Video: RNC Corruption: Should Libertarians Leave Republican Party?

[orenbus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2qhx_LXAOw

[wgadget]

They should stay in the GOP and be a thorn in their flesh. They should also vote strategically based on their state's election laws.

[MozoVote]

I've struggled with the question. But there is a good local candidate to support here, so I plan to remain in the GOP at least through this election cycle.

I am going to let someone else become precinct chair though. I've had enough of being a sheep herder, that distributes GOP literature containing some candidates on the slate, that I just don't like.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Leaving the GOP means that liberty activists cannot run for GOP committee seats at the county level. It is of the highest priority that we have more liberty minded people elected to county committee so that we can have a greater presence in the state committees and national committee.

Additionally, in most states you cannot vote in the primary election if you are not registered in the GOP. Since every single libertarian elected to Congress has been elected as a Republican it is advantageous for liberty activists to remain registered as Republican to help candidates win in primary races.

Lastly, the reality is that the LP is a minor party. The large majority of their candidates get single digit results in state and federal races. Even if every single member of this forum were to join the LP and actively support their candidates, it would not effect the results at the polls significantly.

[orenbus]

Even if every single member of this forum were to join the LP and actively support their candidates, it would not effect the results at the polls significantly.

Hmm I don't know about you, but I bring the thunder. :D

That said I don't have any plans though to re-register right now.

[phill4paul]

I'll be registering Independent in Oct. when I renew my D.L. The GOP will not count me on the rolls of membership. I will still vote for the candidates that I feel best represent me.

[presence]

RNC needs a paint job.

http://www.truevalue.com/assets/product_images/styles/large/338798.jpg

http://www.avoiceformen.com/portal/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/White-feathers.jpg

[Peace&Freedom]

Leaving the GOP means that liberty activists cannot run for GOP committee seats at the county level. It is of the highest priority that we have more liberty minded people elected to county committee so that we can have a greater presence in the state committees and national committee.

Additionally, in most states you cannot vote in the primary election if you are not registered in the GOP. Since every single libertarian elected to Congress has been elected as a Republican it is advantageous for liberty activists to remain registered as Republican to help candidates win in primary races.

Lastly, the reality is that the LP is a minor party. The large majority of their candidates get single digit results in state and federal races. Even if every single member of this forum were to join the LP and actively support their candidates, it would not effect the results at the polls significantly.

There will continue to be liberty people in both the GOP and the LP. It's not an either/or, and there have been failures on both sides in terms of getting things accomplished for liberty. The establishment knows how to marginalize us using both vehicles. The real reality is that we need a third option, that permits us to win more races without having to deal with corruption and special interests.

Let's not set the two party alternatives against each other, but fuse them from a vantage point that is independent of party. Let's use the principled LP candidates fielded and vetted by that party to run in major party primary races, just as Paul did. We stand a much higher chance of winning in open seat cases, or at least gaining real influence that way, than laboring for years through party committees, ranks and rules, hoping enough people hang in there through all that time to succeed in the end. That's like trying to walk across the US from LA to NY over broken glass, instead of just taking a plane. Let's get it done in a more high percentage way, in our lifetime.

[CaptLouAlbano]

There will continue to be liberty people in both the GOP and the LP. It's not an either/or, and there have been failures on both sides in terms of getting things accomplished for liberty. The establishment knows how to marginalize us using both vehicles. The real reality is that we need a third option, that permits us to win more races without having to deal with corruption and special interests.

Let's not set the two party alternatives against each other, but fuse them from a vantage point that is independent of party. Let's use the principled LP candidates fielded and vetted by that party to run in major party primary races, just as Paul did. We stand a much higher chance of winning in open seat cases, or at least gaining real influence that way, than laboring for years through party committees, ranks and rules, hoping enough people hang in there through all that time to succeed in the end. That's like trying to walk across the US from LA to NY over broken glass, instead of just taking a plane. Let's get it done in a more high percentage way, in our lifetime.

Politics is a numbers game, plain and simple. The LP does not have the numbers to win elections at the state and federal level. And a third option (i.e. a new party) would have even fewer numbers - we see that evidenced in the CP and the various other minor parties that have sprung up in the last decade or so.

If a liberty activist is not registered as a Republican they can not run for a county committee seat. In that case then the seat will be filled by someone from another faction of the GOP (neo-con, moderate, liberal, social-con, etc). If we wish to see substantive reform of the GOP - which is a stated goal of Ron Paul, then we need liberty activists to run for these local seats.

And again, in most states, unless you are registered as a Republican you cannot participate in the primary elections. Therefore, a liberty activist would be unable to vote for candidates like Massie, Amash, Bentivolio, etc and put them in a position where they are able to win the general election. The majority of the gains the liberty movement has made over the last 4 years have come in the primary elections. Open seats in strong GOP districts are far easier races to win (in terms of the number of votes needed and the financial resources needed), and when you look at the list of the candidates that are a virtual shoe in for this year's general election, you can see that most of them followed this formula.

The LP's biggest problem is that it does not have a field of electable candidates to run for office. Most of those who run for state and federal offices are virtually unknown in their district and have never held an elected office before. When you look at the overwhelming majority of state and federal officials you will see that they started their political careers at the local level and ascended from there. For example: Massie was a county judge before winning his primary for the Congressional seat, Bills served on city council and then in the state legislature before winning the Senatorial primary.

The fact remains that the LP has not won a state legislature seat in over 10 years, and the majority of the 12 LP victories in its 40 year history have been with fusion candidates. People are free to do what they wish, but the proven means of success at the ballot box for libertarian candidates has been within the GOP. This year the LP will run hundreds of candidates for state and federal offices, and spend millions of dollars doing so. The results this year will be the same as they have been in year's past - there will be not a single LP candidate who wins an election for a state of federal office. Meanwhile, the liberty movement in the GOP will have many victories.

[mz10]

Staying in the GOP doesn't always mean you have to vote GOP. Therefore we can continue making strides without having to compromise any principles.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Staying in the GOP doesn't always mean you have to vote GOP. Therefore we can continue making strides without having to compromise any principles.

Absolutely. I have been a registered Republican for my entire life, but I rarely have pulled a straight ticket. I vote for Republican candidates that share my views and if there are none on the ballot, I leave that line blank.

[Carlybee]

Being independent means I can vote however I want without being attached to a crime syndicate

[CaptLouAlbano]

Being independent means I can vote however I want without being attached to a crime syndicate

However, you cannot vote in the GOP primary. The first step to getting liberty candidates elected to state and federal offices is for them to win their primary election.

[Keith and stuff]

Didn't Matt already create the official thread :)
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?388692-Leaving-the-GOP-is-what-the-establishment-WANTS-you-to-do!

[Carlybee]

However, you cannot vote in the GOP primary. The first step to getting liberty candidates elected to state and federal offices is for them to win their primary election.


Oh well. We have now gone from trying to get liberty candidates elected to "liberty minded". Which is not the same thing. Being in the GOP means you might get a few liberty items on the platform, you might get a few liberty items voted on, but ultimately as we have seen, you better be prepared to compromise on some major issues.

[cajuncocoa]

However, you cannot vote in the GOP primary. The first step to getting liberty candidates elected to state and federal offices is for them to win their primary election.If there is anyone worthy of my vote, I can always change back.

[CaptLouAlbano]

If there is anyone worthy of my vote, I can always change back.

In most states you can. There is a deadline typically, so keep that in mind. It will be difficult for you to run for office yourself however, if you keep bouncing back and forth. In some locales you need to be a member of a party for a given period of time before you can run for an office within that party. Check your state and parish rules though for clarification on that.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Oh well. We have now gone from trying to get liberty candidates elected to "liberty minded". Which is not the same thing. Being in the GOP means you might get a few liberty items on the platform, you might get a few liberty items voted on, but ultimately as we have seen, you better be prepared to compromise on some major issues.

Compromise is part of politics until you have the strength in numbers. With the gains the liberty movement will make this year, we will still be a minority voice. Possibly with the 2014 mid terms we will have the numbers in our favor so that we will not have to make any concessions to advance our legislative initiatives.

[FSP-Rebel]

If unregistering as a republican makes one feel more righteous then have at it. But, it's in the off season where we need to make our gains in coalition building w/i the party which Ron was famous for as well as getting more of our people in on the ground floor as delegates to get ready to go to the next state convention and shake up the leadership if not outright change it.

[Carlybee]

Compromise is part of politics until you have the strength in numbers. With the gains the liberty movement will make this year, we will still be a minority voice. Possibly with the 2014 mid terms we will have the numbers in our favor so that we will not have to make any concessions to advance our legislative initiatives.

Good luck. Some of us on here want no further part of it and my responses speak directly to the question asked in the OP. I am a small l libertarian and tired of 8 years of pretending to be a Republican. It's dishonest at the core as is trying to take over a party that has very little to do with my ideology other than perhaps a restoration of fiscal sanity. (just my intentions...others can do as they wish). And I'm not falling for the guilt trip anymore that this is what Ron wanted us to do. I was only in it for him to begin with and now he's gone. I love him to death but the RNC showed us that unfortunately it is a flawed plan.

[cajuncocoa]

In most states you can. There is a deadline typically, so keep that in mind. It will be difficult for you to run for office yourself however, if you keep bouncing back and forth. In some locales you need to be a member of a party for a given period of time before you can run for an office within that party. Check your state and parish rules though for clarification on that.In MY state I can, and I'm aware of the deadline. And I have no intention of ever running for public office. But thanks for the advice.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Good luck. Some of us on here want no further part of it and my responses speak directly to the question asked in the OP. I am a small l libertarian and tired of 8 years of pretending to be a Republican. It's dishonest at the core as is trying to take over a party that has very little to do with my ideology other than perhaps a restoration of fiscal sanity. (just my intentions...others can do as they wish).

Have you ever run for office?

[phill4paul]

However, you cannot vote in the GOP primary. The first step to getting liberty candidates elected to state and federal offices is for them to win their primary election.

Negative. Depends on your state. In N.C. unaffiliated voters may choose either the Republican primary or the Democratic primary to vote in.

[cajuncocoa]

Yet again we see which side it is that just cannot live and let live. Contrary to what some here would like everyone to believe, it's not Carlybee and/or I who are trying to talk anyone else out of doing whatever it is they want to do.

[angelatc]

Negative. Depends on your state. In N.C. unaffiliated voters may choose either the Republican primary or the Democratic primary to vote in.

Michigan - any voter can ask for either ballot.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Yet again we see which side it is that just cannot live and let live. Contrary to what some here would like everyone to believe, it's not Carlybee and/or I who are trying to talk anyone else out of doing whatever it is they want to do.

Everyone is free to do what they wish. I think though many of us have laid out what has worked successfully this year, and in years past. It is far easier to repeat what has worked, than to come up with another way of doing things - especially when other methods have documented results of failure.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Negative. Depends on your state. In N.C. unaffiliated voters may choose either the Republican primary or the Democratic primary to vote in.

I was referencing Texas. In my original post on the primaries, I noted that in most states the primaries are closed for state and federal offices.

And of course you cannot run for county committee if you are not registered in the GOP - that is for every state as far as I know. But it seems from reading here very few people are actually interested in getting elected to office. That's a shame though, since it is people who are passionate about the principles which we hold dear are the ones we need running for office.

Folks should just keep in mind, that if you don't run, someone else will. And they very well may not be someone whom you agree with or can support. Local offices and committee seats take very little money to win, and very little of one's time (usually one meeting a month or so). However, the impact you can have is great.

[Carlybee]

Have you ever run for office?


Why does everyone here seem to think that any and all people are office holding type people? There is a criteria for being the type person who should run for office..not just anybody and everybody off the street. I hate speaking in public. I work full time and can never get time off. I have a physical ailment that curtails me from standing very long at one time without spinal issues. When you tell people they should run, you should realize that running for office is not a one size fits all thing. Some people work better behind the scenes or just contributing in other ways that they can. In short and to answer your question succinctly...no and I never will.

[cajuncocoa]

Everyone is free to do what they wish. I think though many of us have laid out what has worked successfully this year, and in years past. It is far easier to repeat what has worked, than to come up with another way of doing things - especially when other methods have documented results of failure.I'm glad it's working for you and those who wish to continue on this path. You have my sincere blessings, but I don't choose to follow you.

[cajuncocoa]

Why does everyone here seem to think that any and all people are office holding type people? There is a criteria for being the type person who should run for office..not just anybody and everybody off the street. I hate speaking in public. I work full time and can never get time off. I have a physical ailment that curtails me from standing very long at one time without spinal issues. When you tell people they should run, you should realize that running for office is not a one size fits all thing. Some people work better behind the scenes or just contributing in other ways that they can. In short and to answer your question succinctly...no and I never will.You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Carlybee again.

[angelatc]

Nobody is going to change their mind, but being Republican only in the election when you like a particular candidate doesn't really help. The real nuts-and-blots of the campaign season, the boring administrative behind-the-scenes actions, take place in the non-election years.

People who are whimpering because they've been active for 7 years should remember that Marianne Stebbins has been doing this for 25 or so. Her state was a Ron Paul state.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Nobody is going to change their mind, but being Republican only in the election when you like a particular candidate doesn't really help. The real nuts-and-blots of the campaign season, the boring administrative behind-the-scenes actions, take place in the non-election years.

People who are whimpering because they've been active for 7 years should remember that Marianne Stebbins has been doing this for 25 or so. Her state was a Ron Paul state.

I have been at this since 1960. I have seen victories and failures, but you never give up when you believe in something.

[Carlybee]

No one has the right to tell a libertarian they better join or stay in the GOP. It's misleading that the GOP will become the party of liberty because even when states like MN do become majority RP people...the GOP chops them off at the knees and nothing is done about it.

[sailingaway]

Nobody is going to change their mind, but being Republican only in the election when you like a particular candidate doesn't really help. The real nuts-and-blots of the campaign season, the boring administrative behind-the-scenes actions, take place in the non-election years.

People who are whimpering because they've been active for 7 years should remember that Marianne Stebbins has been doing this for 25 or so. Her state was a Ron Paul state.

what can we run her for? She is truly a great selection.

[cajuncocoa]

I don't believe anyone here said they are "giving up". Again, we see which side it is that continues to misrepresent the other. There are numerous jobs to do in getting liberty candidates elected. Only some of them require being in a particular political party. Others do not.

[cajuncocoa]

No one has the right to tell a libertarian they better join or stay in the GOP. It's misleading that the GOP will become the party of liberty because even when states like MN do become majority RP people...the GOP chops them off at the knees and nothing is done about it.Not to mention that MN is largely a "blue" state in the first place.

[sailingaway]

Not to mention that MN is largely a "blue" state in the first place.

the point here isn't proving one side in this is 'right' that it is or isn't a good path to work within the GOP. The point is respecting the individual choice of members to select their own actions.

[CaptLouAlbano]

No one has the right to tell a libertarian they better join or stay in the GOP. It's misleading that the GOP will become the party of liberty because even when states like MN do become majority RP people...the GOP chops them off at the knees and nothing is done about it.

You are looking at one nomination race, and not what those folks will be able to do in state and federal elections forthcoming. It was the work of the liberty activists in MN that got Bills the nomination, and while that will be a very difficult one to win in the general, MN is on the right track. Additionally, they will have members seated on the national committee. If we are able to replicate what has been done in MN, IA and other states we will see a remarkable change of the structure of the national committee, and could very well be looking at a national chair that represents our wing of the party in the next 2-4 years.

[Carlybee]

Not to mention that MN is largely a "blue" state in the first place.


I'm proud of those delegates for what they did. Not proud of the GOP for silencing them and there is the crux of the problem. Look at what happened to Maine and LA. So much lying and cheating from the party we are supposed to be a part of. Sickening.

[Carlybee]

You are looking at one nomination race, and not what those folks will be able to do in state and federal elections forthcoming. It was the work of the liberty activists in MN that got Bills the nomination, and while that will be a very difficult one to win in the general, MN is on the right track. Additionally, they will have members seated on the national committee. If we are able to replicate what has been done in MN, IA and other states we will see a remarkable change of the structure of the national committee, and could very well be looking at a national chair that represents our wing of the party in the next 2-4 years.


And there is every good chance that I will donate financially to certain candidates who meet the liberty criteria. I can do that without re-joining the GOP and I dare anyone here to say that monetary contributions are not a huge part of getting them elected.

[cajuncocoa]

the point here isn't proving one side in this is 'right' that it is or isn't a good path to work within the GOP. The point is respecting the individual choice of members to select their own actions.I agree! Why would you think I don't?

[CaptLouAlbano]

I'm proud of those delegates for what they did. Not proud of the GOP for silencing them and there is the crux of the problem. Look at what happened to Maine and LA. So much lying and cheating from the party we are supposed to be a part of. Sickening.

Again it is a numbers game. We have control of a small number of states, which does not give us the numbers needed to make fundamental changes at the national level. However, there are committee seats up for grabs next year and the following which could result in us having a much larger contingency, and potentially the majority of states. All it takes is for liberty activists to win those local seats and with enough people doing it we win the county and the state.

[FSP-Rebel]

I don't believe anyone here said they are "giving up". Again, we see which side it is that continues to misrepresent the other. There are numerous jobs to do in getting liberty candidates elected. Only some of them require being in a particular political party. Others do not.
After viewing many of your past posts, it did directly lead many to think that giving up is exactly what the sentiment was. That being said, why would I or other doers be cool with people that have abandoned the movement. As far as what side is what, going scorched on Ron's GOP restoration plan in job-mode leads one to "misrepresent" what one's intentions truly are. Good to see you're still on board somewhat.:)

[Carlybee]

After viewing many of your past posts, it did directly lead many to think that giving up is exactly what the sentiment was. That being said, why would I or other doers be cool with people that have abandoned the movement. As far as what side is what, going scorched on Ron's GOP restoration plan in job-mode leads one to "misrepresent" what one's intentions truly are. Good to see you're still on board somewhat.:)


She and I are both long time Ron Paul supporters. Where does it say in the title of this forum that it is the Movement forum? Unless I am mistaken this forum is for those of us who support RP whether or not we support the movement attached to his name. We supported him as a presidential candidate and I was under the impression that the grass roots was for getting him the nomination? I was under the impression that those who are seeking office as part of the "movement" had their own sub-forums. If I am wrong, someone please correct me. If I am wrong that donating money and trying to educate people on the concepts of liberty is not contributing to the "movement", but rather one is expected to have an R after their name, or run for office in order to be considered a part of it, then please correct me.


Subheading: The hub for grassroots discussion on Ron Paul.

[sailingaway]

I agree! Why would you think I don't?

It wasn't just directed at you. It seemed to be turning into that sort of argument, and I think we have had too many of those, is all. Personally, I think working in the GOP has been constructive and I want to continue our gains, but a) it is incremental and b) with the current rules and willingness to cheat even on national tv, I think a counter balance approach to try to change the rules of the game is also in order. I'm not sure exactly what it is, and don't think I'll need to change voter registration to do it, but it will be a different avenue in addition to the press inside the GOP. I don't think any regular member here is giving up the effort, and think it slows momentum to attack ways others want to work on this, inside or outside of the party. That isn't the same as expressing your personal preference for what you yourself want to do.

characterizing ONLY those who choose one avenue as 'doers' raises the false negative pregnant that those who want to work for liberty differently are not 'doers', for example.

It also turns off people who are willing to donate and add their voices when others are pushing a project, even if it isn't their particular 'type' of project, so it is not constructive.

[cajuncocoa]

After viewing many of your past posts, it did directly lead many to think that giving up is exactly what the sentiment was. That being said, why would I or other doers be cool with people that have abandoned the movement. As far as what side is what, going scorched on Ron's GOP restoration plan in job-mode leads one to "misrepresent" what one's intentions truly are. Good to see you're still on board somewhat.:)Why is it so hard for those of you on the GOP side to comprehend what Carlybee and I are writing? Could you point out where it is we said we are "abandoning the movement"? We were part of the liberty movement before RPF even existed!!

[Carlybee]

Why is it so hard for those of you on the GOP side to comprehend what Carlybee and I are writing? Could you point out where it is we said we are "abandoning the movement"? We were part of the liberty movement before RPF even existed!!

+rep

[cajuncocoa]

It wasn't just directed at you. But many comments that are being made in this thread and many others ARE directed at me, sailing...and I'm not going to stand for it without rebuttal. As I said in a previous post, I know Carlybee a long time, and she and I supported Ron Paul before RPF even existed. I'm not going to stand for people I barely know trying to misrepresent both of us as "giving up" or "doing nothing".

[cajuncocoa]

characterizing ONLY those who choose one avenue as 'doers' raises the false negative pregnant that those who want to work for liberty differently are not 'doers', for example.

It also turns off people who are willing to donate and add their voices when others are pushing a project, even if it isn't their particular 'type' of project, so it is not constructive.I see you edited your post since I replied....added comments much appreciated, and +rep

[sailingaway]

But many comments that are being made in this thread and many others ARE directed at me, sailing...and I'm not going to stand for it without rebuttal. As I said in a previous post, I know Carlybee a long time, and she and I supported Ron Paul before RPF even existed. I'm not going to stand for people I barely know trying to misrepresent both of us as "giving up" or "doing nothing".

I directed comments at others as well. It is on both sides.

[phill4paul]

There was once a debate between military officers about who's command it was that really won the wars.

The command of the calvary said, "Well, of course, it is the calvary that wins the wars. We charge into our enemies and drive them from the field. The calvary is the command that wins the wars."

The command of artillery, puffed his chest and said, "Well, that is well and good of course, however if the artillery did not soften the enemies resolve than a calvary charge may end in defeat. It is the artillary that wins the wars."

The command of logistics, slamming his fist to the table, replied, "And what would happen, my good men, if the horses of the cavalry never recieved it's grains and oat's nor the artillary it's shells? Why you would be an army that would be useless on the battlefield. It is logistics which wins the war!"

Coming to a standstill they asked the steward of his thoughts on the subject at hand.

"I don't know, sirs." said the private. "I believe it matters not who is at the head of a charge or at the end. The only thing that matters is that they work together to bring about victory."

[coffeewithgames]

Why is it so hard for those of you on the GOP side to comprehend what Carlybee and I are writing? Could you point out where it is we said we are "abandoning the movement"? We were part of the liberty movement before RPF even existed!!

Or, even before we knew who Ron Paul was.

[cajuncocoa]

Or, even before we knew who Ron Paul was.Yes, that too.

[FSP-Rebel]

Why is it so hard for those of you on the GOP side to comprehend what Carlybee and I are writing? Could you point out where it is we said we are "abandoning the movement"? We were part of the liberty movement before RPF even existed!!
Come on, man. There's no shortage of witnesses of dozens of threads where some people relentlessly bemoaned, belittled, called into question, ridiculed and outright dismissed Ron's GOP restoration plan. That means, to many of the active supporters of that plan, that some are directly opposed to that goal and are potentially wishful of that plans demise. It's evidenced by the continual bashing of that approach despite the many overlooked and unacknowledged successes. The pro-restore the GOP folks aren't on some other planet that haven't seen the dirt at the RNC but that could've been prevented if we were further down the line and more entrenched in the party. The fact is, some people by their serial rejection of Ron's restore plan with their every last breath here, appeared to seem like they were abandoning the movement. Most of the posts espousing such rhetoric offered next to nothing in the form of positive steps toward future activism, just negativity to the nth degree. There never would've been any animosity if one would've offered their initial disagreements and then at least acknowledged the obvious advancements that have been made then moved on. Yet, that wasn't the case and there was a concerted effort to ritually bash any forward progress in the GOP for months on end. As I previously mentioned and have stated in recent times, it's nice to see some of that crowd make note of the fact that they're still involved in some fashion rather than being pessimistic, defeatist and having the appearance of despising Ron's stated goal in his grassroots sub. Like yall, I was part of the liberty movement prior to a message board's birth but that movement wasn't worth a crap prior to Ron connecting the remnant with the newly educated and focusing us on a strategy to make us more effective in restoring liberty.

[sailingaway]

Come on, man. There's no shortage of witnesses of dozens of threads where some people relentlessly bemoaned, belittled, called into question, ridiculed and outright dismissed Ron's GOP restoration plan. That means, to many of the active supporters of that plan, that some are directly opposed to that goal and are potentially wishful of that plans demise. It's evidenced by the continual bashing of that approach despite the many overlooked and unacknowledged successes. The pro-restore the GOP folks aren't on some other planet that haven't seen the dirt at the RNC but that could've been prevented if we were further down the line and more entrenched in the party. The fact is, some people by their serial rejection of Ron's restore plan with their every last breath here, appeared to seem like they were abandoning the movement. Most of the posts espousing such rhetoric offered next to nothing in the form of positive steps toward future activism, just negativity to the nth degree. There never would've been any animosity if one would've offered their initial disagreements and then at least acknowledged the obvious advancements that have been made then moved on. Yet, that wasn't the case and there was a concerted effort to ritually bash any forward progress in the GOP for months on end. As I previously mentioned and have stated in recent times, it's nice to see some of that crowd make note of the fact that they're still involved in some fashion rather than being pessimistic, defeatist and having the appearance of despising Ron's stated goal in his grassroots sub. Like yall, I was part of the liberty movement prior to a message board's birth but that movement wasn't worth a crap prior to Ron connecting the remnant with the newly educated and focusing us on a strategy to make us more effective in restoring liberty.

Sounds kind of like what happened in the threads discussing and supporting Ron's delegates going into Tampa. Be honest, it is on both sides. People shouldn't spend their energy deriding how OTHERS choose to act towards their goals.

[FSP-Rebel]

Sounds kind of like what happened in the threads discussing and supporting Ron's delegates going into Tampa. Be honest, it is on both sides. People shouldn't spend their energy deriding how OTHERS choose to act towards their goals.
There was no offering of further activism outside of going LP. I can't speak to the threads you've mentioned because I've donated to plenty of these delegates both on and off this board. If some in the restore the GOP tent had issues with sending delegates to the RNC, I'm unaware of it.

[sailingaway]

There was no offering of further activism outside of going LP. I can't speak to the threads you've mentioned because I've donated to plenty of these delegates both on and off this board. If some in the restore the GOP tent had issues with sending delegates to the RNC, I'm unaware of it.

I'm not speaking of your donations, but of people in threads trying to work towards supporting delegates and others coming in saying to give up, they were delusional and needed to spend their time doing other things.

It is the same thing.

People's personal activity choices should be respected.

Some felt strongly then that what others were doing was a waste of time, while those others wanted to get Ron's name in nomination (which filing occurred, although the RNC changed the rules after that.)

Some feel strongly now that working in the GOP as a primary goal is a waste of time. I don't happen to agree, but on BOTH sides, just dissing and sniping at others actions slows momentum and ruins morale and I hope we can quit it.

On the other hand, people shouldn't be bullied into working on a particular project by assertions that if they don't agree with that approach, they are not acceptable.

[FSP-Rebel]

People's personal activity choices should be respected.
agreed

[cajuncocoa]

There was no offering of further activism outside of going LP. I can't speak to the threads you've mentioned because I've donated to plenty of these delegates both on and off this board. If some in the restore the GOP tent had issues with sending delegates to the RNC, I'm unaware of it.Newsflash: I don't need to offer evidence of activism to you. And I didn't say I was going LP either.

[hrdman2luv]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2qhx_LXAOw

This video makes some good points. But I support continue fighting within the GOP, while voting for the Liberty candidates. If the GOP put's forth a legitimate liberty candidate, I don't know any one that wouldn't support that person. But, when they GOP's candidate isn't liberty minded, then vote for the Libertarian party. You can do both.
Your vote is private, unless you make it public.

Kill two birds with one stone.

[Carlybee]

There was no offering of further activism outside of going LP. I can't speak to the threads you've mentioned because I've donated to plenty of these delegates both on and off this board. If some in the restore the GOP tent had issues with sending delegates to the RNC, I'm unaware of it.


But there was activism going on outside this board and this movement that some may have been totally unaware of. For example: The Blue Republican movement. I was not a part of that or actually didn't really know much about it but I do know they did a lot of work toward getting RP the nomination as well as getting a lot of anti-war Democrats on board with RP's message of liberty. However I didn't see much mention of them nor their efforts on this board. (and there may have been before I started posting here, I don't know...just saying)

[cajuncocoa]

People's personal activity choices should be respected.Agreed!

[sailingaway]

But there was activism going on outside this board and this movement that some may have been totally unaware of. For example: The Blue Republican movement. I was not a part of that or actually didn't really know much about it but I do know they did a lot of work toward getting RP the nomination as well as getting a lot of anti-war Democrats on board with RP's message of liberty. However I didn't see much mention of them nor their efforts on this board. (and there may have been before I started posting here, I don't know...just saying)

There was more mention up to the Washington caucuses and conventions, because Robin K who headed it up was in that area. (He couldn't personally vote, being a permanent resident fulfilling years prior to applying for citizenship, but he was very active.) He then posted some articles here, as did others post his articles, but at that point it wasn't as much a movement separate but integrated within Paul delegates and supporters, at least for this year. Those Blue Republicans planned to be in only one year, and it will likely take someone tempting to them to keep them in, but I don't expect them to quit caring about liberty or quit working towards it.

And they are now part of our networks and can be alerted when something of interest comes up.

[cajuncocoa]

The Blue Republicans were specifically in it to support Ron Paul. I doubt that they will continue to support anyone else in the GOP...after all, there is only one Ron Paul.

[sailingaway]

The Blue Republicans were specifically in it to support Ron Paul. I doubt that they will continue to support anyone else in the GOP...after all, there is only one Ron Paul.

Actually, there are all of us, as well. We had some spectacular delegates. I foresee future Ron Pauls.

[Peace&Freedom]

The fact remains that the LP has not won a state legislature seat in over 10 years, and the majority of the 12 LP victories in its 40 year history have been with fusion candidates. People are free to do what they wish, but the proven means of success at the ballot box for libertarian candidates has been within the GOP. This year the LP will run hundreds of candidates for state and federal offices, and spend millions of dollars doing so. The results this year will be the same as they have been in year's past - there will be not a single LP candidate who wins an election for a state of federal office. Meanwhile, the liberty movement in the GOP will have many victories.

Almost all those liberty victories (that is, in major elections) have come without using the major party apparatus, or in the face of opposition from that apparatus. The GOP history of legislative failure is the perfect complement of third party electoral failure, and the fact that other third parties have fared the same shows the lack of 'electability' is structurally imposed upon those efforts. 'Victories' mean nothing if policy never changes, or the victors are mired in compromise and corruption. I stressed we should strive at getting somewhere, outside of becoming dependent on ANY party structure, yet the response above swiftly misdirected things back to running down the LP, without accounting for the other issues.

This missed the entire point I was making, that liberty candidates are more likely to be 'electable' INDEPENDENT of party, major or minor, in specific situations (open seat primaries), than by pursuing EITHER third party election campaigns, or major party restoration efforts. Both of the latter paths are designed by TPTB in our current election system to lead to marginalizing or neutralizing the movement. The current system is designed by the big special interests (big banks, big militarists, big oil, big biz) to PROTECT the establishment from alternative movements, from either the major or minor party direction. To overcome this we should pursue a plan C, instead of settling for a cage A (GOP) or cage B (LP) mentality.

[cajuncocoa]

Actually, there are all of us, as well. We had some spectacular delegates. I foresee future Ron Pauls.I understand what you're saying, but Blue Republicans might not see it the way some here do. Being Democrats (in reality) I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be interested in making concessions with GOP establishment as some "liberty candidates" have had to do, according to their supporters.

[sailingaway]

I understand what you're saying, but Blue Republicans might not see it the way some here do. Being Democrats (in reality) I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be interested in making concessions with GOP establishment as some "liberty candidates" have had to do, according to their supporters.

Each person would have to see the candidate as attractive and be willing to look at them. But if we continue to be guided by our principles, when we find those principles wrapped up in human skin, we should be all attracted.

[angelatc]

People's personal activity choices should be respected.

Sure, but some people are so bitter and defensive about their decision that it's hard to believe they're actually at peace with it.

Of course, the reality is that a majority of Republicans aren't active in the party, only showing up to vote for the (R) that the media told them to choose.

[NoOneButPaul]

Come on, man. There's no shortage of witnesses of dozens of threads where some people relentlessly bemoaned, belittled, called into question, ridiculed and outright dismissed Ron's GOP restoration plan. That means, to many of the active supporters of that plan, that some are directly opposed to that goal and are potentially wishful of that plans demise. It's evidenced by the continual bashing of that approach despite the many overlooked and unacknowledged successes. The pro-restore the GOP folks aren't on some other planet that haven't seen the dirt at the RNC but that could've been prevented if we were further down the line and more entrenched in the party. The fact is, some people by their serial rejection of Ron's restore plan with their every last breath here, appeared to seem like they were abandoning the movement. Most of the posts espousing such rhetoric offered next to nothing in the form of positive steps toward future activism, just negativity to the nth degree. There never would've been any animosity if one would've offered their initial disagreements and then at least acknowledged the obvious advancements that have been made then moved on. Yet, that wasn't the case and there was a concerted effort to ritually bash any forward progress in the GOP for months on end. As I previously mentioned and have stated in recent times, it's nice to see some of that crowd make note of the fact that they're still involved in some fashion rather than being pessimistic, defeatist and having the appearance of despising Ron's stated goal in his grassroots sub. Like yall, I was part of the liberty movement prior to a message board's birth but that movement wasn't worth a crap prior to Ron connecting the remnant with the newly educated and focusing us on a strategy to make us more effective in restoring liberty.

Perfectly put.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Of course, the reality is that a majority of Republicans aren't active in the party, only showing up to vote for the (R) that the media told them to choose.

And that is the huge advantage we have working within the GOP. Two points from your statement that I want to expand upon:

The first is that a majority of Republicans are not active in the party. This is very true. For example in my county there are over 100,000 registered voters. But when you total up our county committee and the handful of local GOP clubs and organizations the total is only around a few hundred people, which is way less than 1% of registered voters. The same is true in the nearly every county across the country. What that means is it only takes a small number of dedicated activists being involved in the local party organizations to have a tremendous influence on the electorate.

The second point is that many people will show up and pull a straight ticket in the general, or vote for the candidates that the media told them to. This is very true, and you can see in elections around the country for as many years as you can find information that the candidates who were endorsed by local organizations and county committees typically outperform unendorsed candidates.

So the means by which we get more liberty candidates elected to office is as clear as day. Liberty activists need to become involved in local GOP organizations and/or run for committee seats. Once we have a majority voice on those committees we can then endorse liberty candidates for elected office. Those candidates will then outperform unendorsed candidates and succeed at the polls the overwhelming majority of the time.

It isn't rocket science. Just show up, get involved, and we will see more liberty candidates elected to state and federal offices. The more candidates we elect to state and federal offices, the larger the voting bloc we will have. The larger the voting bloc, the more likely legislation we support will pass the various bodies of government.

[LibertyRevolution]

I don't care you if want to stay in the GOP, that is your prerogative. Just stop expecting us all to stay..
After 5 years of it, I have had enough of the games. I cannot deal with my local GOP, these people here are hopeless.

Spreading the liberty message to my local GOP is like trying to sell bacon cheeseburgers at a synagogue to the parishioners as temple gets out.
I could spend all the money I want, I could put in all the effort I have, and still I would be the poor shunned outcast...

Some of us joined the GOP only to vote for Ron Paul.
He was as a libertarian, we fallowed him to the GOP when he asked us help him win the nomination, but now most of us are going home.
We are trying to invite you to come with us, to help make a viable liberty party, we have the same goals and principals.

If you look at the latest who you going to vote for poll thread here on the forums, you will the the liberty movement is damn evenly divided.
It drives me crazy to think that the LP could have twice as many votes, but people would rather write in Ron Paul.

I feel used/backstabbed, I am a libertarian, I joined the GOP to help nominate Ron and spread the message.
I had to register republican to vote for Ron, a move that made me physically ill to my stomach signing.
Now that the LP is asking for you to help get them a higher %, and possible national debate time, you turn your back us, to write in Ron Paul..
You don't even need to leave the GOP to vote LP in the general.. so I just don't get it..
Don't you want them to see how many of us they pissed off? We all need to vote LP, so it will a show of our numbers.

[Carlybee]

*double post

[Carlybee]

I don't care you if want to stay in the GOP, that is your prerogative. Just stop expecting us all to stay..
After 5 years of it, I have had enough of the games. I cannot deal with my local GOP, these people here are hopeless.

Spreading the liberty message to my local GOP is like trying to sell bacon cheeseburgers at a synagogue to the parishioners as temple gets out.
I could spend all the money I want, I could put in all the effort I have, and still I would be the poor shunned outcast...

Some of us joined the GOP only to vote for Ron Paul.
He was as a libertarian, we fallowed him to the GOP when he asked us help him win the nomination, but now most of us are going home.
We are trying to invite you to come with us, to help make a viable liberty party, we have the same goals and principals.

If you look at the latest who you going to vote for poll thread here on the forums, you will the the liberty movement is damn evenly divided.
It drives me crazy to think that the LP could have twice as many votes, but people would rather write in Ron Paul.

I feel used/backstabbed, I am a libertarian, I joined the GOP to help nominate Ron and spread the message.
I had to register republican to vote for Ron, a move that made me physically ill to my stomach signing.
Now that the LP is asking for you to help get them a higher %, and possible national debate time, you turn your back us, to write in Ron Paul..
You don't even need to leave the GOP to vote LP in the general.. so I just don't get it..
Don't you want them to see how many of us they pissed off? We all need to vote LP, so it will a show of our numbers.


Question: Were you a member of the LP before you registered GOP? I consider myself a small l libertarian and it took the Dems and the Repubs to make me realize that over the years. I've never been a member of the LP, and the way I feel right now, I really don't want to be a part of any political party again.

[liberty2897]

I don't care you if want to stay in the GOP, that is your prerogative. Just stop expecting us all to stay..
After 5 years of it, I have had enough of the games. I cannot deal with my local GOP, these people here are hopeless.

Spreading the liberty message to my local GOP is like trying to sell bacon cheeseburgers at a synagogue to the parishioners as temple gets out.
I could spend all the money I want, I could put in all the effort I have, and still I would be the poor shunned outcast...

Some of us joined the GOP only to vote for Ron Paul.
He was as a libertarian, we fallowed him to the GOP when he asked us help him win the nomination, but now most of us are going home.
We are trying to invite you to come with us, to help make a viable liberty party, we have the same goals and principals.

If you look at the latest who you going to vote for poll thread here on the forums, you will the the liberty movement is damn evenly divided.
It drives me crazy to think that the LP could have twice as many votes, but people would rather write in Ron Paul.

I feel used/backstabbed, I am a libertarian, I joined the GOP to help nominate Ron and spread the message.
I had to register republican to vote for Ron, a move that made me physically ill to my stomach signing.
Now that the LP is asking for you to help get them a higher %, and possible national debate time, you turn your back us, to write in Ron Paul..
You don't even need to leave the GOP to vote LP in the general.. so I just don't get it..
Don't you want them to see how many of us they pissed off? We all need to vote LP, so it will a show of our numbers.


That is one of the more compelling arguments to vote for the Libertarian party this cycle that I've read. I personally F*G HATE the GOP. Still, I will be writing-in Dr. Paul. Why? Because our votes don't count anyway. It doesn't matter if I vote for RP, GJ, MR, BR. The election will be decided by the "electors" in the "electoral process". Since the RNC and DNC have both shown that they can hand-pick whomever they please, there really is little incentive left to vote at all. The whole process is an absurd exercise. I'm writing-in Ron Paul because he is the one who stood up for us his whole life only to be betrayed by the RNC when the momentum he generated over the years finally kicked in a breathed some new life into a dying party. I'm writing-in Ron Paul because he he tells the truth even when it is not popular. I'm writing in Ron Paul out of respect for him and so I can respect myself after November is long gone and we face another four years of the same. Do what you have to, but don't try to lay a guilt trip on the rest of us for voting our conscious in a system that leaves us no real say in anything.

[CaptLouAlbano]

I don't care you if want to stay in the GOP, that is your prerogative. Just stop expecting us all to stay..
After 5 years of it, I have had enough of the games. I cannot deal with my local GOP, these people here are hopeless.

Spreading the liberty message to my local GOP is like trying to sell bacon cheeseburgers at a synagogue to the parishioners as temple gets out.
I could spend all the money I want, I could put in all the effort I have, and still I would be the poor shunned outcast...

Some of us joined the GOP only to vote for Ron Paul.
He was as a libertarian, we fallowed him to the GOP when he asked us help him win the nomination, but now most of us are going home.
We are trying to invite you to come with us, to help make a viable liberty party, we have the same goals and principals.

If you look at the latest who you going to vote for poll thread here on the forums, you will the the liberty movement is damn evenly divided.
It drives me crazy to think that the LP could have twice as many votes, but people would rather write in Ron Paul.

I feel used/backstabbed, I am a libertarian, I joined the GOP to help nominate Ron and spread the message.
I had to register republican to vote for Ron, a move that made me physically ill to my stomach signing.
Now that the LP is asking for you to help get them a higher %, and possible national debate time, you turn your back us, to write in Ron Paul..
You don't even need to leave the GOP to vote LP in the general.. so I just don't get it..
Don't you want them to see how many of us they pissed off? We all need to vote LP, so it will a show of our numbers.

The answer to your local GOP is simple. Run for committee, and find other like minded people to run for committee seats as well. With just one election cycle, if you are all elected, your local GOP will be run by an entirely different group of people. Most committee races can be won with only a few hundred votes. If you have the desire, and the ability to knock on several hundred doors in your precinct you can win the seat.

In the 1960's we faced the same issue with my local GOP committee. It was comprised entirely of Rockefeller Republicans. Within 2 years those of us who were Old Right conservatives replaced nearly ever committee member. In 1964 our county committee endorsed William Scranton (a liberal Republican), in 68 with the new leadership the county endorsed Reagan. We were also able to see a conservative Republican win our congressional seat defeating a liberal Democrat.

[LibertyRevolution]

Question: Were you a member of the LP before you registered GOP? I consider myself a small l libertarian and it took the Dems and the Repubs to make me realize that over the years. I've never been a member of the LP, and the way I feel right now, I really don't want to be a part of any political party again.

I was a DEM to start, because my family were DEMS. Then I found out what liberty and freedom truly were from Badnarik, I became a libertarian.
I voted the LP ticket, even for my local elections also.
Then Ron Paul asked for our help, and I swallowed my pride in this closed primary state and registered republican, and act that still sickens me.
Then Ron asked me to stay and try again, that with the deals we made last time, this time would be different...
Instead it was just more of the same they lied, cheated, and screwed us again.

I am supporter of liberty, I think we need the LP, I think we need the DEMS, I think we the independents..
I don't think that tent will fit inside the GOP.

[orenbus]

Or, even before we knew who Ron Paul was.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2FAAVPX-jg

[LibertyRevolution]

The answer to your local GOP is simple. Run for committee, and find other like minded people to run for committee seats as well. With just one election cycle, if you are all elected, your local GOP will be run by an entirely different group of people. Most committee races can be won with only a few hundred votes. If you have the desire, and the ability to knock on several hundred doors in your precinct you can win the seat.

In the 1960's we faced the same issue with my local GOP committee. It was comprised entirely of Rockefeller Republicans. Within 2 years those of us who were Old Right conservatives replaced nearly ever committee member. In 1964 our county committee endorsed William Scranton (a liberal Republican), in 68 with the new leadership the county endorsed Reagan. We were also able to see a conservative Republican win our congressional seat defeating a liberal Democrat.

No can do.. I have WAY do much dirt in my background to even think of running for anything, even a GOP committee.
I cannot find anyone at my local GOP meeting that was not hardcore big money neo-con.
These people are Romney supporters, like the kind that actually support him..
The people in my town that I did get to vote for Ron Paul, they don't go to meetings, they are to busy trying to work and live...

[CaptLouAlbano]

No can do.. I have WAY do much dirt in my background to even think of running for anything, even a GOP committee.
I cannot find anyone at my local GOP meeting that was not hardcore big money neo-con.
These people are Romney supporters, like the kind that actually support him..
The people in my town that I did get to vote for Ron Paul, they don't go to meetings, they are to busy trying to work and live...

Fair enough, but I do want to clarify that it does not take much time out of one's life to serve on committee. I had children, a business with multiple locations, and many other activities that I was involved in (sports, church, etc) all the while I was able to serve.

[orenbus]

The Blue Republicans were specifically in it to support Ron Paul. I doubt that they will continue to support anyone else in the GOP...after all, there is only one Ron Paul.

[Raises hand]

I guess you could consider me a blue Republican, was a registered Democrat, voted Green party and Libertarian and now registered Republican since 2007. I would be willing to vote for anyone in the GOP, or any other party for that matter, that has very similar positions on issues as Ron Paul does, unfortunately however it is true that those individuals are far and few between at this point.

[RonRules]

The Republican Party will get trashed in Nov 2012 and for the next 4-6 years for several reasons including defections to the LP party and because of the old age of many of it's members. They won't win for quite a while.

So if you're Liberty Minded, you want to win, how about running as a Libertarian leaning Democrat? It easier to steer a party in the right direction rather than trying to get a 1% Libertarian party to a 50% win.

There's lots of local elections you could win that way and effect change much more effectively. Winning helps, it helps a lot!

Why waste your time with the LP and the GOP if they are not likely to win?

That's what Ron basically did when he came back to the Republican party, when they had their revival.

[CaptLouAlbano]

The Republican Party will get trashed in Nov 2012 and for the next 4-6 years for several reasons including defections to the LP party and because of the old age of many of it's members. They won't win for quite a while.

I'm not sure what data you are looking at, but most polling data shows that the GOP will retain control of the House and has a high possibility of winning the Senate as well.

[Carlybee]

The Democratic and Republican parties will always retain a political stranglehold as long as people are willing to keep it that way. What happened to the Revolt in Revolution?

[Carehn]

Staying in the GOP doesn't always mean you have to vote GOP. Therefore we can continue making strides without having to compromise any principles.
This is what I'v been trying to say for like ever. yet people don't think you can do two things at once around here.

[CaptLouAlbano]

The Democratic and Republican parties will always retain a political stranglehold as long as people are willing to keep it that way. What happened to the Revolt in Revolution?

The fundamental problem with the current third parties is that they have few, if any, people within their ranks who know how to win elections. The LP, CP and the rest continually run unknown candidates for state and federal offices that are poorly funded and do not have the political/civic resume that it takes to win elections. Add to that is the complete absence of a network of activists within a local community that are networked and connected to the voters.

[Carlybee]

The fundamental problem with the current third parties is that they have few, if any, people within their ranks who know how to win elections. The LP, CP and the rest continually run unknown candidates for state and federal offices that are poorly funded and do not have the political/civic resume that it takes to win elections. Add to that is the complete absence of a network of activists within a local community that are networked and connected to the voters.

So you are saying the two party stranglehold is a life sentence? Are not liberty candidates running within the GOP also largely unknown? I am not disagreeing that they have had little success nor am I pushing a third party, but there will never be a paradigm change unless people at least acknowledge that by supporting the big 2 they are perpetuating the problem.

[sailingaway]

I really think that we have an opportunity it might be foolish to let pass, with all the evidence of corruption we have in the RNC and now in the DNC with their vote as well. I think it might be able to be used in a law suit to change ballot access requirements and barriers to third party entry and independent candidates, by showing the collusion between the state and the parties, with ballot access, selective funding and other privileges, means no one outside the two main parties has a practical chance of winning,so you are forced into the two parties, the corruption of which causes voter disenfranchisement.

But it would be a huge project.

[Carlybee]

I really think that we have an opportunity it might be foolish to let pass, with all the evidence of corruption we have in the RNC and now in the DNC with their vote as well. I think it might be able to be used in a law suit to change ballot access requirements and barriers to third party entry and independent candidates, by showing the collusion between the state and the parties, with ballot access, selective funding and other privileges, means no one outside the two main parties has a practical chance of winning,so you are forced into the two parties, the corruption of which causes voter disenfranchisement.

But it would be a huge project.


I would support that.

[ClydeCoulter]

@SA,
You mentioned dems showing more and more their anger about disenfranchisement. Is there a "coming together" possibility there? How do we approach it?
We need an online campaign that unites for the causes that converge. Disenfranchisement may be the glue that can bring sides together. The RNC & DNC acted similar, Ron got 4% in NH from the dems, continuous wars without declaration or stated goal/end, sound money (maybe later we can work on that, but the Federal Reserve may be a binder there), etc..

edit: Disenfrachised dems and repubs working together on the lawsuit and changes to ballot access, etc..

[CaptLouAlbano]

So you are saying the two party stranglehold is a life sentence? Are not liberty candidates running within the GOP also largely unknown? I am not disagreeing that they have had little success nor am I pushing a third party, but there will never be a paradigm change unless people at least acknowledge that by supporting the big 2 they are perpetuating the problem.

No the liberty candidates that are running in the GOP are pretty well known.

Massie was a county judge before running for Congress. Bills was a city councilman and state legislator before running for Senate. Bentivolio has been active in his community for 30 years both politically and civically - he also ran (and lost) for a State senate race, so his name has been on the ballot before. Art Robinson has run a large non-profit organization in his community for over 30 years, and has been on the ballot before. John Koster was a state rep for many years before running for Congress. The list goes on and on.

And beyond liberty candidates the same goes for other Republicans and Democrats that are up for federal offices. You have to start locally, and/or have a lot of ties and connections within a community before you run for a big seat.

And again you have the issue of a built in network. When I was a county coordinator for a US House race, I had a phonebook filled with dozens and dozens of names that I could call and count on for support (both financial and physical). Every polling place in our county was staffed with greeters on election day from open to close. We had people that would knock on every single door in the county to GOTV. I had this list because I had the connections, from my years of political activism and community service.

[Carlybee]

No the liberty candidates that are running in the GOP are pretty well known.

Massie was a county judge before running for Congress. Bills was a city councilman and state legislator before running for Senate. Bentivolio has been active in his community for 30 years both politically and civically - he also ran (and lost) for a State senate race, so his name has been on the ballot before. Art Robinson has run a large non-profit organization in his community for over 30 years, and has been on the ballot before. John Koster was a state rep for many years before running for Congress. The list goes on and on.

And beyond liberty candidates the same goes for other Republicans and Democrats that are up for federal offices. You have to start locally, and/or have a lot of ties and connections within a community before you run for a big seat.

And again you have the issue of a built in network. When I was a county coordinator for a US House race, I had a phonebook filled with dozens and dozens of names that I could call and count on for support (both financial and physical). Every polling place in our county was staffed with greeters on election day from open to close. We had people that would knock on every single door in the county to GOTV. I had this list because I had the connections, from my years of political activism and community service.

I can see why you have a vested interest in trying to get people to stay within the GOP...you have a lot of time invested in it and I assume the same goes for candidates and office holders who have started off at the local level and worked their way up. However, I'm not sure that really resonates with those of us with nothing to lose and it will be us who will carry the burden of any sort of "changing of the system" as it were, because those who are already entrenched in it will not be willing to do whatever it takes to really change things...you can't change the status quo if you become the status quo. That being said, I'm sure you will have no trouble getting support from the young members on here who are willing and able to run for offices and work their way up the ladder.

[CaptLouAlbano]

I can see why you have a vested interest in trying to get people to stay within the GOP...you have a lot of time invested in it and I assume the same goes for candidates and office holders who have started off at the local level and worked their way up. However, I'm not sure that really resonates with those of us with nothing to lose and it will be us who will carry the burden of any sort of "changing of the system" as it were, because those who are already entrenched in it will not be willing to do whatever it takes to really change things...you can't change the status quo if you become the status quo. That being said, I'm sure you will have no trouble getting support from the young members on here who are willing and able to run for offices and work their way up the ladder.

It does require working their way up the ladder. That is true in any pursuit in life. It takes time and hard work to succeed.

The good news is that there is an incredible "farm team" of liberty candidates already serving at the local and state level within the GOP who can make the jump to Congress over the next few years.

Where we are lacking at the present time is at the committee level. The more people we have running for, and winning committee seats the quicker we can see substantive changes at the county, state and national level. Committees have a great influence over the electorate they serve, and can greatly benefit liberty candidates running in their district if the committee is controlled by liberty activists. You can go across the races in the country and look at vote totals by county. History demonstrates that candidates who are endorsed by the county committee outperform those who are not endorsed. Again, it all goes back to that built in infrastructure that the committee provides.

[LibertyEagle]

I can see why you have a vested interest in trying to get people to stay within the GOP...you have a lot of time invested in it and I assume the same goes for candidates and office holders who have started off at the local level and worked their way up. However, I'm not sure that really resonates with those of us with nothing to lose and it will be us who will carry the burden of any sort of "changing of the system" as it were,
Oh, that's some kind of bullshit, right there. We all are trying to change the system. But, if you are not engaged effectively, your voice does nothing at all.

I like the idea of what SailingAway mentioned above. It's certainly worth looking at more. But, unless something like that is done, only the 2 major parties get in debates and get any media attention.

If you can change that, or get talk someone like Peter Thiel into buying a friendly TV network, then we stand a chance at a 3rd Party. Until then, it's like blowing smoke.


because those who are already entrenched in it will not be willing to do whatever it takes to really change things...you can't change the status quo if you become the status quo.

That's a bit condescending, don't you think; it's also quite disingenuous. You are implying that anyone who is a liberty candidate under the Republican banner will somehow sell out, just because they are a Republican.


That being said, I'm sure you will have no trouble getting support from the young members on here who are willing and able to run for offices and work their way up the ladder.

A lot more than young members are in support of Ron's strategy. Don't be ridiculous.

[sailingaway]

@SA,
You mentioned dems showing more and more their anger about disenfranchisement. Is there a "coming together" possibility there? How do we approach it?
We need an online campaign that unites for the causes that converge. Disenfranchisement may be the glue that can bring sides together. The RNC & DNC acted similar, Ron got 4% in NH from the dems, continuous wars without declaration or stated goal/end, sound money (maybe later we can work on that, but the Federal Reserve may be a binder there), etc..

edit: Disenfrachised dems and repubs working together on the lawsuit and changes to ballot access, etc..

could be. Except for the Blue Republican types, we'd be coming together in spots, not soul mates, but I could see enough Dems wanting to support it that we could have plaintiffs in both parties, which is all it takes, I would think. But I don't know, we would have to see if that is the case. I don't know the independence of the people who made it to DNC -- on the other hand they DID vote against what was declared passed....

If we have enough people interested we can think about how to do outreach. I do have an account at firedoglake, from HR 1207 days, and I could check and see if people over there are posting about the DNC, for starters.

[Carlybee]

Oh, that's some kind of bullshit, right there. We all are trying to change the system. But, if you are not engaged effectively, your voice does nothing at all. Not necessarily true and who says I'm not trying to change it in other ways that may be effective, you don't know me or anything about me. Apparently none of our voices did much of anything at all when it came to what happened at the convention to the delegates who got elected at the local level now did it? Some of you apparently have all of that filed somewhere down the memory hole.

I like the idea of what SailingAway mentioned above. It's certainly worth looking at more. But, unless something like that is done, only the 2 major parties get in debates and get any media attention.

If you can change that, or get talk someone like Peter Thiel into buying a friendly TV network, then we stand a chance at a 3rd Party. Until then, it's like blowing smoke.



That's a bit condescending, don't you think; it's also quite disingenuous. You are implying that anyone who is a liberty candidate under the Republican banner will somehow sell out, just because they are a Republican.

I didn't imply that all. That is just the way you want to interpret it and you are always skulking around waiting to jump on anything that people say around here that might not agree with the agenda. I said that if you want to work within the status quo, you have to become the status quo. Rand Paul certainly thinks so or he wouldn't be going on the campaign trail for Romney. Let's see as time goes on just how much those who are going to be "changing it from within" end up compromising on important issues.


A lot more than young members are in support of Ron's strategy. Don't be ridiculous. I am aware of that but in order to work one's way up a ladder that could take quite a few years, youth is an asset. Tell me how that is being ridiculous.

[cajuncocoa]

Oh, that's some kind of bullshit, right there. We all are trying to change the system. But, if you are not engaged effectively, your voice does nothing at all.

LE, would you mind telling me exactly how you were engaged effectively with your state's GOP in the 2012 election cycle?