be a large disservice on our part if we allowed the republican party to remain in its current state and no matter how cool a 3rd party sounds that is really not what is needed.

[nate895]

The current republican party and the one that used to be the republican party are two separate things. I don't even look at this party as mine right now BUT someone who hijacked it and once we get it back WILL be the true republican party.

Of course it is worth taking back.

Everytime someone takes something from us by force should we just start another party versus actually fighting for what is ours simply based on previous bullshit stats and polls?

They stole it from us and we need to take it back. The republican party needs to become what it was supposed to be and leaving it the way it is would be OPPOSITE of the revolution and what we need to do.

1 party system that will not "democratically" dictate the constitution based on a majority vote or start wars without a declaration.

It would be a large disservice on our part if we allowed the republican party to remain in its current state and no matter how cool a 3rd party sounds that is really not what is needed.

We shouldn't let them takeover our party. Do to them what they have done to us, they deserve every last bit of it.

[Matt Collins]

The CFL isn't as much about taking over the GOP as it is BECOMING the GOP.

[nate895]

The CFL isn't as much about taking over the GOP as it is BECOMING the GOP.

How do you plan on doing that? We have tried to take this party several times before, we have only failed and lost more and more to apathy. Trying it again would be like a general ordering another charge on a hill, after he has already lost two-thirds of his men. The party is too entrenched for us to try to take them out, the best way is to bypass the hill and go directly to the people of the United States.

[Truth Warrior]

"If you want to understand, what's REALLY going on, just follow the money!"

[nate895]

We can both work within the GOP, while supporting a third party. A third party is currently the only vehicle which we can use to promote our message.

[Matt Collins]

How do you plan on doing that? We have tried to take this party several times before, we have only failed and lost more and more to apathy.
I have not tried before, I am only 26.


The party is too entrenched for us to try to take them out, the best way is to bypass the hill and go directly to the people of the United States.Not if we show up to regular meetings and begin to take offices inside of our local GOP.

[nate895]

I have not tried before, I am only 26.

Not if we show up to regular meetings and begin to take offices inside of our local GOP.

When I say "we" I mean paleoconservatives and libertarians. I am even younger than you. Here in Washington, we have tried to take the GOP. We lost, miserably I might add. We try to attend meetings. We aren't let into their little social clubs that they've had since high school.

[Sean]

I think you are mistaking taking over the party with becoming President. I think to take over the party you have to do a few things. One we must take control over the low level positions. City councils, mayors, local party positions. Second is take control of some communication networks. We need alternate cable news networks, talk radio stations, academic researchers, magazines ect.

If you can't take control of the communications and local and state level you will be locked out every four years. Look and see how the neocons have operated and you will understand these things take years.

[1836]

I haven't posted here in a while but I still read from time to time.

The GOP is not a fruitless effort.

Remember Pat Robertson in '88. Then, in 1996, 1998, and 2000, the cultural conservatives took over the party. Why in the world can't the liberty wing do the same?

[user]

If you think about it, Democrats are closer to liberty than Republicans in many ways.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Let's take a trip back to the year 1992.

snip

2004 Finance:

George W. Bush (R) $367,227,801 / 62,040,610 = $5.92 per vote
John Kerry (D) $326,236,288 / 59,028,111 = $5.52
Ralph Nader (i) $4,566,037 / 463,653 = $9.85
Michael Badnarik (L) $1,093,013 / 397,265 = $2.75
Michael Peroutka (C) $729,087 / 144,498 = $5.05
David Cobb (G) $493,723 / 119,859 = $4.12
Walt Brown (SPUSA) $2,060 / 10,837 = $0.19



The Present:
An Idea who's time has come (¿) PRICELESS....

[idiom]

We need to be turning out Tomes to compete with the CFR Rag Foreign Relations. That thing is in bookstores and airports everywhere and really does set the tone of a lot of thinking.

Basically the CFL has to compete directly with the CFR.

[mudhoney]

If you think about it, Democrats are closer to liberty than Republicans in many ways.

If all goes well, hopefully our movement will impact them as well.

[speciallyblend]

well if mccain wins the revolution will be dead in the gop!!!!

[freelance]

We need to be turning out Tomes to compete with the CFR Rag Foreign Relations. That thing is in bookstores and airports everywhere and really does set the tone of a lot of thinking.

Basically the CFL has to compete directly with the CFR.

I have no idea if that is even feasible, since it requires major, heavy hitters, but that's one of the most interesting ideas I've heard.

I'd disagree with one thing. I think that it directs the thinking of what's already been decided rather than merely setting the tone.

[freelance]

well if mccain wins the revolution will be dead in the gop!!!!

The same way any semblance of freedom was absent in St. Paul, inside and outside of the convention center.

[speciallyblend]

I haven't posted here in a while but I still read from time to time.

The GOP is not a fruitless effort.

Remember Pat Robertson in '88. Then, in 1996, 1998, and 2000, the cultural conservatives took over the party. Why in the world can't the liberty wing do the same?

what the hell are you talking about neo-cons have controlled the party since 1996(even earlier),so im not sure what your talking about....

[Anti Federalist]

The GOP is dead to me.

It started as third party.

Best to let it end that way as well.

[slacker921]

You have to take over the media first. It doesn't matter whether you want to retake the GOP, build the Constitution party, build the Libertarian party, or start a totally new party. You must control the message otherwise you will be crushed.

... but this should be totally obvious to anyone who has supported Ron Paul... or anyone who has watched V for Vendetta.

[Matt Collins]

When I say "we" I mean paleoconservatives and libertarians. I am even younger than you. Here in Washington, we have tried to take the GOP. We lost, miserably I might add. We try to attend meetings. We aren't let into their little social clubs that they've had since high school.Well some in the CFL are already having great success so it is possible.

[scandinaviany3]

We can both work within the GOP, while supporting a third party. A third party is currently the only vehicle which we can use to promote our message.

Some states will let you do both, others will be hard to do this but worth the try.

In terms of the only vehicle..that is not true. Look at the marketing job all these guys do up front with programs before elections. On top of that they have the fruits of religion to tap into done 24X7....

This is all about media and marketing control.

It is crucial to have that access in the markets one wants to access to for winning. All the money in the world wont change things otherwise as perot found out in 1996 as a third party.

Its all about beating them at their own game and unlike buchanan actually having the money to do something with it from within

[nate895]

I haven't posted here in a while but I still read from time to time.

The GOP is not a fruitless effort.

Remember Pat Robertson in '88. Then, in 1996, 1998, and 2000, the cultural conservatives took over the party. Why in the world can't the liberty wing do the same?

Yes, and look where their concerns are. If you would have read the OP, I addressed that.
They took over the party.
The GOP had the majority.
Abortion is still legal.

[porcupine]

Yep. The national strategy just isn't feasible right now. We need to regroup and work on a smaller project to serve as a springboard. Enter the Free State Project

[porcupine]

If you think about it, Democrats are closer to liberty than Republicans in many ways.

Ummm...how?

Guns? Nope, they're worse
Socialism? No, they're worse
Privacy? Ha! No
The War? No difference
Monetary Policy? No difference
Federalism? No, the Democrats are worse
Environmental and other regulations? No, worse
Education? About the same

How exactly are democrats better?

[jblosser]

Both the Goldwater crowd and then the Robertson crowd succeeded in taking over the party for their leadership. The problem is that by the time they did it, their leadership was no longer with them.

Repeat their successes but not their mistakes.

[user]

Ummm...how?

Guns? Nope, they're worse
Socialism? No, they're worse
Privacy? Ha! No
The War? No difference
Monetary Policy? No difference
Federalism? No, the Democrats are worse
Environmental and other regulations? No, worse
Education? About the same

How exactly are democrats better?

I mean the base, not the politicians who are pretty much the same.

Civil liberties? Democrats are better
Personal freedom? Democrats are better
Economics? Both are terrible
War? Democrats are better

[idiom]

If you want to really change the political landscape the CFL won't do it on its own. If it achieved all its goals, it would revolutionize the GOP. Yay!

But for those of us who have completed the assigned readings, you Need to go Ellsworth Toohey on the bastards.

We need to win over the Hollywood writers, we need to win a lot more musicians, we might need to set up counter teachers associations. Oh and despite the rampant militant atheism of these forums we need to reach the Pastors, Priests, Rabbis and Imams of the country.

Each of these is nearly its own CFL, except that a lot of the members of these diverse and unrelated organisations would naturally join the CFL and the GOP of their own accord.

[Peace&Freedom]

From a yahoogroup exchange I had with Bill Westmiller of the RLC today, my comments in arrows:

> ... Paul goes into the 2012 cycle with a 200,000+ email
> and mailing list ...

It's closer to 100,000 ... but half are just emails, not real
activists or contributors.

> He has his own major PAC with the Campaign for Liberty ...

He may want you to believe that, but it isn't true. C4L is
NOT a PAC. It cannot contribute any money to any partisan
candidate, because it is a 501(c)4 "non-profit" corporation.

> ... his own massive grassroots movement ...

But, C4L is not a grassroots organization. There will be
no grassroots control or input. It's run by a handful of Paul
financial gurus on a small Board of Directors. There won't
be any election of C4L officers, nor any state or local
organizations. It's all run from the top down.

> ... and his own ad hoc media support systems ...

Which will be totally focused on selling books, seminars,
and collecting money for speakers. Not that there's anything
wrong with that ... it just isn't a vehicle for political action.

> The earlier he announces ...

With an ailing wife and practical expulsion from the
Republican Party, Ron will serve out his next term in
Congress and then, probably, retire to the speaking
and writing circuit.

> So, keep the motor running.

But steer it toward a credible target: electing liberty-
minded individuals to GOP party positions that will
exert control over every future campaign.

Bill

[porcupine]

I mean the base, not the politicians who are pretty much the same.

Civil liberties? Democrats are better

How? They voted for the FISA bill. They voted for the Patriot Act



Personal freedom? Democrats are better


What personal freedoms? Guns? Drugs? What?



War? Democrats are better

They TALK better.

[user]

How? They voted for the FISA bill. They voted for the Patriot Act

Read the part of my post you quoted. I'm talking about the base, not the politicians. The base was not happy with either of those laws. Can you say that for the GOP base? No.


They TALK better.

Actually, the Republicans usually talk better by claiming to believe in liberty, but then they do their best to destroy it.

[porcupine]

Read the part of my post you quoted. I'm talking about the base, not the politicians. The base was not happy with either of those laws. Can you say that for the GOP base? No.



Point taken. You're right.



Actually, the Republicans usually talk better by claiming to believe in liberty, but then they do their best to destroy it.

I was talking specifically about war.

[user]

I was talking specifically about war.

If you mean the politicians you're definitely right about that. I'm pretty sure that's why their approval ratings are so low.

[heavenlyboy34]

If you mean the politicians you're definitely right about that. I'm pretty sure that's why their approval ratings are so low.

Polls turn out the way they do because the pollster chooses the wording to manipulate the outcome. They're a favorite tool of politicians when deciding "how to fool 'em today". I don't trust any poll that doesn't publish its methodology (which is just about every stupid poll nowadays it seems). :mad: Remember, the establishment used polls to try and discourage RP fans and artificially bump Giuliani/McCain.:mad:

[ChickenHawk]

In order to take over a party you have to spend a lot of time and make a lot of sometimes painful compromises. Compromise is practically a swear word as far as many here are concerned. Unwillingness to compromise is a major reason minor parties never get anywhere. Compromise also means that you will probably never get everything you want. That's okay if you can come to grips with the fact that you never will get everything you want.

Politics is not about solving all the countries problems. It's about trying to keep it from getting worse and improving things whenever possible. Working constantly to improve government and being grateful for your successes while not dwelling on failures is the key. Foaming at the mouth about all the "sheeple" and insulting your political opponents for not accepting your uncompromising positions will get you nowhere.

The political discourse here is decidedly unhelpful. The constant "criminal", "war monger", "fascist", "neocon" (a word so misused it is now nothing more than an insult) and countless other words to describe political opponents does nothing to win them over. Just because you don't agree or understand someone else's opinion doesn't mean they have malicious intent.

As long as the "mainstream" of America and the GOP see this movement as a bunch of uncomprimising, angry and intolerant thugs, taking over the GOP, or anything else for that matter, just ain't gonna happen.

[josephadel_3]

Agreed. Renewing or transforming the GOP into a conservative party is impossible.