PDA

View Full Version : Why Medina Race Matters




rbmcdonald
09-12-2009, 10:58 PM
Our people across the country have an easy time seeing the benefit for them personally of supporting quality candidates from other states, such as Rand Paul. It is not as easy to see the benefit of supporting a Governor candidate such as Debra Medina. I would like to throw out some food for thought about why we should all consider this an important race.

• This is not a pie in the Sky race, this is a winnable race. Some nationally known political strategists have called the Texas Governor’s race one of the best chances in 2010 for a populist candidate to win. The first Republican Governor elected in Texas since Reconstruction, was elected in 1978, at some point in the early to mid ‘90s Texas became a solid Republican State. It is the largest solid Republican State in the Union and easily one of the Reddest of the Red states. A Democrat has not been elected to a state-wide office in Texas in 14 years. Since 1978 there have only been TWO heavily contest Republican Primaries for Governor, yes you heard my right, TWO. The last one was in 1990, almost 20 years ago. The party elite have worked very hard to keep it that way. Heavy pressure was applied to Kay Bailey Hutchison to keep her from running against Rick Perry in 2006. Rumors abound that Perry promised not to run for reelection in 2010. Well jump forward to 2009, and the Rick Perry vs Kay Bailey Hutchison heavy weight battle the party elite so feared in 2006 is all set for 2010. Early campaigning has already shown it will be a bloodbath. 350,000 to 400,000 votes will put Debra Medina in a run-off, which is less than 2% of the total population of the state.
• How does a win in the Texas Governor race benefit those that live in the other 49 states? To illustrate the national visibility a state Governor can have (think Palin on a much larger scale [population, not area]), since WWII there have been 11 Presidents. Their job prior to becoming President? 1 – Military, 2 – Senator, 4 – Vice President & 4 – Governor. A win in the Governor’s race in Texas could become our Normandy. A small beachhead that could quickly engulf the nation.

Robert B. McDonald

Changing the World One Governor at a Time
WWW.MedinaForTexas.Com

Bern
09-26-2009, 07:07 AM
Assuming she doesn't Jesse Ventura the opportunity. I really don't know much about her, but I have gauged reaction from more mainstream (ie. less Ron Paul centric) venues and there is concern out there about her being an evangelical extremist/nut.

jblosser
09-27-2009, 11:25 PM
To add to the above: Current polls still indicate that 20-30% of likely Republican primary voters do not like either of the two establishment choices. Texas is a majority-required-primary state, which means someone has to get 51% of the vote to get the nomination.

From a strategy perspective there's plenty of reason to support this race. Many of us continue to push for restoration of the Constitutional Federal Republican, including the doctrine of States Rights as described in the 10th Amendment and promoted by Jefferson and Madison in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. As much good as Ron Paul has done being our voice in Congress these past 30 years, he has not been able to turn that tide there because he is only one voice among 435. Even if we elected every liberty candidate we are running to join him--even if we elected to Congress one, or two, or three, or FOUR from every state--we would not change that math enough. In contrast, ONE governor who understands the proper role of government can take a stand that DC has to contend with. No, governors do not act unilaterally to create legislative policy any more than presidents do, but they also don't have to win votes owned by special interests to do things within their authority, particularly with the weight of the people that directly elected them already behind them.

Add to that, the state we are talking about is Texas. As much as I love what is going on in NH and MN for liberty, they do not bring the cards to the table that Texas does. We have resources and we have clout, and this kind of win here would not just be a foothold, it would be a fortification.

jblosser
09-27-2009, 11:29 PM
Assuming she doesn't Jesse Ventura the opportunity. I really don't know much about her, but I have gauged reaction from more mainstream (ie. less Ron Paul centric) venues and there is concern out there about her being an evangelical extremist/nut.

Smells like a typical whisper campaign. There's nothing nutty about her. Ron Paul hired her for his Congressional Campaign and put her on the Executive Board of the C4L. Her current campaign is all about restoring the proper limited role of government to protect individual life, liberty, and property, and she means it. She's a Christian but she's already taking flack from some on the Right because she went and talked to "teh gays" when invited to do so, even though when asked in that speech she clearly told them that she doesn't approve of the lifestyle, but also wants government to leave it alone because it's not their job.

Bern
09-28-2009, 08:56 AM
Don't shoot the messenger. I've known the folks on that other site for several years. It's honest feedback from people who are turned off by the Moral Majority/Religious Right. My advice to the Medina campaign - de-emphasize the ties to her evangelical education/activism (it's on her campaign website).

thasre
09-28-2009, 11:33 AM
Don't shoot the messenger. I've known the folks on that other site for several years. It's honest feedback from people who are turned off by the Moral Majority/Religious Right. My advice to the Medina campaign - de-emphasize the ties to her evangelical education/activism (it's on her campaign website).

I would seriously refer them to her YouTube page www.youtube.com/user/medinafortexas. She has a number of lengthy radio interviews she's given and she really doesn't sound at all like a nutcase. Sure she has a handful of ideas that seem a little out there, but that's true of any candidate who doesn't consult a team of campaign managers and pollsters before they even decide what shoes to wear to an event. And the minor pet peeves people might have about some of her positions would be largely unrelated to the Religious Right, I think.

At any rate, the videos are a great source of candid information that should make it easier for people to decide one way or another whether they like her.

Nathan Hale
10-01-2009, 07:35 AM
I disagree that this race presents a good opportunity. It would be a good win, because Texas is an important state and governorship is an important post with good opportunities connected to it, but this is not a good opportunity. Here's why:

The Republican establishment already has two competing celebrity candidates who both have huge campaign infrastructures and are going to drum up obscene donation numbers. This will be a multi-million dollar primary. Now, it's possible for a C4L candidate to challenge such a situation. As we see with Rand Paul it's quite possible to go toe-to-toe with an establishment candidate. But as Rand himself admits, he has a measure of celebrity that gives him the ability to do that. Debra Medina doesn't. So while we might be able to drum up six figure fundraising for her, she has no other credentials that cause her to stand out in the race enough to bring her into the top-tier, to say nothing about her dubious ties, if they exist.

This race looks like it's going to be Perry vs Hutchinson, and the media is going to ignore everybody else in the primary. Medina needs a door to open in her favor, and quick. I just don't see anything like that happening in the near future.

constituent
10-01-2009, 08:03 AM
Why I haven't supported Debra Medina:

Looks like yet another eternal fundraiser with little or no promise of paying off.

You can flame me for that if you want, but it is what it is ...and I'm not alone in thinking this.

constituent
10-01-2009, 08:05 AM
This race looks like it's going to be Perry vs Hutchinson, and the media is going to ignore everybody else in the primary. Medina needs a door to open in her favor, and quick. I just don't see anything like that happening in the near future.

My guess is Kinky V. Hutch. If advancing the cause of liberty is the goal here, time and resources would be better spent bolstering the kinky camp and trying to shape their practically non-existent policy positions.

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 08:17 AM
Why I haven't supported Debra Medina:

Looks like yet another eternal fundraiser with little or no promise of paying off.

You can flame me for that if you want, but it is what it is ...and I'm not alone in thinking this.

And you think Kinky DOES?

Give me a break, Constituent.


My guess is Kinky V. Hutch. If advancing the cause of liberty is the goal here, time and resources would be better spent bolstering the kinky camp and trying to shape their practically non-existent policy positions.

I voted for Kinky the last time around. I will not do so again. Constituent, did you see his last mainstream news interview? It's posted on here somewhere. His stances are totally against anything this movement has ever stood for.

With Medina, it's all about whether she will have enough money and feet to get her message out and whether she will be able to get into the debates. If we're not even going to help her, then yeah, she has little hope. Too bad, though. She would make one hell of a good Governor.

If we're not even going to try, I guess we'll just get what we deserve. Another round of Perry or one with Kay Bailout.

constituent
10-01-2009, 08:25 AM
I voted for Kinky the last time around. I will not do so again. Constituent, did you see his last mainstream news interview? It's posted on here somewhere. His stances are totally against anything this movement has ever stood for.


Kinky changes with the wind. We can be the wind.

To me, it's about actually breaking the perry stranglehold. Paying lip service to
Medina might help, but it's not going to get us there imo.

The RP campaign taught me a valuable lesson in futility.

That said, I haven't heard anything about her anywhere outside of this community.

What is her plan for breaking the "ron paul bubble?" Let's start there and maybe we can build on that... Convince me.

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 08:31 AM
Kinky changes with the wind. We can be the wind.
You mean like passing gas? :p


To me, it's about actually breaking the perry stranglehold. Paying lip service to
Medina might help, but it's not going to get us there imo.
So, you'd prefer to pay lip service to Kinky?


The RP campaign taught me a valuable lesson in futility.

That said, I haven't heard anything about her anywhere outside of this community.

What is her plan for breaking the "ron paul bubble?" Let's start there and maybe we can build on that... Convince me.

:eek::D



Kinky Friedman:

1.) "If I were Governor, I would absolutely take the Federal Government stimulus money"

2.) Doesn't support Texas Sovereignty under the 10th Amendment.

3.) Kinky supports Obama. Gives him a 7 out of 10.

YouTube - Kinky Friedman Speaks To Ed Schultz (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K8sJthrJnU)

You can read Debra's stances on issues, the same as me. Personally, I like them.
http://www.medinafortexas.com/issues.php

american.swan
10-01-2009, 08:48 AM
IF the media ignores her....if she doesn't get into the debates....

Tough road to climb, but if I was in TEXAS, I wouldn't sit on my ARSE guessing what will happen. I would be franticly trying to raise her name recognition in and around my home districts.

constituent
10-01-2009, 08:59 AM
Illegal immigration affects many aspects of our lives: jobs, health care, education, housing, and taxes to name a few. It also adversely affects the lives of those who come here illegally, as they are forced into an underground culture. We are all harmed by illegal immigration. The most compassionate thing We Texans can do is stop illegal immigration.


LE, what does she mean by "stop illegal immigration?" What is her game plan?

-Does she support the Real I.D. as a means to stop illegal immigration? If not, what will she do as governor to lift passport requirements for texans traveling to and from mexico over land? If she supports the new passport requirements, how does she square the two?

-What is her position on stopping the theft of land for the construction of the wall?

Additionally, does she agree with Ron Paul's stance that handing over existing (as in paid for and maintained by taxpayer dollars) state highways to the King of Spain (to toll) represents a "victory" (ron paul's words) for the people of Texas?

Where does she stand on the expansion of the South Texas Project? Where does she stand on the Railroad Commission's railroading of the good people in Goliad, DeWitt and Victoria counties regarding Uranium mining? What will she do to help the fight when the E.P.A. hands over their final approval?

What is her position on the GBRA, SAWS and the LCRA?


These are just a couple of question that must be addressed first. Even if I feel that her fight is futile, with the right answers she will get my enthusiastic support.

If you get a chance to answer, many thanks in advance.

constituent
10-01-2009, 09:03 AM
I would be franticly trying to raise her name recognition in and around my home districts.

I assume that means you've conducted adequate due diligence and can therefore answer my concerns above... it would be greatly appreciated.

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 09:04 AM
LE, what does she mean by "stop illegal immigration?" What is her game plan?

-Does she support the Real I.D. as a means to stop illegal immigration? If not, what will she do as governor to lift passport requirements for texans traveling to and from mexico over land? If she supports the new passport requirements, how does she square the two?

-What is her position on stopping the theft of land for the construction of the wall?

Additionally, does she agree with Ron Paul's stance that handing over existing (as in paid for and maintained by taxpayer dollars) state highways to the King of Spain (to toll) represents a "victory" (ron paul's words) for the people of Texas?

Where does she stand on the expansion of the South Texas Project? Where does she stand on the Railroad Commission's railroading of the good people in Goliad, DeWitt and Victoria counties regarding Uranium mining? What will she do to help the fight when the E.P.A. hands over their final approval?

What is her position on the GBRA, SAWS and the LCRA?


These are just a couple of question that must be addressed first. Even if I feel that her fight is futile, with the right answers she will get my enthusiastic support.

If you get a chance to answer, many thanks in advance.

I've got to admit, those are great questions. I don't know the answers. The best place to get 'em would be to ask the campaign directly. I'd bet you money though, that she's against REAL ID and anything like you described about the RR Commission. I doubt though, Cons, that you are going to agree with her about illegal immigration.

As an aside, RP really said that about the toll roads? :eek: What is his rationale, do you know? Because I damn sure am not too keen about handing over our already paid for roads. Not one bit.

constituent
10-01-2009, 09:09 AM
As an aside, RP really said that about the toll roads? :eek: What is his rationale, do you know?

Yea, it was one of the first posts on the CFL site. I'm not sure what his rationale was, but i'd say that article was a "wake up" moment for me personally.

constituent
10-01-2009, 09:11 AM
I doubt though, Cons, that you are going to agree with her about illegal immigration.


Most differences can be overcome. The wall and passports are pretty much deal breakers though. Admittedly, Kinky is not much better (but that's why i'm pretty apathetic atm) on these, but he is an advocate of ending the war on drugs, so I see opportunity for a little give and take. I'd give Medina the same shot.

Plus, ultimately Kinky has his status as a pop-icon in the balance (an easy string to pull from a populist's perspective, imo).

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 09:14 AM
Yea, it was one of the first posts on the CFL site. I'm not sure what his rationale was, but i'd say that article was a "wake up" moment for me personally.

I'll try to find it. I'll bet it's because someone else would have the expense of maintaining them. Not the taxpayers. But, that still doesn't sit well with me for our already bought and paid for roads being handed over to a foreign country. All the while, Perry's grubby hands are greased.

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 09:16 AM
Most differences can be overcome. The wall and passports are pretty much deal breakers though. Admittedly, Kinky is not much better (but that's why i'm pretty apathetic atm) on these, but he is an advocate of ending the war on drugs, so I see opportunity for a little give and take. I'd give Medina the same shot.

Plus, ultimately Kinky has his status as a pop-icon in the balance (an easy string to pull from a populist's perspective, imo).

http://www.medinafortexas.com/contact-us.php

Be sure and post what you find out.

constituent
10-01-2009, 09:23 AM
questions submitted, i'll let you know.

Nathan Hale
10-01-2009, 02:12 PM
My guess is Kinky V. Hutch. If advancing the cause of liberty is the goal here, time and resources would be better spent bolstering the kinky camp and trying to shape their practically non-existent policy positions.

I agree that Kinky is the least possible evil of the major candidates in this race. He has some good ideas, and he's pretty wishy-washy otherwise. He could end up like a Ventura. Or he could end up like a Schwarzenegger.

jblosser
10-01-2009, 05:00 PM
The Republican establishment already has two competing celebrity candidates who both have huge campaign infrastructures and are going to drum up obscene donation numbers. This will be a multi-million dollar primary. Now, it's possible for a C4L candidate to challenge such a situation. As we see with Rand Paul it's quite possible to go toe-to-toe with an establishment candidate. But as Rand himself admits, he has a measure of celebrity that gives him the ability to do that. Debra Medina doesn't. So while we might be able to drum up six figure fundraising for her, she has no other credentials that cause her to stand out in the race enough to bring her into the top-tier, to say nothing about her dubious ties, if they exist.

While you're not wrong that it's going to be hard to be heard, your logic on why it would be futile to try is inverted. The fact that the two heavyweights are goint to be fighting tooth and nail is excatly why there's a chance--people get fed up with that kind of politics, even more than they are already fed up with the establishment offerings, and they cast protest votes. This is why some pretty heavy players have shown interest in this race and stated they see it as the best chance for a by-the-people upset in the country this cycle.


This race looks like it's going to be Perry vs Hutchinson, and the media is going to ignore everybody else in the primary. Medina needs a door to open in her favor, and quick. I just don't see anything like that happening in the near future.

The media is not ignoring Debra even now. Surprisingly, they're giving her pretty good and enthusiastic coverage. Largely because they see the bloodbath coming, and the messier it is the better for their ink. 50/50 Perry/KBH is interesting, but even 45/45/10 Perry/KBH/Medina is the stuff of prize fights. They don't want her to win but they want her around long enough to maximize their bylines, so they're asking for interviews all over the place right now.

LibertyEagle
10-01-2009, 05:02 PM
I agree that Kinky is the least possible evil of the major candidates in this race. He has some good ideas, and he's pretty wishy-washy otherwise. He could end up like a Ventura. Or he could end up like a Schwarzenegger.

Kinky thinks Obama is doing a good job. That should tell you all you need to know.

jblosser
10-01-2009, 05:09 PM
LE, what does she mean by "stop illegal immigration?" What is her game plan?

Her game plan right now is research on the problem because she thinks it's a complex issue that has been overused as a political soundbite with very little substance in solutions thrown around and then ignored. She's talking to border sheriffs in Texas, other states that have had successes, etc. That does not mean she's not taking it seriously, she's spending a ton of time on this. But she's not the kind to put out half-baked ideas or solutions she can't commit to actually delivering, like so many others have done.


-Does she support the Real I.D. as a means to stop illegal immigration? If not, what will she do as governor to lift passport requirements for texans traveling to and from mexico over land? If she supports the new passport requirements, how does she square the two?

No, she doesn't support Real ID, and she's leery of any of the various voter/employer/etc. ID programs that are targetted at the immigration issue but really just Real ID in disguise. "Leery" means "let's find something better, backdoor RealID programs aren't the answer".


-What is her position on stopping the theft of land for the construction of the wall?

She's publicly criticized the idea of a wall as first among those promises that never get delivered and aren't that realistic in the first place. Private property concerns being a primary reason. First in her campaign platform are protection of private property--no exceptions--and firearms. She's campaigning to eliminate property taxes entirely because a property you have to pay regular fees on does not belong to you, it's a lease.



I'm not personally up on the details of the below points so would need to research to provide answers but Debra's position is as consistent as anyone I've met on the fact that the proper role of government is the protection of individual life, liberty, and property. Without exceptions. Assuming the below programs infringe on those rights the way they sound as you've presented them, she would oppose them and stand in the way of them as much as such was within her authority as governor.

PS: Yes, I'm a person who can speak authoritatively on where she stands on things.




Additionally, does she agree with Ron Paul's stance that handing over existing (as in paid for and maintained by taxpayer dollars) state highways to the King of Spain (to toll) represents a "victory" (ron paul's words) for the people of Texas?

Where does she stand on the expansion of the South Texas Project? Where does she stand on the Railroad Commission's railroading of the good people in Goliad, DeWitt and Victoria counties regarding Uranium mining? What will she do to help the fight when the E.P.A. hands over their final approval?

What is her position on the GBRA, SAWS and the LCRA?


These are just a couple of question that must be addressed first. Even if I feel that her fight is futile, with the right answers she will get my enthusiastic support.

If you get a chance to answer, many thanks in advance.

constituent
10-01-2009, 05:23 PM
Her game plan right now is research on the problem because she thinks it's a complex issue that has been overused as a political soundbite with very little substance in solutions thrown around and then ignored. She's talking to border sheriffs in Texas, other states that have had successes, etc. That does not mean she's not taking it seriously, she's spending a ton of time on this. But she's not the kind to put out half-baked ideas or solutions she can't commit to actually delivering, like so many others have done.



No, she doesn't support Real ID, and she's leery of any of the various voter/employer/etc. ID programs that are targetted at the immigration issue but really just Real ID in disguise. "Leery" means "let's find something better, backdoor RealID programs aren't the answer".



She's publicly criticized the idea of a wall as first among those promises that never get delivered and aren't that realistic in the first place. Private property concerns being a primary reason. First in her campaign platform are protection of private property--no exceptions--and firearms. She's campaigning to eliminate property taxes entirely because a property you have to pay regular fees on does not belong to you, it's a lease.



I'm not personally up on the details of the below points so would need to research to provide answers but Debra's position is as consistent as anyone I've met on the fact that the proper role of government is the protection of individual life, liberty, and property. Without exceptions. Assuming the below programs infringe on those rights the way they sound as you've presented them, she would oppose them and stand in the way of them as much as such was within her authority as governor.

PS: Yes, I'm a person who can speak authoritatively on where she stands on things.

then she has my support.

thanks!

Number19
10-01-2009, 08:43 PM
I disagree that this race presents a good opportunity. It would be a good win, because Texas is an important state and governorship is an important post with good opportunities connected to it, but this is not a good opportunity. Here's why:

The Republican establishment already has two competing celebrity candidates who both have huge campaign infrastructures and are going to drum up obscene donation numbers. This will be a multi-million dollar primary. Now, it's possible for a C4L candidate to challenge such a situation. As we see with Rand Paul it's quite possible to go toe-to-toe with an establishment candidate. But as Rand himself admits, he has a measure of celebrity that gives him the ability to do that. Debra Medina doesn't. So while we might be able to drum up six figure fundraising for her, she has no other credentials that cause her to stand out in the race enough to bring her into the top-tier, to say nothing about her dubious ties, if they exist.

This race looks like it's going to be Perry vs Hutchinson, and the media is going to ignore everybody else in the primary. Medina needs a door to open in her favor, and quick. I just don't see anything like that happening in the near future.The "door" that Debra has that allows her to go toe to toe with Perry and Hutchinson is the personality which comes through in this video commercial :

YouTube - Come and Take It (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysUcBPpQ8_w&feature=player_embedded)

Debra is 100% Texan and people are going to respond to this "longshot" like they haven't before, in my 61 years. The key for Debra, just like Ron, is to be heard, and the key to this is money for advertising. With a state the size and population of Texas, radio, and if possible, television, commercials are critical. These are the hook.

Nathan Hale
10-02-2009, 08:59 PM
While you're not wrong that it's going to be hard to be heard, your logic on why it would be futile to try is inverted. The fact that the two heavyweights are goint to be fighting tooth and nail is excatly why there's a chance--people get fed up with that kind of politics, even more than they are already fed up with the establishment offerings, and they cast protest votes. This is why some pretty heavy players have shown interest in this race and stated they see it as the best chance for a by-the-people upset in the country this cycle.

While I agree with Rand Paul that this is the best time in a generation for a candidate with no experience to win, I disagree that such possibility is cause to assume a candidate can win strictly because of that paradigm. Two heavyweights are going to dominate the primary race. Unless a third choice has something that catapults them into the spotlight, there's little chance of a third candidate infiltrating the established "top tier".


The media is not ignoring Debra even now. Surprisingly, they're giving her pretty good and enthusiastic coverage.

Oh she'll get coverage. Every candidate who donates a modicum of effort to their race can get coverage. As I posted earlier, she might even get a six figure budget for her race, but the media is never going to consider her "on par" with the top tier when they discuss the primary, and as such she's not going to be in a position to win.


Largely because they see the bloodbath coming, and the messier it is the better for their ink. 50/50 Perry/KBH is interesting, but even 45/45/10 Perry/KBH/Medina is the stuff of prize fights. They don't want her to win but they want her around long enough to maximize their bylines, so they're asking for interviews all over the place right now.

I don't see that tactic as being viable. WHY does adding Medina to the mix fix their bottom line?

Nathan Hale
10-02-2009, 09:02 PM
The "door" that Debra has that allows her to go toe to toe with Perry and Hutchinson is the personality which comes through in this video commercial :

Alas, entertaining personality isn't a door in modern electoral politics.


Debra is 100% Texan and people are going to respond to this "longshot" like they haven't before, in my 61 years.

That's a bold prediction. Unfortunately, it's not a strategic prediction, unless you have a reason for feeling that way other than your candidate's charisma.


The key for Debra, just like Ron, is to be heard, and the key to this is money for advertising. With a state the size and population of Texas, radio, and if possible, television, commercials are critical. These are the hook.

But advertising costs money. And money comes from people who have confidence in your ability to be a viable candidate.

Nathan Hale
10-02-2009, 09:05 PM
Kinky thinks Obama is doing a good job. That should tell you all you need to know.

I know many reasonable, rational, intelligent people who think Obama is doing a good job. I disagree with them, but I don't immediately marginalize them for it. Once you delve outside of people who love politics and issues, you need to change your standards when it comes to identity politics. Kinky runs for office, but he's not a traditional politician, so asking him about Obama is not the same as asking somebody who follows DC politics whether or not they like Obama. And even so, I'm not claiming he's the best person for the job. But he's our best chance at least of getting an outsider in the office who has some good ideas, and that's better for us than Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Rick Perry.

ForLiberty-RonPaul
10-02-2009, 09:21 PM
I know many reasonable, rational, intelligent people who think Obama is doing a good job. I disagree with them, but I don't immediately marginalize them for it. Once you delve outside of people who love politics and issues, you need to change your standards when it comes to identity politics. Kinky runs for office, but he's not a traditional politician, so asking him about Obama is not the same as asking somebody who follows DC politics whether or not they like Obama. And even so, I'm not claiming he's the best person for the job. But he's our best chance at least of getting an outsider in the office who has some good ideas, and that's better for us than Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Rick Perry.

maybe they aren't as intelligent as you think. Ron Paul was a long shot. Some of us never truly believed he could win, some did. But we all supported him because of his message. And because of that we now have a thriving r3VOLution. We need to support Medina, not because we think she can win or not, but because her message is the same message written our hearts. Whatever happened to standing on principle? What we've done for the country we need to do for Texas, one of the MOST neo-con infested states in the Union.

LibertyEagle
10-02-2009, 09:47 PM
I know many reasonable, rational, intelligent people who think Obama is doing a good job. I disagree with them, but I don't immediately marginalize them for it. Once you delve outside of people who love politics and issues, you need to change your standards when it comes to identity politics. Kinky runs for office, but he's not a traditional politician, so asking him about Obama is not the same as asking somebody who follows DC politics whether or not they like Obama. And even so, I'm not claiming he's the best person for the job. But he's our best chance at least of getting an outsider in the office who has some good ideas, and that's better for us than Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Rick Perry.

Kinky does not stand a chance. Neither probably does Deb.

I'd rather back the person who spreads the message. Deb does that; Kinky does NOT,

Number19
10-02-2009, 10:05 PM
At last years Texas GOP State Convention, the grassroots, liberty movement, with Debra Medina one of the leaders, had a vocal presence of 25-33 %. The discontent in Texas politics, with the establishment Republicans, is strong. Strong enough to kick the old guard out of power during the current upcoming election cycle? We don't know, but the first test is coming on March 2, 2010, with Debra leading the way.

ForLiberty-RonPaul
10-02-2009, 10:48 PM
bump

Andrew-Austin
10-02-2009, 10:51 PM
My intuition tells me its better to pick my battles, and that this one does not present that great of an opportunity to accomplish much, even if we were just aiming to use the election for the purposes of education and not to win. Just saying in this case I'd rather invest my 100$ on something that can prepare me for when shit hits the fan. If things pick up for the Medina campaign I might involve myself in any grassroots activity, but until that comes...

ForLiberty-RonPaul
10-02-2009, 10:56 PM
hope you don't follow that intuition often

have we forgotten about the NAU??? Texas is the front line of that fight.

it was Texans who stood up against the TTC before Ron Paul brought it mainstream

jblosser
10-03-2009, 12:13 AM
While I agree with Rand Paul that this is the best time in a generation for a candidate with no experience to win, I disagree that such possibility is cause to assume a candidate can win strictly because of that paradigm. Two heavyweights are going to dominate the primary race. Unless a third choice has something that catapults them into the spotlight, there's little chance of a third candidate infiltrating the established "top tier".

I wasn't talking about anything Rand has said, nor was I talking about generic platitudes without reference to this race. I was talking about analysis and comments made by experienced campaign professionals who have won outsider races like this in the past and believe this race in Texas this cycle presents unique opportunities.


I don't see that tactic as being viable. WHY does adding Medina to the mix fix their bottom line?

My point was due to the nature of this race the media has significant reasons for showing interest in her candidacy, more than a "normal" outsider candidate, and they are indeed giving her that attention. What she does with that attention and what else she can turn it into is what determines if she has what it takes to be one of those few that can pull something like this off, or not. It's rare but that's not the same thing as unprecedented.

See for example Paul Burka's comments: http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=4744

Nathan Hale
10-04-2009, 11:58 AM
maybe they aren't as intelligent as you think.

That's being too judgmental. It's possible for intelligent people to have a different political opinion than we do.


Ron Paul was a long shot. Some of us never truly believed he could win, some did. But we all supported him because of his message. And because of that we now have a thriving r3VOLution.

But you're forgetting one thing. This revolution took off because Paul passed certain viability bottlenecks that Medina doesn't pass. Medina is more analogous to John Cox than Ron Paul - though I admit she has our ears and John Cox didn't have much access to core donor support.


We need to support Medina, not because we think she can win or not, but because her message is the same message written our hearts. Whatever happened to standing on principle?

Standing on principle is great, if it's a battle that you're capable of winning. But there is honor in retreating from the unwinnable battlefield and marshalling resources for the battles that can be fought and won. Principle matters, but you're discounting the very important viability factor.

Nathan Hale
10-04-2009, 11:59 AM
Kinky does not stand a chance. Neither probably does Deb.

I'd rather back the person who spreads the message. Deb does that; Kinky does NOT,

How do you figure that Kinky doesn't stand a chance?

Nathan Hale
10-04-2009, 12:05 PM
I wasn't talking about anything Rand has said, nor was I talking about generic platitudes without reference to this race. I was talking about analysis and comments made by experienced campaign professionals who have won outsider races like this in the past and believe this race in Texas this cycle presents unique opportunities.

Okay, present their logic. Present their analysis.


My point was due to the nature of this race the media has significant reasons for showing interest in her candidacy, more than a "normal" outsider candidate, and they are indeed giving her that attention. What she does with that attention and what else she can turn it into is what determines if she has what it takes to be one of those few that can pull something like this off, or not. It's rare but that's not the same thing as unprecedented.

See for example Paul Burka's comments: http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=4744

It sounds like she's getting the standard spoiler treatment. This sort of situation happens nearly every year in nearly every state for one race or another, and with one or two notable exceptions in the past decade it never amounts to anything.

MikeStanart
10-06-2009, 09:44 PM
Kinky does not stand a chance. Neither probably does Deb.

I'd rather back the person who spreads the message. Deb does that; Kinky does NOT,

Yeah, I completely agree with you!

I absolutely love Medina; I just don't see this as a winnable race. A lot of insider republicans really like her (including my dad; which says a LOT). I think she should focus her efforts on a lower office and move up to governer in later years.

That being said; I will continue to support Medina as far as rhetoric is concerned; but will focus my very limited (college budget) resources to candadites like Rand and Schiff.

Nathan Hale
10-07-2009, 06:11 AM
Yeah, I completely agree with you!

I absolutely love Medina; I just don't see this as a winnable race. A lot of insider republicans really like her (including my dad; which says a LOT). I think she should focus her efforts on a lower office and move up to governer in later years.

That being said; I will continue to support Medina as far as rhetoric is concerned; but will focus my very limited (college budget) resources to candadites like Rand and Schiff.

Well said. There is a place for candidates like Medina, who don't have the celebrity or experience to compete in a major race. How about US house? Or state house? Or mayor in her town? Or town council? If you don't have experience or celebrity, you have to play AAA ball.

constituent
10-07-2009, 07:04 AM
Or mayor in her town? Or town council? If you don't have experience or celebrity, you have to play AAA ball.

Which sadly, at least in terms of stated goals of "the revolution," gets ignored. In terms of restoring liberty in any concrete sense, local elections are THE "big game."

Frankly, I'm weary of any that overlook this reality, and focus instead on any number of un-winables that do little for liberty but work great as fundraisers.

(no, this isn't what I'm accusing Medina of)

ForLiberty-RonPaul
10-27-2009, 03:29 PM
Medina for Texas Governor!!

TruckinMike
12-15-2009, 08:11 PM
Just to set the record straight.

Kinky is a duplicitous, leftist, attention hound! He says he despises government intrusions on our lives, all the while saying government should do more! He's a freakin' commie! Ok.. maybe not a commie, but he is a die-hard collectivist!


"Hi my name is Kinky "Give me sex, drugs, rock-n-roll, and I'll be a slave for the state" Friedman, and all I want is liberty man. Hey, can someone pass the joint while I apply for my state poetry grant? And TMike, stop killing my buzz with all that negativity"

I think that sums him up.:D

Debra is a Constitutionalist. Is everything she does perfect? Probably not, but she is leaps and bounds better than Perry or Hutchinson. She has the guts to
actually try to overturn property Taxes. Thats right -- Zero property taxes. That in itself is enough for me.

So please stop the division, and petty bickering.

TMike

truthspeaker
12-28-2009, 05:03 PM
I have to weigh-in on this one. This is what happened during the last gubernatorial race in Texas:

A Perry-supporting interest group sent fliers out to the TX Bay-Area flaming the other candidates as "Pro-choice", including Carole Keeton Strayhorn, who was a NOT pro-choice candidate. The result? Through quick word of mouth, the heavy Strayhorn supporting area, changed their support to Perry just 2 days before the election. This action was done too close to the election to recover the damage. It is because of tactics like this one that it is hard to beat Perry.

Furthermore, when Medina ran for Senate, the non-partisan voter info paper had documented Medina also as Pro-Choice, even though she took a States Rights approach to life issues. (The question was something like "do you support a Federal Amendment to the Constitution limiting abortions") Her addendum was at the end of the paper, but a quick reader would miss comments like that.

Akus
12-30-2009, 03:01 AM
....since WWII there have been 11 Presidents. Their job prior to becoming President? 1 – Military, 2 – Senator, 4 – Vice President & 4 – Governor......

Wrong, it was 5 Veeps

http://i50.tinypic.com/2zrp9xd.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2e4gaxd.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/2wfmu6d.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/2qdx4dt.jpg
http://i48.tinypic.com/10zcuno.jpg

jblosser
02-09-2010, 10:42 AM
Bump for we told you so. :-P

constituent
02-09-2010, 10:51 AM
Bump for we told you so. :-P

that's the best kind. :)

rp08orbust
02-09-2010, 10:56 AM
Bump for we told you so. :-P

In the context of today's poll results, this has to be the most epic bump ever!