PDA

View Full Version : LP Co-Founder: "The Barr Campaign Is Over"




Hamer
09-11-2008, 09:46 PM
My donations and my vote now go to Chuck Baldwin

www.buckforchuck.com

www.baldwin2008.com

by David F. Nolan
(Libertarian)

Thursday, September 11, 2008

As of yesterday afternoon, Bob Barr's Presidential campaign is effectively over. There were signs of serious trouble even before yesterday, but his "no-show" at Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty news conference -- followed by an insulting suggestion that Ron should join Barr on the LP ticket in the VP slot -- demonstrated just how out-of-touch the Barr campaign is, and how poor Barr's vote total is likely to be.

In earlier articles here on nolanchart.com I tried to give Barr every benefit of the doubt. I observed that in theory he should be one of the Libertarian Party's stronger Presidential candidates. I opined that while his pronouncements on the campaign trail were hardly hard-core libertarian, they were mostly to-the-point and well stated. I did not support him for the nomination, but I was more or less comfortable supporting him once he became the LP nominee.

There has been evidence all along that the Barr '08 campaign has been mismanaged. Ballot access drives were begun late, and conducted erratically. As of today, it appears that Barr's name will be on the ballot in 46 or 47 states. (Harry Browne appeared on 50 ballots in 1996 and 49 in 2000. Michael Badnarik made it onto 48 in 2004.) Barr has failed to achieve ballot status in West Virginia, due entirely to Shane Cory's ineptitude, and there are lawsuits pending in five states (LA, MA, ME, OK and PA) to determine whether Barr will be on the ballot.

Fundraising has also been a flop. As I write this, the fundraising "meter" on the Barr '08 website shows the total raised by the campaign at $881,500 -- about $700,000 since the Denver nominating convention. That works out to about $6,400 a day or $200,000/month. In the days leading up to the nomination, Barr's people were throwing around numbers like $20 million. The reality is likely to be barely more than $1 million.

But all that would be beside the point if Bob Barr were campaigning proudly as a Libertarian and taking advantage of every opportunity to reach out to like-minded Americans.

Unfortunately, he's not. Following advice from his campaign manager, Russ Verney, Barr has avoided use of the "L" word wherever possible. There's a big empty space in the banner at the top of the Barr '08 website, where the word LIBERTARIAN could (and should) appear. It doesn't, despite several suggestions that this be remedied. Barr's campaign literature, signs and bumper stickers do not include the "L" word either. And a press release issued by the campaign earlier this week describes Barr as a "Former Congressman" with no mention of the Libertarian Party.

Clearly, Barr is not running as a Libertarian; he's running as an independent candidate: "Former Congressman Bob Barr." Which may be just as well, given the way he's been behaving.

Yesterday, Congressman Ron Paul held a news conference to denounce the two-party duopoly. He invited four alternative candidates -- Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader -- to participate. Baldwin, McKinney and Nader showed up; Barr did not. Instead, he held a separate follow-up conference of his own at which he tooted his own horn and "invited" Ron Paul to be his running mate. This was insanely stupid, for several reasons. First, because Barr has no authority to unilaterally change running-mates. Second, because it's a insult to Ron Paul, who is far better known and more widely admired. (Reportedly, Ron Paul and his top people are furious.) And third, because even if Ron Paul accepted the invitation and the Libertarian National Committee approved the substitution, it is too late to make a substitution on most states' ballots.

For a description of what happened at the Campaign for Liberty press conference, see this Washington Post article.

Why has the Barr campaign has gone so badly awry? The simple answer is that the two men running it -- Russ Verney and Shane Cory -- are not Libertarians, do not understand what motivates Libertarian activists, and have no interest in building the LP. Verney is a gun-for-hire of no discernible ideology. Cory is a Republican who left his former job at LP headquarters in disgrace, after abusing his authority prior to the Denver convention. (Just today, Verney posted a Campaign Update on the Barr '08 website, praising George W. Bush for his "leadership" during the days following the 9/11 attacks seven years ago. Any true Libertarian would have instead pointed out that Bush has USED the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to erode our civil liberties!)

With these two running the campaign it will continue to embarrass Libertarians and waste our resources. Bob Barr will never qualify for inclusion in the phony "Presidential debates." He will not get the 5% of the vote that would qualify the LP for future matching funds -- which it should not accept in any case. Indeed, at this point it seems likely that Barr will not get even 1% of the popular vote. (Bettors on intrade.com are currently betting 2:1 against Barr receiving 1%.)

surf
09-11-2008, 09:51 PM
With these two running the campaign it will continue to embarrass Libertarians

agreed

mapcommander
09-11-2008, 09:55 PM
that is the final nail in the coffin.


Bob Barr royally fucked up.


Hello Chuck Baldwin!

rockandrollsouls
09-11-2008, 10:04 PM
that is the final nail in the coffin.


Bob Barr royally fucked up.


Hello Chuck Baldwin!

You didn't read the article. The LP CO FOUNDER didn't say anything poor about Bob...he directed poor words towards the managers ( who I think are terrible..but I also thought Benton was awful).

fr33domfightr
09-11-2008, 10:09 PM
Hmmm....is the Barr Campaign now looking for new managment???


FF

tropicangela
09-11-2008, 10:09 PM
Yes, but Barr doesn't have authorization to change running mates, and he also decided to have the separate conference. He sounds like a nit wit.

revolutionary8
09-11-2008, 10:13 PM
The Chairman would have a hard time defending an anti-Libertarian stance (vote for whomever you want)
The LP made a grave mistake. Either that, or it was intetional.
Who the hell knows these days?
It's black or white-
Bob Barr infiltrated the party, or the party was corrupt to begin with.
Pick one.
As a REPUBLICAN, at least I know the answer.

AWMWTP
09-11-2008, 10:20 PM
After reading several emails from my Libertarian friends, I must say that they now are saying what we Baldwin supporters have been saying. That Barr is not the man they thought he was. Some of them actually suspected it from the beginning but refused to see past the L. The mess that Barr's campaign managers have laid upon his feet is going to weigh him him down like cement overshoes.
I haven't trusted him from the beginning and now it's confirmed that my lack of faith in him was warranted.:cool:

Andrew-Austin
09-11-2008, 10:23 PM
This was already posted, look on the front page of grassroots before you post.

And for Christs sake, post the entire article instead of cutting out the parts you don't agree with.

http://www.nolanchart.com/article4805.html



I haven't trusted him from the beginning and now it's confirmed that my lack of faith in him was warranted.

Really the article was railing against the Barr/Root campaign and those running it, not Bob Bar the man and the platform. It is important to distinguish the difference imo.

reduen
09-11-2008, 10:24 PM
Ok, now why would they not put the "L word" on a website designed for a Libertarian Presidential Candidate...?

On another note I would love to hear Dr. Paul's take on this matter.

rockandrollsouls
09-11-2008, 10:25 PM
After reading several emails from my Libertarian friends, I must say that they now are saying what we Baldwin supporters have been saying. That Barr is not the man they thought he was. Some of them actually suspected it from the beginning but refused to see past the L. The mess that Barr's campaign managers have laid upon his feet is going to weigh him him down like cement overshoes.
I haven't trusted him from the beginning and now it's confirmed that my lack of faith in him was warranted.:cool:

Really, because my libertarian friends and those that have been LP members for a while would argue the opposite.

Thomas_Paine
09-11-2008, 10:43 PM
You didn't read the article. The LP CO FOUNDER didn't say anything poor about Bob...he directed poor words towards the managers ( who I think are terrible..but I also thought Benton was awful).

read this section again

"Yesterday, Congressman Ron Paul held a news conference to denounce the two-party duopoly. He invited four alternative candidates -- Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader -- to participate. Baldwin, McKinney and Nader showed up; Barr did not. Instead, he held a separate follow-up conference of his own at which he tooted his own horn and "invited" Ron Paul to be his running mate. This was insanely stupid, for several reasons. First, because Barr has no authority to unilaterally change running-mates. Second, because it's a insult to Ron Paul, who is far better known and more widely admired. (Reportedly, Ron Paul and his top people are furious.) And third, because even if Ron Paul accepted the invitation and the Libertarian National Committee approved the substitution, it is too late to make a substitution on most states' ballots."

anaconda
09-11-2008, 10:55 PM
I emailed the Barr campaign today and told them that I was a Ron Paul supporter who had intended to vote for him, but would now vote for one of the three candidates that were present at the National Press Club to show solidarity against the false choice non-choice. Just a little feedback.

Hamer
09-11-2008, 10:57 PM
This was already posted, look on the front page of grassroots before you post.

And for Christs sake, post the entire article instead of cutting out the parts you don't agree with.

http://www.nolanchart.com/article4805.html

Really the article was railing against the Barr/Root campaign and those running it, not Bob Bar the man and the platform. It is important to distinguish the difference imo.

I took nothing out and I can read very well. Barr is finished and even the LP is ashamed and damaged by him.

I am going to doante and vote to and for Chcuk Baldwin.


www.buckforchuck.com

rockandrollsouls
09-12-2008, 12:08 AM
read this section again

"Yesterday, Congressman Ron Paul held a news conference to denounce the two-party duopoly. He invited four alternative candidates -- Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader -- to participate. Baldwin, McKinney and Nader showed up; Barr did not. Instead, he held a separate follow-up conference of his own at which he tooted his own horn and "invited" Ron Paul to be his running mate. This was insanely stupid, for several reasons. First, because Barr has no authority to unilaterally change running-mates. Second, because it's a insult to Ron Paul, who is far better known and more widely admired. (Reportedly, Ron Paul and his top people are furious.) And third, because even if Ron Paul accepted the invitation and the Libertarian National Committee approved the substitution, it is too late to make a substitution on most states' ballots."


And where does the author say Barr is at fault? He goes on to say the campaign managers are the foolish ones. Stop isolating bits and pieces to make something look like something it is not.

TER
09-12-2008, 12:28 AM
Even if it was his managers' idea to skip the conference, Barr's decision to go along with it shows that he is completely out of step with this revolution.

Menthol Patch
09-12-2008, 12:36 AM
The LP needs to remove Bob Barr as their presidential candidate!

Scotso
09-12-2008, 01:44 AM
It's too late for that, unfortunately. I mean, too late to get him replaced. Frankly at this point I would rather have no Libertarian candidate than have it be Barr. I've been talking to my libertarian (and Libertarian) friends about this, and they've almost convinced me to vote for Baldwin. I'm still hesitant, but hearing him speak he doesn't sound like the kooky Christian I was afraid all CP members were.

I just hope we can kick Barr and his cronies out of the party before 2010.

Also, I posted this first. :p :'(

Scotso
09-12-2008, 01:47 AM
Also, I sent a message to Bill Redpath to try to get his feelings on all of this, he hasn't responded yet, but I hope he does. I'm voting for him for Senate here in Virginia, and I'll feel more than a little let-down if he isn't critical of these antics.

Joseph_Himself
09-12-2008, 01:49 AM
You know what he was, an anchor. Someone who had name recognition, but all he did was slack around. Silly neocon, leave the Libertarian party for people who actually want the best of both words; and by both worlds I'm implying the best of the "Nazi parties," or the dems and repubs so to speak.

jcarcinogen
09-12-2008, 01:50 AM
It's too late for that, unfortunately. I mean, too late to get him replaced. Frankly at this point I would rather have no Libertarian candidate than have it be Barr. I've been talking to my libertarian (and Libertarian) friends about this, and they've almost convinced me to vote for Baldwin. I'm still hesitant, but hearing him speak he doesn't sound like the kooky Christian I was afraid all CP members were.

I just hope we can kick Barr and his cronies out of the party before 2010.

Also, I posted this first. :p :'(

They were going to replace the VP on a whim why not replace Barr with Paul. (I know Paul said he wouldn't, just wanted to emphasize the point)

literatim
09-12-2008, 02:16 AM
It is funny that Barr was "gracious enough" to let his VP step down for Ron Paul to take his place, but not gracious enough to step down himself for Ron Paul to become the Presidential nominee.

Scotso
09-12-2008, 02:20 AM
But what's amazing is that Barr had the pull to push Root out, who probably is the only person in the world that has an ego to match Barr's. The only answer to that is that they both knew it wasn't going to happen. Which is the most insulting thing of all.

m72mc
09-12-2008, 02:25 AM
so whats the vp offer really about...

I hear itīs too late anyway for some ballots to replace the vp...

if true it just seems like a way to stir up trouble...

Menthol Patch
09-12-2008, 02:27 AM
But what's amazing is that Barr had the pull to push Root out, who probably is the only person in the world that has an ego to match Barr's. The only answer to that is that they both knew it wasn't going to happen. Which is the most insulting thing of all.

Bob Barr already knew that RP would not accept being VP of the Libertarian Party.

Menthol Patch
09-12-2008, 02:28 AM
All he was trying to do is stir up trouble.

RonpaulSupporter7777
09-12-2008, 02:35 AM
Maybe Barr was hoping Paul would be pressured by his supporters to be the VP on the LP ticket. This could've been a tactic to divide his strong movement.

Notice how this all takes place after the big Rally for the Republic in Minneapolis. The rally was a threat to the establishment of which Barr used to be a member of.

Ron Paul supporters are to smart to fall for this "Ron is in it for the money and fame" baloney. This type of insult only makes us unify even more against the status quo.

Menthol Patch
09-12-2008, 02:54 AM
Maybe Barr was hoping Paul would be pressured by his supporters to be the VP on the LP ticket. This could've been a tactic to divide his strong movement.

Notice how this all takes place after the big Rally for the Republic in Minneapolis. The rally was a threat to the establishment of which Barr used to be a member of.

Ron Paul supporters are to smart to fall for this "Ron is in it for the money and fame" baloney. This type of insult only makes us unify even more against the status quo.

I think you are right.

hypnagogue
09-12-2008, 03:56 AM
Barr is responsible for Barr's campaign. If Barr's campaign screwed up, don't try and pass the blame.

amy31416
09-12-2008, 04:47 AM
Bob Barr already knew that RP would not accept being VP of the Libertarian Party.

Agreed, it's more insulting to us than McCain's choice of Palin to women.

angelatc
09-12-2008, 05:35 AM
Fundraising has also been a flop.

They were expecting to cash in on the Ron Paul donors. But for a myriad of reasons he hasn't captured that energy.

I don't think that Ruwart would have either.

I think Paul would have to endorse, and campaign with, any chosen sucessor to make the candidate truly viable.

brandon
09-12-2008, 05:35 AM
Bob Barr GTFO

Scotso
09-12-2008, 05:44 AM
They were expecting to cash in on the Ron Paul donors. But for a myriad of reasons he hasn't captured that energy.

I don't think that Ruwart would have either.

I think Paul would have to endorse, and campaign with, any chosen sucessor to make the candidate truly viable.

The sad fact is that none of the potential LP candidates would have gotten the vocal and financial support that Ron Paul did. He already had name recognition and a support structure to work with. Plus, he just has it.

Ruwart wouldn't have equaled Paul, but she would have ran a much better, much more principled, campaign than Barr. That much is certain.

tonesforjonesbones
09-12-2008, 06:24 AM
I say the LP's nose is bent out of shape because Ron Paul rejected their advances to run for their party. The Cato Institute are snobby intellectuals, atheistic and probably neo cons. I wuold say the LP has been hijacked by neo cons. I am looking at the people running Ron Paul's affairs also. Tones

speciallyblend
09-12-2008, 06:51 AM
The sad fact is that none of the potential LP candidates would have gotten the vocal and financial support that Ron Paul did. He already had name recognition and a support structure to work with. Plus, he just has it.

Ruwart wouldn't have equaled Paul, but she would have ran a much better, much more principled, campaign than Barr. That much is certain.

i agree

Scotso
09-12-2008, 06:57 AM
I say the LP's nose is bent out of shape because Ron Paul rejected their advances to run for their party. The Cato Institute are snobby intellectuals, atheistic and probably neo cons. I wuold say the LP has been hijacked by neo cons. I am looking at the people running Ron Paul's affairs also. Tones

Let me ask you, do you have black bags duct-taped around all your windows and doors and 50 locks on each entrance? You really should get some help, dude, I believe they call that schizophrenia.

speciallyblend
09-12-2008, 07:20 AM
The sad fact is that none of the potential LP candidates would have gotten the vocal and financial support that Ron Paul did. He already had name recognition and a support structure to work with. Plus, he just has it.

Ruwart wouldn't have equaled Paul, but she would have ran a much better, much more principled, campaign than Barr. That much is certain.

she is not ron paul,but i dam sure would of sent the lp some money and stood in storms with her sign and that is half the battle;)

ShowMeLiberty
09-12-2008, 07:30 AM
Russ Verney and Shane Cory -- are not Libertarians, do not understand what motivates Libertarian activists, and have no interest in building the LP.


But all that would be beside the point if Bob Barr were campaigning proudly as a Libertarian and taking advantage of every opportunity to reach out to like-minded Americans.


Barr is responsible for Barr's campaign. If Barr's campaign screwed up, don't try and pass the blame.

There's the bottom line. If it's fair to blame Ron Paul for hiring a campaign staff that was ineffective, thereby calling his leadership abilities into question, it is fair to do the same with Barr.

I'm so glad Ron Paul ran for president because he woke so many people up, me included. But I can recognize that he is more teacher than leader, which I am perfectly fine with. His principled, Constitutional example is more than enough.

Barr also does not appear to be much of a leader if he lets people like Verney and Cory run his campaign. Unfortunately, Barr also does not inspire people with his principled, Constitutional record because he doesn't have one.

MsDoodahs
09-12-2008, 07:42 AM
Barr also does not inspire people with his principled, Constitutional record because he doesn't have one.

:D

pacelli
09-12-2008, 07:42 AM
You didn't read the article. The LP CO FOUNDER didn't say anything poor about Bob...he directed poor words towards the managers ( who I think are terrible..but I also thought Benton was awful).



Clearly, Barr is not running as a Libertarian; he's running as an independent candidate: "Former Congressman Bob Barr." Which may be just as well, given the way he's been behaving.

The author is also referring to Barr's behavior.

pacelli
09-12-2008, 07:49 AM
Let me ask you, do you have black bags duct-taped around all your windows and doors and 50 locks on each entrance? You really should get some help, dude, I believe they call that schizophrenia.

Schizophrenia is a thought disorder characterized by negative and positive symptoms that impact upon global functioning. Millions of people have suffered with this mental illness and it is unfair and disrespectful to casually throw around diagnostic labels.

acptulsa
09-12-2008, 07:59 AM
Bob Barr already knew that RP would not accept being VP of the Libertarian Party.

True dat. Meaningless pandering. I'm very proud to say most of us are unimpressed.

Would you vote for me for President if I named Mother Theresa as my running mate?

SnappleLlama
09-12-2008, 08:00 AM
True dat. Meaningless pandering. I'm very proud to say most of us are unimpressed.

Would you vote for me for President if I named Mother Theresa as my running mate?

Ewww...you'd run with a dead person?! :eek:

speciallyblend
09-12-2008, 08:05 AM
I have contacted the Colorado Libertarian Party. I have an email for contact asap.
If you live in COLORADO and you want to send a POWERFUL MESSAGE to the COLP/NLP, then please post here or im me in rpforums.
I have talked to the head of the COLP and he told me that every email would be sent to the leaders in colorado and national(UNFILTERED), so if your frustrated with the lp and barr,then this is our way to be HEARD AND SPEAK UP .
IF YOU LIVE IN COLORADO OR WANT TO WRITE A POWERFUL LETTER, THEN CONTACT ME ASAP.......
I have an email address but i do not want to post it here,but instant message asap!!!!! than you kenny

THIS IS 100% SERIOUS and our feelings are pretty much in line with many in THE COLP and NLP,so the time is now TO STAND UP AND BE HEARD!!!!!

NOTE TO FORUM MEMBERS,if you have something to say and you are not from colorado, and have something to say ,then im me as well

angelatc
09-12-2008, 08:11 AM
she is not ron paul,but i dam sure would of sent the lp some money and stood in storms with her sign and that is half the battle;)

Again, I think that Ron Paul would need to campaign with a candidate if that candidate wanted to capture that magic.

And even then we'd probably lose the 100%ers....

brandon
09-12-2008, 08:53 AM
I wuold say the LP has been hijacked by neo cons. Tones

lol, I have been telling you this for the last 4 months.

Menthol Patch
09-12-2008, 11:01 AM
bump

Menthol Patch
09-15-2008, 06:37 AM
It's becoming more obvious every single day that the Bob Barr campaign is over.

tonesforjonesbones
09-15-2008, 08:20 AM
I consider the C4L was also hijacked by someone. I am staying away from political parties. Too easily infiltrated and corrupted. For the person who called me schitzo....take your own advice...you are terrified of Christians. <eyeroll> Tones

Highland
09-15-2008, 08:23 AM
After reading several emails from my Libertarian friends, I must say that they now are saying what we Baldwin supporters have been saying. That Barr is not the man they thought he was. Some of them actually suspected it from the beginning but refused to see past the L. The mess that Barr's campaign managers have laid upon his feet is going to weigh him him down like cement overshoes.
I haven't trusted him from the beginning and now it's confirmed that my lack of faith in him was warranted.:cool:

go amanda go! Baldwin is awesome...Go Ron Paul!

Menthol Patch
09-15-2008, 08:45 AM
go amanda go! Baldwin is awesome...Go Ron Paul!

I don't support Baldwin because he is a theocrat.

Hamer
09-15-2008, 09:50 AM
I don't support Baldwin because he is a theocrat.

You have never seen Chuck Baldwins platform because he is far from anything close to a theocrat



www.buckforchuck.com

tonesforjonesbones
09-15-2008, 09:52 AM
The Constitution Party is theocratic...you can see it in the preamble. Now, as a Christian, I'm ok with it, but because of the preamble, the CP won't get anywhere...too many atheists in the USA today. Sad but true. I actually admire the CP for taking their stance. Tones