PDA

View Full Version : Change the GOP From Inside




rockerrockstar
03-15-2012, 09:49 AM
The goal should be to try to change the GOP from the inside. Ron may not win the election but if he and others like him keep on working on changing the GOP maybe down the road people like Ron Paul will be elected. One bright spot of this election is showing that Ron is gaining influence around the nation. His ideas are spreading. People are waking up. Also, if we expose the election fraud that will help gain fairness next time around.

Don't think of this election as the be all and end all of this movement. If we keep the movement going real change could happen.

The Gold Standard
03-15-2012, 10:05 AM
Fuck the GOP. If Ron doesn't get the nomination the goal should be to destroy the Republican party.

vechorik
03-15-2012, 10:16 AM
Fuck the GOP. If Ron doesn't get the nomination the goal should be to destroy the Republican party.

You are so wrong and misguided. Your choice of words reflects that.
The OP has it right.
You can't win by bucking the establishment. Become the establishment.

KMX
03-15-2012, 10:19 AM
I am getting involved in my GOP. I am going to help change the course of history instead of complain about it.

A Son of Liberty
03-15-2012, 10:44 AM
This isn't even "changing Captains on the Titanic". This is "spend lots of time whispering in the ear of the guy who is going to try to be Captain of the Titanic."

If Ron doesn't win, the GOP doesn't matter. Nothing else does, either.

bluesc
03-15-2012, 10:46 AM
Fuck the GOP. If Ron doesn't get the nomination the goal should be to destroy the Republican party.

See, I agreed with you up until a week or so ago.

The conventions are going better than expected, and we have a slate of good candidates running. Unless the GOP expels our delegates and drops our candidates, we should try to get supporters in important positions to change it from within.

noneedtoaggress
03-15-2012, 10:46 AM
Ideas are the only things that count, and politicians are, for the most part, pretty much irrelevant.

:P

ZanZibar
03-15-2012, 10:47 AM
It's like the Death Star. It can't be changed from the outside, you have to go inside in order to do what needs to be done :p

GeorgiaAvenger
03-15-2012, 10:48 AM
Fuck the GOP. If Ron doesn't get the nomination the goal should be to destroy the Republican party.

Well I will be breaking with that group of people.

Keith and stuff
03-15-2012, 10:50 AM
It seems crazy how bitter some of the people here are acting towards the GOP. I guess the GOP where I live is 180 degrees different from where some of you live. The GOP absolutely loves liberty activists. It welcomes them with open arms and encourages them to run for office. It helps them when they run for office. That's been my experience for years.

John F Kennedy III
03-15-2012, 10:50 AM
This isn't even "changing Captains on the Titanic". This is "spend lots of time whispering in the ear of the guy who is going to try to be Captain of the Titanic."

If Ron doesn't win, the GOP doesn't matter. Nothing else does, either.

Bullshit. We are taking over the GOP. Period. We need all the people from this movement we can get. If you don't care about changing the direction our nation is going then go join some third party.

A Son of Liberty
03-15-2012, 10:52 AM
Bullshit. We are taking over the GOP. Period. We need all the people from this movement we can get. If you don't care about changing the direction our nation is going then go join some third party.

Good luck with that. Listen to what Alex has to say about the party machines in this country. THEY WILL NOT LET YOU TAKE OVER THE PARTY.

And once this election is over, I'm done with politics. You know where I stand on that, philosophically.

John F Kennedy III
03-15-2012, 10:54 AM
Good luck with that. Listen to what Alex has to say about the party machines in this country. THEY WILL NOT LET YOU TAKE OVER THE PARTY.

And once this election is over, I'm done with politics. You know where I stand on that, philosophically.

I completely understand. We can't give up without trying though.

A Son of Liberty
03-15-2012, 10:54 AM
I registered Republican the other day so I can vote in my state's primary. I feel filthy. I can't wait to change back to 'unaffiliated'.

A Son of Liberty
03-15-2012, 10:55 AM
I completely understand. We can't give without trying though.

:thumbs: Like I said - good luck! I'm taking a different route, myself. But we are allies.

NoOneButPaul
03-15-2012, 10:57 AM
I love the GOP haters... I hate the GOP as much as the next guy but that's not a good reason to cut and run from the challenge.

The goal should always and forever be a GOP takeover, then we can rebrand it anyway we feel fit and actually make it conservative again. We can actually make it a party we'd be proud to be apart of.

Going outside the party is exactly where the NeoCons want us to go...

NoOneButPaul
03-15-2012, 10:59 AM
Good luck with that. Listen to what Alex has to say about the party machines in this country. THEY WILL NOT LET YOU TAKE OVER THE PARTY.

And once this election is over, I'm done with politics. You know where I stand on that, philosophically.

So because one man tells you you can't change the GOP you won't try?

By that same logic, Jesse Ventura says winning anything as a 3rd party is impossible...

Ron says once you become knowledgeable it's your duty to spread the message to the rest of the people.

Why cherrypick one person's idea? If the delegate conventions are proving anything it's that we are closer to a GOP takeover than ever before and our numbers will only grow greater in the coming years.

If we take over the party we can do some serious damage, if we just go away and stop being a headache for the NeoCons then all of this was for nothing...

Liberty74
03-15-2012, 10:59 AM
Delusional thinking.

The GOP is too far gone. The two party criminal system is not going to give up control to 10%. After 20 years, I will be changing my voter registration.

Best route to take is to take over the Indy Party. They have no leader, no platform and no establishment.

LibertyEagle
03-15-2012, 11:00 AM
Good luck with that. Listen to what Alex has to say about the party machines in this country. THEY WILL NOT LET YOU TAKE OVER THE PARTY.

And once this election is over, I'm done with politics. You know where I stand on that, philosophically.

THEY CANNOT STOP IT, if we take it over from the local level on up. Now, the bad guys may then start another party and try to make what we have done, irrelevant, but they cannot stop us.

But, feel free to quit if you want. But, remember, just because you may want to be done with politics, does not mean that politics is done with you. In other words, you will have to live with what is done, just like the rest of us.

NoOneButPaul
03-15-2012, 11:02 AM
Delusional thinking.

The GOP is too far gone. The two party criminal system is not going to give up control to 10%. After 20 years, I will be changing my voter registration.

Best route to take is to take over the Indy Party. They have no leader, no platform and no establishment.

Indy is exactly where they want us to go, right back to obscurity...

Also you assume we only have 10%, and you assume those numbers will not continue to go up as time goes on.

The numbers will only dwindle if people like you decide taking over the GOP isn't worth it.

And newsflash... even if a 3rd party worked all we'd be doing is handing the Democrats the government for the next century...

John F Kennedy III
03-15-2012, 11:02 AM
I love the GOP haters... I hate the GOP as much as the next guy but that's not a good reason to cut and run from the challenge.

The goal should always and forever be a GOP takeover, then we can rebrand it anyway we feel fit and actually make it conservative again. We can actually make it a party we'd be proud to be apart of.

Going outside the party is exactly where the NeoCons want us to go...

This.

LibertyEagle
03-15-2012, 11:06 AM
It is just my opinion, but for people to be considering throwing all our hard work away over the last 4 years to start a new political party is well, just nuts. We already have people in elected positions and will build upon that quite a bit this year.

John F Kennedy III
03-15-2012, 11:06 AM
THEY CANNOT STOP IT, if we take it over from the local level on up. Now, the bad guys may then start another party and try to make what we have done, irrelevant, but they cannot stop us.

But, feel free to quit if you want. But, remember, just because you may want to be done with politics, does not mean that politics is done with you. In other words, you will have to live with what is done, just like the rest of us.

I feel the reasons they cannot stop us from taking over need to be discussed in more detail.

Pericles
03-15-2012, 11:06 AM
You are so wrong and misguided. Your choice of words reflects that.
The OP has it right.
You can't win by bucking the establishment. Become the establishment.

Just look at well that strategy has worked for the socialists.

Jingles
03-15-2012, 11:07 AM
After the primary depending on how it goes I might give up on them for a bit since I have been registered Republican since I was old enough to vote. I feel like playing around in the Libertarian party for a bit until 2014 elections draw nearer.

Liberty74
03-15-2012, 11:09 AM
Bullshit. We are taking over the GOP. Period. We need all the people from this movement we can get. If you don't care about changing the direction our nation is going then go join some third party.

Ugh last time I checked, the two party system is the problem. You aren't going to change anything as long as that remains true.

It's best to go Indy, start a mass movement that puts pressure on the system. You are not going to win against the dinosaur. Oh trust me, the establishment will throw you a doggie treat once in a while to think you are winning but in the end you won't. It's just the way the system is set up and to have real change it must be broken.

It's not giving up or quitting. It's thinking on a bigger scale that apparently many in here cannot comprehend.

LibertyEagle
03-15-2012, 11:16 AM
Ugh last time I checked, the two party system is the problem. You aren't going to change anything as long as that remains true.

It's best to go Indy, start a mass movement that puts pressure on the system. You are not going to win against the dinosaur. Oh trust me, the establishment will throw you a doggie treat once in a while to think you are winning but in the end you won't. It's just the way the system is set up and to have real change it must be broken.

It's not giving up or quitting. It's thinking on a bigger scale that apparently many in here cannot comprehend.

Apparently, you do not comprehend that this is what the Libertarian Party has been trying to do for many years and FAILED at doing. It is also what the Constitution Party has tried to do. Again, another FAILURE.

What you are suggesting is not thinking on a bigger scale, it is thinking on a broken scale.

vechorik
03-15-2012, 11:16 AM
Ugh last time I checked, the two party system is the problem. You aren't going to change anything as long as that remains true.

It's best to go Indy, start a mass movement that puts pressure on the system. You are not going to win against the dinosaur. Oh trust me, the establishment will throw you a doggie treat once in a while to think you are winning but in the end you won't. It's just the way the system is set up and to have real change it must be broken.

It's not giving up or quitting. It's thinking on a bigger scale that apparently many in here cannot comprehend.

You go ahead and start a political party from scratch.
In the meantime, liberty-lovers will be infiltrating the GOP by hundreds of thousands.
I'm already GOP. Where do you think delegates come from?

thoughtomator
03-15-2012, 11:17 AM
Pick a battle and fight it. My goal will be to bring my local county GOP into alignment with the liberty movement, whether by persuasion or by simply bringing in enough people to be the majority and force our will on the party by popular vote. As we are what the GOP promised to be and should be, I expect that a critical mass will be able to persuade a great many who are already on the inside of the party.

Just talk to people. One on one, fully informed with the facts, most people will agree to do the right thing. Those that remain obstinate get isolated and ejected from positions of authority by majority vote.

thoughtomator
03-15-2012, 11:19 AM
By the way I was in the "death to the GOP" camp for a while myself, so I respect that position. It's a passing phase though, because the reality is that that is the game and refusing to play it will not advance the cause of liberty.

noneedtoaggress
03-15-2012, 11:21 AM
Apparently, you do not comprehend that this is what the Libertarian Party has been trying to do for many years and FAILED at doing. It is also what the Constitution Party has tried to do. Again, another FAILURE.

What you are suggesting is not thinking on a bigger scale, it is thinking on a broken scale.

Was Goldwater thinking on a broken scale?

LibertyEagle
03-15-2012, 11:25 AM
Was Goldwater thinking on a broken scale?

He ran in the Republican Party. I'm sorry, I am not getting your point.

kill the banks
03-15-2012, 11:27 AM
when you really think it through taking over the GOP is the genius way to go ... it worked for the neocons no

donnay
03-15-2012, 11:45 AM
If we can just continue to expose the neoconservatives for the cancer they are, we can take control of our party, once again. Dr. Paul has done a great job in exposing them!

I was a Republican my whole adult voting life, up until 2004, then I voted for Michael Badnarik. I once again, in 2008, became a Republican once more and voted for Dr. Paul then, just like I will vote for him again 2012!! NO ONE BUT PAUL!!!!

We've Been Neo-Conned
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

puppetmaster
03-15-2012, 11:50 AM
we are doing well taking it over in Nevada.....not a difficult task when organized. it is absolutely worth it when you see the shock on the establishment GOP's faces....really

vechorik
03-15-2012, 11:58 AM
I feel the reasons they cannot stop us from taking over need to be discussed in more detail.

The Tea Party split and failed. The GOP has been going along for years and hasn't had that fate. Why? Because most GOP groups DON'T endorse specific candidates until AFTER the candidates win the nomination by VOTERS. There is no arguing over candidates to split local GOP. This has kept them organized and strong. Something the Tea Party should have considered.

Unfortunately, this same mentality of the GOP has caused Republicans to stray from the Constitution and become more like Democrats. It's time to make the GOP more conservative -- as they should be! Only GOP members in close contact with candidates will influence that. Namely -- "US" in the GOP holding candidates accountable to conservative principles, using the Constitution as our guideline.

noneedtoaggress
03-15-2012, 12:11 PM
He ran in the Republican Party. I'm sorry, I am not getting your point.

Well the government sure didn't get any smaller is all I'm saying.

Peace&Freedom
03-15-2012, 12:16 PM
Apparently, you do not comprehend that this is what the Libertarian Party has been trying to do for many years and FAILED at doing. It is also what the Constitution Party has tried to do. Again, another FAILURE.

What you are suggesting is not thinking on a bigger scale, it is thinking on a broken scale.

UNthis. The real truth, and true big picture you do not comprehend is that BOTH SCALES ARE BROKEN. The establishment has set up the electoral system to ensure pro-freedom, pro-constitutional alternatives fail or are marginalized, whether or not they are inside or outside the two party system. The LP has 'failed' electorally for forty years, but the GOP has failed legislatively for 80 years, in reversing any aspect of the welfare-warfare state. Both paths are designed by the establishment to fail, because the binary two party puppet show itself is a con, a mirage of popular sovereignty meant to disguise the reality of the iron rule of the power elite, the banksters, and the militarists. That trifecta comprises the real three branches of central government. Both scales are broken, so we should on principle refuse to stand on a broken scale.

With all due respect, many of us absolutely are not prepared to wait yet another 80 years for the Republican Party to "at last become transformed." That was always the lazy minded notion of reform, predicated on the false concept that the system was honest enough to permit that change to happen. IT ISN'T. We have now seen GOP leaders systematically vote-rig Paul out of caucus victories across two primary race cycles. Some of us even predicted this ahead of time, knowing how the parties have used the same tactics to structurally cheat third parties out of having political influence for decades (hence the main reason for their "electoral failure"). As I have always said, the movement is more important than one candidate, a major party, or our stand with either at a given point in time.

Paul advocates are getting better at achieving county level victories, but the party leadership has had generations of experience in containing and co-opting alternative movements, and will continue to do so, because those leadership positions are controlled by the power elite. The entire reason for existence of the "two party system," in fact, is to contain, co-opt, neutralize or marginalize alternative political movements, for the benefit of the establishment in maintaining its monopoly on power. Two-party system, one faction rule. This is why the "save the GOP" effort has always been fatally flawed. What path has been successful has come from using a major party as leverage, and nothing more, to get mainstream access in order to lead the grassroots in reforming the entire political order from the ground up. The establishment, across that whole order, not just one party, must be replaced by a pro-liberty one. Building a whole movement that transcends the elite controlled party system is the way to get there.

As Justin Raimondo remarked in his most recent column on Paul, the movement is like a potted plant that is overrunning the Republican pot. Growing within that pot has reached reached the limit of its usefulness, as staying there means its roots will die. Paul running third party will advance the influence and growth of the liberty movement within and without the GOP, by making an impact on the election (that is, if he doesn't win it outright), and to properly punish the leadership for cheating him out of victories and momentum throughout the primacy races. If he doesn't do so, the movement will have no impact on the election, is exposed as ultimately impotent and unwilling to answer the vote riggers, and is simply all bark and no bite. In a more elaborate way, it will have simply gone a another route at being a Kucinich candidacy---i.e., complain about the system, but ultimately line up solidly behind it at convention time. We must be beyond "succeeding" OR "failing" under the FED/MIC/Big Inc's controlled system, and more about replacing that system.

Peace&Freedom
03-15-2012, 12:20 PM
when you really think it through taking over the GOP is the genius way to go ... it worked for the neocons no

The neocons took over BOTH parties, and dominate the media. They became the SYSTEM, no matter who "wins" or which major media covers it. Replacing the SYSTEM with OUR system is what works. And you have to think beyond one party to do that.

FrancisMarion
03-15-2012, 12:22 PM
Pick a battle and fight it. My goal will be to bring my local county GOP into alignment with the liberty movement, whether by persuasion or by simply bringing in enough people to be the majority and force our will on the party by popular vote. As we are what the GOP promised to be and should be, I expect that a critical mass will be able to persuade a great many who are already on the inside of the party.

Just talk to people. One on one, fully informed with the facts, most people will agree to do the right thing. Those that remain obstinate get isolated and ejected from positions of authority by majority vote.

This post is 100% success. I can tell that the thoughtomator knows how to build teams. You have to appeal to other people's intellectual ego, (whatever scale), and even more importantly show some respect in order to successfully persuade. NOBODY likes to be told they are wrong.

Its either evil or ignorance that keeps people in their ways. I prefer to think that the former is a very small %. That leaves a lot of people to talk to. People change their minds

FrancisMarion
03-15-2012, 12:36 PM
UNthis. The real truth, and true big picture you do not comprehend is that BOTH SCALES ARE BROKEN. The establishment has set up the electoral system to ensure pro-freedom, pro-constitutional alternatives fail or are marginalized, whether or not they are inside or outside the two party system. The LP has 'failed' electorally for forty years, but the GOP has failed legislatively for 80 years, in reversing any aspect of the welfare-warfare state. Both paths are designed by the establishment to fail, because the binary two party puppet show itself is a con, a mirage of popular sovereignty meant to disguise the reality of the iron rule of the power elite, the banksters, and the militarists. That trifecta comprises the real three branches of central government. Both scales are broken, so we should on principle refuse to stand on a broken scale.


With all due respect, many of us absolutely are not prepared to wait yet another 80 years for Republican Party to "at last become transformed." That was always the lazy minded notion of reform, predicated on the false notion that the system was honest enough to permit that change to happen. IT ISN'T. We have now seen GOP leaders systematically vote-rig Paul out of caucus victories across two primary race cycles. Some of us even predicted this ahead of time, knowing how the parties have used the same tactics to structurally cheat third parties out of having political influence for decades (hence the main reason for their "electoral failure"). As I have always said, the movement is more important than one candidate, a major party, or our stand with either at a given point in time.

Paul advocates are getting better at achieving county level victories, but the party leadership has had generation of experience in containing and co-opting alternative movements, and will continue to do so, because those leadership positions are controlled by the power elite. The entire reason for existence of the "two party system," in fact, is to contain, co-opt, neutralize or marginalize alternative political movements, for the benefit of the establishment in maintaining its monopoly on power. Two-party system, one faction rule. This is why the "save the GOP" effort has always been fatally flawed. What path has been successful has come from using a major party as leverage, and nothing more, to get mainstream access in order to lead the grassroots in reforming the entire political order from the ground up. The establishment, across that whole order, not just one party, must be replaced by a pro-liberty one. Building a whole movement that transcends the elite controlled party system is the way to get there.

As Justin Raimondo remarked in his most recent column on Paul, the movement is like a potted plant that has is overrunning the Republican pot. Growing within that pot has reached reached the limit of its usefulness, as staying there means its roots will die. Paul running third party will advance the influence and growth of the liberty movement within and without the GOP, by making an impact on the election (that is, if he doesn't win it outright), and to properly punish the leadership for cheating him out of victories and momentum throughout the primacy races. If he doesn't do so, the movement will have no impact on the election, is exposed as ultimately impotent and unwilling to answer the vote riggers, and is simply all bark and no bite. In a more elaborate way, it will have simply gone a another route at being a Kucinich candidacy---i.e., complain about the system, but ultimately line up solidly behind it at convention time. We must be beyond "succeeding" OR "failing" under the FED/MIC/Big Inc's controlled system, and more about replacing that system.

Fascinating post. May I ask how you have gained this insight?

kill the banks
03-15-2012, 12:57 PM
The neocons took over BOTH parties, and dominate the media. They became the SYSTEM, no matter who "wins" or which major media covers it. Replacing the SYSTEM with OUR system is what works. And you have to think beyond one party to do that.

tell me something I don't know ... that's true but so is taking over the GOP ... yes I want to arrest the racketeer banksters , hang them , return the monies , end the MIC etc etc too

NoOneButPaul
03-15-2012, 01:10 PM
UNthis. The real truth, and true big picture you do not comprehend is that BOTH SCALES ARE BROKEN. The establishment has set up the electoral system to ensure pro-freedom, pro-constitutional alternatives fail or are marginalized, whether or not they are inside or outside the two party system. The LP has 'failed' electorally for forty years, but the GOP has failed legislatively for 80 years, in reversing any aspect of the welfare-warfare state. Both paths are designed by the establishment to fail, because the binary two party puppet show itself is a con, a mirage of popular sovereignty meant to disguise the reality of the iron rule of the power elite, the banksters, and the militarists. That trifecta comprises the real three branches of central government. Both scales are broken, so we should on principle refuse to stand on a broken scale.

With all due respect, many of us absolutely are not prepared to wait yet another 80 years for Republican Party to "at last become transformed." That was always the lazy minded notion of reform, predicated on the false notion that the system was honest enough to permit that change to happen. IT ISN'T. We have now seen GOP leaders systematically vote-rig Paul out of caucus victories across two primary race cycles. Some of us even predicted this ahead of time, knowing how the parties have used the same tactics to structurally cheat third parties out of having political influence for decades (hence the main reason for their "electoral failure"). As I have always said, the movement is more important than one candidate, a major party, or our stand with either at a given point in time.

Paul advocates are getting better at achieving county level victories, but the party leadership has had generation of experience in containing and co-opting alternative movements, and will continue to do so, because those leadership positions are controlled by the power elite. The entire reason for existence of the "two party system," in fact, is to contain, co-opt, neutralize or marginalize alternative political movements, for the benefit of the establishment in maintaining its monopoly on power. Two-party system, one faction rule. This is why the "save the GOP" effort has always been fatally flawed. What path has been successful has come from using a major party as leverage, and nothing more, to get mainstream access in order to lead the grassroots in reforming the entire political order from the ground up. The establishment, across that whole order, not just one party, must be replaced by a pro-liberty one. Building a whole movement that transcends the elite controlled party system is the way to get there.

As Justin Raimondo remarked in his most recent column on Paul, the movement is like a potted plant that has is overrunning the Republican pot. Growing within that pot has reached reached the limit of its usefulness, as staying there means its roots will die. Paul running third party will advance the influence and growth of the liberty movement within and without the GOP, by making an impact on the election (that is, if he doesn't win it outright), and to properly punish the leadership for cheating him out of victories and momentum throughout the primacy races. If he doesn't do so, the movement will have no impact on the election, is exposed as ultimately impotent and unwilling to answer the vote riggers, and is simply all bark and no bite. In a more elaborate way, it will have simply gone a another route at being a Kucinich candidacy---i.e., complain about the system, but ultimately line up solidly behind it at convention time. We must be beyond "succeeding" OR "failing" under the FED/MIC/Big Inc's controlled system, and more about replacing that system.

It will advance the cause so much it will lead to Obama becoming President again... which will decrease the amount of time we have to take back the GOP, and the country, significantly.

And, get a hold of your sanity. Paul isn't getting 270 electoral votes as a 3rd party, he won't even get 1 (Perot didn't even get 1 and he got nearly 20%!).

I posted this earlier, and now I feel like I need to start pasting it everywhere because you guys just don't get how destructive the 3rd party would be because you're delusional enough to think Paul will get 270 electoral votes if he runs as a 3rd party.

(In response to a video suggesting the same insanity...)-

This video was a waste of 19minutes...

-He starts off the video by pointing out that there's so many people in the GOP, especially at the local levels, because they are Ron Paul supporters- Well that means the GOP takeover is working...GREAT!

But, then he loses me...

-He starts talking about how if Ron loses the nomination and runs 3rd party he'll be the 1st 3rd party candidate to ever win the Presidency. He points out how even Jesse Ventura said this isn't possible and then never gives an actual LEGITIMATE reason as to why Ron would win other than he has so much crossover support.

-His argument for Ron being able to win the Presidency as a 3rd party is that he takes so many GOP votes and so many Dem votes that he'd be able to win.

Ummmm think about this logically folks... even if Ron Paul took 33% of the GOP with him (ain't going to happen) and even if Ron Paul took 33% of the Dems with him (ain't going to happen) he'd still only end up with 33% of the popular vote.

Even if he won a couple of states how in the hell is he going to get 270 electoral votes? It's like this guy thinks Ron just has to win the popular vote to win the POTUS.

THEN to make matters even more ridiculous he continues to point out at the end of the video that Ron has so much GOP support that if he took it with him it would destroy the party (If that was true he'd be winning right now) but let's just say that it is actually true for the sake of argument... UMMM why in the world would Ron jeopardize this great infiltration within the GOP just for an INDY shot at the POTUS when it's not possible to win?!!?!

IF he truly has so much of the "New Establishment" on his side then he should stick with the GOP so those people aren't ostracized later, as the Old Establishment dies the New will be there to take their place.

If you run 3rd party and lose ( 3rd parties can't win, get over it, get over the idea it's ridiculous) then ALL of the "New Establishment" support will NEVER be accepted into the GOP again. People who try to run as Ron Paul Republicans will be destroyed because Paul showed his true colors at the end, his son will NEVER get a shot at the nomination if he tries later on, his son's attempts to continue to take back the GOP will be futile.

Almost everything he says in this video is absurd...

A 3rd party run kills everything Ron has built over the last 5 years, it screws over every libertarian-republican from here on out, it ruins his son's chances, it kills the movement and moves it back to the fringes of the libertarian party.

And, newsflash, there isn't a snowballs chance in hell Ron would get 270 electoral votes.

At the very best he could win a couple of states, cause no one to get 270, and force John Boehner to pick the POTUS (Gee.. I wonder who he'd pick)

If Ron truly has such an incredible amount of local and county support than the goal should be building that support up from the grassroots and taking back control of the GOP from the Neo-Cons and Diet-Democrats... this will lead the way for Rand and the entire liberty movement... it will be considerably easier to win with Rand if the GOP is split between Libertarians and Neo-Cons.

A 3rd party run literally ruins everything, people need to get over it, they need to get over it now.

The goal should always and forever be a GOP takeover, this will launch the movement to places it's never been and will absolutely never be in a 3rd party.

All the 3rd party does is split up the GOP and cause the Democrats to control the government forever. It's ludicrous on so many different levels...

tbone717
03-15-2012, 01:20 PM
Third party talk is utter nonsense and makes one wonder whose side folks are really on. There is no need to start a third party (which btw will be completely ineffective), because libertarian-conservatives already have a strong presence in the GOP and we are increasing our numbers. There are currently close to 400 libertarian-Republicans holding elected office. We have people at the local, state and federal level. Additionally, there are hundreds of libertarian-Republicans in leadership positions at the local, county and state level. These numbers will grow this year and we anticipate further growth in the years to come, because the principles that we hold to are resonating with the American voter.

Additionally, if there were libertarian members of the GOP that broke from the party, the GOP would lose control of the House and many state legislatures. And then who is in charge of the committees? The Dems. Do you think we are going to get legislation through Congress when the Dems are in charge of it all? Not on your life.

kill the banks
03-15-2012, 01:31 PM
I agree the third party thingy is something to put aside ... this is the peaceful war , we have to know the rules and use them to our advantage ... the neocons are not smarter they just got their show running earlier with a group of clever fanatical shakers that organized and conquered ... we shall undo it with every brain cell to the rules toward our advantage ~ we are a force

Peace&Freedom
03-15-2012, 03:28 PM
I say again, there is power in threatening to bolt from the party if you want influence it, IF YOU CARRY IT OUT, and show you are for real. Those who won't bolt, not ever, have no leverage, and will not influence the party, plain and simple. You either transcend the party, or you are in the hip pocket of the party. Those worrying about Obama winning as a result, sound like they are still trapped in the two-party paradigm, and actually think it makes a difference whether Romney or Obama occupies the White House next year, also plain and simple.

For those who didn't see it, Raimondo's anti-war column in its entirety. The comments were excellent as well:

Ron Paul’s Hour of Decision

Is Ron Paul running for president in the wrong party?

The results of the GOP primaries, so far, would certainly seem to suggest that. Paul’s support draws heavily from two constituencies one doesn’t normally associate with the Republican party: young voters, who are overwhelmingly independents, and antiwar voters, who tend to be Democrats. He has carried the youth vote and garnered a significant proportion of independents in virtually every contest: more significantly, polls show him beating President Obama in the general election by winning a huge portion of the independent and youth votes. Combined with the anybody-but-Obama vote, Paul’s potential base of support in a two-way race defines the contours of a winning electoral coalition, one that could win him the White House, bring about a major political realignment – and upend the political Establishment in this country.

The problem, for Paul, is that the GOP leadership is implacably opposed to his candidacy: never mind all that nonsense about a Romney-Paul “alliance,” which was just an invention of the “mainstream” media pushed by the Santorum campaign. After all, the Romneyites stole the Maine caucuses right out from under the Paul campaign, and are doing their best to repeat the same fraud in the rest of the caucus states. Some “alliance”!

Three factors have kept Paul from being a real contender: not only the hostility of the leadership and the age demographics of the average Republican primary voter – which is well over 40 – but also the ideological factor. After a decade and more of neoconservative domination, not only of the party but of the conservative movement, the GOP is the War Party. For the Paul campaign, this is fatal. Ron has made his anti-interventionist views the linchpin of his campaign: he never fails to bring up the issue of war and peace, even when discussing some economic or social topic. That’s because he realizes – unlike some “libertarians” – the issue is central to the question of rolling back the power of government to rule our lives.

While Paul regularly invokes the “Old Right” and the legacy of Robert A. Taft and the Taft Republicans, this tradition has been long forgotten by Republican voters – and deliberately buried and disdained by the party’s intellectuals, such as they are, who regularly rail against “isolationism” and hail FDR and Winston Churchill as their chosen icons.

The result is that, after an initial spurt of success – starting out with a respectable showing in Iowa, and placing second in New Hampshire – the Paul campaign has fallen back to its 2008 levels, with Ron rarely breaking 10 percent.

The response of the Paul campaign has been to hunker down and reassure its enthusiastic supporters – and they haven’t lost their enthusiasm, not by a long shot – that they have a strategy. That strategy is to concentrate on getting delegates, rather than winning “beauty contests,” i.e. primaries in which the results don’t determine who gets the delegates. In many states, the process of delegate selection is long and involved, with county, regional, and state-wide conventions being held to determine who gets to go to Tampa. Given the dedication of the Paulians, and their superior organizational skills, the idea is that Ron will get many more delegates than his vote totals in the primaries would indicate, through sheer perseverance.

However, the process hasn’t always worked out that way. The Paulians, having devoted themselves to learning the arcane rules governing delegate selection, and playing by the book, often arrive at these conventions to find that the rule book has been thrown out by the party leadership. Huge fights have broken out at these shindigs, and the going has been pretty rough: when the party leaders arrive to find the hall packed with under-30 Paulians, all waving signs and wearing buttons, suddenly the rules are “revised,” and the Paulian playbook is no longer applicable.

The Paul campaign started out with the odds stacked against it: the GOP leadership and the “mainstream” media both did everything they could to smear, discredit, and discount him and his supporters. This effort failed: Ron emerged from the pack, and went on to create what is arguably the most vital and alive movement this country has seen since the 1960s.

However, the growth and development of the Paulian movement has now reached its limits within the confines of the GOP, like a potted plant whose roots can no longer be contained. Either the plant is put in the ground, or its roots will become so stunted that the plant will wither and die.

In short, the Paulians must make a decision: either break free of the bonds of the GOP, or else face a future of dwindling political fortunes.

Consider the two likeliest scenarios: 1) Romney gains the magic number of 1144 delegates before the Tampa convention, and is declared the winner: i.e. it’s a repeat of the McCain victory in 2008. And we all remember what happened in 2008: Ron was locked out of the convention, and the Paulians held their own well-attended convention down the street. Paul never endorsed McCain (perish the thought!), and the neocon-run McCain campaign managed to run their candidate – and the GOP – into the ground.

Now, however, we are confronted with a quite different prospect: a brokered convention. With no candidate winning the magic number of delegates, the usual nominating convention-as-coronation scenario is thrown out the window, and what the mainstream media and party officials refer to as “chaos” reigns in Tampa. Translation: the convention will revert back to the way these events normally played out in the Good Old Days, before Big Money and Big Media turned them into political Kabuki theater, with the players and the outcome predetermined from the start.

While this prospect is refreshing, and even exciting – as any disruption in our ritualized political process would be – it still doesn’t hold out much hope for the Paul campaign. The reason is because, short of Paul getting the nomination, there is nothing concrete to be gained from a brokered convention.

With Romney in the lead, delegate-wise, a brokered convention will center on efforts by the Not-Romneys to put together a coalition capable of grabbing the nomination away from Mitt. Yet the Paulians are highly unlikely to be a part of this Not-Romney coalition – unless, of course, they ditch their principles and their whole rationale for launching the campaign to begin with. For this would mean voting for an anti-libertarian schmuck, i.e. either Santorum or Gingrich. That, I believe, is never going to happen: if it did, the Paulian movement would immediately implode, given the enormity of the sell-out.

There is, on the other hand, another possibility, and that is allying with the Romneyites against the Santorum and Gingrich camps. Yet, again, we are faced with the question of what concrete rewards the Paulians could expect to gain from such a dark alliance. In my view, a realistic answer to that question is: exactly nothing.

In the view of some Paul campaign officials, however, the answer is not so clear, as this televised interview with campaign manager Jesse Benton demonstrates. Ignore the typically biased and obnoxious demeanor of the interviewer, and focus on Benton’s answers toward the end, when he says a brokered convention could yield all sorts of rewards for the Paul campaign, such as “a cabinet position,” changes in the party platform — and even “the vice-presidency”!

It’s hard to decide whether this kind of speculation is delusional or just a way of reassuring Paul’s supporters that there’s a good reason to keep sending in the campaign contributions and pinning their hopes on making a splash in Tampa. As we all know, however, a stone makes a splash before it sinks to the bottom of the pond….

The idea that Romney is going to offer the vice-presidential nomination to Ron – or his son, Rand, freshly elected to the Senate from Kentucky – is a pipe dream. The party leadership would never allow it, the convention might well rebel (as a way of expressing conservative discontent with the candidate), and – in my opinion – Romney would never offer it in the first place.

As for changes in the party platform [.pdf] – so what? No one pays attention to these documents, not even the candidates, who are not bound by them. A cabinet position would be a paltry prize indeed, and accepting such a deal – handing the nomination to Romney in exchange for, say, making Nick Gillespie the drug czar – or, more likely, making Rand Paul Transportation Secretary – would be a humiliating end to what started out as a noble crusade.

In each case, the price the Paul campaign would have to pay for such ill-gotten “gains” would be so high that the result would be the effective end of the Paulian movement: that’s because the price would be supporting the nominee, i.e. Mitt Romney, with a personal endorsement from Ron. I, for one, can’t imagine him doing that: whenever he’s asked if he would consider supporting the eventual nominee, Paul gives every indication that the answer is no. He explains why in this interview, in which he emphasizes the Republicans’ warmongering as a major reason not to endorse any of them.

Viewed objectively, and with the long-range goals of the Paulians in mind, there is only one road forward for the movement: the third party route.

Running on a third party ticket would give Paul access to the votes of his natural constituency: the young independents disgusted with both parties who yearn for real change – i.e. a revolution – in Washington. It would give the Old Right remnant in the GOP, which Paul has reawakened from its long sleep, a place to go in November, while also making room for independents, antiwar voters, civil libertarians, disillusioned Obamaites, and other constituencies unlikely to be caught dead voting in a Republican primary.

Polls indicate Paul would get anywhere from 18 percent to 21 percent running as a third party candidate, and the percentage seem to be climbing as the actual election draws nearer. These same polls indicate he would draw two-thirds of his votes from the Republican column, but I don’t think these “drill-down” analyses hold much water: what they leave out is non-voters, new voters, and – most important of all – future events. If the US starts bombing Iran before election day, or, say, we have another economic meltdown, as we did in the winter of 2008, then all bets are off – and the prospect of a Paul victory becomes more than mere wishful thinking.

A Paul third party candidacy would not only open up a prospect that, right now, seems highly unlikely if not impossible – i.e. Ron Paul sitting in the Oval Office – it would also place significant constraints on the other candidates, including President Obama. Faced only with a warmongering Republican, Obama can pretty much do whatever he likes when it comes to provoking, sanctioning, and threatening Iran: after all, antiwar voters have nowhere else to go. With Paul in the race, however, Obama is going to have to be very careful not to lose his left-ish antiwar constituency, which has so far stuck with him as the lesser to the two evils. If and when Obama makes his move against Iran, Paul’s third party campaign will be right there, scarfing up votes from the President’s disillusioned and angry former supporters.

Indeed, the ultimate effect of a Paulian third party ticket could well be preventing the outbreak of a major war in the Middle East. This, it seems to me, is a factor the Paul campaign is going to have to weigh in the balance as it considers its options. In terms of the Paulians’ own principles – especially their characteristic opposition to wars of aggression on moral grounds – this is a powerful argument for launching a third party campaign.

We don’t endorse candidates here at Antiwar.com, and for a very good reason: we’re a journalistic enterprise, not a political organization, and we don’t take orders from any party central committee or faction. Nor do we give a blank check to any politician – no, not even Ron Paul. There can be little doubt, however, that the Paul campaign has had a tremendous effect on the antiwar movement in this country, with several longtime peace campaigners taking up Paul’s cause. He has become a symbol of the anti-interventionist impulse in modern American politics, and his political fate is bound up to a large extent with the fate of the antiwar movement – and the prospects for peace in the 21st century.

He has moved the discourse forward, challenging the premises of the interventionists at every turn and upholding a consistent vision of a republic that respects the sovereignty of all and seeks to lead by example rather than by force. If his voice is stilled after the Tampa convention, American voters will be left with a “choice” of an outright warmonger in Republican clothing versus our somewhat less overtly belligerent albeit no less interventionist sitting President, whose foreign policy record is worse than his predecessor’s.

Ron Paul’s last hurrah cannot – must not — be a “deal” made in Tampa, and I’d be willing to bet the ranch no such deal will be forthcoming. Speaking as a political analyst, and not a partisan, I would venture to say the Paulian movement will peter out and come to nothing if it stays locked within a Republican straitjacket. Liberated from their partisan constraints, Paul’s supporters will be spared the Long March through the GOP apparatus, and instead of wasting their time running for county central committee they’ll be freed up to make the case for peace directly to the American people.

What course the Paul campaign takes in the next few weeks will determine the nature of his political legacy. If it ends in Tampa, then the fate of the Paulian movement will be reflected in this bit of verse from the poet Robinson Jeffers, whose fierce “isolationism” caused him to be exiled from polite “liberal” circles in the run up to World War II:

“While this America settles in the mould of its vulgarity, heavily thickening to empire

“And protest, only a bubble in the molten mass, pops and sighs out, and the mass hardens,

“I sadly smiling remember that the flower fades to make fruit, the fruit rots to make earth.”

Paul has often been asked if he’d run as a third party candidate, and he always gives the same ambiguous answer – and that was necessary, at the time, and proper. However, the moment is fast approaching when ambiguity on this matter becomes increasingly counterproductive, as far as advancing the cause of peace and liberty is concerned.

In politics, timing is everything. Before the movement he created passes the apex of its influence in the GOP and begins to lose its relevance, the candidate and the campaign must stop at this crossroads and contemplate their ultimate direction. The hour of decision has arrived.

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

I would note, for my readers’ information, that this decision cannot wait until the Tampa convention this summer: the most likely vehicle for a Paul third party run, the Libertarian Party, holds its nominating convention at the beginning of May. While it seems likely the LP nomination is Paul’s if he seeks it, the reality is that Paul’s hour of decision will arrive a lot sooner than late August, when the Tampa convention is scheduled to take place. An alternative would be to run on the Constitution Party ticket, which has ballot status in many states: however, the baggage this particular political formation carries may well be a burden the Paulians will wind up wishing they didn’t have to carry. There’s always the course of launching an independent ticket from scratch, but that would be costly and prone to disruption by Republican operatives. Remember how the Democrats followed the Naderites from state to state, mounting harassing lawsuits and keeping Nader off the ballot in several instances? The GOP would no doubt launch a similar operation directed at Paul.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/03/13/ron-pauls-hour-of-decision/

P.S.: Walter Block now also concurs with the "both/and" strategy of Paul running on the LP line, while continuing in the GOP primaries:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/107902.html

nano1895
03-15-2012, 03:53 PM
Third Party would not accomplish anything.