Matt Kibbe's say Ron Paul NOT running to Win

[BUSHLIED]

Matt Kibbe, the President of Freedom-Works, said on CSPAN today that it is his understanding of Paul's campaign that it to "define the issues" and NOT "to win"..and that Ron Paul has already succeeded in doing that.

[sailingaway]

Freedomworks showed their true colors when they started agitating forPaul Ryan to run for president who is proTarp pro no child left behind, pro medicare prescription drug when there were already tea party candidates in and on the verge of running, by popular demand. They have their own agenda.

Look at what the campaign has been doing, setting up offices, defining targets, getting volunteers mobilized, scooping endorsements, having Ron in Iowa 6 times already, in NH several times, and at major speaking functions. they are running to win, and if we want them running harder, they need more money.

(edited to clarify that it is Paul Ryan, the guy Freedomworks is pushing for president who is protarp etc, not, officially, Freedomworks, because some read it differently.)

[LibertyEagle]

EDIT: If one googles, they can see that FreedomWorks DOES NOT support TARP, or No Child Left Behind.

It is a good question why they would support Ryan, who apparently does.

[BucksforPaul]

It appears that Matt Kibbe is still stuck in 2007 and wants to discourage the liberty movement.

[BUSHLIED]

I agree that FreedomWorks is not our friend and that the campaign is showing more motivation to win this time...

I think we should all blast this guy, let him know that the tea-party wants freedom-works to talk more about Paul as the true tea-party candidate...

This is the number for Freedom-Works: Toll Free: 1.888.564.6273-Local: 202.783.3870

[LibertyEagle]

I just talked to someone there. It was a worthless call. She basically said he had the right to say what he did... that it was what he believed. I was pretty much seething when I got off the call.

Oh, and SailingAway, I asked her about TARP and No Child Left Behind and she said that they were not in support of either of those. I'm going to do some checking.

I would wait a few minutes before you call. lol

EDIT: FreedomWorks is not in support of either of those things. Google it. It is a good question, however, why they supported Paul Ryan, when he apparently does.

[Chester Copperpot]

matt kibbles n bits..

[RonPaulVolunteer]

So Ron Paul is a liar then??? Because he has clearly stated several times that he is running to WIN!

[TheTyke]

Freedomworks showed their true colors when they started agitating for proTarp pro no child left behind, pro medicare prescription drug Paul Ryan to run for president when there were already tea party candidates in and on the verge of running, by popular demand. They have their own agenda.

Look at what the campaign has been doing, setting up offices, defining targets, getting volunteers mobilized, scooping endorsements, having Ron in Iowa 6 times already, in NH several times, and at major speaking functions. they are running to win, and if we want them running harder, they need more money.

+Rep

[BUSHLIED]

I don't know what to believe BUT I think that this type of comment detracts from the campaign and true or not, it needs to be checked, since no one knows the truth on that but Ron..that being said, Freedomworks is based in DC and DC has a very small libertarian group. Maybe Freedomworks knows something that the rest of us don't know...

[Crystallas]

Hmm, the only honest politician who has a track record to back it up, and he says he is in it to win it. Then you have an inconsistent analyst who watches from the sidelines and says he's not in it to win it.

Wow, this is so hard, I don't know what to believe.

[sailingaway]

Wow, they supported TARP and No Child Left Behind?? :eek:

I was saying they were pushing Paul Ryan to run for president over Ron, and all the other tea partiers in the race or thinking of coming in and HE supported them: http://dailycaller.com/2010/02/14/paul-ryan-explains-his-votes-for-tarp-auto-bailouts-and-tax-on-aig-bonuses/

[sailingaway]

I don't know what to believe BUT I think that this type of comment detracts from the campaign and true or not, it needs to be checked, since no one knows the truth on that but Ron..that being said, Freedomworks is based in DC and DC has a very small libertarian group. Maybe Freedomworks knows something that the rest of us don't know...

Ron Paul has all the credibility in the world. Kibbe.... doesn't.

[Thargok]

Not sure about NCLB but they were against TARP

http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/02/what-would-mises-do

[sailingaway]

Not sure about NCLB but they were against TARP

http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/02/what-would-mises-do

Clearly I should edit my remark! I was saying they were pushing someone to run for president who was for those things, against tea party candidates already in or about to run who were against them, and was implying they are inconsistent and seem to have their own, non-tea party, agenda. I wasn't saying Freedomworks is pro-tarp etc, but that Freedomworks is pushing pro-tarp (etc) Paul Ryan.

[LibertyEagle]

Not sure about NCLB but they were against TARP

http://reason.com/archives/2008/10/02/what-would-mises-do

Yes, they were against TARP. I'm also pretty sure that Ron Paul was FreedomWorks' first Chairman.

[sailingaway]

I just talked to someone there. It was a worthless call. She basically said he had the right to say what he did... that it was what he believed. I was pretty much seething when I got off the call.

Oh, and SailingAway, I asked her about TARP and No Child Left Behind and she said that they were not in support of either of those. I'm going to do some checking.

I would wait a few minutes before you call. lol

EDIT: FreedomWorks is not in support of either of those things. Google it. It is a good question, however, why they supported Paul Ryan, when he apparently does.

I hadn't said they supported those things officially. My sentence was convoluted, however, with the object some distance from the describing clause, so I changed the sentence structure. I think supporting someone who supports those things for President when he isn't even running, over people who don't support those things who are running indicates their priorities, however.

[LibertyEagle]

I understand. It's a good thing we got it cleared up though. Kind of reminds me of that kid's telephone game. lol

[Napoleon's Shadow]

Since there is a real chance to win, everyone is running to win. This should be obvious, especially when the 2012 campaign is compared to the 2008 campaign.

[LibertyEagle]

Isn't Ryan a member of the Aspen Institute?

[sailingaway]

Since there is a real chance to win, everyone is running to win. This should be obvious, especially when the 2012 campaign is compared to the 2012 campaign.

:eek: