We are only x% of America

[Matt Collins]

So I was thinking about this the other day, and in fact discussed it with Ron on Friday. If 1 million people voted for Ron that is 1 out of 300 million. In other words, the liberty movement is about 1/3rd of 1 percent of the country's population.


However if we look at the amount of those who voted in the 2008 election, there are about 130 million of them. We are still less than 1 percent of voters.


We have a long way to go, that is for sure!


However the good news is that more things have happened in history with less people. We are a tiny fish in a huge pond, but if we can get it together we can be one of the most influential fish in the pond because we have the sharpest teeth and the determination to bite and not let go.

[UnReconstructed]

the liberty movement is just a conspiracy

[torchbearer]

I thought that was 1 million republican voters?

[MelissaWV]

... if we look at the amount of those who voted in the 2008 election, there are about 130 million of them. We are still less than 1 percent of voters.


I hate statistics. Have I mentioned that? How many of those 130,000,000 people had heard of Ron Paul, would be one of the questions one should ask. What should be analyzed is, of those who heard of Ron Paul, and then voted for someone else... why'd they do it? Were they "voting for the lesser evil"? Was he on their ballots at all?

Is there data addressing these factors?

Of those who'd never heard of Ron Paul, what were they looking for in a leader? Unfortunately, this last question usually just turns to ridicule and accusation, rather than a thoughtful analysis of what Ron Paul could have had to offer them, if they'd known. It's not about changing the message, it's about getting it out there, and placing emphasis on what will be interesting to the given demographic. Second Amendment rights are not as popular in some regions as Non-Interventionalist Foreign Policy.

[Matt Collins]

It's not about changing the message, it's about getting it out there, and placing emphasis on what will be interesting to the given demographic. Second Amendment rights are not as popular in some regions as Non-Interventionalist Foreign Policy.Absolutely right. As a professional marketer, I agree that this is true.

[Bossobass]

Bullshit thread.

1) RP only ran in the Republican primaries. 130 million = way off.

2) RP was robbed of votes in Iowa and New Hampshire. 1 million = way off.

3) Millions of 'youth' primary voters; a) jumped ship after Iowa/NH, b) weren't aware of what a closed primary is and weren't timely registered R, c) didn't vote, etc.

4) A HUGE block of apathetics (non-voters) had zero access to information. (Who is Ron Paul?)

4b) HUGE number of RP supporters were chased away by Matt Collins and his ilk as being too radical and detractors from 'the message of Freedom' because they didn't adhere to the dress code and don't believe the Warren Report :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: and subsequently didn't vote or voted obscure.

5) Sampling the world, which is much less affected by US MSM BS, where RP is the most popular US Congressman on earth, is a better way to gauge the true numbers.

Run this poll and get back to me:

Q: Do you like taxes?
Q: Do you like war?
Q: Is the $12 trillion deficit a good thing?
Q: Do you prefer slavery or freedom?
Q: Should a Congressman lie or tell the truth?
Q: Should a bank be allowed to steal your savings?

Just a guess, but I think the numbers are much higher than you suggest.

Bosso

[HOLLYWOOD]

BUMP these POINTS below!

MSM is a saboteur to anything that threatens their ideologies and gravy train payola between; WH, Capital Hill, & the political propaganda games.


Bullshit thread.

1) RP only ran in the Republican primaries. 130 million = way off.

2) RP was robbed of votes in Iowa and New Hampshire. 1 million = way off.

3) Millions of 'youth' primary voters; a) jumped ship after Iowa/NH, b) weren't aware of what a closed primary is and weren't timely registered R, c) didn't vote, etc.

4) A HUGE block of apathetics (non-voters) had zero access to information. (Who is Ron Paul?)

4b) HUGE number of RP supporters were chased away by Matt Collins and his ilk as being too radical and detractors from 'the message of Freedom' because they didn't adhere to the dress code and don't believe the Warren Report :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: and subsequently didn't vote or voted obscure.

5) Sampling the world, which is much less affected by US MSM BS, where RP is the most popular US Congressman on earth, is a better way to gauge the true numbers.

Run this poll and get back to me:

Q: Do you like taxes?
Q: Do you like war?
Q: Is the $12 trillion deficit a good thing?
Q: Do you prefer slavery or freedom?
Q: Should a Congressman lie or tell the truth?
Q: Should a bank be allowed to steal your savings?

Just a guess, but I think the numbers are much higher than you suggest.

Bosso

[Matt Collins]

1) RP only ran in the Republican primaries. 130 million = way off.Ok - how many voted total then?


2) RP was robbed of votes in Iowa and New Hampshire. 1 million = way off.How so? :confused:


3) Millions of 'youth' primary voters; a) jumped ship after Iowa/NH, b) weren't aware of what a closed primary is and weren't timely registered R, c) didn't vote, etc.

4) A HUGE block of apathetics (non-voters) had zero access to information. (Who is Ron Paul?)Perhaps, but if they are really that disengaged then are they part of the liberty movement to begin with?


4b) HUGE number of RP supporters were chased away by Matt Collins and his ilk as being too radical and detractors from 'the message of Freedom' because they didn't adhere to the dress code and don't believe the Warren Report :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: and subsequently didn't vote or voted obscure.That's asinine. But many average voters WERE chased away because of the conspiracy crowd in Ron's campaign (or at least those being vocal about it).


Just a guess, but I think the numbers are much higher than you suggest.Well that was based upon Ron's results. The Cato institute has done real studies on this however.

[RevolutionSD]

So I was thinking about this the other day, and in fact discussed it with Ron on Friday. If 1 million people voted for Ron that is 1 out of 300 million. In other words, the liberty movement is about 1/3rd of 1 percent of the country's population.


However if we look at the amount of those who voted in the 2008 election, there are about 130 million of them. We are still less than 1 percent of voters.


We have a long way to go, that is for sure!


However the good news is that more things have happened in history with less people. We are a tiny fish in a huge pond, but if we can get it together we can be one of the most influential fish in the pond because we have the sharpest teeth and the determination to bite and not let go.

There are lots of people who believe in true freedom and do not participate in voting.

[Natalie]

Ok - how many voted total then?



You can see the number of votes by state here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914

The primary election had much lower turnout than in the general election.

[hamilton1049]

If the vote count reflects anything it is that the "ignorance is bliss" philosophy has worked for American politicians, and maybe we chipped a little paint off of it. We won't know the numbers that matter until someone crosses that undefined "line in the sand" and the S really HTF.

[nobody's_hero]

We are the tireless, irate minority that Samuel Adams warned tyrants about.

[Matt Collins]

There are lots of people who believe in true freedom and do not participate in voting.Then their voices are not heard and they don't count.

[TurtleBurger]

A lot of people in the late states (mine included) didn't vote in the primaries because John McCain already had the nomination wrapped up. There's no primary fever here like there is in New Hampshire.

[Njon]

A lot has changed since Dr. Paul's 08' campaign ended. The liberty movement is much bigger now.

[Matt Collins]

A lot has changed since Dr. Paul's 08' campaign ended. The liberty movement is much bigger now.Yes that is true, but it has also become more fractured and a bit less focused since we're not running a race.

[acptulsa]

Yes that is true, but it has also become more fractured and a bit less focused since we're not running a race.

And that is in no small part because what Njon is true--very true--as our hard work in the more than a year since the primary begins to pay a tangible dividend or two at last. Riding with Michael I saw it everywhere; hell I see it when I'm not riding with Michael. I met up with a friend who had disappeared from 'the circle' for a while (found a girlfriend who was fond of monopolizing him); a year ago he was one of those 'Ron who?' types and now he's quite cognizant of what's going on and has been thinking about it.

We've grown. And, yes, have no doubt that there are numbers to measure it. But also have no doubt that those polling statistics the pollsters won't be sharing with us any time soon (as in never ever) as we might take heart...

Take heart anyway. I've been watching this with interest. We're at least going to have as big an influence as the populist movement of a hundred years ago, and we're going to have a more positive effect than they did. At LEAST.

Primary day, April 5, 2008: x%
Election day, November 2008: 2x% wishing they had done more to prevent that idiot McCain from being the nominee.
Today: 3x? 5x? 7x? Don't scoff. Look around. What 'they' don't take into account when they hide the poll numbers from us that confirm our success is that we actually talk to real people, and we don't need pollsters to do it for us. Talk to some people, if you haven't since the primary. You'll find you get a very different reception.

[slacker921]

I agree.. we're still less than x% ... now we might be 10 or 20% during a state GOP convention, but that just means we're far more engaged than the average neoconservative.

If the "liberty" movement, some rich libertarian, a PAC, or someone who sees through the neocon BS would buy an existing media outlet then things might change. .. how quickly would things change if "Good Morning America" didn't parrot every other media outlet with the same propaganda? What would have happened if every morning starting in December 2007 they included Ron Paul in with the other Republican contenders?

[erowe1]

3) Millions of 'youth' primary voters; a) jumped ship after Iowa/NH, b) weren't aware of what a closed primary is and weren't timely registered R, c) didn't vote, etc.

4) A HUGE block of apathetics (non-voters) had zero access to information. (Who is Ron Paul?)

A lot of the points you made were fair. But trying to pump up our numbers by counting the support of youth who fit the description you gave and adding a supposedly huge block of apathetics is erring on the side of being too optimistic. We can't and shouldn't ever count on those folks (which is also why the enormous level of moral support RP has among potheads is irrelevant to us). There are good reasons that pollsters distinguish between polls that include an indiscriminate sample of people, and polls that only include registered voters, and polls that only include likely voters.

[Bossobass]

A lot of the points you made were fair. But trying to pump up our numbers by counting the support of youth who fit the description you gave and adding a supposedly huge block of apathetics is erring on the side of being too optimistic. We can't and shouldn't ever count on those folks (which is also why the enormous level of moral support RP has among potheads is irrelevant to us). There are good reasons that pollsters distinguish between polls that include an indiscriminate sample of people, and polls that only include registered voters, and polls that only include likely voters.

You should do some research before forming such strong opinions. I don't know what a 'pothead' is, or what that has to do with apathy in American politics, but it sounds a lot like Matt's prejudices, which tend to keep people apathetic.

You can't (and shouldn't) judge a book by its cover.

Polls are shit.

http://i469.photobucket.com/albums/rr55/Bosobass/1419433321_82a893a11c.jpg

Bosso

[Conza88]

Collins, as usual = you have no idea what you're talking about.

Isaiah's Job by Albert Jay Nock (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/nock3b.html)

[paulitics]

This is idiotic. Most people in late states did not vote for RP for other reasons than not supporting RP. This is like saying Giuliani only has a million supporters in the entire country, who fared no better than RP.

No, RP did extraordinary well considering a late start to a political campaign. It is all psychological. Most don't vote for someone, that consider have no chance of winning period. Even the subpar performance in Iowa and NH can be blamed on this.

A good point was brought up about the youth not having the expereince of primary voting. Many were on winter break, traveling, did not register in time, etc. Look at what happened to Dean who greatly underperformed in Iowa for likely the same reasons. He then became a flat tire who lost all momentum after Iowa. If he won the early states, he probably would have won the primaries and gone on to win the presidency.

[RevolutionSD]

Then their voices are not heard and they don't count.

How's voting been working out for the libertarian movement Matt?

Why should the rights of the majority trump the minority?

[erowe1]

You should do some research before forming such strong opinions. I don't know what a 'pothead' is, or what that has to do with apathy in American politics, but it sounds a lot like Matt's prejudices, which tend to keep people apathetic.


Sorry. I don't know what Collins' prejudices are or if I have the same ones. But if people are too apathetic to vote or to find out what they need to do to vote, then I don't think those are folks that we should count on as supporters of our cause. Whatever agreements they have with us in principles are irrelevant if they don't care enough to act on them or are too ignorant to know how and unwilling to figure out how. Similarly with the youth vote. Every election there's some candidate who has the pundits saying that he'll finally be the one to bring out the youth vote and for the first time ever they'll make a difference, and it never happens. It will always be the case that if we want to win elections we have to win over older voters. The same goes for anarchists who refuse to participate in the political process. They may be with us in spirit. But when it comes to making a difference on election day, then until we change their minds about those things, they're no different to us than Obama supporters whose minds we need to change about politics.

[Conza88]

Sorry. I don't know what Collins' prejudices are or if I have the same ones. But if people are too apathetic to vote or to find out what they need to do to vote, then I don't think those are folks that we should count on as supporters of our cause. Whatever agreements they have with us in principles are irrelevant if they don't care enough to act on them or are too ignorant to know how and unwilling to figure out how. Similarly with the youth vote. Every election there's some candidate who has the pundits saying that he'll finally be the one to bring out the youth vote and for the first time ever they'll make a difference, and it never happens. It will always be the case that if we want to win elections we have to win over older voters. The same goes for anarchists who refuse to participate in the political process. They may be with us in spirit. But when it comes to making a difference on election day, then until we change their minds about those things, they're no different to us than Obama supporters whose minds we need to change about politics.

Lew Rockwell isn't a supporter? Hmmm?

Yeaaaaaaahhhhhhhh, amazing analysis. Very credible! :rolleyes:

[georgiaboy]

nevermind the dick cheney insert. my point is, we're out here, we know what's right, and we're waking up.

YouTube - Bug's Life a Metaphor for 2008 America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyrINW3-_-8&feature=related)

[erowe1]

Lew Rockwell isn't a supporter? Hmmm?

Yeaaaaaaahhhhhhhh, amazing analysis. Very credible! :rolleyes:

Touche. Lew Rockwell is a supporter. But to the degree that he is a supporter he is also someone who, despite any stated conviction he may have to the contrary, is involved in the political process. I didn't mean to exclude him or people like him. And my main point really wasn't about the anarchists. It was more about the MTV crowd.

[Todd]

Sorry. I don't know what Collins' prejudices are or if I have the same ones. But if people are too apathetic to vote or to find out what they need to do to vote, then I don't think those are folks that we should count on as supporters of our cause. Whatever agreements they have with us in principles are irrelevant if they don't care enough to act on them or are too ignorant to know how and unwilling to figure out how.

And what's alarming about that point is how many threads you can find where someone is telling you or stating that it's a good idea to simply drop out of the process all together.:rolleyes:

[acptulsa]

And what's alarming about that point is how many threads you can find where someone is telling you or stating that it's a good idea to simply drop out of the process all together.:rolleyes:

Well, they can fling that $#+ all they want. I'm skinned in Teflon.

You see, I know better.

[Stary Hickory]

For the record I was historically a Republican voter. Because Republicans run on a common sense, small government platform. I have always been more what my family would call isolationist and prefer to not to stick my nose in the buisness of others.

However, as long as the good times rolled, I could of cared less about politics, economics, history, or philosophy. I was content to believe what the GOP was telling me, while they did the complete opposite. But during the Bush administrations war in Iraq I came to the conclusion that we were wasting resources helping/killing people who did not even want our help. This got me exploring.

Next the economic crisis hits, and all the talking heads in DC say that no one could have forseen this coming. I decided that this was hogwash and researched it myself. And of course I quickly found Austrian Economics and started really reading, and educating myself about everything.

The point is I did not even know who Ron Paul was during the campaign. I had heard libertarians were loonies and that Ron Paul was crazy too. This is what most Americans had been getting. It doesn't matter that they agree with Ron Paul. it's just the fact they never gave it a chance before because there were certain powers that were saying he was crazy.

So this 3% number is krap, I would say 20-25% of the US would stand 95% behind what Ron Paul says. And another 30-35% are very small government oriented but simply not intellectually honest enough to take an objective look at the GOP. These are my estimates mind you, but I think things have picked up consideribaly for Libertarians in the recent months. It's a rapidly growing movement as people realize there is a home for their beliefs.

[Conza88]

Voting for the sake of voting is fundamentally retarded.

If you're name isn't Ron Paul, and you are not in the same calibre. (eg. Bob Barr - not in the same caliber) then you ain't worth it.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil.

[Bossobass]

Sorry. I don't know what Collins' prejudices are or if I have the same ones.

Then let me help you with that:


But if people are too apathetic to vote or to find out what they need to do to vote, then I don't think those are folks that we should count on as supporters of our cause.


Whatever agreements they have with us in principles are irrelevant if they don't care enough to act on them or are too ignorant to know how and unwilling to figure out how.


It will always be the case that if we want to win elections we have to win over older voters.


The same goes for anarchists who refuse to participate in the political process. They may be with us in spirit. But when it comes to making a difference on election day, then until we change their minds about those things, they're no different to us than Obama supporters whose minds we need to change about politics.

Us, them, I, we, minds we need to change, etc., etc., blah, blah.

If you can't see that you have the exact attitude the establishment has, that of a superior position and the self inflicted mantle of molding opinions and herding those poor unfortunates, then what can anyone tell you?

Yeah, I'm well aware of the "WE need to fight for a bigger piece of the pie" while ignoring, and even disparaging, the majority who are excluded from the description of the pie, philosophy.

Political process, blue haired voters, potheads, anarchists, youth, our cause, Obama supporters, leftists, conservatives.

If your plan is to infiltrate the establishment by disguising yourself as one of them with the plan of changing their minds...

Please read the sign in my previous post. It doesn't say anything about you. He isn't old. He wasn't a proud Republican voter. No one changed his mind.

All that was needed was someone worth voting for. It doesn't matter what his favorite TV show is, or what clothes he likes to wear, or his race, color, creed, gender, hobbies, strengths, weaknesses, talents, IQ or any of the other bullshit requirements are imagined by WE.

It's funny to me that the establishment knows exactly what I'm talking about, enough so to compel them to launch an all out attack, while so many Ron Paul supporters don't.

This thread is about numbers. Matt claimed that they are less than 1/3 of 1 percent. I call bullshit, and I could not disagree more with his limp offering as to how to increase the numbers, whatever they really are.

I have and will continue to applaud his efforts, but there ain't no statues of him in my church, and he should try not to go so crazy with his Acme label maker.

Bosso

[acptulsa]

This thread is about numbers. Matt claimed that they are less than 1/3 of 1 percent. I call bullshit, and I could not disagree more with his limp offering as to how to increase the numbers, whatever they really are.

I have and will continue to applaud his efforts, but there ain't no statues of him in my church, and he should try not to go so crazy with his Acme label maker.

Agreed. No more effective way to blow our own feet off than to keep repeating the crap labels they use to divide us from ourselves.

[erowe1]

I apologize for the fact that I put people in categories. Apparently that makes you think I'm a prejudiced person, which means that you put me in a category.

I don't see the relevance of the picture you posted, or how I'm supposed to conclude all the things from that picture about its subject that you want me to conclude. Perhaps I'm not as gifted in judging people simply by their appearance as you are.

However, if your argument is that we actually can count the apathetic and ignorant people who sit on the sidelines as though they are the same thing as people who understand what's happening to our country and care enough to do something about it, and then you think that I'm supposed to look at a picture of someone who clearly fits in the latter category and pretend that he's the same as someone who fits in the former category, then you have committed a non sequitur, and I hope you will forgive me for failing to reach the illogical conclusion you wanted me to.

I just think that, when it comes to improving our country, whatever the best way to do that is (whether political or not, whether infiltrating a party or not, and whether it involves looking like them or not), it's the people who are actually doing something who are on our team, not the people who are doing nothing and inclined to continue with that.

And for the record, I agree with you that there's no good basis for the 1/3 of 1% number.

[LibertyEagle]

Run this poll and get back to me:

Q: Do you like taxes?
Q: Do you like war?
Q: Is the $12 trillion deficit a good thing?
Q: Do you prefer slavery or freedom?
Q: Should a Congressman lie or tell the truth?
Q: Should a bank be allowed to steal your savings?



Heck yeah.

It's these types of things that we agree on. I wish we could get back to rallying behind what we agree on, instead of spending so much time ripping each other to shreds. It's not getting us anywhere, when we do that.

[Todd]

Heck yeah.

It's these types of things that we agree on. I wish we could get back to rallying behind what we agree on, instead of spending so much time ripping each other to shreds. It's not getting us anywhere, when we do that.

+ infinity

[Matt Collins]

Polls are shit.
Not if they are done properly.

[Conza88]

It's simple. The Austrian school - class analysis.

There are RULERS and there are those who are RULED. There is the parasitic class, and there is the productive class.

Government intervention is the enemy, the free market, free enterprise is better in every single regard.

So when you get someone who believes that enemy should be destroyed completely, you (as a minarchist) should stfu &acknowledge:
"HEY, if this guy is so radical and wants to get rid of the government intervention as soon as possible, by golly gosh Batman, wouldn't that help my cause about getting limited government faster?! - Hey! I'll be smart! So instead of opening my mouth and defending the State and Government, maybe I should shut the fck up until I get the level of government I want (limited) and then I'll say, hey fellas, I want to keep a parasitic class around, they won't grow again, trust me! That's enough freedom for me!"

:rolleyes:

No, really.. stop defending the State and I'll stop defending freedom. Then we'll kick ass until you let Thomas Hobbes get the best of you, and then we can have our "chat"... lol

[Conza88]

Not if they are done properly.

YouTube - Media Caught Lying, Version2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iW5kOB1pmg)

[LibertyEagle]

Or, Conza, we could rally together to reinstate the Constitution, which as you know is Ron Paul's goal. And once we get that done, you as an anarcho-capitalist can try to convince people that government should be done away with completely.

[acptulsa]

However, if your argument is that we actually can count the apathetic and ignorant people who sit on the sidelines as though they are the same thing as people who understand what's happening to our country and care enough to do something about it, and then you think that I'm supposed to look at a picture of someone who clearly fits in the latter category and pretend that he's the same as someone who fits in the former category, then you have committed a non sequitur, and I hope you will forgive me for failing to reach the illogical conclusion you wanted me to.

Can we count on all of them? Hardly. But in a great many cases, the difference between the apathetic and the engaged is merely twofold: One, show them there's a group working toward a system that actually makes sense. Two, wait for a few more straws to hit the camel's back. Pretty simple, no? No poll can accurately gauge that.

And it's working. See it happening all around me.


Not if they are done properly.

Aren't they always? Seems to me we don't see them until the numbers are spun, fileted and cooked to perfection...

[manny229]

I first heard of Ron Paul in late October of '07. Days later I looked into changing my party affiliation from Independent to Republican. But unfortunately in my state, New York, the deadline to change party affiliation was October 12th. Never mind that the New York primaries were months away on Super Tuesday!

http://www.primarilypaul.com/2007/10/02/new-yorks-screwy-party-registration-laws-and-how-it-screws-ron-paul-supporters/

Still, I spread the word about Congressman Paul to my friends and family and almost all were eager to vote for him but again most were not registered Republicans in New York and thus were not able to vote for him in the primaries! All we could do was volunteer, write letters to republicans in Iowa, and show support at the Rhode Island primaries. Nothing was more frustrating than campaigning for a candidate for whom you yourself do not have the privilege of voting for.
I've learned some important lessons: Contrary to what Lou Dobbs says being an independent does not give you any power. You are instead stuck on the sidelines until November , at which time you are stuck between choosing between A-hole #1 and A-hole #2. Sometimes I wonder if this is his true agenda.
I am now registered republican though it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Another lesson learned is that New York politics/ voting rules are perhaps the most corrupt in the country.
So inclosing I'd like to say there were many out there who wanted to vote for the Congressman during the primaries but because of asinine state rules were prevented from voting.

[Matt Collins]

Collins, as usual = you have no idea what you're talking about.Here you go with the attacks again! :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

Sorry. I don't know what Collins' prejudices are or if I have the same ones. But if people are too apathetic to vote or to find out what they need to do to vote, then I don't think those are folks that we should count on as supporters of our cause. Whatever agreements they have with us in principles are irrelevant if they don't care enough to act on them or are too ignorant to know how and unwilling to figure out how. The same goes for anarchists who refuse to participate in the political process. They may be with us in spirit. But when it comes to making a difference on election day, then until we change their minds about those things, they're no different to us than Obama supporters whose minds we need to change about politics.You sir are correct.

[Matt Collins]

How's voting been working out for the libertarian movement Matt? Well when many libertarians don't vote not so well. Or when they only vote for the lesser of the 2 evils not so well. Or when they refuse to participate in the political process, not so well.



Why should the rights of the majority trump the minority?They shouldn't and I never suggested otherwise :rolleyes: Remember the government's job is to secure individual rights; unfortunately government by it's very nature does the opposite the bigger and more powerful it is.

[Matt Collins]

A good point was brought up about the youth not having the expereince of primary voting. Many were on winter break, traveling, did not register in time, etc. Look at what happened to Dean who greatly underperformed in Iowa for likely the same reasons. He then became a flat tire who lost all momentum after Iowa. If he won the early states, he probably would have won the primaries and gone on to win the presidency.
Interesting perspective, I can't say I disagree.

However someone who would vote for McCain over Ron in the primary is not part of this movement obviously.

[Matt Collins]

If your plan is to infiltrate the establishment by disguising yourself as one of them with the plan of changing their minds...No... by showing up and out numbering them at the local and state level.

[Matt Collins]

Voting for the sake of voting is fundamentally retarded.Depends on what you do with your ballot. If there are no good candidates on the ballot, and you vote and turn in a blank ballot, that will send a message (of course many others have to do this for the message to be sent).




Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil.That is correct.