John Dennis

[RP4EVER]

I apologize if this has already been posted; but John Dennis running against Nancy Pelosi in Californias 8th District; he was endorsed yesterday by Congressman Ron Paul. Hes having a money bomb today; so I hope you guys will consider donating time talent and money

[low preference guy]

Does Dennis have Republican opposition?

[Koz]

Link to his moneybomb? I will donate to anyone running against Pelosi.

[low preference guy]

Link to his moneybomb? I will donate to anyone running against Pelosi.

https://www.johndennis2010.com/donate/

[chudrockz]

Bump!

I got an email reminding me about the moneybomb today. I will throw a donation his way after work tonight when the wifey tells me how much we can afford.

:)

[Nathan Hale]

Running against Pelosi? Why even waste your money? I like the guy and all, but he'd haved been luck running for dictator of Cuba.

[low preference guy]

Running against Pelosi? Why even waste your money? I like the guy and all, but he'd haved been luck running for dictator of Cuba.


It's important to have candidates and run races. People learn from their mistakes. Volunteers learn to organize and the experience will become valuable later. Every now and then there is a scandal, the economy changes, or the candidate makes a wrong vote in a suddenly important issue. When the other side slips, it's important to have a candidate on the ballot to seize the opportunity.

Even if we don't win, he'll likely make some headlines. Some people will learn about non-interventionism, and a fraction of them will join RPF and become small donors. Many who hear the message from the local newspaper in Dennis' district wouldn't have heard it otherwise. All these things help the movement.

The money spent is not too much. Today he'll raise about $20,000. Compare that with the $35,000,000 we spent with Ron Paul. It's 0,005%. Plus it comes from individuals who give $10, $20. It doesn't hurt them much.

[Nathan Hale]

It's important to have candidates and run races. People learn from their mistakes. Volunteers learn to organize and the experience will become valuable later. Every now and then there is a scandal, the economy changes, or the candidate makes a wrong vote in a suddenly important issue. When the other side slips, it's important to have a candidate on the ballot to seize the opportunity.

In a perfect world, this is a good priority, but we don't have the luxury of a candidate in every race. Funding and activist hours need to target viable candidates to increase the likelihood of their victory. So unfortunately, when you're dealing with limited resources, as any movement's resources are, scarcity of funding requires trimming candidates who are essentially fighting unwinnable battles.


Even if we don't win, he'll likely make some headlines. Some people will learn about non-interventionism, and a fraction of them will join RPF and become small donors. Many who hear the message from the local newspaper in Dennis' district wouldn't have heard it otherwise. All these things help the movement.

Then spend the money and activist hours doing that. It's only worth running for office if you use the method in an attempt solely devoted to winning the seat. If you're there to educate, you're better off organizing in a different manner than an electoral candidacy, regardless of the race.


The money spent is not too much. Today he'll raise about $20,000. Compare that with the $35,000,000 we spent with Ron Paul. It's 0,005%. Plus it comes from individuals who give $10, $20. It doesn't hurt them much.

$20,000 can go a long way in the hands of a viable Congressional candidate. It's better spent elsewhere. I wouldn't use Ron Paul's donation totals as the bar for 2010. You're going to see a huge dip in the funding of liberty candidates by members of the core movement. That's just how it works in off-year elections.

[low preference guy]

There aren't that many viable Congressional candidates. Let's not compare it to Ron Paul's money then. Let's compare it to what Schiff and Rand have raised so far, about $3,500,000. It's still less than one percent. If it generates some press, I think the money is well spent. Pelosi is hated so much that if the race gets just a little tight, Dennis will be flooded with money that does not come from the Freedom movement. We sure can give 20k. It's spare change for a political movement.

As for the claim that the "money can be better spent elsewhere", I doubt it. That money will most likely stay in the pockets of the donors. Many donate because of their hatred of Pelosi. It's not like you can identify the Dennis donors and say, hey, there is a guy with a better chance. Whatever you were gonna give to Dennis, give it to him. Not gonna happen. You can't even identify Dennis's donors and the motivation, so the 20k is not transferable to other races, at least not all.

[Nathan Hale]

There aren't that many viable Congressional candidates. Let's not compare it to Ron Paul's money then. Let's compare it to what Schiff and Rand have raised so far, about $3,500,000. It's still less than one percent.

$20,000 can give an underfunded campaign a huge boost. Dennis will get a lot of support independent of the liberty movement - there's no need for us to drop our limited number of dimes into his hat.


If it generates some press, I think the money is well spent.

Yeah, press is great. But is the money being used optimally or effectively?


Pelosi is hated so much that if the race gets just a little tight, Dennis will be flooded with money that does not come from the Freedom movement. We sure can give 20k. It's spare change for a political movement.

We aren't evolved to the point that we can pooh pooh "spare change" and throw tens of thousands of dollars away willy-nilly.


As for the claim that the "money can be better spent elsewhere", I doubt it. That money will most likely stay in the pockets of the donors. Many donate because of their hatred of Pelosi.

But not us. I don't care what the average voter does with his or her money. I'm speaking strictly to core liberty movement members, the kind of people who read these boards, organize money bombs, and energize liberty activists to do their activism.


It's not like you can identify the Dennis donors and say, hey, there is a guy with a better chance. Whatever you were gonna give to Dennis, give it to him. Not gonna happen. You can't even identify Dennis's donors and the motivation, so the 20k is not transferable to other races, at least not all.

I think we're having a miscommunication here. I'm speaking only to us, not to every single Dennis voter.

[low preference guy]

I think we're having a miscommunication here. I'm speaking only to us, not to every single Dennis voter.

But you also talk about 20k:


$20,000 can give an underfunded campaign a huge boost.
I think we're having a miscommunication here. I'm speaking only to us, not to every single Dennis voter.

20k is all the money raised by all voters, not only RPF visitors, so implicitly we are talking about all of them.



But not us. I don't care what the average voter does with his or her money. I'm speaking strictly to core liberty movement members...

But then you are probably talking about a really small amount of money. Tons of donors come from the Daily Paul, and if you watch it closely, they have more visitors but they are on average less studious of the issues. Many of them just read something like "Get Pelosi out", then donate and log off. There's hardly a way to get them to divert their resources to Dennis. So if we are talking about the very informed members of the movement, we are talking only about RPF, who are likely to give less than half of Dennis' donations.

[Nathan Hale]

But you also talk about 20k:



20k is all the money raised by all voters, not only RPF visitors, so implicitly we are talking about all of them.

We were discussing $20K as the result of a money bomb. Money bombs pull donations by and large from the movement.


But then you are probably talking about a really small amount of money. Tons of donors come from the Daily Paul, and if you watch it closely, they have more visitors but they are on average less studious of the issues. Many of them just read something like "Get Pelosi out", then donate and log off. There's hardly a way to get them to divert their resources to Dennis. So if we are talking about the very informed members of the movement, we are talking only about RPF, who are likely to give less than half of Dennis' donations.

I'm not speaking strictly of RPF, but of people who self-identify as "in the movement/Revolution", or "Ron Paul Republican/constitutional conservative". They need not specifically frequent RPF - but Daily Paul, a meetup group, or any focal point of "the movement". I consider them "core members".

[Brian4Liberty]

We need to support all Liberty/Constitutional candidates, especially those endorsed by Ron Paul. If someone doesn't want to donate, that's fine. Help spread the word instead. How much effort does it take to send an e-mail or post information somewhere? Or just refrain from being negative?

This talk about "trimming candidates" is counter-productive. We can "support" (in any way we can) as many candidates as we can find. And we should not let any of these big government/socialist Senators/Congressman run unopposed.

In the case of John Dennis vs. Nancy Pelosi, yeah, it's a long shot, but let's not concede before the Primaries!

There are some things that may help this year against Pelosi:

- This is the first Pelosi election since the Ron Paul Revolution, eyes are more open this time around.
- Pelosi has forced a bad Healthcare bill down our throats, a lot of people resent that on all sides of the aisles.
- Pelosi supports the continued and expanded wars.
- Pelosi supported the extremely unpopular Wall St. bailouts.
- Democrats are in for a rough time supporting a President who has gone back on all of his campaign promises.

Nancy has some bad karma built up right now. There may be a chance.


On the other hand, Nancy is in full agreement with anyone who wants to give up now...

http://lauriekendrick.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/nancy-p.jpg

[Nathan Hale]

We need to support all Liberty/Constitutional candidates, especially those endorsed by Ron Paul. If someone doesn't want to donate, that's fine. Help spread the word instead. How much effort does it take to send an e-mail or post information somewhere? Or just refrain from being negative?

That's like saying that an army should fight every possible battle that comes along. The army that emerges victorious marshalls its resources and employs them in winnable fights.


This talk about "trimming candidates" is counter-productive. We can "support" (in any way we can) as many candidates as we can find. And we should not let any of these big government/socialist Senators/Congressman run unopposed.

But we have limited resources. What makes us a force is our ability to target donations across state lines.


In the case of John Dennis vs. Nancy Pelosi, yeah, it's a long shot, but let's not concede before the Primaries!

Foresight is an important part of strategy.


There are some things that may help this year against Pelosi:

- This is the first Pelosi election since the Ron Paul Revolution, eyes are more open this time around.
- Pelosi has forced a bad Healthcare bill down our throats, a lot of people resent that on all sides of the aisles.
- Pelosi supports the continued and expanded wars.
- Pelosi supported the extremely unpopular Wall St. bailouts.
- Democrats are in for a rough time supporting a President who has gone back on all of his campaign promises.

Nancy has some bad karma built up right now. There may be a chance.

Not for a Republican. If Nancy ever loses, it'll come from somebody on the left. Look at her district!

[Brian4Liberty]

That's like saying that an army should fight every possible battle that comes along. The army that emerges victorious marshalls its resources and employs them in winnable fights.

We are not playing a board game here. John Dennis is running. That is already a fact. Ron Paul endorsed him. You don't have to spend any of your resources if you don't like. The rest of us make our own decisions.



But we have limited resources. What makes us a force is our ability to target donations across state lines.


Everyone decides on their own who they support (financially or otherwise). For most people, a donation to one candidate does not limit a donation to another candidate. We don't need a gatekeeper to decide for us. There are hundreds of races, and we need to try to win as many as possible.

[Nathan Hale]

We are not playing a board game here. John Dennis is running. That is already a fact.

I'm not talking about a board game. My reference was to armies, not Risk or Axis & Allies armies, but real armies. You're aware that real armies marshal resources and pick their fights, right? It's how we won the War of Independence.


Ron Paul endorsed him. You don't have to spend any of your resources if you don't like. The rest of us make our own decisions.

But of course it's our equal right as individuals to attempt to influence how others spend their money by pointing out, as I have, how it's a waste of time to spend money on a certain candidate.


Everyone decides on their own who they support (financially or otherwise). For most people, a donation to one candidate does not limit a donation to another candidate. We don't need a gatekeeper to decide for us. There are hundreds of races, and we need to try to win as many as possible.

Unfortunately "everyone doing their own thing" is a recipe for failure. Granted, we're a voluntary movement, so I don't seek to force people to donate in such-and-such a way, but I rightfully seek to influence how people spend their money because unified direction is more effective than no direction. Libertarianism works for government, it doesn't work for organizing a political movement. Because we have a limited pool of resources, and we are made or broken by how those limited resources are spent, it is important to target those resources in as effective a manner as possible. After all, that's what the enemy is doing.

[Brian4Liberty]

Because we have a limited pool of resources, and we are made or broken by how those limited resources are spent, it is important to target those resources in as effective a manner as possible. After all, that's what the enemy is doing.

So out of all the candidates mentioned on this forum, you are only donating to (and supporting) Rand Paul? He seems to be the only one with a good chance of winning both the Primary and General. John Dennis may be the only one to survive the Primaries along with Rand. If we wait till the General election, we won't have to worry so much about dividing our "limited resources".

[Nathan Hale]

So out of all the candidates mentioned on this forum, you are only donating to (and supporting) Rand Paul? He seems to be the only one with a good chance of winning both the Primary and General. John Dennis may be the only one to survive the Primaries along with Rand. If we wait till the General election, we won't have to worry so much about dividing our "limited resources".

I'm not saying that the candidate needs to be statistically likely to win. They just have to be capable of winning if resources are applied effectively. I consider Schiff, Kokesh, Medina, and several others to be realistically capable of pulling off a win if they get the right funding and support, and if they take appropriate measures. But Dennis is so low down on the list, I'd say even RJ Harris has a better chance of winning. Even if we wait for the general, it doesn't matter, because that's where Dennis' problem lies. The man is running in Liberaltopia against the High Priestess of Liberalism. The only way she'll ever fall is to a grassroots challenge from the left, not some Republican who promises change.

[Brian4Liberty]

But of course it's our equal right as individuals to attempt to influence how others spend their money by pointing out, as I have, how it's a waste of time to spend money on a certain candidate.


I didn't see you over on the Scott Brown threads advocating that we save our limited resources. Is our money well spent on the Scott Brown MoneyBomb?

[Nathan Hale]

I didn't see you over on the Scott Brown threads advocating that we save our limited resources. Is our money well spent on the Scott Brown MoneyBomb?

If I didn't post somewhere, wasn't aware of those threads. You'll have to forgive me, I post only in the threads I stumble upon. This is a big site, and I'm only on for a short time at a time.

As for Scott Brown, I wasn't aware he was even a constitutional conservative. Is he?

[Brian4Liberty]

As for Scott Brown, I wasn't aware he was even a constitutional conservative. Is he?

No, more like a big government neo-conservative. He has a chance to win. There is a 100% Ron Paul style Independent running too.

[Nathan Hale]

No, more like a big government neo-conservative. He has a chance to win. There is a 100% Ron Paul style Independent running too.

So they're picking up on our tactics and doing a money bomb for him? Interesting. In a way, Brown winning has some strategic benefit to it other than the obvious playfield leveling in the Senate - the next time around both neo-cons and dems will have to put resources into what used to be a slam dunk race for the dems, which means that faction leaderships in both groups will have less to put in to other races. I hope both this race and the "real" election are well-fought, tight contests that force both groups to spend a ton of money. :D

[nobody's_hero]

I consider these little political campaigns the same as the minor skirmishes that pestered the British here in the south until the yankees could deal some big blows further north.

I don't think that Francis Marion was ever responsible for any crushing defeats against the Redcoats, but there's something to be said about creating choke-points in supply lines, causing logistical headaches, fighting and then retreating back into the swamp, only to reappear when and where the enemy least expects it. It can be very demoralizing for your opponents.

[Nathan Hale]

I consider these little political campaigns the same as the minor skirmishes that pestered the British here in the south until the yankees could deal some big blows further north.

I don't think that Francis Marion was ever responsible for any crushing defeats against the Redcoats, but there's something to be said about creating choke-points in supply lines, causing logistical headaches, fighting and then retreating back into the swamp, only to reappear when and where the enemy least expects it. It can be very demoralizing for your opponents.

I agree with your military assessment, but I don't see that as analogous to donating and supporting a candidate in an unwinnable race. I see your statement as more analogous to activist activities as Pelosi events and in Pelosi core supporter communities.

[RP4EVER]

How you forget Kings Mountain; Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse.

The latter battle; though a tactical defeat for the Continentals tipped the war and forced Lord Cornwallis to give up campaigning in the interior; he retreated north to Yorktown in an attempt to rendezvous with the British Fleet where he was pinned down by the French and American forces.

[Nathan Hale]

How you forget Kings Mountain; Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse.

The latter battle; though a tactical defeat for the Continentals tipped the war and forced Lord Cornwallis to give up campaigning in the interior; he retreated north to Yorktown in an attempt to rendezvous with the British Fleet where he was pinned down by the French and American forces.

Gotta give Daniel Morgan credit for Cowpens (and much of the South's good fortune in the later years of the war).