PDA

View Full Version : Draft Gary Johnson 2012 still needs organizers




nate895
11-13-2008, 06:24 PM
Treasurer-preferably an accountant, files all paperwork with the FEC TOP PRIORITY we cannot start until we have a treasurer, a deputy treasurer would be much appreciated as well
E-Campaign Director
Fundraising Director
Writers-10 of them at least, I have one volunteer already


Duties of each job:
Treasurer-Keeps track of the money. You sign the checks and make sure we have all the information for contributions and expenditures so the FEC doesn't get mad at us and decide we need to be fined. An assistant treasurer would also be welcomed.
E-Campaign Director-Keep track of how many "Draft so and so" blogs there are, help make bloggers effective, and also manages the "Draft so and so" groups on social networking sites. Keeps all the email addresses and other information to give over to the campaign when it starts.
Writers-help write the blog on the site, issues, pieces on why so and so should run. Hopefully we can get 10

Please PM me with email and your talents if you are interested in doing any one of these.

The outline of the committee plan is at this thread. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=168103)

itshappening
11-14-2008, 05:27 PM
bump please people step forward, Nate is doing a great job on his own but he needs help!

nate895
11-15-2008, 02:25 PM
Bump, we need a treasurer

Kotin
11-15-2008, 02:26 PM
bump

Imperial
11-15-2008, 07:38 PM
Bump, but I think we should start doing this while simultaneously pumping up for the 2010 congressional races in some manner, identifying key races and targeting them- about 10 nationwide.

Regardless, you know I am onboard already.

nate895
11-15-2008, 07:41 PM
Bump, but I think we should start doing this while simultaneously pumping up for the 2010 congressional races in some manner, identifying key races and targeting them- about 10 nationwide.

Regardless, you know I am onboard already.

That was hopefully going to be part of the draft movement. We could also draft and support candidates for other Federal offices as well. Since we would be an unconnected PAC, we'd be able to support anyone we wanted to.

Imperial
11-15-2008, 07:57 PM
I know during the primaries there were several PAC's set up by the grassroots, beyond the liberty PAC. Perhaps trying to find contacts between groups would be more efficient than just starting from scratch.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 08:59 PM
What's all of this hoopla over Gary Johnson? Does he understand the business cycle? Has he read the anti-federalist papers and understand the history of our founding documents? Does he know what Austrian economics is and the fact that it relies itself on human action moreso than number crunching? Does he believe in a truly free market? Is he a noninterventionist and would bring our troops home?! Google searches of "Gary Johnson" +"Gold Standard" produce nothing.

A Republican who who has a "libertarian streak" is not a libertarian.

nate895
11-15-2008, 09:00 PM
What's all of this hoopla over Gary Johnson? Does he understand the business cycle? Has he read the anti-federalist papers and understand the history of our founding documents? Does he know what Austrian economics is and the fact that it relies itself on human action moreso than number crunching? Does he believe in a truly free market? Is he a noninterventionist and would bring our troops home?! Google searches of "Gary Johnson" +"Gold Standard" produce nothing.

A Republican who who has a "libertarian streak" is not a libertarian.

He is noninterventionist, endorsed Ron Paul, and has a conservative economic philosophy as far as we know.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 09:07 PM
He is noninterventionist, endorsed Ron Paul, and has a conservative economic philosophy as far as we know.

Nate. Ok so you one of my questions is answered that he's a noninterventionist. Do you have some sources on this? Would he bring the troops home from around the world, stop subsidies other nations, stop arming both sides of conflicts, and NEVER get us into an aggressive unjust and undeclared war?

Conservative economic philosophy != Austrian.

Tucker Carlson also endorsed Ron Paul, doesn't make him of the same mold of a Paul, Rockwell, Schiff, Rothbard, Mises, Hayek, etc.

nate895
11-15-2008, 09:33 PM
Nate. Ok so you one of my questions is answered that he's a noninterventionist. Do you have some sources on this? Would he bring the troops home from around the world, stop subsidies other nations, stop arming both sides of conflicts, and NEVER get us into an aggressive unjust and undeclared war?

Conservative economic philosophy != Austrian.

Tucker Carlson also endorsed Ron Paul, doesn't make him of the same mold of a Paul, Rockwell, Schiff, Rothbard, Mises, Hayek, etc.

I heard Johnson say he was noninterventionist, I believe in his CFL interview he said that. He complemented the speakers around him at the convention, and he is opposed to a national sales tax, VAT, and income tax from On the Issues and other sites.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 09:40 PM
Well, I just listened to his speach at the Rally for the Republic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2EhAVQS2V8), I'm not sure how any Paulian can get excited about this guy? Sounds like a decent limited government Republican, but he doesn't even come close to being a Bob Barr. Yes, Bob Barr.

I guess it's either going to be Ron Paul once again or Jesse Ventura in the general. Jesse is the only other guy that can get me pumped up enough as the good doctor in contributing towards his campaign.

Imperial
11-15-2008, 09:50 PM
Well, I just listened to his speach at the Rally for the Republic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2EhAVQS2V8), I'm not sure how any Paulian can get excited about this guy? Sounds like a decent limited government Republican, but he doesn't even come close to being a Bob Barr. Yes, Bob Barr.

I guess it's either going to be Ron Paul once again or Jesse Ventura in the general. Jesse is the only other guy that can get me pumped up enough as the good doctor in contributing towards his campaign.

You made a claim but didn't even explain your claim on Bob Barr. Ron Paul probably won't run. Jesse Ventura is great, but he would alienate certain segments to the point of no return.

I would be interested to hear the major problem with Johnson. He is strongly anti-drug war, pro-fiscal discipline, and has illustrated testicular fortitude against the will of mobocratic-minded legislatures. I am fairly certain he would endorse Ron Paul's four points. To demand perfection seems impossible. A general shift in mindset is what we need, and I want a candidate that will aid that process.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 10:01 PM
You made a claim but didn't even explain your claim on Bob Barr. Ron Paul probably won't run. Jesse Ventura is great, but he would alienate certain segments to the point of no return.

I would be interested to hear the major problem with Johnson. He is strongly anti-drug war, pro-fiscal discipline, and has illustrated testicular fortitude against the will of mobocratic-minded legislatures. I am fairly certain he would endorse Ron Paul's four points. To demand perfection seems impossible. A general shift in mindset is what we need, and I want a candidate that will aid that process.

Listen to Bob Barr's speeches. He is no libertarian but he seems to understand liberty is more than being fiscally conservative and opposing the drug war.

From the surface, I haven't see anything about Johnson to see that he understands the basics of government, and can tackle our most important issues being monetary policy and foreign policy, and reinstating the Constitution.

It seems, at best, he could potentially be another 1976 Ronald Reagan. We saw what happened when Reagan the candidate became President Reagan.

Whynot apply the perfection test to the Mises Institute and to LRC, if they didn't demand perfection in the policies supported, and the writers they use, what would they sound like?

nate895
11-15-2008, 10:25 PM
Listen to Bob Barr's speeches. He is no libertarian but he seems to understand liberty is more than being fiscally conservative and opposing the drug war.

From the surface, I haven't see anything about Johnson to see that he understands the basics of government, and can tackle our most important issues being monetary policy and foreign policy, and reinstating the Constitution.

It seems, at best, he could potentially be another 1976 Ronald Reagan. We saw what happened when Reagan the candidate became President Reagan.

Whynot apply the perfection test to the Mises Institute and to LRC, if they didn't demand perfection in the policies supported, and the writers they use, what would they sound like?

Look, we already had the vote, Johnson won in a landslide. We have been talking about Johnson being a potential leader for quite some time, and he was a good governor and endorsed Ron Paul in the primaries. He therefore endorses the majority of his policies, or he is lying. I see no evidence to suggest he has lied about his positions in the past, so why would I believe he is lying now?

orafi
11-15-2008, 10:27 PM
sorry homies, ron paul 2012 for me

nate895
11-15-2008, 10:31 PM
sorry homies, ron paul 2012 for me

Ron Paul probably isn't going to run. We will know in six months for sure.

ArrestPoliticians
11-15-2008, 10:48 PM
Listen to Bob Barr's speeches. He is no libertarian but he seems to understand liberty is more than being fiscally conservative and opposing the drug war.

From the surface, I haven't see anything about Johnson to see that he understands the basics of government, and can tackle our most important issues being monetary policy and foreign policy, and reinstating the Constitution.

It seems, at best, he could potentially be another 1976 Ronald Reagan. We saw what happened when Reagan the candidate became President Reagan.

Whynot apply the perfection test to the Mises Institute and to LRC, if they didn't demand perfection in the policies supported, and the writers they use, what would they sound like?

I agree that that speech was pretty lousy, but from what I hear Johnson agrees with Ron Paul's 4 point litmus test.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 10:49 PM
I agree that that speech was pretty lousy, but from what I hear Johnson agrees with Ron Paul's 4 point litmus test.

So did Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney.

ArrestPoliticians
11-15-2008, 10:51 PM
So did Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney.

Right, and if I had to I would campaign and vote for either of them. It just so happens that Johnson is better on the peripheral issues than those two also, and is a republican who can run in the primary.

Misesian
11-15-2008, 11:21 PM
Right, and if I had to I would campaign and vote for either of them. It just so happens that Johnson is better on the peripheral issues than those two also, and is a republican who can run in the primary.

Don't get me wrong, when speaking to friends of mine who were known socialist democrats that backed Obama I'd always try to get them to consider voting for McKinney or Nader vs. Obama, but to campaign for and vote for either of these two?!?!

It's very hard for me to give me time, money, and hard work to somebody who believes that people with guns can come and steal my life, my liberty, and my property when I have not used aggression against another whatsoever. I'd lose all credibility if I endorsed Nader or McKinney with my vote.

ArrestPoliticians
11-15-2008, 11:26 PM
Don't get me wrong, when speaking to friends of mine who were known socialist democrats that backed Obama I'd always try to get them to consider voting for McKinney or Nader vs. Obama, but to campaign for and vote for either of these two?!?!

It's very hard for me to give me time, money, and hard work to somebody who believes that people with guns can come and steal my life, my liberty, and my property when I have not used aggression against another whatsoever. I'd lose all credibility if I endorsed Nader or McKinney with my vote.

If you had a choice between Hitler or a socialist candidate that ran against him, who would you vote for?

Misesian
11-15-2008, 11:29 PM
If you had a choice between Hitler or a socialist candidate that ran against him, who would you vote for?

If you were taken hostage along with 10 children, and the hostage-taker says that you pick out one kid for them to shoot, otherwise they shoot them all. What would you do?

ArrestPoliticians
11-15-2008, 11:55 PM
If you were taken hostage along with 10 children, and the hostage-taker says that you pick out one kid for them to shoot, otherwise they shoot them all. What would you do?

Shoot the most annoying kid. hmm, that was easy :)

Imperial
11-16-2008, 03:50 PM
Listen to Bob Barr's speeches. He is no libertarian but he seems to understand liberty is more than being fiscally conservative and opposing the drug war.

From the surface, I haven't see anything about Johnson to see that he understands the basics of government, and can tackle our most important issues being monetary policy and foreign policy, and reinstating the Constitution.

It seems, at best, he could potentially be another 1976 Ronald Reagan. We saw what happened when Reagan the candidate became President Reagan.

Whynot apply the perfection test to the Mises Institute and to LRC, if they didn't demand perfection in the policies supported, and the writers they use, what would they sound like?

I would say Johson's veto-usage shows he probably keeps Constitutionality in mind. States do have more authority to use government than the federal, at least by the 10th amendment. His advocacy of limited but effective government and practical business model mentality shows he understands the basics. He was outspoken against Iraq from the outset, the drug war, and didn't endorse Bush in 2000. Johnson is considered a small-l libertarian, and almost ran for the 04 Libertarian president nomination.

Comparing Johnson and Reagan isn't the best analogy. Reagan was originally recruited to run for California governor by a wealthy group; Johnson ran on his own accord. Johnson had to fight into the establishment, and was never really accepted.

When you say LRC, you mean the liberty republican caucus, right? I would note that group has a wide variety of members who don't always see eye to eye. The key is a general shift in mindset.

Imperial
11-16-2008, 03:51 PM
And we still need help for this effort!

Misesian
11-16-2008, 06:10 PM
I would say Johson's veto-usage shows he probably keeps Constitutionality in mind. States do have more authority to use government than the federal, at least by the 10th amendment. His advocacy of limited but effective government and practical business model mentality shows he understands the basics. He was outspoken against Iraq from the outset, the drug war, and didn't endorse Bush in 2000. Johnson is considered a small-l libertarian, and almost ran for the 04 Libertarian president nomination.

There were a lot of people who spoke out against Iraq at the time, but say now that we're there, we have to finish what we started, blah blah. It's very simple, does Gary Johnson believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy, thereby prompting him to bring ALL the troops home, or not? Just like Ludwig Von Mises illustrated there is no middle ground with economics, as moderate interventions leads to socialism by installments, there is no middle ground with foreign policy either. Phasing out the empire will just lead to eventual redeployment.

Small l-libertarian is just a libertarian not in the LP. Does he believe in and accept the non-aggression axiom as the underpinnings of libertarianism?

Still, nothing about monetary policy too. I mean it's all rather simple, a few books on sound money from Rothbard, Hazlitt, or Mises and you know what we should do but why aren't these Johnson, Sanford, or Ventura guys READING these things?!?!



When you say LRC, you mean the liberty republican caucus, right? I would note that group has a wide variety of members who don't always see eye to eye. The key is a general shift in mindset.

LRC = www.LewRockwell.com

nate895
11-16-2008, 09:27 PM
Bump

Imperial
11-17-2008, 05:43 PM
Duh about LRC. I was thinking RLC. I know small-l libertarians, and I am debating myself whether I am small or large l for which party to get active in predominantly. I think we will have a difference of opinion Misesian over economics and foreign policy. The former I haven't studied enough to debate, beyond Dr. Paul's writings; the latter, I think I can predict its outcome. So, I think its best to agree to disagree. Suffice my case to be that we need a practical and principled candidate who has the right idea if not all the details.

REMEMBER, WE NEED THE FOLLOWING! Plus, we plan to adapt this for 2010 candidates as well.


Treasurer-preferably an accountant, files all paperwork with the FEC TOP PRIORITY we cannot start until we have a treasurer, a deputy treasurer would be much appreciated as well
E-Campaign Director
Fundraising Director
Writers-10 of them at least, I have one volunteer already


Duties of each job:
Treasurer-Keeps track of the money. You sign the checks and make sure we have all the information for contributions and expenditures so the FEC doesn't get mad at us and decide we need to be fined. An assistant treasurer would also be welcomed.
E-Campaign Director-Keep track of how many "Draft so and so" blogs there are, help make bloggers effective, and also manages the "Draft so and so" groups on social networking sites. Keeps all the email addresses and other information to give over to the campaign when it starts.
Writers-help write the blog on the site, issues, pieces on why so and so should run. Hopefully we can get 10

Please PM me with email and your talents if you are interested in doing any one of these.

The outline of the committee plan is at this thread

blakjak
11-17-2008, 09:11 PM
I would say Johson's veto-usage shows he probably keeps Constitutionality in mind. States do have more authority to use government than the federal, at least by the 10th amendment. His advocacy of limited but effective government and practical business model mentality shows he understands the basics. He was outspoken against Iraq from the outset, the drug war, and didn't endorse Bush in 2000. Johnson is considered a small-l libertarian, and almost ran for the 04 Libertarian president nomination.

Comparing Johnson and Reagan isn't the best analogy. Reagan was originally recruited to run for California governor by a wealthy group; Johnson ran on his own accord. Johnson had to fight into the establishment, and was never really accepted.

When you say LRC, you mean the liberty republican caucus, right? I would note that group has a wide variety of members who don't always see eye to eye. The key is a general shift in mindset.

+1

itshappening
11-18-2008, 02:44 PM
Bump

Nathan Hale
11-18-2008, 07:41 PM
There were a lot of people who spoke out against Iraq at the time, but say now that we're there, we have to finish what we started, blah blah. It's very simple, does Gary Johnson believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy, thereby prompting him to bring ALL the troops home, or not? Just like Ludwig Von Mises illustrated there is no middle ground with economics, as moderate interventions leads to socialism by installments, there is no middle ground with foreign policy either. Phasing out the empire will just lead to eventual redeployment.

Incrementalism is not a one-way street. If socialism can be brought about in installments, so can freedom. In fact, considering the outlook of the public and the sheer size, scope, and velocity of the government, we HAVE to change things in installments. But, we have to win office in order to change things. So we REQUIRE somebody willing to advocate changes that the people are willing to accept. Otherwise all political action is fruitless.


Small l-libertarian is just a libertarian not in the LP. Does he believe in and accept the non-aggression axiom as the underpinnings of libertarianism?

who the fuck cares? Libertarianism, capital letter or not, does not require adherence to the ZAP.


LRC = www.LewRockwell.com

Better a candidate espouse Cato Institute and Reason Magazine than Lew Rockwell or Strike the Root. We are, after all, trying to win the election, right?

Misesian
11-18-2008, 07:46 PM
Incrementalism is not a one-way street. If socialism can be brought about in installments, so can freedom. In fact, considering the outlook of the public and the sheer size, scope, and velocity of the government, we HAVE to change things in installments. But, we have to win office in order to change things. So we REQUIRE somebody willing to advocate changes that the people are willing to accept. Otherwise all political action is fruitless.

When was the last time we've been brought out of bondage by incrementalism? Are you sure we're not just incrementally watering down the liberty message by supporting candidates who we're not sure actually GET liberty?!



who the fuck cares? Libertarianism, capital letter or not, does not require adherence to the ZAP.

ZAP?




Better a candidate espouse Cato Institute and Reason Magazine than Lew Rockwell or Strike the Root. We are, after all, trying to win the election, right?

So you're saying it's better that a candidate espouses STATO (pro-federal reserve) and Reason (libertine issues as higher priorities) than Mises or Lew Rockwell?!

dr. hfn
11-18-2008, 09:06 PM
Ron Paul and Gary Johnson! Woot!

thasre
11-19-2008, 02:43 PM
Are there any updates on this Draft Gary Johnson stuff?

Elwar
11-19-2008, 03:18 PM
Are there any updates on this Draft Gary Johnson stuff?

He said he wouldn't do anything until after the inaugeration.

nate895
11-19-2008, 05:21 PM
He said he wouldn't do anything until after the inaugeration.

That is Johnson himself, we are going to be active as soon as we get a treasurer.

Nathan Hale
11-19-2008, 07:52 PM
When was the last time we've been brought out of bondage by incrementalism?

That's a bullshit question for two reasons.

First, we're not in bondage. Yes, we're not in some ancap ZAP shangri-la, but it's not like we're chain ganged singing negro spirituals.

Second, people are brought out of bondage by sudden change only when the public discourse has reached a critical mass that enables that change, and America is FAR from that critical mass.

That said, look to the War for Independence. The only reason the goal of the war became independence was incrementalism. Had Congress not initially declared the war a tool to renegotiate the arrangement with England, support would not have galvanized behind it and enabled the eventual switch to Independence rhetoric.


Are you sure we're not just incrementally watering down the liberty message by supporting candidates who we're not sure actually GET liberty?!

Perhaps we're watering down the message of radicals, but most people don't want radical change, most people, people we REQUIRE to have on our side if we ever hope to win elections, would like a smaller, less intrusive government. Nothing crazy - a balanced budget and lower taxes would do. We need these people on board to take that first step. After that, when the memes become a part of the political culture, we're more able to take another step. And so on.



ZAP?

Shorthand for "Zero Aggression Principle".


So you're saying it's better that a candidate espouses STATO (pro-federal reserve) and Reason (libertine issues as higher priorities) than Mises or Lew Rockwell?!

Yes. You forget that politics is about direction, not destination. "STATO", as you arrogantly dismiss them, and Reason, are ideologies in the right direction. Hell, they're enough to make me happy. But even if you're a Randroid from the Mises/Rockwell camp, Cato and Reason are good things for a candidate to be talking about because those two groups have traction, and they do bring America closer to where you want to be. Remember - direction, not destination. Let these pro-liberty candidates take us to a freer America, and then we will work from there, but let's not burn that bridge until we come to it.

itshappening
11-23-2008, 07:23 PM
i guess we still need a treasurer !!

nate895
11-23-2008, 07:26 PM
i guess we still need a treasurer !!

Yes we do. I can't get anyone to help. I'd do it, but as one could see in my profile, I am too young. Heck, I probably shouldn't even be facilitating the thing, but no one else was, and I am absolutely fascinated with political strategy so I figured I could give it a go on a relatively small scale.

itshappening
11-23-2008, 08:57 PM
Yes we do. I can't get anyone to help. I'd do it, but as one could see in my profile, I am too young. Heck, I probably shouldn't even be facilitating the thing, but no one else was, and I am absolutely fascinated with political strategy so I figured I could give it a go on a relatively small scale.

it's disheartening but im sure something will turn up.... I hope so anyway

robert4rp08
11-23-2008, 10:00 PM
I don't understand 'drafting' anyone to run for president without their consent and approval.

nate895
11-23-2008, 10:30 PM
I don't understand 'drafting' anyone to run for president without their consent and approval.

A "draft" movement is meant to encourage a candidate to run for office. It is possible to enter names into an election without their approval, but you can always deny the office if you win it. I doubt Johnson wouldn't run if we had already gathered sufficient support.

pastortony
11-24-2008, 06:10 AM
I have read through this thread a little, and while I can see there is some enthusiasm here, I was curious as to whether anyone has considered what a huge uphill battle it would be to get Johnson in contention for the nomination.

For one, he is an unknown. Even amongst political junkies he isn't well-known. Second, he is mostly known for his drug position which is a controverisal stance and easily targeted. Third, he is recently divorced which loses some of the Evangelical vote. Fourth, his stance on abortion isn't too solid which loses him the rest of the Evangelical vote. Fifth he is an outsider, and while that may sound like a good thing, it is really a bad thing since then he has little if any connections within the party to advance his run for the nomination.

While I realize that he is a "Ron Paul Republican", I am wondering what makes people think that he would do any better than Paul did considering the above.

However, if you are looking for a candidate for the LP, then Johnson seems to be a perfect fit and would like fair a little better than Barr did this time out.

itshappening
11-24-2008, 06:57 AM
I have read through this thread a little, and while I can see there is some enthusiasm here, I was curious as to whether anyone has considered what a huge uphill battle it would be to get Johnson in contention for the nomination.

For one, he is an unknown. Even amongst political junkies he isn't well-known. Second, he is mostly known for his drug position which is a controverisal stance and easily targeted. Third, he is recently divorced which loses some of the Evangelical vote. Fourth, his stance on abortion isn't too solid which loses him the rest of the Evangelical vote. Fifth he is an outsider, and while that may sound like a good thing, it is really a bad thing since then he has little if any connections within the party to advance his run for the nomination.

While I realize that he is a "Ron Paul Republican", I am wondering what makes people think that he would do any better than Paul did considering the above.

However, if you are looking for a candidate for the LP, then Johnson seems to be a perfect fit and would like fair a little better than Barr did this time out.

it might be a problem in iowa but he is a good candidate for New Hampshire, which is the really important one. as for being not well known, well, that can change

pastortony
11-24-2008, 07:35 AM
it might be a problem in iowa but he is a good candidate for New Hampshire, which is the really important one. as for being not well known, well, that can change

I don't know if it can. History shows that unknowns never win the nomination.

itshappening
11-24-2008, 07:54 AM
I don't know if it can. History shows that unknowns never win the nomination.

we know him don't we?

he doesn't have much of a recent national profile but that doesn't matter, New Hampshire can make him famous if he runs a good enough campaign

pastortony
11-24-2008, 09:21 AM
we know him don't we?

he doesn't have much of a recent national profile but that doesn't matter, New Hampshire can make him famous if he runs a good enough campaign

Actually I wasn't really that much aware of him until his name starting popping up here, and I have followed this stuff closely for 22 years. So as you say in order to win NH has has to run a good campaign there. I would say that in order to run a good campaign there he has to have some degree of name recognition. And winning NH doesn't mean that he can win the South which is crucial to winning the nomination. Like it or not the Evangelical vote is needed to win the nomination, and a pro-choice, pro-drug, recently divorced ex-governor doesn't sound like someone who will be able to get their support.

I'm not saying that any of this is impossible, but it seems to me that he is a huge longshot. A lot of time and money was spent on Ron Paul with poor results, are people really willing to put time and money behind someone who is an even greater longshot than Paul was?

Imperial
11-24-2008, 11:26 AM
It depends how much of the social conservative vote is split. If Palin and Huckabee split the evangelical vote, Johnson could occupy a voting block as Paul did in Iowa but come out strong in NH. The X factors are Romney and Jindal, who could probably grab votes against fiscal conservatives. Most significantly, Sanford would possibly trade-off.

HOWEVER, having both Johnson and Sanford in the debates would probably be the best method of getting our point across. We won't have everybody laughing at our Paul like they did in South Carolina, like the nervous laughter of sheeple knowing they are about to be culled.

If worst came to worst, Johnson could drop out right before Iowa. However, that is something that can be decided later. Suffice it to be, Johnson could sweep in if we pull it off, but it is worth a shot when the stakes aren't yet too high.

Nathan Hale
11-24-2008, 10:57 PM
It's a little too early to count on specific candidates being in the race, but what we can already see if the formation of "parties" in the GOP. The top tier of candidates in the 2012 GOP primary will likely consist of:

1. A McCain centrist.

2. A PNAC neocon from Alaska.

3. A Huckabee-style social conservative.

4. A Ron Paul paleoconservative.

There's a full-scale civil war going on in the GOP. As it struggles for identity, these are the parties that are developing. We have the opportunity to take control here, but it all depends on the results of the 2010 Senatorial, Congressional, and Gubernatorial races.

Imperial
11-28-2008, 12:19 PM
BUMP!

We need to at least get this thing going for 2010 elections. I know I am already going to be campaigning in my district!

nate895
11-28-2008, 12:34 PM
BUMP!

We need to at least get this thing going for 2010 elections. I know I am already going to be campaigning in my district!

I sent out a PM to three members who haven't officially responded to becoming a member of the Google Group, I was also going to post a discussion on the group to see if anyone wanted to switch jobs to be treasurer.

DXDoug
12-11-2008, 07:18 PM
sweet i love organization would be cool to help :eek:

nate895
12-11-2008, 07:21 PM
sweet i love organization would be cool to help :eek:

What do you want to do?

itshappening
12-15-2008, 11:18 AM
Bump

we need to get moving on this, please contact Nate to volunteer!!

Imperial
12-15-2008, 09:24 PM
I've spread the effort to the facebook group, which I think has almost 400 members. Hopefully somebody will step up for treasurer.

If we can get the organization up by April, we can then be ready to act effectively by the Fall of '09.

ItsTime
12-15-2008, 10:10 PM
Ill head the New Hampshire grassroots

dr. hfn
12-15-2008, 10:41 PM
bump

LibertyIn08
12-15-2008, 11:22 PM
What do you want to do?

Nate, I've been hoping someone else would stand up, as I am quite busy as-is.

However, during the interim period, I would be willing and able to step up as a treasurer, if you'd be willing to have me.

PM me if you wish to discuss this further.

dr. hfn
12-17-2008, 12:06 AM
i'm young and stupid, but...i hope whoever is organizing this tries to coordinate with as many freedom/liberty people and organizations as possible. Like the LP, CP, CFL, YAL, SFL, CATO, Ludwig von Mises...coordination and cooperation between as many freedom loving people as possible will strengthen the movement!