How Important is Winning to You?

[ShaneEnochs]

There's been talk of staying in the Republican Party, and there's been talk of going to the Libertarian Party. I think those that want to stay in the Republican Party want to do it so we can actually win elections. Those that want to go to the Libertarian Party mostly want to do it to give the middle finger to the GOP/RNC, in my opinion.

There's also been a little talk about creating our own party, and the more I think about it, the more I think that this really might be the way to go. The DNC and RNC are so corrupt that I really don't think that anything we're going to do short of winning national chair is really going to make a difference, and even then I don't think we'd keep it for very long. The Libertarian Party has a sort of stigma that I don't think we're going to get rid of.

If we were to make our own party, we'd need the entire r3VOLution on board with it. We would obviously not have any significant wins for the short term, but if we want to look at the long term, I think we could dismantle the two-party system. What say you?

[Suzu]

I like the name PAUL (as in your sig) for the new party. Let me be first to sign on!

[CaseyCBenn]

I've been thinking about this all year. Thinking that Ron Paul should have had his own movement.

Yet I believe that one of the main goals was to be included in the "republican" debates. This had/has the best chance at getting television exposure better then being in the libertarian party. Also, to change the "republican" party back to its republican values. Which is hard to imagine now that the RNC is eliminating delegations voting their conscience.

There currently aren't any televised libertarian debates, green party debates, or liberty party debates on television that I know of.

There needs to be more demand for candidates and more people interested for this to take place in my opinion.

At this juncture in time we see an opportunity for this idea to grow into fruition though. The last year showed that the GOP will cheat, steal, and change elections. They will change rules to fit any candidate they force on people. Even the debate questions were styled such that it made Mitt Romney seem like the winner from the start. They tried to push every candidate past Ron Paul's second place into first. Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, and each time they would call it a "surge" or something else.

I honestly think we need a television station like fox news or cnn that has its own coverage showing people the new context by which people that are liberty minded want things to work.

How that style of government would operate and how the culture would have to adjust its assumptions about how things work and how we approach what we decide we are dependent on at a national, state, and personal level.

Without a network of our own we won't be able to stand up to the left and right news media. People need that good old television set setting the standard for them. Maybe later when 30 somethings become 50 somethings it will change and the internet tv stations will matter more then the old guard abc, cbs, nbc, fox news, cnn.

Currently the "news" networks do so much statement crafting in the way they frame an event or issue that people either do not or barely notice any slant or context styling.

An opposing network that could give better analysis of events in the same manner that Ben Swann achieves but at a national level and with more people of like mind.

Without this competing media I don't think the liberty movement stands a chance.

I honestly think a national liberty party is the way to go though. Have our own debates with our own candidates and frame our own arguments so that Sean Hannity and Ariana Huffington can't frame every issue the same way the two parties have been for 50 years.

We are a bigger group than we know and we need to be aware of our each other and our overall size.

[UMULAS]

I call dibs on the first youth in the P.A.U.L party.

[sailingaway]

I WANT to create our own party, but I want to see what Ron is doing, first.

We don't have to give up gains in the GOP or not turn up to expand that, but given the rules, it might be a good idea to have more than one string to our bow in 2016. We could get ballot access and sit on it, if we want.

[realtonygoodwin]

I don't have the beliefs that I have because I follow Ron Paul.

I support Ron Paul because he is the candidate whose beliefs most closely match my own.

I think having a third party that has anything to do with Ron Paul, other than ideology, policy, integrity, and consistency will be a non-starter. This is not a cult. I do not worship Ron Paul. I will not be part of a P.A.U.L. Party or anything like that.

If we have the numbers, then a new third party might be a great idea. But there are so many obstacles with creating a new third party. Look at the track record of American's Elect, for example.

On top of all that, we represent probably 5-10% of the electorate, max. How do we win any elections like that? Only start a new party if that makes your chances of victory higher. If it doesn't, we must work within the framework of the two party system that already exists.

[CaseyCBenn]

My statement mainly applies to the ideals of Liberty which is why I agree with Ron Paul more then any other candidate. So I am not in favor of starting a "Ron Paul" party but rather that liberty minded individuals need a media source and party. I don't want to work in the frame work of the current two party system any longer. In my opinion the events we have just seen prove that we will lose every time. We need a new party that can not be shut down by the DNC, RNC, GOP, any longer.

[eleganz]

There shouldn't even be any talks of leaving the GOP, we've come this far and we have just completed the third phase of Ghandi's saying..."then they fight you", we now have the sympathies of many in the GOP that previously were not sympathetic of our movement.

WE ARE WINNING AND WE ARE THE FUTURE. TAKE OVER EVERY GOP APPARATUS ACROSS THE NATION.

[sailingaway]

There shouldn't even be any talks of leaving the GOP, we've come this far and we have just completed the third phase of Ghandi's saying..."then they fight you", we now have the sympathies of many in the GOP that previously were not sympathetic of our movement.

WE ARE WINNING AND WE ARE THE FUTURE. TAKE OVER EVERY GOP APPARATUS ACROSS THE NATION.

I'm not saying leave. I'm saying create the entity, get ballot access in 50 states while we can, and sit on who we pick to put on as our candidate. If we had done that this year, I wonder if they would have treated us more fairly? We'd just have more options.

[ShaneEnochs]

There shouldn't even be any talks of leaving the GOP, we've come this far and we have just completed the third phase of Ghandi's saying..."then they fight you", we now have the sympathies of many in the GOP that previously were not sympathetic of our movement.

WE ARE WINNING AND WE ARE THE FUTURE. TAKE OVER EVERY GOP APPARATUS ACROSS THE NATION.

Why does the movement have to continue in the Republican party? People know who we are now. Besides, we have no power in regard to the presidential races now that they can switch out our delegates on a whim.

[realtonygoodwin]

Unless of course, we are the ones making the rules.

One of the biggest things you hear about us is that we are trying to hijack the GOP. That once the election is over, we will go back to being non-voters, LP members, and Democrats. If we stick around, and let them get to know us, and show we aren't a flash in the pan that is following a cult of personality, and work hard, then we will earn, in their eyes, the right to be heard.

[idiom]

Unless of course, we are the ones making the rules.

One of the biggest things you hear about us is that we are trying to hijack the GOP. That once the election is over, we will go back to being non-voters, LP members, and Democrats. If we stick around, and let them get to know us, and show we aren't a flash in the pan that is following a cult of personality, and work hard, then we will earn, in their eyes, the right to be heard.

More importantly we will earn a majority.

[CUnknown]

The GOP has shown that they will never let us take over. They control the party apparatus and will use it to make new rules and change old ones so we will never be able to take over. If we had 8 states, it would be 10, and you all know that. If we had 10, it would be 12.

Until we can actually beat the establishment candidate, hacked voting machines notwithstanding, we will not be able to take over the RNC. Local GOPs are still worthwhile joining, if you feel like it.

It's pretty clear that the Libertarian party is the best route for us to go right now. They have worked hard getting ballot access in most States -- so that's a huge advantage to starting our own party. We'd have to work for 20 years just to get to the point where the Libertarian party is now. It doesn't make sense to duplicate those efforts when there seems to be little or no advantage to doing so. I wouldn't worry about the stigma associated with the LP. Any 3rd party will be stigmatized by the establishment media -- so we'd best just learn to live with it.

As far as electoral politics is concerned, the LP is certainly our best option at this point. Besides, the GOP is a sinking ship. It may not even exist in 10 years.

[sailingaway]

Unless of course, we are the ones making the rules.

One of the biggest things you hear about us is that we are trying to hijack the GOP. That once the election is over, we will go back to being non-voters, LP members, and Democrats. If we stick around, and let them get to know us, and show we aren't a flash in the pan that is following a cult of personality, and work hard, then we will earn, in their eyes, the right to be heard.

They are saying RNC can replace all the delegates. Including on the rules committee. So unless outrage makes the backlash too hot to handle, how do we get to where we make the rules?

I think we push for it, but I like sitting on 50 state ballot access.

[LibertyEagle]

I think we push for it, but I like sitting on 50 state ballot access.

I don't think it's quite that easy to get.

[Maltheus]

One of the biggest things you hear about us is that we are trying to hijack the GOP. That once the election is over, we will go back to being non-voters, LP members, and Democrats. If we stick around, and let them get to know us, and show we aren't a flash in the pan that is following a cult of personality, and work hard, then we will earn, in their eyes, the right to be heard.

That's what we said in '08. We'll never be able to impress daddy so much that he stops beating us.

As for a 3rd party, the LP might have a stigma, but we have the same stigma. It would be a waste of energy to try and reinvent the wheel, just to get where they are now, in another 10+ years.

[sailingaway]

I don't think it's quite that easy to get.

I don't think it is easy, I just think we could do it.

[ShaneEnochs]

I say we go for it. I'm not sure the Libertarian Party is the correct vehicle to do it though. Regardless of the name, they're no libertarians.

[Indy Vidual]

...The Libertarian Party has a sort of stigma that I don't think we're going to get rid of....

What exactly is that stigma (i.e. "crazy") and what's to keep TPTB from attaching a similar stigma to the new party?

[Indy Vidual]

I don't have the beliefs that I have because I follow Ron Paul.

I support Ron Paul because he is the candidate whose beliefs most closely match my own.

I think having a third party that has anything to do with Ron Paul, other than ideology, policy, integrity, and consistency will be a non-starter. This is not a cult.....

Yes



I like the name PAUL (as in your sig) for the new party. Let me be first to sign on!

OP is worried about stigma, and you want to get stuck with the crazy old Doc's name? :p
Get real, please:
Liberty is our theme and our message, Ron is retiring and never wanted this to be about him.

[CaptLouAlbano]

There are literally dozens of minor political parties that all had the idea that is being expressed here. None of them have ever been able to elect a candidate to a major office. The LP is a failure as well since it has been able to have any success outside of a small number of state legislature races (12 total I believe in 40+ years).

There is a reason behind this, and it has little to do with ballot access and the media. It has to do with people.

People that win political office at any level have some sort of connection in the community and political resume. I have been active in politics & my communities since the 1960's, and throughout my years every time a candidate runs for office on either the D or R ticket, I know who these people are. But whenever a third party (be it LP, Cp, Reform or whatever) would run for office, these people were unknown to me and all of my contacts.

To put it simply, you typically don't go from unknown to a Congressman or Senator overnight. Politics is a entity that calls for building and growth. Each election that a candidate participates in benefits him or her self for the next election they will run. That is why the overwhelming majority of the politicians that we know and love started out at the local level and/or had very strong connections to their community for many years.

And that therein is the fundamental flaw with third parties. They simply do not have the people that have the professional and civic resumes to win office. We have hundreds and quite possibly thousands of libertarian people already elected into office all across this country under the GOP banner. Those people who are today serving in local office will be our next county officials, those who hold county offices will be our next state legislators, those people current in state legislature will be our next Congressmen and Governors.

Look at Tom Davis for example. In 2 years he will be taking a run at Graham's Senate seat. But where did he come from? Davis as most of you know is a SC State Senator, but before he was able to win that seat he was Chief of Staff for Gov Sanford, before that he spent years serving in county positions in Beaufort County.

For those who wish to go down the path of starting a new party - go for it. But keep in mind that there are literally dozens of groups that had the same brilliant idea that you did and are wallowing away in ineffectiveness. Just ask the members of the American First Party, American Party, America's Party, Independent American Party, Christian Liberty Party, American Populist Party, Jefferson Republican Party or Objectivist Party how things are working out for them. Success at the ballot box takes more than an idea and a website. It takes having money and qualified people to run for office and win offices. So far the libertarian wing of the GOP has been very successful at this. The reason being that electable people are already serving within the GOP.

[ShaneEnochs]

I'd be pretty cool with the Liberty Party myself.

Don't we have some 18 year old millionaire that started a PAC?

[Indy Vidual]

Why don't we build a Liberty oriented "shadow Gov" which will be ready when everything collapses?




There are literally dozens of minor political parties that all had the idea that is being expressed here. None of them have ever been able to elect a candidate to a major office. The LP is a failure as well since it has been able to have any success outside of a small number of state legislature races (12 total I believe in 40+ years).

There is a reason behind this, and it has little to do with ballot access and the media. It has to do with people.

People that win political office at any level have some sort of connection in the community and political resume. I have been active in politics & my communities since the 1960's, and throughout my years every time a candidate runs for office on either the D or R ticket, I know who these people are. But whenever a third party (be it LP, Cp, Reform or whatever) would run for office, these people were unknown to me and all of my contacts.

To put it simply, you typically don't go from unknown to a Congressman or Senator overnight. Politics is a entity that calls for building and growth. Each election that a candidate participates in benefits him or her self for the next election they will run. That is why the overwhelming majority of the politicians that we know and love started out at the local level and/or had very strong connections to their community for many years.

And that therein is the fundamental flaw with third parties. They simply do not have the people that have the professional and civic resumes to win office. We have hundreds and quite possibly thousands of libertarian people already elected into office all across this country under the GOP banner. Those people who are today serving in local office will be our next county officials, those who hold county offices will be our next state legislators, those people current in state legislature will be our next Congressmen and Governors.

Look at Tom Davis for example. In 2 years he will be taking a run at Graham's Senate seat. But where did he come from? Davis as most of you know is a SC State Senator, but before he was able to win that seat he was Chief of Staff for Gov Sanford, before that he spent years serving in county positions in Beaufort County.

For those who wish to go down the path of starting a new party - go for it. But keep in mind that there are literally dozens of groups that had the same brilliant idea that you did and are wallowing away in ineffectiveness. Just ask the members of the American First Party, American Party, America's Party, Independent American Party, Christian Liberty Party, American Populist Party, Jefferson Republican Party or Objectivist Party how things are working out for them. Success at the ballot box takes more than an idea and a website. It takes having money and qualified people to run for office and win offices. So far the libertarian wing of the GOP has been very successful at this. The reason being that electable people are already serving within the GOP.

+1984
If we had a more free country I would quickly remember how much I truly despise politics.

[jllundqu]

There are literally dozens of minor political parties that all had the idea that is being expressed here. None of them have ever been able to elect a candidate to a major office. The LP is a failure as well since it has been able to have any success outside of a small number of state legislature races (12 total I believe in 40+ years).

There is a reason behind this, and it has little to do with ballot access and the media. It has to do with people.

People that win political office at any level have some sort of connection in the community and political resume. I have been active in politics & my communities since the 1960's, and throughout my years every time a candidate runs for office on either the D or R ticket, I know who these people are. But whenever a third party (be it LP, Cp, Reform or whatever) would run for office, these people were unknown to me and all of my contacts.

To put it simply, you typically don't go from unknown to a Congressman or Senator overnight. Politics is a entity that calls for building and growth. Each election that a candidate participates in benefits him or her self for the next election they will run. That is why the overwhelming majority of the politicians that we know and love started out at the local level and/or had very strong connections to their community for many years.

And that therein is the fundamental flaw with third parties. They simply do not have the people that have the professional and civic resumes to win office. We have hundreds and quite possibly thousands of libertarian people already elected into office all across this country under the GOP banner. Those people who are today serving in local office will be our next county officials, those who hold county offices will be our next state legislators, those people current in state legislature will be our next Congressmen and Governors.

Look at Tom Davis for example. In 2 years he will be taking a run at Graham's Senate seat. But where did he come from? Davis as most of you know is a SC State Senator, but before he was able to win that seat he was Chief of Staff for Gov Sanford, before that he spent years serving in county positions in Beaufort County.

For those who wish to go down the path of starting a new party - go for it. But keep in mind that there are literally dozens of groups that had the same brilliant idea that you did and are wallowing away in ineffectiveness. Just ask the members of the American First Party, American Party, America's Party, Independent American Party, Christian Liberty Party, American Populist Party, Jefferson Republican Party or Objectivist Party how things are working out for them. Success at the ballot box takes more than an idea and a website. It takes having money and qualified people to run for office and win offices. So far the libertarian wing of the GOP has been very successful at this. The reason being that electable people are already serving within the GOP.

Dude...You are like a samurai... slicing ribbons of BS to reveal a hidden truth.

Powerful stuff man...

[Occam's Banana]

Why does the movement have to continue in the Republican party?

For many (indeed, most) purposes, it doesn't. There are many worthwhile, important & necessary endeavors that need to be pursued and that do not require any involvement with the GOP at all.

Take educational & promotional activism, for instance. That can be done via the Libertarian Party, other organizations (like the Tenth Amendment Center, for example), or even via individuals or small, unaffiliated groups.

However, there is one particular endeavor - achieving & maintaining electoral success - which *does* (unfortunately) require continued involvement with the GOP.

Due to the nature of "winner-take-all" plurality representation, 3rd-party & independent electoral bids are doomed to fail. Throughout American history, there has only ever been two major parties at any given time. This isn't because of ballot-access restrictions or whatnot (as wrong & unjust as those things are). It's because of the pluralistic "winner-take-all" nature of the electoral system we have. So - unfortunately - if we wan't to achieve any lasting electoral success, we have to either take over or completely replace one of the already-existing major parties. That is the only way it has ever happened in the past, and it's the only way it will ever happen in the future (unless and until we can replace the current pluralistic system with a proportional one).

And since we already have a foothold in the GOP, that's the one to go with.


Besides, we have no power in regard to the presidential races now that they can switch out our delegates on a whim.

The presidency needs to be the last place we try to take over. Especially in light of the "switch out our delegates" problem you mentioned. But even if it weren't for that, it would still be a mistake, I think, to focus on the presidency. In order to be successful, we need to "insurge" the GOP from the bottom up, rather from the top down.

For the "achieving & maintaining electoral success" part of the liberty movement, we *must* get as many of our people as possible into local & state Republican parties, from the precinct level up. This is the single most important thing of all. It's even more important than getting people elected to state legislatures & Congress (let alone the Presidency). Of course, when the opportunity to support a liberty candidate for one of those offices arises, we should certainly do so. But it will become *much* easier to do that once we've got a nice chunk of the party apparatus under our control. It will become *much* easier to find, field, support & elect liberty candidates once we're able to leverage part of the GOP infrastructure in our favor.

Ron Paul's presidential bids have been absolutely fantastic in terms of waking people up & getting them involved, but even if they had been successful, there wouldn't have been the support he (or any other president) would have needed to get anything useful done. Also, as soon as RP was out of office, an "un-insurged" GOP would surely have simply reversed most or all of whatever he did manage to achieve.

ETA: You can't climb a mountain by starting at the top.

[Indy Vidual]

For many (indeed, most) purposes, it doesn't. There are many worthwhile, important & necessary endeavors that need to be pursued and that do not require any involvement with the GOP at all.

Take educational & promotional activism, for instance. That can be done via the Libertarian Party, other organizations (like the Tenth Amendment Center, for example), or even via individuals or small, unaffiliated groups.

However, there is one particular endeavor - achieving & maintaining electoral success - which *does* (unfortunately) require continued involvement with the GOP.

Due to the nature of "winner-take-all" plurality representation, 3rd-party & independent electoral bids are doomed to fail. Throughout American history, there has only ever been two major parties at any given time. This isn't because of ballot-access restrictions or whatnot (as wrong & unjust as those things are). It's because of the pluralistic "winner-take-all" nature of the electoral system we have. So - unfortunately - if we wan't to achieve any lasting electoral success, we have to either take over or completely replace one of the already-existing major parties. Since we already have a foothold in the GOP, that's the one to go with.



The presidency needs to be the last place we try to take over. Especially in light of the "switch out our delegates" problem you mentioned. But even if it weren't for that, it would still be a mistake, I think, to focus on the presidency. In order to be successful, we need to "insurge" the GOP from the bottom up, rather from the top down.

For the "achieving & maintaining electoral success" part of the liberty movement, we *must* get as many of our people as possible into local & state Republican parties, from the precinct level up. This is the single most important thing of all. It's even more important than getting people elected to state legislatures & Congress (let alone the Presidency). Of course, when the opportunity to support a liberty candidate for one of those offices arises, we should certainly do so. But it will become *much* easier to do that once we've got a nice chunk of the party apparatus under our control. It will become *much* easier to find, field & support liberty candidates once we're able to leverage part of the GOP infrastructure in our favor.

Ron Paul's presidential bids have been absolutely fantastic in terms of waking people up & getting them involved, but even if they had been successful, there wouldn't have been the support he (or any other president) would have needed to get anything useful done. Also, as soon as RP was out of office, an "un-insurged" GOP would surely have simply reversed most or all of whatever he did manage to achieve.

+rep
Fair and balanced:
Have you thought about infiltrating the MSM?

[CaptLouAlbano]

For the "achieving & maintaining electoral success" part of the liberty movement, we *must* get as many of our people as possible into local & state Republican parties, from the precinct level up. This is the single most important thing of all. It's even more important than getting people elected to state legislatures & Congress (let alone the Presidency).

Spot on. And these are the easiest seats to win. Committee seats in many states are elected positions. They are usually two year terms, and are typically for a single precinct (or ward). When I lived in NJ the majority of the time the committee seats were unchallenged - meaning that whomever decided to run for the office was the winner. In the instances where it was a competitive race it would only take a few hundred votes to win the seat in a non-presidential year.

I would highly recommend everyone to take a look at the party rules for both your state and county GOP. Find out how to get elected onto the committee and do it if you are able. It is a highly rewarding service to the community and you can be incredibly effective at spreading the liberty message. Who knows - it may be the first step in a much greater political career for you.

[jllundqu]

I like the name PAUL (as in your sig) for the new party. Let me be first to sign on!

I also like the quote that follows! ;)

[Michigan11]

You know, alot of things are dependent upon finding a system that works, and then things usually get much easier to work with there after. It's still work, but once you find a point of success, it's best to continue and evolve with that success. Alot of times I think we need to remind ourselves where we began in this movement. In 07' I remember around the Dearborn, Michigan debate, I was in a meetup and Ron came to a hotel to meet and greet with supporters. There was only maybe 30 of us, and we were just getting a picture and saying hello to him. Nobody really thought he had a chance by any means to win however, and there were no lines to meet him either.

At that same juncture, money and I.D. recognition were the forethought, but most of us at that time just began connecting on the internet, and a million dollars if I remember right, was the goal. He wasn't even comfortable in front of crowds, because he never had crowds.

Then and now are very different. That was alot of work and money from everyone from then til present. We need to remember that I think.

[69360]

I intend to vote LP for president this year. I will stay registered GOP as I've always been. Rand is in real good shape for '16.

[sailingaway]

There are literally dozens of minor political parties that all had the idea that is being expressed here. None of them have ever been able to elect a candidate to a major office. The LP is a failure as well since it has been able to have any success outside of a small number of state legislature races (12 total I believe in 40+ years).

There is a reason behind this, and it has little to do with ballot access and the media. It has to do with people.

People that win political office at any level have some sort of connection in the community and political resume. I have been active in politics & my communities since the 1960's, and throughout my years every time a candidate runs for office on either the D or R ticket, I know who these people are. But whenever a third party (be it LP, Cp, Reform or whatever) would run for office, these people were unknown to me and all of my contacts.

To put it simply, you typically don't go from unknown to a Congressman or Senator overnight. Politics is a entity that calls for building and growth. Each election that a candidate participates in benefits him or her self for the next election they will run. That is why the overwhelming majority of the politicians that we know and love started out at the local level and/or had very strong connections to their community for many years.

And that therein is the fundamental flaw with third parties. They simply do not have the people that have the professional and civic resumes to win office. We have hundreds and quite possibly thousands of libertarian people already elected into office all across this country under the GOP banner. Those people who are today serving in local office will be our next county officials, those who hold county offices will be our next state legislators, those people current in state legislature will be our next Congressmen and Governors.

Look at Tom Davis for example. In 2 years he will be taking a run at Graham's Senate seat. But where did he come from? Davis as most of you know is a SC State Senator, but before he was able to win that seat he was Chief of Staff for Gov Sanford, before that he spent years serving in county positions in Beaufort County.

For those who wish to go down the path of starting a new party - go for it. But keep in mind that there are literally dozens of groups that had the same brilliant idea that you did and are wallowing away in ineffectiveness. Just ask the members of the American First Party, American Party, America's Party, Independent American Party, Christian Liberty Party, American Populist Party, Jefferson Republican Party or Objectivist Party how things are working out for them. Success at the ballot box takes more than an idea and a website. It takes having money and qualified people to run for office and win offices. So far the libertarian wing of the GOP has been very successful at this. The reason being that electable people are already serving within the GOP.

None of them have been able to have $6 million dollar money bombs either. There are more of us and we are more determined. I don't think we necessarily have the exact same limits, although we still may not be able to make a go of it. I'm backing Ron while he's still active, but I'd love our own party if that were the general consensus. I don't know that it is worth it with just a handful of us wanted to, though.

[Smitty]

I want freedom.

If a political party offers that,..fine,...but liberty isn't about partisanship.

In fact, partisanship is often used as a tool to limit personal liberties.

The GOP is particularly guilty of such activity,...as it has recently demonstrated.

[ShaneEnochs]

None of them have been able to have $6 million dollar money bombs either. There are more of us and we are more determined. I don't think we necessarily have the exact same limits, although we still may not be able to make a go of it. I'm backing Ron while he's still active, but I'd love our own party if that were the general consensus. I don't know that it is worth it with just a handful of us wanted to, though.

This.

The key to creating a successful third party is having a strong grassroots base, which we have in spades.

[tangent4ronpaul]

America First Party 2002
American Party 1969
American Populist Party 2009
American Third Position Party 2010
Americans Elect 2011
America's Party 2008 America's Independent Party
Christian Liberty Party 1996 American Heritage Party
Citizens Party of the United States 2004 New American Independent Party
Communist Party of the United States of America 1919 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
Freedom Socialist Party 1966
Independence Party of America 2007
Independent American Party 1998
Jefferson Republican Party 2006
Justice Party 2011
Labor Party 1996
Modern Whig Party 2008
National Socialist Movement 1974
Objectivist Party 2008
Party for Socialism and Liberation 2004
Peace and Freedom Party 1967
Prohibition Party 1869
Raza Unida Party 1970
Reform Party of the United States of America 1995
Socialist Action 1983 Fourth International
Socialist Alternative 1986 Committee for a Workers' International
Socialist Equality Party 1966 Workers League International Committee of the Fourth International
Socialist Party USA 1973
Socialist Workers Party 1938 Pathfinder tendency (unofficial)
United States Marijuana Party* 2002
United States Pacifist Party 1983
United States Pirate Party 2006
Unity Party of America 2004
Workers World Party 1959

Right-wing

This section includes any party that advocates positions associated with American conservatism, including both Old Right and New Right tendencies.

America First Party
Christian Liberty Party
American Party
America's Party
Independent American Party

State-only parties

Conservative Party of New York
Alaskan Independence Party
Florida Whig Party

Centrist

This section includes any party that is independent, populist, or any other that either rejects right-left politics or doesn't have a party platform.

Citizens Party
Independence Party of America
Modern Whig Party
Reform Party of the United States of America
Unity Party of America
Justice Party USA

State-only parties

Moderate Party (Illinois)
Republican Moderate Party of Alaska
Moderate Party of Rhode Island

Left-wing

This section includes any party that supports liberal, socialist, Marxist, or communist party platforms.

Working Families Party
Labor Party
Socialist Party USA
Communist Party USA
Socialist Labor Party of America*
Party for Socialism and Liberation
Peace and Freedom Party
Socialist Equality Party (United States)
Socialist Workers Party
Freedom Socialist Party
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Workers World Party

State-only parties

Liberal Party of New York
Vermont Progressive Party
Liberty Union Party

Libertarian

This section includes parties that primarily advocate libertarian policies, or otherwise general reductions in the size and power of the Federal government.

American Populist Party
Jefferson Republican Party
Objectivist Party

Ethnic nationalism

This section includes parties that primarily advocate for granting special privileges or consideration to members of a certain race, ethnic group, religion etc.

National Socialist Movement
American Third Position Party
Raza Unida Party

Single-issue/protest-oriented

This section includes parties that primarily advocate single-issue politics (though they may have a more detailed platform), and/or may seek to attract protest votes rather than to mount serious political campaigns or advocacy.

Prohibition Party
Pirate Party of the United States
United States Marijuana Party

State-only parties

New York State Right to Life Party
Rent Is Too Damn High Party
Marijuana Reform Party

Yeah - lets add ourselves to this list... :rolleyes:

-t

[ShaneEnochs]

America First Party 2002
American Party 1969
American Populist Party 2009
American Third Position Party 2010
Americans Elect 2011
America's Party 2008 America's Independent Party
Christian Liberty Party 1996 American Heritage Party
Citizens Party of the United States 2004 New American Independent Party
Communist Party of the United States of America 1919 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
Freedom Socialist Party 1966
Independence Party of America 2007
Independent American Party 1998
Jefferson Republican Party 2006
Justice Party 2011
Labor Party 1996
Modern Whig Party 2008
National Socialist Movement 1974
Objectivist Party 2008
Party for Socialism and Liberation 2004
Peace and Freedom Party 1967
Prohibition Party 1869
Raza Unida Party 1970
Reform Party of the United States of America 1995
Socialist Action 1983 Fourth International
Socialist Alternative 1986 Committee for a Workers' International
Socialist Equality Party 1966 Workers League International Committee of the Fourth International
Socialist Party USA 1973
Socialist Workers Party 1938 Pathfinder tendency (unofficial)
United States Marijuana Party* 2002
United States Pacifist Party 1983
United States Pirate Party 2006
Unity Party of America 2004
Workers World Party 1959

Right-wing

This section includes any party that advocates positions associated with American conservatism, including both Old Right and New Right tendencies.

America First Party
Christian Liberty Party
American Party
America's Party
Independent American Party

State-only parties

Conservative Party of New York
Alaskan Independence Party
Florida Whig Party

Centrist

This section includes any party that is independent, populist, or any other that either rejects right-left politics or doesn't have a party platform.

Citizens Party
Independence Party of America
Modern Whig Party
Reform Party of the United States of America
Unity Party of America
Justice Party USA

State-only parties

Moderate Party (Illinois)
Republican Moderate Party of Alaska
Moderate Party of Rhode Island

Left-wing

This section includes any party that supports liberal, socialist, Marxist, or communist party platforms.

Working Families Party
Labor Party
Socialist Party USA
Communist Party USA
Socialist Labor Party of America*
Party for Socialism and Liberation
Peace and Freedom Party
Socialist Equality Party (United States)
Socialist Workers Party
Freedom Socialist Party
Socialist Action
Socialist Alternative
Workers World Party

State-only parties

Liberal Party of New York
Vermont Progressive Party
Liberty Union Party

Libertarian

This section includes parties that primarily advocate libertarian policies, or otherwise general reductions in the size and power of the Federal government.

American Populist Party
Jefferson Republican Party
Objectivist Party

Ethnic nationalism

This section includes parties that primarily advocate for granting special privileges or consideration to members of a certain race, ethnic group, religion etc.

National Socialist Movement
American Third Position Party
Raza Unida Party

Single-issue/protest-oriented

This section includes parties that primarily advocate single-issue politics (though they may have a more detailed platform), and/or may seek to attract protest votes rather than to mount serious political campaigns or advocacy.

Prohibition Party
Pirate Party of the United States
United States Marijuana Party

State-only parties

New York State Right to Life Party
Rent Is Too Damn High Party
Marijuana Reform Party

Yeah - lets add ourselves to this list... :rolleyes:

-t

None of those have a base like ours. We can raise millions of dollars over night. Can they?

[realtonygoodwin]

Americans Elect could raise the money, and they were unsuccessful.

[ShaneEnochs]

Americans Elect could raise the money, and they were unsuccessful.

That's because they couldn't find a candidate that could get votes. Our movement has a very specific vetting process for candidates. You only need a few thousand signatures in most states to get on the ballot.

[CaptLouAlbano]

That's because they couldn't find a candidate that could get votes. Our movement has a very specific vetting process for candidates. You only need a few thousand signatures in most states to get on the ballot.

Getting on the ballot is just one step though. Getting votes is an entirely different thing. To win a US House seat for example you need 100,000 to 200,000 votes, depending of course on the CD. From the folks that are kicking around the idea of a new party who among you have ever run for and won an election for a state legislature or congressional seat? You mention vetting candidates, and that is great for identifying people that have the ideological positions you want to support, but do any of you have the political resume that it takes to win a state or federal race?