PDA

View Full Version : Tis a sad day for Connecticut




Schifference
08-11-2010, 05:29 AM
Republican victory? Look who we have. "you can't buy your way into the senate." How can this person be the republican peoples chosen candidate. What are they thinking? I just saw McMahon on NBC trying to explain her statement regarding buying her way into the election and how she spent 7 times that of her opponents. Why would she even make such a statement? We need a better senator than the choices we currently have. Peter would probably get more media attention than ever if he decided to stay in as an independent and I think the money would pour in from all across the country to support him. He should organize a money bomb and let the people speak with their wallets. Try to raise 5 million in 14 days with no funds from Schiff. If he does not raise the 5 million then give it all back and truly drop out. If he does raise the 5 million how can he go unnoticed? One more money bomb for the people of Connecticut.

K466
08-11-2010, 06:31 AM
I'd love to see him continue running but it's simply not possible to win and it would be a waste of time. If he's going to take a shot at 2012 he needs to relax and save up more money. Too bad he's not a billionaire (yet).

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 06:36 AM
This is why we shouldn't waste time effort and money running someone in CT or other similar states. Low hanging fruit should be our goal.

Really though I didn't see this one coming :rolleyes:

teacherone
08-11-2010, 06:44 AM
This is why we shouldn't waste time effort and money running someone in CT or other similar states. Low hanging fruit should be our goal.

Really though I didn't see this one coming :rolleyes:

you, my friend, get more annoying with each passing day.

K466
08-11-2010, 06:57 AM
This is why we shouldn't waste time effort and money running someone in CT or other similar states. Low hanging fruit should be our goal.

Really though I didn't see this one coming :rolleyes:

McMahon was the problem- that $22+ million dollars; and the abysmal media coverage; not so much CT.

SamuraisWisdom
08-11-2010, 07:14 AM
This is why we shouldn't waste time effort and money running someone in CT or other similar states. Low hanging fruit should be our goal.

Really though I didn't see this one coming :rolleyes:

Schiff got 23% of the vote with something like 40% name recognition and virtually no media coverage. I'd say that's pretty damn good so don't go blaming CT.

Tinnuhana
08-11-2010, 07:34 AM
Another "problem" was Dodd dropping out. Wasn't Peter all geared up to take on Sen. Dodd? Did McMahon decide before or after Dodd's announcement to enter the primary?

G-Wohl
08-11-2010, 07:41 AM
The major problem was that a significant number of people outside of CT stopped supporting Peter after the pre-candidate money bomb. We got Peter's hopes up, only for them to be completely destroyed by peoples' irrational refusal to accept a candidate who is secular, pro-choice and an advocate of a rational, America-first foreign policy.

Peter needed at least three times the amount of money he raised to be a realistic contender in this race. It would have been achievable if the "liberty movement" (as they like to be called) maintained the support that they began with. Considering that he was a few percentage points down from Simmons with less than 50 percent name recognition, and received roughly half the votes of McMahon, with the proper amount of funding, Schiff would have had an easy victory.

Peter's candidacy was a grassroots campaign. There is no excusing this - CT is not to blame, and neither is Peter. The volunteers and supporters let him down, and there's nothing else to it.

Bruno
08-11-2010, 07:46 AM
Another "problem" was Dodd dropping out. Wasn't Peter all geared up to take on Sen. Dodd? Did McMahon decide before or after Dodd's announcement to enter the primary?

+ 1

wizardwatson
08-11-2010, 07:49 AM
McMahon was the problem- that $22+ million dollars; and the abysmal media coverage; not so much CT.

It's always been about money.

Rand may have a shot, but if he does win, to me it's just the establishment throwing us a bone in order to create more optimism within the liberty movement that electoral politics alone is a viable path to change.

In other words, even if we win a few here and there, in my opinion we're losing.

Ron never expected to win the Presidency, and most of his supporters didn't either. I wonder if Ron expects Rand to win.

I just wonder how long this "our main goal is to educate" meme is going to last. The only people it seems to be serving is the armchair intellectuals at the Mises institute, LRC and the campaigns of these candidates with zero experience trying to get elected in Ron Paul's shadow.

gls
08-11-2010, 07:51 AM
All I know is I'd take Blumenthal over McMahon, because at least Blumenthal opposed the corporate fleecing of the American people known as TARP. I'll probably just skip voting for that office altogether this year, unless the Libertarians run someone.

itshappening
08-11-2010, 07:57 AM
All I know is I'd take Blumenthal over McMahon, because at least Blumenthal opposed the corporate fleecing of the American people known as TARP. I'll probably just skip voting for that office altogether this year, unless the Libertarians run someone.

it's a convenient position, if Blume was in the senate with a 6 year term he would have backed it and will back whatever his bosses tell him to

CT is a lose-lose, we continue to have some small but significant victories though with Rand, Amash, Buck.. these are the people who will shape the GOP in the future not McMahon, even if she manages to win

Schiff did well with a quarter of the vote, he has never ran for anything before and I think he is primed for a run in 2012 if he wants to and he will have a better chance in the General too especially if Joe runs and the Dems vote splits

K466
08-11-2010, 08:06 AM
Blumenthal isn't any better than McMahon. It's another no-choice election.

MelissaWV
08-11-2010, 08:25 AM
It seems Schiff thinks there's a choice to be had...


Schiff, a broker and financial pundit who drew support among the Tea Party movement, drew a small but enthusiastic band of followers from across the nation, but his message about the coming collapse of the U.S. economy failed to find broad support in Connecticut. "At this point, Linda is our only shot at beating Blumenthal, so I guess we have to support her," he said, a prospect that brought groans from his supporters.

SLSteven
08-11-2010, 08:51 AM
Is it possible the people of Connecticut don't really want to see a Schiff inspired upheaval in the monetary system. Maybe they benefit from Federal Reserve funny money spilling out of NYC and into Connecticut?

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 09:07 AM
Schiff got 23% of the vote with something like 40% name recognition and virtually no media coverage. I'd say that's pretty damn good so don't go blaming CT.He came in 3rd in a 3 way race. I wouldn't say that's "good". Bad timing, and bad location was the cause here.

itshappening
08-11-2010, 09:25 AM
23% is good for a first time run in an expensive state like CT

he can build on that, his name recognition has improved with the mailers and TV and now he is well positioned for 2012 if he wants to go for it again

johnrocks
08-11-2010, 09:28 AM
We'll win some and we'll lose some, hopefully Peter will continue the good fight. 23% is good for a first time run with not nearly the money I would think.

itshappening
08-11-2010, 09:38 AM
exactly, 23% is GOOD. Remember Ron Paul could only get 5-8% in some states and we didnt give up, this is just the start. it shows Schiff is viable and the 28% for Simmons shows that there is more votes up for grabs once he becomes more well known and liked which he will be in future.

Have some faith, Peter is a viable CT GOP candidate and that is great news if he decides to run for something again

K466
08-11-2010, 09:51 AM
It seems Schiff thinks there's a choice to be had...

He really said that? I'm not convinced McMahon is worth a vote. It's a no choice election, I would probably vote third party.

Michael P
08-11-2010, 09:57 AM
This is why we shouldn't waste time effort and money running someone in CT or other similar states. Low hanging fruit should be our goal.

Really though I didn't see this one coming :rolleyes:

This was far from a "waste of time".

Why are the hard core supporters of other liberty candidates coming to the Peter Schiff area and taking shots at us now that it's over? I do support other candidates but almost want to stop just to spite these douche bags. It hasn't even been 24 hours since Peter lost for crying out loud.

K466
08-11-2010, 10:01 AM
Maybe our 'daddy' Ron Paul needs to remind us about the bigger picture here, we need to be supporting all the liberty candidates.

The anti Schiff & anti Rand comments that show up here and there are not helpful to the cause.

crazyfacedjenkins
08-11-2010, 10:09 AM
Maybe if CT felt the same way about the government as...

YouTube - ‪alex jones hates the government‬‎ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQay3PIeXq8)

MelissaWV
08-11-2010, 10:13 AM
This was far from a "waste of time".

Why are the hard core supporters of other liberty candidates coming to the Peter Schiff area and taking shots at us now that it's over? I do support other candidates but almost want to stop just to spite these douche bags. It hasn't even been 24 hours since Peter lost for crying out loud.

I don't know why people are swooping in today (it's in poor taste, imo), but to characterize it as being a sudden attack is silly. People have been saying the frenzied focus on Schiff and Rand would hurt smaller candidates/campaigns. Personally, I think the infighting makes it worse. If one disagrees with a candidate, one can withhold support and voice specific disagreements via threads in which it'd be more on-topic.

The attitude of "well, we told you so" can discourage some supporters from future endeavors on behalf of candidates who might win with just a little more support. That's worse damage than having tried and failed.

MelissaWV
08-11-2010, 10:15 AM
He really said that? I'm not convinced McMahon is worth a vote. It's a no choice election, I would probably vote third party.

He did say that, yes. It stops short of a ringing endorsement, but I winced when I read it. I posted it in another thread where I feel it was a more relevant statement: he is sure not to run Independent/3rd Party with a statement like that. Granted, prior statements had been made to indicate he wasn't going to go third party, but this is after the loss... this is when such statements can be taken at face value.

Michael P
08-11-2010, 10:19 AM
There are a lot of Peter Schiff supporters here who spent a lot of time, effort and money to help Peter with his run. To assume all of this effort and money would have gone to a different Liberty candidate had Peter not run is simply wrong. To say that Peters run was a waste of time is equally wrong.

To kick folks when they are down is a good way to piss a lot of people off.

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 10:52 AM
To kick folks when they are downI'm not kicking anyone. I'm just saying that better focusing our efforts at either a different time or a different place may not have resulted in such a disappointing loss which kills morale for the long run and thus makes people less willing to get involved in the future!

Anyone with 3 brain cells knew a year ago that this was unwinnable barring some unforseen bizarre and unlikely circumstances. Combined resources would've been more effective if spent on other things such as state and local races (perhaps Gunny's race for example) where they are easier to win.


is a good way to piss a lot of people off.In case you haven't noticed, I don't care so much about that :cool:

Tinnuhana
08-11-2010, 12:14 PM
How about "Peter Schiff: Free Stater"?

Michael P
08-11-2010, 12:35 PM
I'm not kicking anyone. I'm just saying that better focusing our efforts at either a different time or a different place may not have resulted in such a disappointing loss which kills morale for the long run and thus makes people less willing to get involved in the future!

Anyone with 3 brain cells knew a year ago that this was unwinnable barring some unforseen bizarre and unlikely circumstances. Combined resources would've been more effective if spent on other things such as state and local races (perhaps Gunny's race for example) where they are easier to win.

In case you haven't noticed, I don't care so much about that :cool:

You really have no tact whatsoever. Not much common sense either. Why post here at all? What were you trying to accomplish by your neener-neener post? You didn't think that would hurt morale?

Would it have killed you to take a more respectful approach? How about:


Hey gang good effort. For those of you who were exclusive Peter Schiff supporters I would urge you to check out some of the other Liberty candidates. We can use all the help we can get! ...or something along those lines.

Aratus
08-11-2010, 12:38 PM
FOLKs... PETER SCHIFF HIMSELF IS LOOKING AT 2012 AS SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN STARTs To
RESEMBLE ARLAN SPECTOR MORE AND MORE! WHY ASSUME THIS IS MR. SCHIFF's LAST RACE!

libertybrewcity
08-11-2010, 12:39 PM
He came in 3rd in a 3 way race. I wouldn't say that's "good". Bad timing, and bad location was the cause here.

His accomplishments in CT are actually quite amazing if you think about it. He was up against a Republican party that already nominated a candidate early on. He was outspent many times over by the McMan who didn't even manage to get over 50% of the vote. Schiff had almost zero name recognition and came from only a few percentage points in the beginning to over 23 percent in the polls.

The two things that slowed the campaign down were his comments on Iran which were largely misconstrued and Dodd dropping out.

I think that anything could have happened here. Politics is unpredictable.

Peace&Freedom
08-11-2010, 01:23 PM
FOLKs... PETER SCHIFF HIMSELF IS LOOKING AT 2012 AS SENATOR JOE LIEBERMAN STARTs To
RESEMBLE ARLAN SPECTOR MORE AND MORE! WHY ASSUME THIS IS MR. SCHIFF's LAST RACE!

Schiff supporters should ask him to run again against Lieberman in '12, since the incumbent will likely be just as unpopular as now. Had Schiff had received the nomination, he would have been in a competitive position to win in CT, which actually is a competitive state for Republicans. By my own very tight criteria for supporting liberty candidates running credible major party campaigns---i.e., ONLY run in a competitive area/state or in the dominant party's primary, ONLY when there's an open seat, ONLY when you can do serious fundraising---Schiff's candidacy was worth the effort, as it met that criterion. 2012 looks promising as a repeat of the above scenario, but with him winning the nomination next time.

low preference guy
08-11-2010, 01:52 PM
In case you haven't noticed, I don't care so much about that :cool:

i.e.: I don't care about pissing off Schiff supporters and cause them to stop helping Rand, because I'd rather be attention whoring than helping Rand.

low preference guy
08-11-2010, 01:57 PM
He came in 3rd in a 3 way race. I wouldn't say that's "good". Bad timing, and bad location was the cause here.

It was very positive. He can start his 2012 run his 50% name recognition among Republicans. He accomplished that with only 3 million. That's a huge feat for CT.

Aratus
08-11-2010, 01:58 PM
MATT... you do know better!!! be good! Actually the story here is that Dodd's old seat could go totally REPUBLICAN
before Joe Lieberman has to run again. Petter Schiff may indeed keep candidate Linda McMahon way more honest!

low preference guy
08-11-2010, 02:01 PM
Anyone with 3 brain cells knew a year ago that this was unwinnable barring some unforseen bizarre and unlikely circumstances. Combined resources would've been more effective if spent on other things such as state and local races (perhaps Gunny's race for example) where they are easier to win.

Why do you care about talking to people with less than 3 brain cells? Can you take your trolling somewhere else?

Mods, Matt Collins is not only insulting Schiff supporters by saying they have less than 3 brain cells, he is also thread hijacking a thread to talk about what Connecticut lost by not electing Peter Schiff.

If he wants to talk about how resources are better spent, he can start his own thread. Please split or remove the hijacking posts from this thread.

A temp ban will also be fitting. This is over the top.

Aratus
08-11-2010, 02:06 PM
.


LINDA McMAHON CLEARLY DID NOT SECURE A LANDSLIDE VICTORY IN THE PRIMARY... SO IN ORDER TO WIN
IN NOVEMBER, SHE NEEDs THE GOP TO UNIFY. ---I THINK PETER SCHIFF IS STILL A SIGNIFICANT "PLAYER"
IN THE RACE FOR IF SHE CANNOT SECURE HIS SUPPORT, IF IF IF HE BOLTs FROM THE GOP HE COULD ELECT
A.G BLUMENTHAL. ---I FEEL SHE HAS TO AT LEAST MEET PETER SCHIFF HALFWAY AND BE A REALIST NOW!!!


.

Kotin
08-11-2010, 02:07 PM
I'm not kicking anyone. I'm just saying that better focusing our efforts at either a different time or a different place may not have resulted in such a disappointing loss which kills morale for the long run and thus makes people less willing to get involved in the future!

Anyone with 3 brain cells knew a year ago that this was unwinnable barring some unforseen bizarre and unlikely circumstances. Combined resources would've been more effective if spent on other things such as state and local races (perhaps Gunny's race for example) where they are easier to win.

In case you haven't noticed, I don't care so much about that :cool:


Quit trolling this thread.

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 02:58 PM
It was very positive. He can start his 2012 run his 50% name recognition among Republicans. He accomplished that with only 3 million.Now, if this is indeed true, then yes that makes a difference. Most people don't win their first campaign. And if he does in fact use this run as a test to figure out how to run for real next time around and win (or at least come close to winning), then absolutely it was not a waste. That would be the best outcome and the most effective means of salvaging this loss.

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 03:00 PM
Quit trolling this thread.
If you don't like what I write, then quit reading my posts. :)



Mods, Matt Collins is not only insulting Schiff supporters by saying they have less than 3 brain cells, he is also thread hijacking a thread to talk about what Connecticut lost by not electing Peter Schiff.I have not intentionally insulted anyone. Anyone who was under the delsioun that Schiff could win the race was in fact very naive. That's not an insult, nor is it meant to be, it's a fact.

low preference guy
08-11-2010, 03:10 PM
I have not intentionally insulted anyone. Anyone who was under the delsioun that Schiff could win the race was in fact very naive. That's not an insult, nor is it meant to be, it's a fact.

Why don't you create your own thread to talk about it, Matt Trollins? What does your statement have to do with what Connecticut lost by not electing Peter Schiff, the topic of this thread? Nothing. So if you want to talk about which races are best to support, please create your own thread and stop hijacking and trolling.

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 03:23 PM
The attitude of "well, we told you so" can discourage some supporters from future endeavors on behalf of candidates who might win with just a little more support. That's worse damage than having tried and failed.
People who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. I've worked on some campaigns where the candidate had no chance. And after getting burned I realized that I was completely wasting my time with few exceptions. Don't you think it is better for the movement to spend their resources on places they are likely or at least have a chance of winning?

MelissaWV
08-11-2010, 05:39 PM
People who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. I've worked on some campaigns where the candidate had no chance. And after getting burned I realized that I was completely wasting my time with few exceptions. Don't you think it is better for the movement to spend their resources on places they are likely or at least have a chance of winning?

I think it's better to argue the merits of a candidate openly, but not chastize people for where they put their money. Especially not the day after a loss. It seems like a moronic time to leap into a thread with the pompous attitude of "You were naive! I knew it all along! Maybe next time you'll bow down to my superior knowledge and abilities and pool your resources with mine to support ______!" Those may not be your words, but it's the booming message you are sending. It's off-putting.

Once people have a chance to digest precisely what happened, it's time to get into why, and correct anything that needs correcting, preferably in ANOTHER THREAD and not this one, which was about what CT missed out on by not electing Schiff.

You say you worked on losing campaigns. Out of curiosity, were there obnoxious people telling you it was folly the whole time? What was your response to them? Did it take you time to arrive at certain conclusions about what is effective and useful in political races?

Your "expertise" could be useful ahead of time. At this time, it's just salt in a wound. Make another thread about it. It's what you're best at, no?

MozoVote
08-11-2010, 06:52 PM
Matt Collins is coming pretty darn close to going into the "ignore" bucket... People have a choice who to send money to, dammit.

I didn't think Kokesh would win his primary, but that doesn't mean I have to run down his supporters as having wasted money on a lost cause.

low preference guy
08-11-2010, 06:55 PM
Matt Collins is coming pretty darn close to going into the "ignore" bucket... People have a choice who to send money to, dammit.

I didn't think Kokesh would win his primary, but that doesn't mean I have to run down his supporters as having wasted money on a lost cause.

and if you do it, you should do it in your own thread, not hijack another one like Matt Trollins does. he's already in my ignore list. you can still read him by clicking "view post", but you will at least know you are about to read a troll post or one without substance.

Matt Collins
08-11-2010, 09:58 PM
You say you worked on losing campaigns. Out of curiosity, were there obnoxious people telling you it was folly the whole time? What was your response to them? Did it take you time to arrive at certain conclusions about what is effective and useful in political races?No, when I began to realize (largely due to other people who knew more about politics at that time then I did telling me so) that it was a lost cause I began to examine it and arrived at the same conclusion.


Your "expertise" could be useful ahead of time. At this time, it's just salt in a wound. If people want to take it that way then that is their problem. I just don't want people to be under delusions but more importantly I want them to learn from their mistakes.

And I hope that Peter and CT use this experience to make a run for an office later on that will more than likely have a chance of winning.

Daamien
08-11-2010, 10:35 PM
We put up a good fight and sowed the ground for more liberty candidates to run in the North East as well as a potential run in 2012.