Ron Paul Republicans Should Have Focused on Hostettler, Not Schiff

[bobbyw24]

By W. James Antle, III on 8.11.10 @ 12:52PM

Peter Schiff deserves his ardent national following and, all things considered, had a respectable showing in his race for the Republican senatorial nomination in Connecticut. But I think Ron Paul Republicans erred by making him their number two priority after Rand Paul.

Schiff was always a long shot to win the Republican primary. Once Chris Dodd decided not to seek reelection, the Republican nominee became a long shot to win the general election. By contrast, John Hostettler was in a winnable race in Indiana. What little polling was done of the Republican primary voters suggested he was competitive with frontrunner Dan Coats in a more fluid contest. All the public polling showed Hostettler beating the eventual Democratic nominee, with the early surveys showing him running better than Coats. In any event the winner of the GOP primary had to be considered a strong favorite in November.

Imagine if, say, half the resources that went into Schiff's campaign had gone into Hostettler's. Hostettler's biggest problem was his poor fundraising. Had he raised a credible amount of money, the Beltway right would never have gone all in for Marlin Stutzman. So a split in the conservative vote would have been avoided. If Hostettler could have gotten his hard-hitting ad about Coats on television, it could have blown the race open.

more
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/08/11/ron-paul-republicans-should-ha

[ChaosControl]

I agree. Kind of stupid to focus on winning a primary in a state you have no chance in the general.

[bobbyw24]

Yep

[gls]

I don't think this argument is particularly valid because Peter didn't raise all that much money from the 'grassroots'; most of what he spent came out of his own pocket or from his wealthy client base (many of whom he solicited directly).

[bobbyw24]

I don't think this argument is particularly valid because Peter didn't raise all that much money from the 'grassroots'; most of what he spent came out of his own pocket or from his wealthy client base (many of whom he solicited directly).

Also a god point. Peter recently said in an interview that he expected more support from us than we gave him.

[low preference guy]

No. Schiff accomplished a great feat. He laid the ground for a run in 2012 where he will be able to start with 50% name recognition among Republicans, as opposed to 2% this time.

Start planning for Peter Schiff 2012!!!

[NewFederalist]

Peter Schiff had no shot. Why waste money on a race like that?

[Aratus]

perhaps peter schiff honestly tole his clients to expect 10% to 15% unemployment in 2012
insted of 4% to 7% and likewise if the debt is not directly addressed as spending increases... we
have a staggering long-term debt situation that could balloon up badly in the distant future?

[brenden.b]

I agree with the sentiment of this thread. While I agree that Peter Schiff was a worthy candidate, we really need to prioritize and strategize where we target our support. Kentucky and Indiana are good states for Republicans, Connecticut is not.

Our chances of getting Hostettler to the Senate were much higher than our chances of getting Schiff to the Senate. That is fact. But, we certainly punted on our support of Hostettler. He deserved more support.

I should mention, though, that when it came to candidates, Peter Schiff was a much better candidate than Hostettler. If only Schiff were running somewhere else....

[libertybrewcity]

I didn't really know Hostettler. He didn't really seem to have much pizazz that Schiff had. Schiff is the man too, I would support him even if he was posed to only get 2 percent of the vote.

[MRoCkEd]

He makes a good point.

[nate895]

I definitely would have wanted to support Hostettler more than Schiff, and he was in a lot closer race that we simply did not pay practically any attention to until the end of the race. I think the same thing is happening with Clint Didier. If we would have got behind Didier and pushed as much as we pushed Schiff in May or early June, the race here in Washington would be more competitive than it might turn out being. I still think Didier can pull it off, maybe, but he seriously lacks funds, just like Hostettler.

[low preference guy]

He makes a good point.

I don't think Hostettler was ever in a position to compete for support with Schiff, since most of the energy and a lot of the money for Schiff was spent way after Hostettler's race was over.

If the author wanted support from anyone to go to Hostettler, that support could've been only taken from Rand, who was the only liberty candidate receiving serious support at the time Hostettler could have. And I don't think people would've done that.

He is forgetting the fact that most people have limited funds and donate with their monthly salaries, so it isn't like they would have taken a loan to donate to Hostettler and pay back the loan with the money they were planning to donate to Schiff.

My verdict of the article: nonsense.

[erowe1]

I don't think Hostettler was ever in a position to compete for support with Schiff, since most of the energy and a lot of the money for Schiff was spent way after Hostettler's race was over.

IIRC, that's not true. In fact, I might be tempted to make a similar point to yours only chronologically opposite. Most of the energy and funding Schiff got from Ron Paul supporters came before Hostettler had entered his race.

I personally invested a lot in the Hostettler race, but I always tried to avoid the kind of argument Antle makes where we try to talk people out of supporting someone so that they can give their support to someone else instead. We have to accept the diversity of our coalition and let people put their energies where they're most comfortable. In some ways I see Schiff and Hostettler as representatives of two pretty different types of Ron Paul Republicans. Hostettler is very far to the right on social issues and drew a lot of his non-Ron Paul support from the Christian right, whereas Schiff is more socially liberal and a lot of those non-Ron Paul supporters who backed Hostettler would consider Schiff anathema. Most likely the non-Ron Paul Republicans who backed Schiff in CT would never identify with someone like Hostettler either. Meanwhile, if they had both made it into the Senate, I bet their voting records would be pretty similar.

The truth is, you can't talk about "Ron Paul Republicans" as if they make up a single cohesive unit with one mind. It's a bunch of individuals, and the relative support they gave Schiff and Hostettler is the result of a million separate individual decisions. I think there could have been a lot to gain if Hostettler had enjoyed the level of support Schiff did. But as I see it, no one of us (or hundred of us) could effectively steer those million decisions. Only two individuals could have done anything differently that would have made a really big impact, Ron Paul and John Hostettler. If Ron Paul had decided to make a bigger point out of supporting Hostettler, then that might well have translated into a lot of funding. And if Hostettler had decided to enter the race sooner and accelerate into full campaign mode faster, I think we would have been able to get the word out about him among Ron Paul supporters more effectively. But RP and Hostettler made the decisions they did for their own reasons, and not knowing their mindsets, I don't really feel like I can second guess them.

[erowe1]

Also, since it's no use crying over spilled milk, look at the bright side. Ron Paul only got 4% in CT and 8% in Indiana in 2008. But in 2010 candidates in statewide primaries in those states who were identified as "the Ron Paul" candidate each got about 23%, with similar stories in statewide races elsewhere, such as with Medina. If we're going to keep fighting for a political solution for our nation's government-caused problems, then we have to make serious efforts to win in as many races as possible and be ready to lose most of them just for the hope of winning a few.

[Condor Bastadon]

I don't see why we couldn't focus on both. We were late to the Hostettler party, and that is indeed a shame. But IMO Schiff deserves as much support as anybody...and I doubt we've heard the last of him.

[Corto_Maltese]

Guys, imagine all the ppl dismissing the effort that was put to Ron Pauls campaign in 2008. He wasn't close to win then, but look what happened after the election! More people found him, his fanbase grew, he inspired more liberty candidates all around the country. Support the candidate your heart tells you to, and dont look at who can win. The fact that 23% voted for Peter despite media blackout, a candidate that was known in the state from former political positions and a candidate buying the election shows he reached a lot of ppl with his message. That will build over time, his popularity will grow, not diminish!

[HOLLYWOOD]

It's a good thread because we need to know how to focus limited resources, timing, and strategies The concern in Nevada...

RP supporters, Libertarians, etc etc should of focused on Dr. Robin Titus to run against Harry Reid. She was almost completely aligned with RP on the issues and a very intelligent physician. Robin Titus was the prefect senatorial candidate, with credentials and communication, in a state that put Ron Paul in second place in votes with a deep field and beat McCain. 15% but would of been much higher if not for the Romney Mormon fraud. She dropped out because she knew what it would take financially to beat REID and set a minimum donation mark of $1 million early.

Instead, we have the Brides Maid(Sharron Angle), that's okay, but she's a used car salesman, barking sound bite cheap talking points, with questionable judgment philosophies, and poor public speaking skills.

I do blame some of this on C4L very poor coordination with state reps bringing in candidates at all levels and having operations people remain cognizant where to focus.

Plus you always have to remind yourself, politics is a dirty filthy business with covert ops and lot's of avenues for sabotage.

[GunnyFreedom]

I seriously believe that for 2010, the State level races are more important for us than the Federal level races. I am not saying that because I am running for State House, I am running for State House because I believed that to be true 18 months ago, and I still believe it today.

Not merely as a springboard to Federal office (although that is important too) but as a fulcrum to help our Congressional minorities work the kinds of reform we need to accomplish towards restoring the Constitution.

We need State level representatives in order to pave the way for 2012, and to start pressuring the US Congress for the kinds of reforms we will need to accomplish in 2012 and 2014.

[Aratus]

GUNNYFREEDOM just got some sweet poll numbers after the RPFs helped him
get up a poll... he's now the voice of experiance! He is living proof of how these
forums can help a local candidate find traction! John Dennis also is a success story.
Admittedly more could have been done, but each little bit helps!! I think Peter Schiff
maximized his resources, and the only flaw his campaign had this time was the very fact
that David Adams could not run TWO campaigns at the exact same time to an equal degree of
success. were we to see David Adams help out Peter Schiff in 2012 we then can do comparisons!!!

[bobbyw24]

David Nolans comments are interesting and noted in another thread