PDA

View Full Version : "Why I left the Republican Party"




WM_in_MO
08-25-2013, 09:09 AM
This seems a fitting follow-up to the man who went to run in the LP after being assaulted at their convention.

http://bangordailynews.com/2013/08/25/opinion/why-i-left-the-republican-party/


By Mark Willis, Special to the BDN


Posted Aug. 25, 2013, at 5:50 a.m.
Last week, thirteen Republicans, myself included, sent a letter to the Secretary of the Maine Republican Party explaining why some of us were not just resigning from our positions, but leaving the party altogether.

In our letter (http://agreetodisagree.bangordailynews.com/2013/08/19/maine-politics/13-members-flee-republican-party/?ref=inline), we cited numerous issues at the federal and state levels that we could no longer support nor defend, stating: “we can no longer associate ourselves with a political party that goes out of its way to continually restrict our freedoms and liberties as well as reaching deeper and deeper into our wallets.”


However, in my case, as the former National Committeeman for the Maine Republican Party and member of the Republican National Committee, there was another issue that tipped my scale in favor of walking away completely from the GOP. To explain, I’ll use a sports analogy:
What if there were two football teams, you being on the underdog team versus the likely favorite in a big game that would decide who would attend a national convention that would elect the head of your football league. In this case, both teams brought their best game, played by the rules, and in the end, your team won fair and square. Let’s say furthermore, the favorites, upset that they lost, appealed your victory to the football league. And let’s say the football league (who favored the favorite team all along), decided (without any valid evidence) it could not determine who won or lost and therefore, rewarded each team with a tie.

(At least in sports you have a chance to win by effort -WM)


Now let’s say you and your teammates, discouraged but not defeated, traveled to the national convention where your candidate, under the rules of the football league, had the requisite support of five teams to at least be on the ballot and speak on his behalf for the position of league president. Then, let’s say, a lawyer for the candidate of the favorite team had the rules changed so that your candidate now needed eight teams to be on the ballot and then had those rules pushed through and adopted in violation of the convention rules, over the objections of you and half of the convention that should have been heard.
That is what happened to the Ron Paul supporters at the hands of the Romney campaign at the at the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla.


The bottom line is that the blatant breaking, bending and flat-out ignoring of your own rules is the type of behavior we have come to expect from the Democratic Party, as they are no longer the party of JFK and have been shifting to the hard left for decades.
However, one would expect better from the RNC if you are to believe in the words of the preamble of the RNC rules, which state, “Be it resolved, that the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality, of opportunity for all, and favoritism for none.” (Two wings of the same bird... -WM)

In the aftermath of Tampa, grassroots activists and I fought to rescind these rules at the RNC winter and summer meetings but our resolutions to do so fell on deaf ears. All windows to achieve this act of good faith to the underdogs of the Republican Party have closed forever.


The RNC rules as they stand, were written by and for the favorite team. To continue on in my position as National Committeeman of the Maine Republican Party would lend credibility and legitimacy to these invalid rules. Furthermore, I would have been expected to spend the next three years preparing for the 2016 primary cycle, ultimately watching and knowing that the underdog team would fall short again — echoes of 2008 and 2012.
In the end, I say, let this OpEd serve as a dire warning to the underdog teams of the Republican Party across our nation who still believe a grassroots candidate can secure the nomination in 2016. Even after the debacle of the Romney campaign, the fix is in for the favorite team in 2016, and there is nothing that the Republican voter or activist can do to stop it.


I would therefore rather relinquish my position at the highest levels of a political party than carry on with a heavy and burdened conscience, knowing that no matter how talented and skilled, the underdog stands no chance.


Moving forward, I would encourage everyone to take a look at independentmaine.org (http://independentmaine.org/) where people can learn more about how to encourage and support independent candidates within the state of Maine, outside of the two-party system.

Lucille
08-25-2013, 09:39 AM
In the end, I say, let this OpEd serve as a dire warning to the underdog teams of the Republican Party across our nation who still believe a grassroots candidate can secure the nomination in 2016. Even after the debacle of the Romney campaign, the fix is in for the favorite team in 2016, and there is nothing that the Republican voter or activist can do to stop it.

Truth.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:03 AM
I can't disagree with what he said, coming from personal experience.

69360
08-25-2013, 10:08 AM
This was the wrong choice.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:09 AM
There are all kinds of positions other than President. But, you're right, it makes sense to throw in the towel given that Thomas Massie, Justin Amash and Rand Paul were elected through the Libertarian Party. Oh wait...

FrankRep
08-25-2013, 10:11 AM
"Why I left the Republican Party"

Or

"Why I decided to make myself irrelevant in politics"

69360
08-25-2013, 10:13 AM
"Why I left the Republican Party"

Or

"Why I decided to make myself irrelevant in politics"

Presidential politics. They could win office here in Maine as independents easily enough. Still was a bad choice, they could have been helpful in the next presidential primary.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:16 AM
There are all kinds of positions other than President. But, you're right, it makes sense to throw in the towel given that Thomas Massie, Justin Amash and Rand Paul were elected through the Libertarian Party. Oh wait...

a unique situation has emerged in louisiana where an LP candidate may actually make a general election run-off.
but instead of helping make that history, people just use as an excuse to do nothing, the history of activist fail in the past.

Clay Grant, an unknown lil' business man ran as a Libertarian in that same race 2 years ago and got 7%.
we have a jungle primary. that 7% can get you in the final showdown.
if Herford was in a run-off with a Dem, he'd win with the GOP backing.

But this will never happen as long of your partisan GOPer spend your time mocking their efforts and not helping.

The Libertarians crossed the lines to help republican candidates, but somehow our brothers and sisters from the GOP won't do the same.
will make people hesitant to do the same in the future for Rand.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:17 AM
Seeing people bail is very disheartening to say the least. Do people really believe this was going to be easy and not done without a huge struggle?

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:20 AM
Seeing people bail is very disheartening to say the least. Do people really believe this was going to be easy and not done without a huge struggle?

some people see other ways forward, the landscape is changing.
the proof was our libertarian guy getting 7% in a race where he had $500 to spend.
These people may very well be back for Rand, but the way they are treat by their "allies" will have a lot to do with their future decision.

Like the Dems taking the black vote for granted.
The Repugs taking the LP vote for granted as well.

Its a two way relationship, if they are giving and you don't help when they need it, well...

Keith and stuff
08-25-2013, 10:24 AM
Maybe he is new to politics and had no idea what the job is? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. He certainly did make any liberty loving Republicans in ME look foolish, in the eyes of some, though :( Also, he was able to help the NSA for years without quitting. Is it really harder to work with the liberty movement than the NSA?

Keith and stuff
08-25-2013, 10:25 AM
Seeing people bail is very disheartening to say the least. Do people really believe this was going to be easy and not done without a huge struggle?

I think most of them finally realized that they will never have liberty in their state unless something amazing happens, something that is started somewhere else.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:27 AM
some people see other ways forward, the landscape is changing.
the proof was our libertarian guy getting 7% in a race where he had $500 to spend.
These people may very well be back for Rand, but the way they are treat by their "allies" will have a lot to do with their future decision.

Like the Dems taking the black vote for granted.
The Repugs taking the LP vote for granted as well.

Its a two way relationship, if they are giving and you don't help when they need it, well...

Well what, Torch? Are you saying that the LP will bite off their nose to spite their faces and not support a liberty candidate in the Republican Party that has a chance of winning, if we do not give them money to dump down a rathole? Sorry, but I am not made of money.

angelatc
08-25-2013, 10:28 AM
Seeing people bail is very disheartening to say the least. Do people really believe this was going to be easy and not done without a huge struggle?

Libertarians have never been Republicans. A lot of them joined just because Ron ran. And now they seem to consider themselves martyrs of some sort for deciding to go back to the basement and whine.

And I understand the decision. My husband made the same decision. He admits it was selfish, but since the stroke he literally could not stand to surround himself with the drama. But he finished his term because he was elected. He had an an obligation, and he finished it.

In Maine, voters trusted those folks. They endorsed them to their friends, and they worked to get them elected. And look what they got. They now have no representation because some self important twits were talking to themselves too much.

Like Frank said, they are now irrelevant.

But Ron is somewhat to blame. These same folks worked for 5 years, and they had a real chance to win the primary. Heck, they might have actually won it, iirc. But the campaign had no interest in winning that state. Why do all that work only to be told you are not important.....

Carson
08-25-2013, 10:29 AM
Who quit whom?

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:32 AM
Well what, Torch? Are you saying that the LP will bite off their nose to spite their faces and not support a liberty candidate in the Republican Party that has a chance of winning, if we do not give them money to dump down a rathole?

why does it have to be money?
volunteer to work a phone to find donations and voters?
or at the very least, if you don't want to do something pro-active... stop shitting on their efforts as useless.
You don't know that.
Everyone told us our efforts for Ron were useless, he couldn't win... but we won in so many other ways.
And that same phenomenon could happen with a healthy and politically respectable and growing liberty party.
It would force the GOP to accept the liberty wing, or die.
And either way we win.

Why do you feel a need to rail against such efforts?
Why not help out if able, and if not, lend a word of support. it won't cost you much to do that.

I've donate to Henry Herford.
I will be meeting with him Monday to try and assemble our Caucus crew to pull off a miracle.

If we can, you will benefit from it.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:33 AM
Libertarians have never been Republicans. A lot of them joined just because Ron ran. And now they seem to consider themselves martyrs of some sort for deciding to go back to the basement and whine.

Like Frank said, they are now irrelevant.

and when the GOP activist come whining to us to help for Rand's campaign, I will give them this post and tell my fellow activist, this is what the GOPers think of you.
Thanks for the material.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:40 AM
why does it have to be money?
volunteer to work a phone to find donations and voters?
or at the very least, if you don't want to do something pro-active... stop shitting on their efforts as useless.
You don't know that.
Everyone told us our efforts for Ron were useless, he could win... but we won in so many other ways.
And that same phenomenon could happen with a healthy and political respectable and growing liberty party.
It would force the GOP to accept the liberty wing, or die.
And either way we win.

Why do you feel a need to rail against such efforts?
Why not help out if able, and if not, lend a word of support. it won't cost you much to do that.

I've donate to Henry Herford.
I will be meeting with him Monday to try and assemble our Caucus crew to pull of a miracle.

If we can, you will benefit from it.

Look at the title of this thread, Torch. This thread is about someone throwing in the towel. Someone who could have been useful to Rand if he runs in 2016. He gave all that up and became irrelevant. I understand why he did it. I am just disappointed.

The establishment at the top of the Republican Party are GLAD libertarians are bailing. Once you leave, you will be out of their hair and out of their minds; just like libertarians were before Ron Paul ran for President. But by all means, good luck, but if you want to promote the Libertarian Party, maybe it should be in a thread where the OP is NOT all about bailing from the Republican Party strategy. The same strategy that has been used to get several of our guys elected. The strategy that some have spent years working to get in position so that they can grease the way for the campaigns of future liberty candidates.

I wish you luck in using the Libertarian Party to get liberty candidates elected. I truly do. But, don't fool yourself. The GOP won't care what you do. You just gave them exactly what they wanted.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:43 AM
Look at the title of this thread, Torch. This thread is about someone throwing in the towel. Someone who could have been useful to Rand if he runs in 2016. He gave all that up and became irrelevant. I understand why he did it. I am just disappointed.

The establishment at the top of the Republican Party are GLAD libertarians are bailing. Once you leave, you will be out of their hair and out of their minds; just like libertarians were before Ron Paul ran for President. But by all means, good luck, but if you want to promote the Libertarian Party, maybe it should be in a thread where the OP is NOT all about bailing from the Republican Party strategy. The same strategy that has been used to get several of our guys elected. The strategy that some have spent years working to get in position so that they can grease the way for the campaigns of future liberty candidates.

well, i'm on executive committees of both parties.
that man had his own reasons... i can't speak for him.
but those people entering the lp, boost lp manpower/brainpower.
Not sure of his state laws and if that will be a benefit.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:44 AM
and when the GOP activist come whining to us to help for Rand's campaign, I will give them this post and tell my fellow activist, this is what the GOPers think of you.
Thanks for the material.

Seriously? You would bite off your nose to spite your face? Is the goal to get liberty candidates elected or isn't it?

What I thought we were talking about is what vehicle we will have the most success using to get that done.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:46 AM
Seriously? You would bite off your nose to spite your face? Is the goal to get liberty candidates elected or isn't it?

What I thought we were talking about is what vehicle we will have the most success using to get that done.


we won't help people who despise us.
its like the poor black folks voting for the dems every election while the dem leaders talk about them as if they are cattle.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:50 AM
we won't help people who despise us.
its like the poor black folks voting for the dems every election while the dem leaders talk about them as if they are cattle.

and to add-
Mr. Herford is a long time GOPer in the party structure who helped Libertarians anytime he could.
We went out of our way to help him in 2012.
It wasn't until they had their strong men rough him up did he consider associating with people who wouldn't use violence against him.

angelatc
08-25-2013, 10:50 AM
Well what, Torch? Are you saying that the LP will bite off their nose to spite their faces and not support a liberty candidate in the Republican Party that has a chance of winning, if we do not give them money to dump down a rathole? Sorry, but I am not made of money.

He might be reminding us that there was a legitimate significant chance that Ron won the Maine popular vote, but the campaign had no interest in the battle.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:50 AM
we won't help people who despise us.
its like the poor black folks voting for the dems every election while the dem leaders talk about them as if they are cattle.

So, it is about the supporters now, not the candidate?

It's strange, you know. Back during Ron's first campaign when I and others attempted to tell people that the supporters' behavior did in fact rub off on how the candidate was viewed, we were told how foolish we were for thinking that. That it was all about the candidate and that people should be smart enough to tell that. Guess not, eh?

Brian4Liberty
08-25-2013, 10:56 AM
"Why I left the Republican Party"

Or

"Why I decided to make myself irrelevant in politics"

Or

"Why I decided to be a bigger fish in a smaller pond."

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 10:58 AM
So, it is about the supporters now, not the candidate?

It's strange, you know. Back during Ron's first campaign when I and others attempted to tell people that the supporters' behavior did in fact rub off on how the candidate was viewed, we were told how foolish we were for thinking that. That it was all about the candidate and that people should be smart enough to tell that. Guess not, eh?


the only benefit to fighting for Rand's nomination is to expose more of the fangs of the GOP leadership. He will not be allowed the nomination.
The party is that corrupt. The people in Maine and Louisiana see it... wonder why?
There will need to be something that takes the GOPs place as it continues to fail in its imperialistic lust.
Some people are building that foundation of another vessel. (within a year, the GOPers have made the LALP a fully functional party, so fast- i didn't even see it happen)
There are people in the GOP who are propaganda blinded to the two party myth and spit nothing but venom at us. (and I'm a bridge guy that works with activist on both sides reguraly). I have no desire to help them.
Our caucus is big enough to function without such people. they only cause problems in the meetings anyway.

Cleaner44
08-25-2013, 11:04 AM
Staying in the Republican party does two things:

Gives us the best chance to get people in office
Gives us the best chance to cause pain to neocons in the Republican party


The next best thing to getting a liberty candidate elected is causing a neocon to lose. As long as the Republicans want to shut us down, they will do so at their own peril because we will not fall in line, hold our nose and support their Romney candidates.

CaptLouAlbano
08-25-2013, 11:15 AM
Do you think some of this disillusionment comes from the fact that many RP supporters were under the false assumption that the movement was far larger than it was in reality? I remember over those 4+ years reading people commenting about how all the young people were going to come out for Ron, how all these people would jump from the Dem party to support Ron, how even though Ron wasn't winning any states that he was still "in it", etc, etc. There was so much hope based on rumors, falsehoods, and exaggerations that when faced with reality, these people have gone back into an apolitical mode?

I know there were people commenting throughout the RP campaigns that internet polls, FB likes, twitter followers, rally attendees, and youtube videos does not equal real world support - but it seems like there were many people that just didn't want to accept that at the time. Perhaps now that they see that they are a small minority of the voting base, that they react in such a means?

FSP-Rebel
08-25-2013, 11:21 AM
the only benefit to fighting for Rand's nomination is to expose more of the fangs of the GOP leadership. He will not be allowed the nomination.
The party is that corrupt. The people in Maine and Louisiana see it... wonder why?
There will need to be something that takes the GOPs place as it continues to fail in its imperialistic lust.
Some people are building that foundation of another vessel. (within a year, the GOPers have made the LALP a fully functional party, so fast- i didn't even see it happen)
There are people in the GOP who are propaganda blinded to the two party myth and spit nothing but venom at us. (and I'm a bridge guy that works with activist on both sides reguraly). I have no desire to help them.
Our caucus is big enough to function without such people. they only cause problems in the meetings anyway.
I agree with most of your post except the part about Rand not getting the nomination. That was the case in regards to Ron because it was all a delegate strategy that was winged after the campaign started. Seriously, it was clear they weren't going to let an outside force game their system and play nice about it. Rand's campaign won't be about delegates for the most part, he's taking it right to the people and has stayed popular enough to be able to use the media to his advantage unlike the nonsense Ron went through. I'm not even saying the media will stay fair it's just that Rand can command better use of it since he's a Senator with a huge following.

And, it isn't about despising people in the LP it's just frustrating to think that money and effort will be going toward races/efforts that notoriously have little to no chance of sprouting to a win. Even though I'm a GOP party guy exclusively, I only go for candidates that I consider conservative/libertarian enough that will be, at minimum, anti-establishment if they were to be elected. Plus, staying a delegate or higher gives you more access to politicians and ample opportunity to let them have it and feel the pain if needed. Sure, this guy was treated poorly but by him leaving he frees up their minds from having to deal with it. No one will be left to reinforce returning to any positive behavior on their part. I surely would never back down to some party ops that operate in such a fashion, if anything I'd double down w/ my crew and become a bigger headache for them. The establishment got what they wanted here, the RP peeps were a fad and they responded appropriately to the tactics that were used against them, bye bye. So, instead of closing in on reforming 2 more state parties or at least claiming a biggest influential stake in them, we're going backwards. shame

FrankRep
08-25-2013, 11:25 AM
I'm glad Rep. Justin Amash didn't leave the Republican Party!


http://cloudfront-media.reason.com/mc/_external/2013_08/credit-gage-skidmore-foter-cc.jpg?h=186&w=280 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?425329-Republican-Rep-Justin-Amash-is-Ready-To-Push-for-New-Vote-Curbing-the-NSA-s-Powers)


Rep. Justin Amash is Ready To Push for New Vote Curbing the NSA's Powers (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?425329-Republican-Rep-Justin-Amash-is-Ready-To-Push-for-New-Vote-Curbing-the-NSA-s-Powers)


Reason.com
Aug. 19, 2013

WM_in_MO
08-25-2013, 12:10 PM
Thereason I posted this was to bring up the subject and to preepmtively pop the Rand bubble now rather than in three years. I posted it as a reminder of 2012 and the ones before.

If you have a real chance to take over your local party, more power to you. I know ill be working on it here in sccmo.

Just remember what happened last year will happen again next year and every year after that until we have the numbers.


You can't win any party until you have the numbers. Convert your friends and family. Get them to support you. Maybe you'll luck out like I did last year and the establishment will follow the rules. Maybe you'll get arrested, beaten, or screwed.


But if you think we are ready to win right now, you're wrong.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 12:12 PM
What is that idiot in the OP talking about? Ron Paul didn't win the nomination because he didn't win enough votes in the state primaries and caucuses. There was no strategy of winning at the convention, or of trying to get a speaking slot there. He can complain about how he was treated, but to relate that to the ability of a grassroots candidate to win the nomination is stupid.

angelatc
08-25-2013, 12:16 PM
Or

"Why I decided to be a bigger fish in a smaller pond."

Pond? More like a puddle.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 12:37 PM
Thereason I posted this was to bring up the subject and to preepmtively pop the Rand bubble now rather than in three years. I posted it as a reminder of 2012 and the ones before.

If you have a real chance to take over your local party, more power to you. I know ill be working on it here in sccmo.

Just remember what happened last year will happen again next year and every year after that until we have the numbers.


You can't win any party until you have the numbers. Convert your friends and family. Get them to support you. Maybe you'll luck out like I did last year and the establishment will follow the rules. Maybe you'll get arrested, beaten, or screwed.

But if you think we are ready to win right now, you're wrong.

You have already proven yourself wrong, but you cannot see it. You don't get the numbers by moving to another playground and preaching to the choir. No one hears you there. You get people by approaching them in their own playgrounds. This is what caused our numbers to grow.

Cleaner44
08-25-2013, 12:45 PM
The more was prevent the crooked Republicans from having an easy go in the GOP, the more we win. The choices are to leave Republicans to run their party as a BIG GOVT progressive party that is nothing more than a pro-2nd amedment version of the Democrat party... or cause them to move toward a more libertarian position by working within their party.

The evidence is clear, we are moving the GOP toward a more libertarian position. We are being successful, even if it is taking more time than we would like. The difference between the GOP of 2007 and 2015 will be huge.

WM_in_MO
08-25-2013, 03:09 PM
You have already proven yourself wrong, but you cannot see it. You don't get the numbers by moving to another playground and preaching to the choir. No one hears you there. You get people by approaching them in their own playgrounds. This is what caused our numbers to grow.

Did I ever say in my own words that abandoning the RP was 100% the right thing to do in all cases everywhere?

Read my follow up again.

I will be supporting those people I know who are running against the RP establishment here locally, be it in a primary, caucus, or general election.

I will not however vote for establishment goons or give them any of my time or funds.

If you can use the RP as a platform to educate people in your area, great.

Don't browbeat people into into becoming martyrs.


The more was prevent the crooked Republicans from having an easy go in the GOP, the more we win. The choices are to leave Republicans to run their party as a BIG GOVT progressive party that is nothing more than a pro-2nd amedment version of the Democrat party... or cause them to move toward a more libertarian position by working within their party.

The evidence is clear, we are moving the GOP toward a more libertarian position. We are being successful, even if it is taking more time than we would like. The difference between the GOP of 2007 and 2015 will be huge.

Read the OP. the delegate strategy will never work again. The party bosses hold all the cards now.

Your best shot is local and state.

Even if we took all 50 state parties you'd see them drop the GOP and start a new one, and the same people would flow the same money into the new party.

This is why I place a huge importance into waking up the regular people. The regular people who make the donations and show up to vote, go door to door, donate to campaigns, and do the hard work will win us the war, not some party label.

You can't beat them at their game. They write (and re-write) the rules in their favor every time. You have to break out of their game and beat them at YOUR game.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 03:29 PM
"They" are not the majority of Americans. "They" are but a small group of people. To the extent that we can win over the people, the "they" can be forced to back down. You reach the people we must win over by going where they are; not expecting them to search you out.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 03:37 PM
Read the OP. the delegate strategy will never work again. The party bosses hold all the cards now.


"The delegate strategy" the OP is talking about never existed in the first place. Don't condemn real strategies in the real world on the basis of a failed strategy that only existed in someone's imagination.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 03:39 PM
This is why I place a huge importance into waking up the regular people. The regular people who make the donations and show up to vote, go door to door, donate to campaigns, and do the hard work will win us the war, not some party label.

This isn't a new plan, this is what the plan always has been. The ones who are doing this are doing it as Republicans.

RDM
08-25-2013, 03:47 PM
a unique situation has emerged in louisiana where an LP candidate may actually make a general election run-off.
but instead of helping make that history, people just use as an excuse to do nothing, the history of activist fail in the past.

Clay Grant, an unknown lil' business man ran as a Libertarian in that same race 2 years ago and got 7%.
we have a jungle primary. that 7% can get you in the final showdown.
if Herford was in a run-off with a Dem, he'd win with the GOP backing.

But this will never happen as long of your partisan GOPer spend your time mocking their efforts and not helping.

The Libertarians crossed the lines to help republican candidates, but somehow our brothers and sisters from the GOP won't do the same.
will make people hesitant to do the same in the future for Rand.

You must spread some reputation around before awarding Torchbearer again.

Austrian Econ Disciple
08-25-2013, 03:59 PM
Look at the title of this thread, Torch. This thread is about someone throwing in the towel. Someone who could have been useful to Rand if he runs in 2016. He gave all that up and became irrelevant. I understand why he did it. I am just disappointed.

The establishment at the top of the Republican Party are GLAD libertarians are bailing. Once you leave, you will be out of their hair and out of their minds; just like libertarians were before Ron Paul ran for President. But by all means, good luck, but if you want to promote the Libertarian Party, maybe it should be in a thread where the OP is NOT all about bailing from the Republican Party strategy. The same strategy that has been used to get several of our guys elected. The strategy that some have spent years working to get in position so that they can grease the way for the campaigns of future liberty candidates.

I wish you luck in using the Libertarian Party to get liberty candidates elected. I truly do. But, don't fool yourself. The GOP won't care what you do. You just gave them exactly what they wanted.

Tell me...what exactly is worth saving about the GOP? A lot of the 'conservative' base is disassociating themselves from the party, and without the infusion of libertarian minded folk that Ron brought in, the GOP would be in even worse woes. Let's not even talk about demographics. Without us young libertarian folks who outnumber young 'conservatives' by a pretty substantial margin, we pretty much assure the death of the GOP. You keep bringing up a few folks. I don't know about you, but having a handful of people nationally elected doesn't make the party itself worth 'saving'. For the most part, the party is absolutely terrible and atrocious. We're outnumbered by people like Peter King, John McCain, Boehner, Cotton, et. al. We're just as likely to win as many seats as Democrats if we spent all the effort and time on that side of the aisle instead of the GOP. Does that make the Democratic Party worth 'saving'? Of course not.

Is the LP that much better? Given their national track record these last 8 years - no, not too much.

Frankly, throwing your money at national candidates is about as 'worthless' as you say, as giving money to the LP. You think you'll ever have a majority on the Potomac? Don't make me laugh.

Focus on your communities. You can rebuild and resist locally, and you have much greater returns. All this attention and money on national politics is not a very good ROI.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 04:00 PM
Tell me...what exactly is worth saving about the GOP?

Nothing whatsoever.

Has anyone here ever expressed care for saving the GOP? Maybe that's where the guy in the OP went wrong, thinking that the GOP ever mattered in the first place.

FrankRep
08-25-2013, 04:04 PM
Tell me...what exactly is worth saving about the GOP?

How many Libertarian Party Congress/Senate members are in office right now?

What political party is Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, and Mike Lee in?

Austrian Econ Disciple
08-25-2013, 04:05 PM
Nothing whatsoever.

Has anyone here ever expressed care for saving the GOP? Maybe that's where the guy in the OP went wrong, thinking that the GOP ever mattered in the first place.

If the party doesn't matter, then why all the pandering? All I keep hearing is Rand Paul has to do and say XYZ, so he can manchurian his way in. Obviously it does matter when you're shifting your positions and what you say to match the GOP mantra.

FrankRep
08-25-2013, 04:06 PM
If the party doesn't matter, then why all the pandering? All I keep hearing is Rand Paul has to do and say XYZ, so he can manchurian his way in. Obviously it does matter when you're shifting your positions and what you say to match the GOP mantra.

Ron Paul: Advice to Liberty Activists on How to Win Elections (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 04:08 PM
If the party doesn't matter, then why all the pandering? All I keep hearing is Rand Paul has to do and say XYZ, so he can manchurian his way in. Obviously it does matter when you're shifting your positions and what you say to match the GOP mantra.

Political parties are tools. Tools that can be used to get your candidate elected. They are nothing more than that. We have had some success using the Republican Party and some have spent a great deal of time getting in leadership positions for future elections to help our candidates. But, sure, we can toss that to the wind. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but hey, some want to keep our movement as a small self-aggrandizing knitting circle.

Austrian Econ Disciple
08-25-2013, 04:10 PM
Ron Paul: Advice to Liberty Activists on How to Win Elections (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ary5F5jKJY

Yeah, I don't care about national elections. Nothing good can come from the Potomac. You can keep deluding yourself that because we have a handful of folks up there that we're going to 'right the ship'. Besides, as I said before, if we spent all the effort, time, and money on the Democratic side, we would have as many seats won as we do on the GOP side, but we don't. Kill the GOP. Maybe something better will rise up in their place. We all ready have one party rule anyways, so it can't get much worse.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 04:10 PM
If the party doesn't matter, then why all the pandering?

Let's say he's pandering. If so, then it's to get the GOP nomination. That's the whole point of working in the GOP. To win. It's not for the good of the party.

If politics is not worth working on then so be it. But if it is, then working in the GOP is obviously the best way to go, regardless of what we think about the rest of party.

Austrian Econ Disciple
08-25-2013, 04:15 PM
Political parties are tools. Tools that can be used to get your candidate elected. They are nothing more than that. We have had some success using the Republican Party and some have spent a great deal of time getting in leadership positions for future elections to help our candidates. But, sure, we can toss that to the wind. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but hey, some want to keep our movement as a small self-aggrandizing knitting circle.

Yes, political party are tools. A bunch of sociopathic, narcisstic, tools. Now, again, tell me what successes we have had nationally? As far as I can see, the machine keeps marching on. Edward Snowden as done more than any of our politicians that we got elected. That was free, not for him of course, but it cost no money. Please, tell me again how having a few guys up there on one side of the aisle, is going to shift the tide? At least locally you can resist and organize much more effectively.

Oh yeah, you seem to think they play fair. Were your eyes closed last election, or the last fifty years?

Carson
08-25-2013, 04:20 PM
Pond? More like a puddle.


Would the last one in the Republican Party please turn off the...

oops. They've been off for a time now.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 04:41 PM
Yes, political party are tools. A bunch of sociopathic, narcisstic, tools. Now, again, tell me what successes we have had nationally? As far as I can see, the machine keeps marching on. Edward Snowden as done more than any of our politicians that we got elected. That was free, not for him of course, but it cost no money. Please, tell me again how having a few guys up there on one side of the aisle, is going to shift the tide? At least locally you can resist and organize much more effectively.



Ron Paul
Rand Paul
Thomas Massey
Justin Amash


Oh yeah, you seem to think they play fair. Were your eyes closed last election, or the last fifty years?
No, but apparently yours were.

cajuncocoa
08-25-2013, 04:44 PM
a unique situation has emerged in louisiana where an LP candidate may actually make a general election run-off.
but instead of helping make that history, people just use as an excuse to do nothing, the history of activist fail in the past.

Clay Grant, an unknown lil' business man ran as a Libertarian in that same race 2 years ago and got 7%.
we have a jungle primary. that 7% can get you in the final showdown.
if Herford was in a run-off with a Dem, he'd win with the GOP backing.

But this will never happen as long of your partisan GOPer spend your time mocking their efforts and not helping.

The Libertarians crossed the lines to help republican candidates, but somehow our brothers and sisters from the GOP won't do the same.
will make people hesitant to do the same in the future for Rand.
+rep.

cajuncocoa
08-25-2013, 04:46 PM
How many Libertarian Party Congress/Senate members are in office right now?

What political party is Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, and Mike Lee in?

And why do you think that is, Frank? Read the posts in this thread...you guys are helping to brainwash the American public with the thinking that a candidate is irrelevant unless he/she wears the Dem or GOP label. The truth of the matter is, all we ever need to do is be determined to VOTE for those people in the 3rd parties. But no, let's just keep spewing the establishment talking points: "3rd parties can't win...you'll be throwing your vote away"

FrankRep
08-25-2013, 04:55 PM
And why do you think that is, Frank? Read the posts in this thread...you guys are helping to brainwash the American public with the thinking that a candidate is irrelevant unless he/she wears the Dem or GOP label. The truth of the matter is, all we ever need to do is be determined to VOTE for those people in the 3rd parties. But no, let's just keep spewing the establishment talking points: "3rd parties can't win...you'll be throwing your vote away"

I doubt we brainwashed 300+ million people. The majority of the people will either vote Republic or Democrat. If you want to get elected, you will need to be in one of those parties. Maybe it's not fair, but it's the reality. Ron Paul learned his lesson, will you?

WM_in_MO
08-25-2013, 04:58 PM
Ron Paul
Rand Paul
Thomas Massey
Justin Amash


No, but apparently yours were.

Not "National" elections. Local and state elections.

The ones we CAN win!

The only "National" election is for the tyrant in chief. That one is firmly in the hands of TPTB (IMO)

You'd have better luck getting congress back. It's hard for TPTB to win 500+ elections every time.

cajuncocoa
08-25-2013, 05:01 PM
I doubt we brainwashed 300+ million people. The majority of the people will either vote Republic or Democrat. If you want to get elected, you will need to be in one of those parties. Maybe it's not fair, but it's the reality. Ron Paul learned his lesson, will you?

No, you won't brainwash 300+ million people, but you're doing your part to convince as many as you can. I'm tired of hearing about Ron Paul learning his lesson on this, too. Ron may have his reasons for having said that (perhaps because he knew his son would run for POTUS??) Maybe he knew it would be impossible to change that in time for Rand's run and he wanted to make sure his (Ron's) supporters stayed in the GOP so as not to hurt Rand's chances. I don't know, but I know the GOP will never allow REAL change to happen. Why else do you think Rand has to be so careful not to sound so much like Ron?

Austrian Econ Disciple
08-25-2013, 05:55 PM
Ron Paul
Rand Paul
Thomas Massey
Justin Amash


No, but apparently yours were.

While Rome burns you'll say how successful we are, by pointing to a few elected praetors in a sea of hundreds! Do you realize how goddamn stupid you sound right now? By all accounts, the machine moves forward. Similarly, by all accounts Edward Snowden has done way more than those four. That's not to dismiss them individually, but let's be real here. You've brainwashed yourself so much so that you actually think we'll ever turn the tide on the Potomac, and in convincing yourself of this, you point to 4 men out of over 500+. Damn man, it took us 7 years to get 4 out of 500+. Well, I guess, by 2200 we might reverse the course! (Oh and trillions of dollars)

You people who delude yourselves year in and year out with national politics...you'll get burnt out eventually, and these guys did. How about you guys start becoming the majority in your localities, and using local political power to tell the States and the Feds to fuck off. If not even one town, one city, one village has yet to resist politically via back up of force (threat of armed resistance), then, well what chance do you even have nationally?

This is why I laugh when you dismiss the LP for being a fools errand, when you don't even realize the path you're on is just as much a fools errand. I'll help local candidates (where party affiliation isn't as important!), but nationally...you'll have to waterboard me first.

69360
08-25-2013, 06:06 PM
Yes, political party are tools. A bunch of sociopathic, narcisstic, tools. Now, again, tell me what successes we have had nationally? As far as I can see, the machine keeps marching on. Edward Snowden as done more than any of our politicians that we got elected. That was free, not for him of course, but it cost no money. Please, tell me again how having a few guys up there on one side of the aisle, is going to shift the tide? At least locally you can resist and organize much more effectively.

Oh yeah, you seem to think they play fair. Were your eyes closed last election, or the last fifty years?

You have got to be kidding me. We have Rand as the frontrunner for the GOP primary.

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 06:39 PM
You have got to be kidding me. We have Rand as the frontrunner for the GOP primary.

watch what happens in louisiana without the activist to work the caucus.
the GOP dick suckers might as well get to loving the government they have.
they will continue to have the government they deserve.

libertariantexas
08-25-2013, 07:03 PM
Libertarians have never been Republicans. A lot of them joined just because Ron ran.

I'll bet more current Libertarians started as Republicans, got fed up, and left (before coming back to help Ron Paul) than those who started as Libertarians, then briefly left to help Ron Paul.

I was a Republican for decades before I found the Libertarian Party. Many Libertarians tell me the same.

The GOP abandoned fiscal conservatism, they became more and more a party bent on using the heavy hand of government to enforce their version of morality, and a party that can't seem to stop supporting stupid wars. With every passing year, I found myself agreeing less and less with the GOP.

I didn't leave the Republican Party, they left me.

I held my nose and came back to the Republican Party to help Ron Paul twice- even becoming a GOP delegate. I will still support Ron Paul and that tiny minority of Republicans who are basically libertarian.

But am I going to smear myself with the label "Republican" on a full time basis?

Not a chance.

I need to maintain some dignity. Lets face it, when you meet someone for the first time and say "I'm a Republican" they are likely to think you are a backward religious zealot, homophobic, sexist, warmonger. And possibly a racist as well. Labels that the GOP has, unfortunately, gone out of it's way to earn.

Those labels don't describe me, so I am extremely hesitant to associate myself with an organization that is largely associated (and often correctly) with those negative traits (and many others).

On the other hand, I agree with the Libertarian Party on almost everything. Libertarians may not win very often, but at least I can proudly say "this is what I believe" when I say that I'm a Libertarian.

libertariantexas
08-25-2013, 07:20 PM
How many Libertarian Party Congress/Senate members are in office right now?

What political party is Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie, and Mike Lee in?

And those of us who are Libertarian support those candidates.

But some of us don't agree it's worth joining a party full time that we largely despise in order to win control of 0.7% of the US Congress. Especially when it's not even necessary.

I can say "I'm a Libertarian" without puking into my mouth as happens when I say "I am Republican." At the same time, I can still support that 1 Republican in 100 or 1,000 who is a good candidate. I can send those candidates money, I can vote for them, campaign for them, even be a delegate for them (one does not need to register as a Republican to be a delegate- in TX, you can caucus and become a delegate just by voting for the candidate).

cajuncocoa
08-25-2013, 07:21 PM
And those of us who are Libertarian support those candidates.

But some of us don't agree it's worth joining a party full time that we largely despise in order to win control of 0.7% of the US Congress. Especially when it's not even necessary.

I can say "I'm a Libertarian" without puking into my mouth as happens when I say "I am Republican." At the same time, I can still support that 1 Republican in 100 or 1,000 who is a good candidate. I can send those candidates money, I can vote for them, campaign for them, even be a delegate for them (one does not need to register as a Republican to be a delegate- in TX, you can caucus and become a delegate just by voting for the candidate).

+rep

erowe1
08-25-2013, 07:58 PM
And those of us who are Libertarian support those candidates.

But some of us don't agree it's worth joining a party full time that we largely despise in order to win control of 0.7% of the US Congress. Especially when it's not even necessary.

I can say "I'm a Libertarian" without puking into my mouth as happens when I say "I am Republican." At the same time, I can still support that 1 Republican in 100 or 1,000 who is a good candidate. I can send those candidates money, I can vote for them, campaign for them, even be a delegate for them (one does not need to register as a Republican to be a delegate- in TX, you can caucus and become a delegate just by voting for the candidate).

Right. But you're comparing apples and oranges. For you, being a Libertarian is like being a fan of Renaissance Fairs or something. It's a hobby. The Republicans you're talking about are Republicans because they're trying to make a difference in something.

That's what these Republican candidates that you vote for, campaign for, and give money to, are. And since you do all those things, it stands to reason that you're glad those Republicans are there for you to support.

fr33
08-25-2013, 08:25 PM
Right. But you're comparing apples and oranges. For you, being a Libertarian is like being a fan of Renaissance Fairs or something. It's a hobby.

Could you explain what you mean by that ^^

torchbearer
08-25-2013, 08:25 PM
Could you explain what you mean by that ^^

its says more about himself than the people he is talking about.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 08:40 PM
Could you explain what you mean by that ^^

The candidates he's talking about supporting, the ones who actually get into office, are all Republicans. So, when it comes down to it, he's as much on board with the GOP strategy as anyone who actually identifies as a Republican is. Whatever he means by identifying himself as a Libertarian, it's something totally different than what this thread is about. Like, there's this Second Life style video game he plays where is character is a Libertarian. But here in the real world, he's still a Republican.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 08:42 PM
And those of us who are Libertarian support those candidates.

But some of us don't agree it's worth joining a party full time that we largely despise in order to win control of 0.7% of the US Congress. Especially when it's not even necessary.

I can say "I'm a Libertarian" without puking into my mouth as happens when I say "I am Republican." At the same time, I can still support that 1 Republican in 100 or 1,000 who is a good candidate. I can send those candidates money, I can vote for them, campaign for them, even be a delegate for them (one does not need to register as a Republican to be a delegate- in TX, you can caucus and become a delegate just by voting for the candidate).

It's your choice of course, but luckily some are staying involved and getting elected to leadership positions so that they can grease the way for our candidates. We were making ground in this effort and it's sad to see some throwing in the towel.

Personally, I don't identify myself as anything besides an American. Political parties do not define me.

fr33
08-25-2013, 09:02 PM
The candidates he's talking about supporting, the ones who actually get into office, are all Republicans. So, when it comes down to it, he's as much on board with the GOP strategy as anyone who actually identifies as a Republican is. Whatever he means by identifying himself as a Libertarian, it's something totally different than what this thread is about. Like, there's this Second Life style video game he plays where is character is a Libertarian. But here in the real world, he's still a Republican.
No he clearly said he only supports a select few Republicans. Almost all of those, (maybe all of them) he can't even vote for. He votes LP most of the time.

erowe1
08-25-2013, 09:08 PM
No he clearly said he only supports a select few Republicans. Almost all of those, (maybe all of them) he can't even vote for. He votes LP most of the time.

But 100% of the politicians he supports who ever made it into office or were in the hunt are Republicans. He didn't just mention voting, but also campaigning and donating.

His voting for LP candidates is equivalent to voting on online polls or something. It's not the same thing. It's fine if he does that. But when he comes up for air and actually does something meaningful, it's with those Republican candidates, no matter how few they are.

fr33
08-25-2013, 09:21 PM
But 100% of the politicians he supports who ever made it into office or were in the hunt are Republicans. He didn't just mention voting, but also campaigning and donating.

His voting for LP candidates is equivalent to voting on online polls or something. It's not the same thing. It's fine if he does that. But when he comes up for air and actually does something meaningful, it's with those Republican candidates, no matter how few they are.

I don't know what part of TX he lives but there's always LP candidates on my ballot to vote for and pretty much never libertarian Republicans on it. It's likely he votes (and donates) to Libertarians like I do.

susano
08-25-2013, 10:07 PM
My voice in this is not very important on this subject because while I'm here because I love freedom, I detest politics and the game. When I read these threads I can always see both sides. Not everyone is cut out to work within the Mafia GOP. Some people just can't stomach the compromises, the corruption and repeatedly getting kicked in the teeth. Their positions must be respected and if they choose to work for freedom in other ways, they're doing what they can and what they think is right. For those who can infiltrate the beast and change it from within - Godspeed. It has to be done because unless something really unforeseen happens, these two organized crime operations, better known as the Republicans and Democrats, have a stranglehold in this country. It's depressing and a terrible system. One thing I do take note of, though, is that Democrats seem to always come together to make sure they get or keep control. Of course, they have no principals, so there's that. Obama could nuke Syria and they'd still defend him as long as their government checks keep coming. And, therein lies how the Democrats keep control over their base - handouts, just like John Gotti.

jjdoyle
08-25-2013, 10:09 PM
Seeing people bail is very disheartening to say the least. Do people really believe this was going to be easy and not done without a huge struggle?

I think people expected more, actually. Like, not lying to your supporters. Not lying in your endorsements on national television. Seeing people claim to be about "liberty", while lying, is very repulsive.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:23 PM
I think people expected more, actually. Like, not lying to your supporters. Not lying in your endorsements on national television. Seeing people claim to be about "liberty", while lying, is very repulsive.

So, you believe that the entire liberty movement is all wrapped up in the people who worked for Ron Paul's campaign? That sure is a lot of power to bestow on such a few people.

I wonder if all that resentment will comfort you when we are in a gulag.

jjdoyle
08-25-2013, 10:32 PM
So, you believe that the entire liberty movement is all wrapped up in the people who worked for Ron Paul's campaign? That sure is a lot of power to bestow on such a few people.

I wonder if all that resentment will comfort you when we are in a gulag.

You believe the liberty movement is all wrapped up in the Republican Party apparently, which will see me off to the gulag, the same as the Democrat Party. You seem to think any real change will come out of Washington, and I think we are past that point.

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:38 PM
You believe the liberty movement is all wrapped up in the Republican Party apparently, which will see me off to the gulag, the same as the Democrat Party. You seem to think any real change will come out of Washington, and I think we are past that point.

Nope, not at all. As I have said many, many times, I think it has to be attacked at all levels of government from the local on up and not just attacked through political means.

No, also on an allegiance to any political party at all. They are tools that we can use to get our candidates elected. Nothing more and nothing less. We have to use one of them and at this time it makes more sense to use the Republican Party. Third parties are not given the time of day and I shouldn't have to explain why using the Democratic Party would be a bad choice.

I agree that far too many, even in this movement, seem to believe that what has taken the bad guys generations to enact can all be turned around in one presidential candidacy of one of our guys. I am not one of them. We are not able to have as much impact as we'd like in Congress right now, because frankly there are only a few of our guys there. The argument I have seen by a couple here is that we will never have a majority, but as Ron Paul has said, we don't need that to succeed, but we do need more. I find it amazing that the ones there have changed the conversation so much already. I don't know about you, but as things fall farther, even if we do not put out the effort to get more elected, that we have some there who will have a podium to speak as the bad guys try to convince the public that the answer is world government.

I think real change has to happen from the local and state levels. But, unfortunately not many people that I have seen on here seem to be interested in that.

jjdoyle
08-25-2013, 10:42 PM
Nope, not at all. As I have said many, many times, I think it has to be attacked at all levels of government from the local on up and not just attacked through political means.

No, also on an allegiance to any political party at all. They are tools that we can use to get our candidates elected. Nothing more and nothing less. We have to use one of them and at this time it makes more sense to use the Republican Party. Third parties are not given the time of day and I shouldn't have to explain why using the Democratic Party would be a bad choice.

Using the Democratic Party, in Democratic areas makes just as much sense as using the Republican Party in certain areas...if this is about really playing games for other means.

Carson
08-25-2013, 10:44 PM
So, you believe that the entire liberty movement is all wrapped up in the people who worked for Ron Paul's campaign? That sure is a lot of power to bestow on such a few people.

I wonder if all that resentment will comfort you when we are in a gulag.


Few people?

By who's account?

Many times over and over tallies were rigged by the Republican Party. Many just blatantly out in your face punctuated by a big PHUQUE YOU!

I remember one in your face vote meant to lock out third party's not only being done by the Republican Party but also by the Democratic Party. Both parties goosestepped it right past their party members reading the results off of teleprompters while the contrary voice counts of their party members were still echoing off the walls.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/presidentronpaul/WhereOWhere.jpg

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:47 PM
Few people?

By who's account?

Uh, I believe he was talking about his anger towards the Ron Paul campaign itself. You know, the people who worked for the campaign.

But, since you showed those pictures of rallies... it sure is too bad all those people didn't show up at the polls, eh?

LibertyEagle
08-25-2013, 10:47 PM
Using the Democratic Party, in Democratic areas makes just as much sense as using the Republican Party in certain areas...if this is about really playing games for other means.

Then by all means do it.

jjdoyle
08-25-2013, 11:11 PM
Uh, I believe he was talking about his anger towards the Ron Paul campaign itself. You know, the people who worked for the campaign.

But, since you showed those pictures of rallies... it sure is too bad all those people didn't show up at the polls, eh?

How do you know how many attended rallies, versus how many showed up to vote? Last I checked, it was Ron Paul supporters taking over state conventions, and getting arrested for holding events in parking lots after the Republicans in charge realized they were outnumbered. What was Ron Paul 2012 doing while supporters were being arrested, assaulted, and harassed? "Please, donate so we can send a message!"

Do you seriously think people that are changing parties, after seeing the complete SCAM of a campaign that it was, are wrong? Then again, we can justify anything around here these days, like endorsing Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. After all, if Rand is playing the game, he should come out and endorse Lindsey Graham right?

susano
08-25-2013, 11:16 PM
Using the Democratic Party, in Democratic areas makes just as much sense as using the Republican Party in certain areas...if this is about really playing games for other means.

I can't see that because any Democrat candidate MUST call for more federal control, more welfare programs and money, more people on food stamps, card check, support teachers and public employee unions, reverse racism, late term abortion rights, and shitloads of other repugnant policies. What libertarian is will to get out and lie their ass off like that? Then, once in office, when they vote way, they'll be primaried and get the boot.

jjdoyle
08-25-2013, 11:23 PM
I can't see that because any Democrat candidate MUST call for more federal control, more welfare programs and money, more people on food stamps, card check, support teachers and public employee unions, reverse racism, late term abortion rights, and shitloads of other repugnant policies. What libertarian is will to get out and lie their ass off like that? Then, once in office, when they vote way, they'll be primaried and get the boot.

Well, Rand lied in his Mitt Romney endorsement on national television, and a number of campaign emails. So, apparently, lying is expected.

Carlybee
08-25-2013, 11:26 PM
Using political parties as tools to get elected is fine and dandy until you realize that once elected you have to keep playing their game in order to stay elected with few exceptions. If either party was worth a damn our last two leaders and their cohorts would have been investigated for starting wars without congressional authority and decimating the constitution, and brought up on impeachment charges. When someone has the cojones to do that then we can ring the bell for liberty. Until then they are all just rats in the cage.

cajuncocoa
08-26-2013, 06:50 AM
it sure is too bad all those people didn't show up at the polls, eh?

How can we be sure they didn't? What if the vote was rigged?

LibertyEagle
08-26-2013, 06:52 AM
How can we be sure they didn't? What if the vote was rigged?

Oh, please. Even our own people have reported that people didn't show up. Oh, they were fantastic at coming out for the rallies, but no so great at showing up to vote.

cajuncocoa
08-26-2013, 06:53 AM
Oh, please. Even our own people have reported that people didn't show up.

So you don't think there was any voter fraud at all?

LibertyEagle
08-26-2013, 06:56 AM
Using political parties as tools to get elected is fine and dandy until you realize that once elected you have to keep playing their game in order to stay elected with few exceptions. If either party was worth a damn our last two leaders and their cohorts would have been investigated for starting wars without congressional authority and decimating the constitution, and brought up on impeachment charges. When someone has the cojones to do that then we can ring the bell for liberty. Until then they are all just rats in the cage.

Do you believe that sitting on the sidelines is somehow going to make that happen? Those things only have a chance of happening if good people are involved and calling for it.

cajuncocoa
08-26-2013, 06:58 AM
Do you believe that sitting on the sidelines is somehow going to make that happen? Those things only have a chance of happening if good people are involved and calling for it.

As has been said to you and others numerous times before, there are many things that need to be done; getting involved politically is only one. NOT getting involved politically is not equal to "sitting on the sidelines".

Carlybee
08-26-2013, 07:09 AM
Do you believe that sitting on the sidelines is somehow going to make that happen? Those things only have a chance of happening if good people are involved and calling for it.

Why haven't the ones who have been elected called for it then? Because they have to keep playing the game.

Dogsoldier
08-26-2013, 07:24 AM
Well...Either way...Ron Paul is a libertarian. I am a libertarian. I'm actually registered as a republican but that's just on paper. I put up libertarian signs in my yard and have libertarian bumper stickers LOL. No body gets my actual vote unless they prove to be libertarian. I don't care what party they are in. NEOCONS will never get my vote.

It disturbs me that so many on here seem to advocate that we vote for the "lesser of 2 evils". I thought we established last election that we won't be doing that anymore???

phill4paul
08-26-2013, 07:41 AM
To each, their own. We all have a role to play


Now the problem is, if we don't have a process whereby you disagree with the two parties, you don't have anyplace to go because it is very difficult to get on the ballot, it's difficult to get in the debates unless you participate in the "so-called" two-party system we have today, and ultimately the changes come about not by tinkering with either political party - it only comes through education and getting people to understand the wisdom of non-intervention in foreign policy, non-intervention in personal liberties, and non-intervention in the economy. - Ron Paul


http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comment...k_me_anything/

jjdoyle
08-26-2013, 07:51 AM
It disturbs me that so many on here seem to advocate that we vote for the "lesser of 2 evils". I thought we established last election that we won't be doing that anymore???

You clearly aren't on the same playing field. Must be stuck in the minor leagues, which is really unfortunate. Not only do you vote for the "lesser of 2 evils", but in the case of Ron Paul 2012 (Rand included), you make backroom deals with Mitt Romney's campaign agreeing to not attack only him, and instead help him win the nomination without any issues at the RNC.

You then, continue to play on the big boy field, by endorsing candidates like Mitch McConnell, over somebody that may be a better alternative. Now, do you understand? If not, can you please give me a donation or a monthly subscription fee, and I might be able to help you understand more.*

*Please note: sarcasm

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 01:51 PM
The candidates he's talking about supporting, the ones who actually get into office, are all Republicans. So, when it comes down to it, he's as much on board with the GOP strategy as anyone who actually identifies as a Republican is.

You couldn't be more wrong. There are a TINY number of "Republicans" who I agree with most of the time. People like Ron Paul.

That does NOT mean I'm on board with much of the GOP platform (and, from the way he has been mistreated and ostracized by the GOP elite, neither is Ron Paul).

I'd support Ron Paul if he ran as a Libertarian or a Democrat or a Green. I support the candidate in spite of the party.

I was raised Republican and first started campaigning for Republicans in 1972 (probably a bit before most of you became politically active). I continued to be a staunch Republican throughout the 80's. But over time, I began to realize that the overwhelming majority of Republicans are NOT fiscal conservatives or for less government, they just choose to blow our money and regulate our lives differently than the Dems.

So in the 90's I became a Libertarian, because, unlike the Republican Party, I support less government and lower taxes.

I still support that tiny minority of Republicans who believe in limited government. That does NOT mean I support the Republican majority who favor ever increasing government intrusion into our lives and more government spending (to say nothing of their horrendous attitudes on most social issues).

erowe1
08-27-2013, 01:56 PM
You couldn't be more wrong. There are a TINY number of "Republicans" who I agree with most of the time. People like Ron Paul

Right. That goes without saying.

But that support for those few candidates is the only political support you've given anyone that actually mattered.

Whatever you did for LP candidates belongs in a separate category. It has nothing to do with actual elections in the real world. It's more like supporting politicians in a role playing game, or rooting for a sports team, or something.



I still support that tiny minority of Republicans who believe in limited government. That does NOT mean I support the Republican majority who favor ever increasing government intrusion into our lives and more government spending (to say nothing of their horrendous attitudes on most social issues).
Of course. Neither do any of us here who are Republicans.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:02 PM
It's your choice of course, but luckily some are staying involved and getting elected to leadership positions so that they can grease the way for our candidates. We were making ground in this effort and it's sad to see some throwing in the towel.



I don't like the taste of bile.

Maybe you are made of stronger stuff and can look someone in the eye and say "I'm a Republican" without puking into your mouth.

I can't.

I'm not going to represent myself as a Republican and pretend I'm something I'm not just for a small chance to possibly slightly increase that 0.7% of the seats in Congress. I don't like pointless wars and blowing trillions of taxpayer dollars on military expenditures, I don't approve of legislating "morality," I don't approve of enriching some Americans at the expense of others (yeah, Republicans do it every day) I don't hate gays, I don't support the moronic "War on Drugs," I don't hate minorities, etc.

In short, I'm a small government fiscal conservative, not a Republican. The Libertarian Party, while far from perfect, is much closer to what I believe in than the GOP.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:09 PM
Right. That goes without saying.

But that support for those few candidates is the only political support you've given anyone that actually mattered.

Whatever you did for LP candidates belongs in a separate category. It has nothing to do with actual elections in the real world. It's more like supporting politicians in a role playing game, or rooting for a sports team, or something.


Of course. Neither do any of us here who are Republicans.


Based on that statement, it sounds like you think supporting candidates (or a party or political philosophy) only matters if we WIN AND WIN NOW! Otherwise, its pointless and we are wasting our time?

By extension, you are also are saying that all of the support all of us gave to Ron Paul over the past 6 years "does not matter," and is pointless and wrong because he DID NOT WIN.

If that is your premise, I strongly disagree.

erowe1
08-27-2013, 02:09 PM
I'm not going to represent myself as a Republican and pretend I'm something I'm not just for a small chance to possibly slightly increase that 0.7% of the seats in Congress.

I don't see how it's pretending to be something you're not. If you're a member of a group, you just are. If other people from your state, or other people with your hair color, or other people who have the same brand of car insurance as you, or whatever, don't represent you, that shouldn't make you puke in your mouth when you identify as being part of that group.

Political action might well be futile. I could see myself giving up on it. But if it's not futile, and if accomplishing anything in it is worth trying to do, then pragmatism is part of that. Without that pragmatism, there's no point in any political party. Perhaps when it comes to pretend politics, you're a Libertarian, but when it comes to pragmatic politics, as long as you still support even that tiny minority, you're a Republican.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:11 PM
Of course. Neither do any of us here who are Republicans.

Well, that's not really true. Some of the Republicans on these boards do support some of those things.

And, unfortunately, an overwhelming majority of the Republicans who are not here on these boards support that stuff. Which is why I no longer choose to be a Republican.

erowe1
08-27-2013, 02:14 PM
Based on that statement, it sounds like you think supporting candidates (or a party or political philosophy) only matters if we WIN AND WIN NOW! Otherwise, its pointless and we are wasting our time?

By extension, you are also are saying that all of the support all of us gave to Ron Paul over the past 6 years "does not matter," and is pointless and wrong because he DID NOT WIN.

If that is your premise, I strongly disagree.

There has to be winning. Maybe not now, but it has to be there. And in order to win at all, you have to be in the game a whole lot of times, and take a bunch of losses for the occasional win. That's the way it works. You lose and lose and lose, and keep coming back and lose and lose, and then you win.

If winning is not part of the point, then neither is any action involving political parties and elections.

There have been a lot of successes in the past 6 years. And you can't override those by picking out the failures. And the support we gave Ron Paul, running as a Republican, has a lot to do with those successes. But not a single thing that a single Libertarian Party candidate has done in those 6 years has anything to do with any of those successes. They're playing whatever they're playing in a whole separate arena that has nothing to do with Ron, Rand, Justin, et al.

So if, in addition to being a Ron Paul supporter, someone is also a stamp collector, or a video game enthusiast, or a Libertarian Party supporter, all those extra hobbies are fine. But they don't have anything to do with changing the makeup of the government.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:14 PM
Political action might well be futile. I could see myself giving up on it. But if it's not futile, and if accomplishing anything in it is worth trying to do, then pragmatism is part of that. Without that pragmatism, there's no point in any political party. Perhaps when it comes to pretend politics, you're a Libertarian, but when it comes to pragmatic politics, as long as you still support even that tiny minority, you're a Republican.

I think the only way we are going to win is to change people's minds long term. I'm not sure that becoming a GOP insider is really the way to do that, since those are the last people who will change their minds.

We need to work on educating those who are not the hard core party hacks. And that can be done just as effectively as a Libertarian or an Independent as it can by attending the county GOP fundraiser.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:15 PM
There has to be winning. Maybe not now, but it has to be there. And in order to win at all, you have to be in the game a whole lot of times, and take a bunch of losses for the occasional win. That's the way it works. You lose and lose and lose, and keep coming back and lose and lose, and then you win.



I agree. But I guess we are going to disagree about how we get there.

erowe1
08-27-2013, 02:19 PM
I think the only way we are going to win is to change people's minds long term.

I'm all for that. And there are people working outside of politics who are doing a great job in that. People like Bob Higgs and tons of others.

Some people in politics are also doing that effectively. Ron Paul has been more effective in changing people's minds than possibly anyone else alive. And the arena in which he has done that is the Republican party. Others who have also been successful in that, even if not as successful as Ron, also have had that success in the Republican Party.

libertariantexas
08-27-2013, 02:22 PM
I'm all for that. And there are people working outside of politics who are doing a great job in that. People like Bob Higgs and tons of others.

Some people in politics are also doing that effectively. Ron Paul has been more effective in changing people's minds than possibly anyone else alive. And the arena in which he has done that is the Republican party. Others who have also been successful in that, even if not as successful as Ron, also have had that success in the Republican Party.

Ron did a lot to inform, educate, and change people's minds.

I also like the way Justin Amash uses social media (e.g. Facebook) to do the same. It also helps that he's very young and will hopefully be doing it for a long time.