Argument to prepare for.

[Mark Rushmore]

Figure we might as well get ready to deal with this "Democrat/Liberal in Elephant's clothing" approach to stifling Republican votes, since it seems like it might become a common one. This doesn't have that Soros rumor but it appears to be part of a developing trend all the same. Of course it seems absurd on the face of it, but sometimes common sense falls to gossip. I realize that his record alone should set it straight, but I figure it's something to prepare to hear anyways.

http://www.americandaily.com/article/20911

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Dondero isn't a libertarian. He's a douchebag. The LP should sue him for disgracing the word

[schmeisser]

dangerous is better than insignificant

I hope people do follow the money - all the way to us average folks that believe in the message.

[Thurston Howell III]

JB Williams is trying to build a career on the back of Ron Paul.

He's pond scum

[micahnelson]

We have been seriously attacked on DailyKOS. Thats a badge of honor for us among conservatives.

There is no need to set the record straight. If support for the war makes you a conservative, then Hillary Clinton is a conservative and Bill Buckley is a liberal.

[Ron Paul Fan]

The neo-cons are the real threat to conservatism. Dondero is a disgruntled employee and a hack. Maybe if Ron Paul can also get democrat votes that also means he can win the general election! Vote Ron Paul!

[work2win]

This one's easy. It's the same response you use to "he's a libertarian."

Response: "What are Republicans supposed to stand for?"

That stops them in their tracks and gets them thinking.

[WillInMiami]

Figure we might as well get ready to deal with this "Democrat/Liberal in Elephant's clothing" approach to stifling Republican votes, since it seems like it might become a common one. This doesn't have that Soros rumor but it appears to be part of a developing trend all the same. Of course it seems absurd on the face of it, but sometimes common sense falls to gossip. I realize that his record alone should set it straight, but I figure it's something to prepare to hear anyways.

http://www.americandaily.com/article/20911

That will ultimately be the most effective weapon used against us. One of the reasons why is because some of Dr. Paul's supporteres ARE lliberals that don't understand what he really stands for and spew some of the most idiotic crap that you can imagine. One example of this can be seen in my thread "Veteran's Day Reminder" where an asshole is calling American soldiers murderers.

I won't even mention the damage that the truthers do to the campaign...

[Furis]

Well now I would like that five minutes of my life back......


That has to be the single worst thing that I have seen written in a long time.

[freelance]

There is no right/left, only ONE war party--except for Dr. Paul.

[Paul4Prez]

Figure we might as well get ready to deal with this "Democrat/Liberal in Elephant's clothing" approach to stifling Republican votes, since it seems like it might become a common one.


You could point out that Ron Paul is more conservative than other top five contenders. Ron Paul is pro-life, anti-amnesty, pro-smaller government, pro-Constitution, pro-free market, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-10th Amendment, pro-lower taxes, pro-balanced budget.

You could point out that the other Republicans have serious, fundamental flaws as "conservatives":

John McCain is pro-amnesty and anti-2nd Amendment. Check his record on gun control, or his Gun Owners of America rating.

Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice and anti-2nd Amendment. Don't let Rudy's cell phone call at the NRA fool you -- check his record.

Mitt Romney WAS pro-choice and anti-2nd Amendment in Massachusetts. Do you trust what he says he is now?

Mike Huckabee increased spending faster in Arkansas than George W. Bush did in Washington -- how is that conservative?

Fred Thompson? He talks about federalism and the Constitution, but if this were a comic book, he would be Ron Paul's sidekick, not the hero.

[paulitics]

The guy writes a long winded essay on how Paul is a liberal in disguise, than concludes with this:


"I hate wasting this much press time on Ron Paul. But the Paul campaign is becoming a real threat to the Republican primary process and if allowed to continue, he will take votes away from the most conservative Republican candidates in the party, not the most liberal. This is bad for the party and the country"

kind of all over the place in his rant.

[Goldwater Conservative]

Republicans opposed every military and humanitarian action taken overseas by the Clinton administration. A majority of them in Congress even voted to cut funding for our troops as a way to get us out of Kosovo.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/06/10/kosovo/

Now they say it's "unpatriotic" to not support nation-building or to suggest we pull out of a conflict. And they can't bring up 9/11, since Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with it and Iraq had done far less to harbor terrorists than Saudi Arabia (our ally) and Pakistan (our ally and a nuclear country).

[quickmike]

Dondero isn't a libertarian. He's a douchebag. The LP should sue him for disgracing the word

Is the Douchebag party running a candidate this year? If not, why isnt Dondero running for it? He could win the nomination with 80% of the vote.

[beerista]

Figure we might as well get ready to deal with this "Democrat/Liberal in Elephant's clothing" approach to stifling Republican votes, since it seems like it might become a common one. This doesn't have that Soros rumor but it appears to be part of a developing trend all the same. Of course it seems absurd on the face of it, but sometimes common sense falls to gossip. I realize that his record alone should set it straight, but I figure it's something to prepare to hear anyways.

http://www.americandaily.com/article/20911

Couldn't finish. If I got the message right though, it had something to do with claims from a disgruntled former aid who likes to apply the title "libertarian" to himself (hey, we can all call ourselves whatever we like) and polls that measure response from a greatly diminished Republican base and the fact that a tech company that might have an actual understanding of and interest in a free internet contributes money to a guy who stands for just that. Sounds pretty un-damning and pretty easy to refute.
If we had to find something positive in the article, at least SOMEONE is calling for the media to cease calling Paul a "Libertarian." So we've got that going for us, which is nice.

Thanks for the heads up. It's always good to know what to expect.

[Mark Rushmore]

Couldn't finish. If I got the message right though, it had something to do with claims from a disgruntled former aid who likes to apply the title "libertarian" to himself (hey, we can all call ourselves whatever we like) and polls that measure response from a greatly diminished Republican base and the fact that a tech company that might have an actual understanding of and interest in a free internet contributes money to a guy who stands for just that. Sounds pretty un-damning and pretty easy to refute.
If we had to find something positive in the article, at least SOMEONE is calling for the media to cease calling Paul a "Libertarian." So we've got that going for us, which is nice.

Thanks for the heads up. It's always good to know what to expect.

The article was pretty much all over the place. I guess what I was trying to highlight was the part of the article which lists "Democratic" zip codes as some of the biggest donor areas. That on the back of the "most of the Nov. 5 money was somehow funneled by MoveOn" rumor, which in another thread people were indicating had gained a widespread traction, made me think that a new phase of attack will involve painting Ron Paul's support as a "Democratic trap" of some sort. That they [Democrats] are funding him to trick unsuspecting Republicans and thereby help the terrorists win, or whatever drivel they usually put out.

As I said, I know the issues and his positions stand for themselves. On the street face-to-face such things are easy to point out, and assuming an honest listener, don't present a problem. But in the blurry realm of a more general "public image", this kind of talk can plant its seeds of doubt, do some damage, and maybe even help suppress Republican votes. I guess my point was that we should all be on guard for accusations over the source of his fundraising, as that seems to be a growing noise amidst the din.

[beerista]

The article was pretty much all over the place. I guess what I was trying to highlight was the part of the article which lists "Democratic" zip codes as some of the biggest donor areas. That on the back of the "most of the Nov. 5 money was somehow funneled by MoveOn" rumor, which in another thread people were indicating had gained a widespread traction, made me think that a new phase of attack will involve painting Ron Paul's support as a "Democratic trap" of some sort. That they [Democrats] are funding him to trick unsuspecting Republicans and thereby help the terrorists win, or whatever drivel they usually put out.

As I said, I know the issues and his positions stand for themselves. On the street face-to-face such things are easy to point out, and assuming an honest listener, don't present a problem. But in the blurry realm of a more general "public image", this kind of talk can plant its seeds of doubt, do some damage, and maybe even help suppress Republican votes. I guess my point was that we should all be on guard for accusations over the source of his fundraising, as that seems to be a growing noise amidst the din.

Thanks for the clarification. And I agree with you; face to face many such misunderstandings are easily countered... if we get the chance to do so.
How does one counter a meme though? Is this a case where repeatedly posting in the comments of false articles may do more good than mere catharsis?

[Mark Rushmore]

How does one counter a meme though?

Starve it or coopt it. Since in this case starvation would prove impossible, coopt. Take the focus from Democratic "funding" and broaden it to Democratic support for Ron Paul. Then present this as evidence that if Ron Paul has any spoiler role to play at all, it is in peeling off Democrats by:

1) Robbing them of the hardcore anti-war vote and the monopoly on anti-war votes in general

2) If a rabid campus campaign gets going a la Dean at his peak, then by denying Obama/Hillary free pickings of the mainstream student population

Of course starting a "Ron Paul is a spoiler" meme, even for noble purposes, is dangerous in that it undermines the "Ron Paul is a highly viable candidate and with a little hard work our next President" one ;). But if that line of attack really picks up steam it seems good to have a prepared defense.

I forget who had a prototype of a website to virally spread a switch in party affiliations (Goprising or something like that perhaps?), but that is the sort of idea that needs to be pushed. That Democratic defections are rampant and Ron Paul, rather than posing any risk to the Republican party, is really a torpedo aimed at some classically Democratic-voting blocs and segments. Whatever the truth in this, or however it truly plays out in either party's interest, is pretty much irrelevant - it is just getting this idea out there in opposition to the "Democratic lackey" one should the need arise.

One last bonus, if this pervades, then you might also get Democrats going into a fierce attack mode on him - which in the end is free publicity, might rile up some even further Republicans if it's blatant enough - and if he gets the nomination is something we would have to deal with anyways, so no harm.

My 2 cents at least.

[beerista]

Starve it or coopt it. Since in this case starvation would prove impossible, coopt. Take the focus from Democratic "funding" and broaden it to Democratic support for Ron Paul. Then present this as evidence that if Ron Paul has any spoiler role to play at all, it is in peeling off Democrats by:

1) Robbing them of the hardcore anti-war vote and the monopoly on anti-war votes in general

2) If a rabid campus campaign gets going a la Dean at his peak, then by denying Obama/Hillary free pickings of the mainstream student population

Of course starting a "Ron Paul is a spoiler" meme, even for noble purposes, is dangerous in that it undermines the "Ron Paul is a highly viable candidate and with a little hard work our next President" one ;). But if that line of attack really picks up steam it seems good to have a prepared defense.

I forget who had a prototype of a website to virally spread a switch in party affiliations (Goprising or something like that perhaps?), but that is the sort of idea that needs to be pushed. That Democratic defections are rampant and Ron Paul, rather than posing any risk to the Republican party, is really a torpedo aimed at some classically Democratic-voting blocs and segments. Whatever the truth in this, or however it truly plays out in either party's interest, is pretty much irrelevant - it is just getting this idea out there in opposition to the "Democratic lackey" one should the need arise.

One last bonus, if this pervades, then you might also get Democrats going into a fierce attack mode on him - which in the end is free publicity, might rile up some even further Republicans if it's blatant enough - and if he gets the nomination is something we would have to deal with anyways, so no harm.

My 2 cents at least.

Great. Good advice on the coopting. I often think it's a tactic that is underused. Sometimes it's just trickier to do, so I appreciate the twist.
As you mention, if we're effective in this, the Ds will attack. Actually, this makes our job easier as an attack from the Ds will be seen (whatever the truth of the matter) as evidence that he is not "one of them."

[Mark Rushmore]

Great. Good advice on the coopting. I often think it's a tactic that is underused. Sometimes it's just trickier to do, so I appreciate the twist.
As you mention, if we're effective in this, the Ds will attack. Actually, this makes our job easier as an attack from the Ds will be seen (whatever the truth of the matter) as evidence that he is not "one of them."

The real delicious beauty of it comes if, in the process of making the argument I outlined, you cite his article's compilation of "Democratic zip codes" as support for your own position ;). That also strips his article of any further poison for a reader who happens to follow your link looking for "evidence" of what you cite. From that moment on, you've overlaid his words with your own ideas.