Rand calls for libertarians to join GOP, run for office: [Archive]

Brian4Liberty

10-28-2014, 02:43 PM

Vote Republican for Limited Government (http://reason.com/archives/2014/10/28/libertarians-should-vote-republican-for)
We've seen how abusive the IRS, DoJ, and NSA are under Democrats, says Sen. Rand Paul. Let's change course.
By Rand Paul - October 28, 2014

It is apparent now more than ever that our government has grown out of control—and under Democratic leadership, it will only continue to infringe upon our civil liberties. Currently, this Democratic leadership is telling you how to run your businesses, telling you which doctor to see, telling you what you can and cannot eat, and monitoring your phone calls and data without a warrant.

Our Founding Fathers wrote the Bill of Rights to protect us, and our current Democratic leadership is trampling all over these protections. President Obama and the Democrats who support him think that violating American citizen's right to privacy is essential for national security and that proves just how out-of-touch and out of control our government has become.

Under Democratic leadership, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has targeted political dissidents, the Department of Justice has seized reporters' phone records, and the NSA has seized an unlimited amount of cell phone data. This is an all-out assault on the Constitution.
...
Our Founder's would be ashamed at what our government has become. Micromanaging the daily lives of citizens is not the duty of government. But the GOP is taking a stand—we are saying enough is enough.

It is the Republican party that is trying to limit government power and this is an ideal that all libertarians firmly believe in and support. If we want to protect our civil liberties, we must come together. And it's no secret that the Republican party desperately need libertarian support.

For too long, our party's platform has solely focused on national security and tax reform. And while those are important issues, it's not enough. Our party needs a facelift. We need a different kind of GOP that will speak to these infringements to personal liberty.

The GOP does not want to tell you how to live. In fact, we want to get out of your lives. We will not choose your doctor for you. We will not trespass on your first amendment right and dictate how to run your business. We also will not outlaw doughnuts or Big Gulps.

We will stay out of your bedroom, your doctor's office, your classroom, your business, your pantry, and your cell phone.

There are millions of Americans, young and old, native and immigrant, black, white and brown, who simply seek to live free—free to practice their religion, free to choose where they send their kids to school, free to choose their own healthcare, free to keep the fruit of their own labor, free to live without government constantly being on their back.

I believe a Republican Party that is more tolerant and dedicated to keeping the government out of people's personal business would be more appealing to the rising generation and libertarians alike.
...
Young Americans—conservative, libertarian, independent—are as fed up with big government as their parents and grandparents. We are the party that is willing to address their unique concerns and in doing so, we will build a new majority that might finally turn this country around.

The Republican Party is not perfect and there is some dissent within the ranks, but I need libertarian minded Republicans and libertarian independents to vote, get involved and run for office. The heart of the Republican Party embraces freedom and we need to vote and then massage the party to get the party to fight harder to implement a positive vision of economic freedom, low taxation and individual liberty.
...
More: http://reason.com/archives/2014/10/28/libertarians-should-vote-republican-for

Christian Liberty

10-28-2014, 02:54 PM

He cannot possibly think the GOP is the "limited government" party. That's just a joke. I know Rand is smarter than that, considering Ron Paul is his father.

Please tell us you're just trolling...

TheTyke

10-28-2014, 03:06 PM

It is the only way libertarians have been elected to national office recently. Paul, Amash, Massie etc. He's irrefutably correct on strategy.

Brian4Liberty

10-28-2014, 03:14 PM

He cannot possibly think the GOP is the "limited government" party.

That has been the stated GOP position for a long time. It will only become reality if enough people who truly believe in limited government join the party and get elected.

Crashland

10-28-2014, 03:45 PM

Uriah

10-28-2014, 04:13 PM

Don't see anything wrong with this at all. Taking over the GOP from the inside is a much better idea than trying to overthrow it from the outside, IMO. Make the enemies of liberty leave the party on their own.

I concur. To overthrow a party from the outside requires a great deal of public support to disavow one for another. Working on the inside has seen much more positive gain in two election cycles than working from the outside has seen in forty years through the Libertarian party.

Tywysog Cymru

10-28-2014, 04:44 PM

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jrmIwjKBdH0/TmxAyKT44oI/AAAAAAAACMc/v0Qx7WdDdPo/s1600/democrats_vs_republicans.jpg

invisible

10-28-2014, 05:43 PM

familydog

10-28-2014, 06:37 PM

Rand should spend some time here in Pennsylvania if he believes the Republican Party stands for limited government.

RonPaulFanInGA

10-28-2014, 06:39 PM

It is the only way libertarians have been elected to national office recently. Paul, Amash, Massie etc. He's irrefutably correct on strategy.

Exactly right; none of them would have been elected to Congress as Libertarian Party candidates.

jurgs01

10-28-2014, 07:33 PM

Vote for the best candidate. Rand is just saying this because he has to because he thinks it is the best way to get support for his presidential run. If the Republicans run a RINO, vote third party. A RINO is more dangerous than a democrat honestly. Vote too many RINOs in and we get Hillary for president and you can expect to go to war again.

Mr.NoSmile

10-28-2014, 08:08 PM

The GOP does not want to tell you how to live. In fact, we want to get out of your lives. We will not choose your doctor for you. We will not trespass on your first amendment right and dictate how to run your business. We also will not outlaw doughnuts or Big Gulps.

We will stay out of your bedroom, your doctor's office, your classroom, your business, your pantry, and your cell phone.

...I dunno what kind of party Rand Paul is talking about. It can't be the GOP that's all for national security, being increasingly against the tide of folks who have no issue with gay marriage, gets its tongue tied on abortion and other women's issues, and is ideologically dead. The same party where, at its National Convention, Clint Eastwood talked to a chair? This GOP doesn't want to tell you how to live? I don't think so. That's an extreme coating of sugar he's putting on.

cajuncocoa

10-28-2014, 08:16 PM

http://s24.postimg.org/r1643rdjp/conservative.jpg

Christian Liberty

10-28-2014, 08:36 PM

Don't see anything wrong with this at all. Taking over the GOP from the inside is a much better idea than trying to overthrow it from the outside, IMO. Make the enemies of liberty leave the party on their own.

I don't have a problem with trying to infiltrate the GOP, but that isn't the same as saying they actually stand for small government.

http://s24.postimg.org/r1643rdjp/conservative.jpg

lol! +rep.

NoOneButPaul

10-28-2014, 08:39 PM

If the Libertarians would at least change to the GOP to vote for him in the primary we would easily win the nomination.

The GOP is dying and Libertarians could easily fill the void if they'd get off their high horse and appreciate the bigger picture.

Crashland

10-28-2014, 08:42 PM

...I dunno what kind of party Rand Paul is talking about. It can't be the GOP that's all for national security, being increasingly against the tide of folks who have no issue with gay marriage, gets its tongue tied on abortion and other women's issues, and is ideologically dead. The same party where, at its National Convention, Clint Eastwood talked to a chair? This GOP doesn't want to tell you how to live? I don't think so. That's an extreme coating of sugar he's putting on.

It's definitely sugar coating the current situation, but if people follow his lead then it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Tea Party was largely an insurgence within the GOP. Obviously it did not take over the GOP, but it ended up getting a hell of a lot more influence over national politics than it would have if it had insisted on splitting to another irrelevant third party. With enough of a groundswell, it is possible to run the bad folks out of the GOP and replace them with liberty friendly people. This is exactly what Rand is trying to do. It doesn't happen overnight, although it could happen a lot faster if we managed to get term limits.

Brett85

10-28-2014, 09:13 PM

TheTyke

10-28-2014, 09:19 PM

cajuncocoa

10-28-2014, 09:47 PM

I'm not looking for a Gary Johnson style libertarian. I want a Ron Paul style libertarian who doesn't pander to Boobus, but rather takes the time to show Boobus where he went wrong. We can't expect to have small government at the same time we're expanding the military budget and catering to Israel's every demand. We can't expect to have small government and a drug war. We can't expect to have small government while micromanaging who can marry whom. I want a Ron Paul libertarian who tells it like it is, whether he can get elected or not.

Brett85

10-28-2014, 09:57 PM

I want a Ron Paul style libertarian who doesn't pander to Boobus, but rather takes the time to show Boobus where he went wrong. We can't expect to have small government at the same time we're expanding the military budget and catering to Israel's every demand.

According to Adam Kinzinger, Rand wants to cut the military in half. :)

Tywysog Cymru

10-28-2014, 09:58 PM

No thanks to the Gary Johnson style libertarians.

There's nothing I hate more than when someone says "I'm a Libertarian, which is basically someone who wants less taxes while supporting abortion, gay marriage, and weed!"

Christian Liberty

10-28-2014, 10:16 PM

There's nothing I hate more than when someone says "I'm a Libertarian, which is basically someone who wants less taxes while supporting abortion, gay marriage, and weed!"

Well, I agree that its annoying, although "Christian" neoconservatives annoy me far more. I'm not a big Gary Johnson fan, but I wouldn't say this is quite what he is (although he definitely is attractive to that crowd.) I definitely think he's less libertarian than Rand though, and Rand isn't even really a libertarian.

Voluntarist

10-29-2014, 12:07 AM

xxxxx

fr33

10-29-2014, 12:13 AM

Neocon-lite can't even come close to winning a primary against the neocons that "represent" me. What a joke.

Rudeman

10-29-2014, 12:53 AM

Parties don't matter, if anyone here plans on running for public office pick whichever party gives you the best chance to win.

Ronin Truth

10-29-2014, 08:45 AM

Hmm? That would seem to suggest and imply that Rand doesn't really GET that whole "libertarian" thing nor it's principles. :(

Well, what's really to be expected from a "GOP conservative realist" (oxymoron)? ;)

Peace&Freedom

10-29-2014, 09:44 AM

It's definitely sugar coating the current situation, but if people follow his lead then it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Tea Party was largely an insurgence within the GOP. Obviously it did not take over the GOP, but it ended up getting a hell of a lot more influence over national politics than it would have if it had insisted on splitting to another irrelevant third party. With enough of a groundswell, it is possible to run the bad folks out of the GOP and replace them with liberty friendly people. This is exactly what Rand is trying to do. It doesn't happen overnight, although it could happen a lot faster if we managed to get term limits.

Okay, okay, more people get elected under the "reform/save the GOP" approach than via the LP/CP, same as it ever was. Then the policy never changes, same as it ever was. What part of the welfare state has gotten repealed, what part of the warfare state has been reduced under this approach? "It doesn't happen overnight," you say? It hasn't happened in decades, and a recent blip of some election victories hasn't changed that basic dynamic.

I would say the independent liberty movement in general is more responsible for getting the political environment back to being oriented around real reform, precisely by NOT being dependent on the major parties or MSM to establish its legitimacy. We (and to a lesser extent, Tea Party supporters) have done an end run around them, and don't buckle when they attempt to whip us into "mainstream," or go with the establishment flow conformity.

How exactly are the Republican reformers supposed "to run the bad folks out of the GOP" in the form of the big banks, big business, big lobbies, and big military contractors that control both parties from the top? Do the reformers have more resources than those factions? The reform can't happen from the inside, because the main bad folks are the puppet masters who run the show from without it. If you get rid of the current "bad folks" leadership, the elite controllers will simply replace them with another set of puppets. So yes, use the main party label as leverage to get into office where possible, but don't expect either of the elite owned majors to ever be reformed, as the concept is fatally flawed.

green73

10-29-2014, 11:10 AM

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jrmIwjKBdH0/TmxAyKT44oI/AAAAAAAACMc/v0Qx7WdDdPo/s1600/democrats_vs_republicans.jpg

Love it!

NewRightLibertarian

10-29-2014, 01:09 PM

Joining the GOP is worth it just for the sake of causing turmoil. There are also a lot of disenfranchised conservatives looking to be led who are open to liberty-orientated ideas.

twomp

10-29-2014, 01:21 PM

Joining the GOP is worth it just for the sake of causing turmoil. There are also a lot of disenfranchised conservatives looking to be led who are open to liberty-orientated ideas.

Yeah... sure... The GOP would LOVE if libertarians joined them. So would the Democrats too. Herd everyone back into the 2-party system. Round and around we go....

twomp

10-29-2014, 01:25 PM

http://img.mylot.com/2309030.jpg

But let me guess, it will be different this time right?

NewRightLibertarian

10-29-2014, 03:12 PM

Yeah... sure... The GOP would LOVE if libertarians joined them. So would the Democrats too. Herd everyone back into the 2-party system. Round and around we go....

No, the GOP is doing everything they can to keep libertarians out. Their constituents are pissed off and susceptible to the liberty message.

twomp

10-29-2014, 03:18 PM

No, the GOP is doing everything they can to keep libertarians out. Their constituents are pissed off and susceptible to the liberty message.

Really? And how are they doing that? Seems to me Rince Priebus, the RNC committee chairman is asking Rand for his help with courting libertarians. These guys are politicians. They WANT voters. The more the better. Haven't you heard? EVERYONE is all about liberty. Team Red. Team Blue. I have yet to hear either side they are against liberty.

The only difference if you decide to fall for it again this time or not.

NewRightLibertarian

10-29-2014, 03:19 PM

Really? And how are they doing that? Seems to me Rince Priebus, the RNC committee chairman is asking Rand for his help with courting libertarians. These guys are politicians. They WANT voters. The more the better. Haven't you heard? EVERYONE is all about liberty. Team Red. Team Blue. I have yet to hear either side they are against liberty.

The only difference if you decide to fall for it again this time or not.

Again, you are simply incorrect. They are doing everything they can to drive libertarians out. Why did you think they primaried Bentivolio and Amash in Michigan?

specsaregood

10-29-2014, 03:57 PM

This thread is a perfect example of why Randal shouldn't waste any time with the Libertarian vote.

twomp

10-29-2014, 04:07 PM

Again, you are simply incorrect. They are doing everything they can to drive libertarians out. Why did you think they primaried Bentivolio and Amash in Michigan?

First off, Bentivolio? A libertarian? I don't think so. Second, you are incorrect. While Amash is a libertarian leaning politician, he isn't being drive out for simply being a libertarian. He is being driven out because he doesn't do what the GOP leaders tell him to do. No politician in their right mind would deliberately chase away potential voters. They do what ALL politicians do, they tell the voters what they want to hear then when elected, do what they want.

This whole "hey libertarains, join the GOP, we love liberty" is an example of that. While it would definitely help to have libertarian leaning politicians like Rand Paul in office, having the GOP absorb the libertarian party is the worst way to go about bringing liberty back. We need more political parties, not less. No matter how much it will benefit in the short run. More competition is needed not less.

twomp

10-29-2014, 04:15 PM

This thread is a perfect example of why Randal shouldn't waste any time with the Libertarian vote.

Agreed. He should just work on getting the Team Red vote like Romney and McCain. This thread is also a perfect example of why battered and abused wives go back to their spouses. Relying on Team Red or Team Blue to fix a problem that they created in the first place. "This time, it will be different. They promised they would change."

robert68

10-29-2014, 04:22 PM

The GOP will revive Reagan's law: For liberty to expand, government must now contract.

Your father knows he ignored that law.

cajuncocoa

10-29-2014, 05:08 PM

This thread is a perfect example of why Randal shouldn't waste any time with the Libertarian vote.
Rand has already indicated he's not wasting time with the Libertarian vote. He's shown more interest in the social conservative vote all along, in my opinion.

Crashland

10-29-2014, 05:24 PM

Okay, okay, more people get elected under the "reform/save the GOP" approach than via the LP/CP, same as it ever was. Then the policy never changes, same as it ever was. What part of the welfare state has gotten repealed, what part of the warfare state has been reduced under this approach? "It doesn't happen overnight," you say? It hasn't happened in decades, and a recent blip of some election victories hasn't changed that basic dynamic.

I would say the independent liberty movement in general is more responsible for getting the political environment back to being oriented around real reform, precisely by NOT being dependent on the major parties or MSM to establish its legitimacy. We (and to a lesser extent, Tea Party supporters) have done an end run around them, and don't buckle when they attempt to whip us into "mainstream," or go with the establishment flow conformity.

How exactly are the Republican reformers supposed "to run the bad folks out of the GOP" in the form of the big banks, big business, big lobbies, and big military contractors that control both parties from the top? Do the reformers have more resources than those factions? The reform can't happen from the inside, because the main bad folks are the puppet masters who run the show from without it. If you get rid of the current "bad folks" leadership, the elite controllers will simply replace them with another set of puppets. So yes, use the main party label as leverage to get into office where possible, but don't expect either of the elite owned majors to ever be reformed, as the concept is fatally flawed.

So the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are the same now as they were 50 years ago? Political re-alignments do happen, and they almost always involve a restructuring of the existing parties, not the emergence of a third party. To whatever pitiful extent the Tea Party has actually impacted national policy, the LP/CP have done substantially less than that. Even if a third party were to gain a footing, it's not like the big banks, big business, big lobbies, and big military contractors will just vanish. They will be in opposition and will use their vast resources to the fullest extent regardless of what party the liberty movement associates with.

Peace&Freedom

10-29-2014, 06:41 PM

So the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are the same now as they were 50 years ago? Political re-alignments do happen, and they almost always involve a restructuring of the existing parties, not the emergence of a third party. To whatever pitiful extent the Tea Party has actually impacted national policy, the LP/CP have done substantially less than that. Even if a third party were to gain a footing, it's not like the big banks, big business, big lobbies, and big military contractors will just vanish. They will be in opposition and will use their vast resources to the fullest extent regardless of what party the liberty movement associates with.

Fair enough, but my main two points remain, that 1) there has been no real progress in reversing the welfare/warfare state, despite all the talk about electing more people under the Republican banner, and 2) the grassroots including the LP/CP that has turned around the environment (if not the policy) so as to make liberty positions front and center, instead of watered down or ignored within the GOP for ages.

My point was not to posit that the third parties will "get a footing" electorally---my position for years now is that the movement should be dependent on neither the major or minor party system, but should build its infrastructure separate from both. Then go for an open seat when the opportunity arises, in either a Democratic or Republican district. Use the third parties as a vetting system to get pro-liberty candidates. Build our victories without being co-opted in somebody else's system, that kind of thing.

Natural Citizen

10-29-2014, 07:08 PM

While Amash is a libertarian leaning politician, he isn't being drive out for simply being a libertarian. He is being driven out because he doesn't do what the GOP leaders tell him to do.

This is an excellent assessment of what we see happening at the lower levels where grassroots folks get hoodwinked and then end up not doing anything at all relative to what led them to become involved. So many Ron Paul libertarians who truly want to become involved soon learn that once they do get involved ("from within" :rolleyes:) they are immediately told what to do and what to think and are forced to limit their involvement to becoming a glorified prop for the incorporated political figures. And so then they never get to do what it was that led them to want to become involved. The issues that they felt were important are tossed to the side. So many times when I see someone tell a person to go take the courses at the seminars I'm reminded of this phenomenon. It's almost worth taking the time to just sit down and type out how it works within that political atmosphere because what is hapening is that people who are influenced by Ron's values are ending up working to promote the values and positions of other people who teach these seminars. Essentially what is happening is that they're being taught the values of what other people who teach at these seminars believe in. It's a wreck. Most of those folks hold very few of Ron's principles and values. Is why they don't want to touch foreign policy with a ten foot pole.

NIU Students for Liberty

10-29-2014, 07:51 PM

Matt Collins

10-29-2014, 07:52 PM

Rand has already indicated he's not wasting time with the Libertarian vote. He's shown more interest in the social conservative vote all along, in my opinion.

Yes, because that is what he has to have in order to win.

twomp

10-29-2014, 08:04 PM

Be that as it may with regard to third parties such as the LP, how have the Republican or Democratic parties changed substantially in 50 years? If anything, they have become more pro-war/police state/bank/corporatist in terms of their policies.

Exactly! The GOP fanboys will always throw out the same line. "What has the Libertarians accomplished in the last 50 years?" Well what has Team Red and Team Blue accomplished in the last 50 years? If anything, they have morphed into 1 party. Then they have the nerve to tell us that if we don't join one of their teams, nothing will ever get done. Nothing will ever change. NEWSFLASH! THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE NOW! And people want us to continue doing the same thing over again?

Wait let me guess, this time it will be different...

Crashland

10-29-2014, 08:05 PM

Vanguard101

10-29-2014, 08:11 PM

Seems irrefutable and we still have dissenters

cajuncocoa

10-29-2014, 08:19 PM

Yes, because that is what he has to have in order to win.meaning he will have to act more as a social conservative in the Oval Office if he expects to be re-elected. Which means libertarians will wait even longer to have a libertarian president. Oh, I know you'll say he'll be "closer than we've seen" but I just think that means he'll look like Ronald Reagan in the end. By the time we find out which one of us is right, it will be too late. You have more to lose than I do, so I'll take a chance on your word...I'm going to vote for junior and see what we get. But my hopes aren't high.

NewRightLibertarian

10-29-2014, 08:20 PM

First off, Bentivolio? A libertarian? I don't think so. Second, you are incorrect. While Amash is a libertarian leaning politician, he isn't being drive out for simply being a libertarian. He is being driven out because he doesn't do what the GOP leaders tell him to do. No politician in their right mind would deliberately chase away potential voters. They do what ALL politicians do, they tell the voters what they want to hear then when elected, do what they want.

This whole "hey libertarains, join the GOP, we love liberty" is an example of that. While it would definitely help to have libertarian leaning politicians like Rand Paul in office, having the GOP absorb the libertarian party is the worst way to go about bringing liberty back. We need more political parties, not less. No matter how much it will benefit in the short run. More competition is needed not less.

The LP will never succeed. The GOP is a disaster and ripe for a takeover. We can overpower them with our numbers even if we don't have their money.

Matt Collins

10-29-2014, 08:40 PM

meaning he will have to act more as a social conservative in the Oval Office if he expects to be re-elected. Which means libertarians will wait even longer to have a libertarian president. Oh, I know you'll say he'll be "closer than we've seen" but I just think that means he'll look like Ronald Reagan in the end. By the time we find out which one of us is right, it will be too late. You have more to lose than I do, so I'll take a chance on your word...I'm going to vote for junior and see what we get. But my hopes aren't high.

Rand will be much more principled than Reagan was... not to mention that the social conservative movement is accustomed to being talked to and receiving nothing. The current GOP has done almost nothing for the social conservatives. Meaning that Rand can do more for them than anyone else has, without violating his principles.

fr33

10-30-2014, 02:09 AM

This thread is a perfect example of why Randal shouldn't waste any time with the Libertarian vote.

Cruz is the best my community can offer in like 100 years. People like Cornyn and Thornberry have been proven as untouchables. Tell me more about how republicans are for individual liberties. In other words, tell me more about how retarded you are.

twomp

10-30-2014, 02:32 AM

The LP will never succeed. The GOP is a disaster and ripe for a takeover. We can overpower them with our numbers even if we don't have their money.

Oh please, as if the GOP has "succeeded." The GOP is losing a demographics game. That is why they are talking about "liberty" these days. Not because they believe in it but because they want to "succeed." And you being a loyal card carrying member, will follow in lockstep along with all the other sheep. If they GOP were really "ripe" for a takeover, explain to me why John Boehner is still House Majority Leader? How is Lindsey Graham about to get re-elected? How is Peter King about to get re-elected? And those are the worst offenders of liberty. You are just cheer leading this on because you are a devoted Team Red member. As for me, I've heard this all before.

The only way out of the 2 party system is to stop supporting the 2 parties.

philipped

10-30-2014, 06:03 AM

Yo

Rand, I hear you loud and clear. Let's take this sinking ship and bring her back to functioning power, ONE MORE TIME (for all my 2008 & 2012 people who may be worn out by now.) Ta$k Force over&out. 2016 The Movie coming to a theatre near you.

cajuncocoa

10-30-2014, 07:00 AM

Rand will be much more principled than Reagan was... not to mention that the social conservative movement is accustomed to being talked to and receiving nothing. The current GOP has done almost nothing for the social conservatives. Meaning that Rand can do more for them than anyone else has, without violating his principles.Maybe you misunderstand me; I'm not looking for whatever Rand can do for social conservatives....the folks who "claim" to want smaller government while demanding more laws to protect marriage. I'm not looking for Rand to become Rick Santorum or the second coming of Reagan. But that seems to be what you're saying here.

NOVALibertarian

10-30-2014, 07:35 AM

The only way out of the 2 party system is to stop supporting the 2 parties.

You're correct. However, not enough people will ever join you in this endeavor, so it's fruitless on your part. Unfortunately, our system is not like Europe's where third parties--under the right circumstances-- can come to power every few years. Therefore, we must work within one of the two major parties in order to bring into existence the Republic that we wish to see. That's where the Republican Party comes in.

Claiming that the Republican Party is "ripe for a takeover" doesn't necessarily make one a Team Red card-carrier. In fact, accusing one to be a fan of Team Red over this topic is meaningless. Recognizing that the Republican Party is ripe for a takeover is the correct perspective. Yes, scum like Lindsey Graham is about to get re-elected and John Boehner is still the House Majority Leader, but this will all change with time. You must remember that this "takeover" only began to truly bear its fruits in 2010 with the election of Rand Paul to the United States Senate. We're just barely four years into this "takeover." That's not enough to time to purge all of the lesser elements from the Republican Party. But, if Rand Paul ends up becoming President--and we continue working tirelessly even after that monumental event--the lesser elements, such as Lindsey Graham and John Boehner, will end up being purged from the Republican Party.

specsaregood

10-30-2014, 07:41 AM

Cruz is the best my community can offer in like 100 years. People like Cornyn and Thornberry have been proven as untouchables. Tell me more about how republicans are for individual liberties. In other words, tell me more about how retarded you are.

And why should Randal waste his time working to get the votes of people that spend their time arguing against voting or are so hung up on labels that they would refuse to vote for somebody just because of the party they are members of? Its a giant timesink. Either Libertarians figure it out on their own or spend their time patting themselves on their back over fighting for ballot access.

muzzled dogg

10-30-2014, 07:49 AM

Will he support those new candidates, or just the Scott Browns?

specsaregood

10-30-2014, 07:58 AM

Will he support those new candidates, or just the Scott Browns?

Are you suggesting that he hasn't already proven that he will support good candidates such as those he suggests when they run in open primaries or elections?

cajuncocoa

10-30-2014, 08:28 AM

And why should Randal waste his time working to get the votes of people that spend their time arguing against voting or are so hung up on labels that they would refuse to vote for somebody just because of the party they are members of? Its a giant timesink. Either Libertarians figure it out on their own or spend their time patting themselves on their back over fighting for ballot access.
that works both ways, specs. Many Republicans are so hung up on labels they will vote for Team Red without even bothering to listen to what the candidate wants to do. They just vote for him/her because of the party they are a member of.

NewRightLibertarian

10-30-2014, 08:30 AM

Oh please, as if the GOP has "succeeded." The GOP is losing a demographics game. That is why they are talking about "liberty" these days. Not because they believe in it but because they want to "succeed." And you being a loyal card carrying member, will follow in lockstep along with all the other sheep. If they GOP were really "ripe" for a takeover, explain to me why John Boehner is still House Majority Leader? How is Lindsey Graham about to get re-elected? How is Peter King about to get re-elected? And those are the worst offenders of liberty. You are just cheer leading this on because you are a devoted Team Red member. As for me, I've heard this all before.

The only way out of the 2 party system is to stop supporting the 2 parties.

The GOP has always paid lip service to liberty. But now they're getting overrun by tea party and C4L people everywhere. That's the big difference. And if you got involved, you could overthrow their leadership. You can't do that by sitting on the sidelines and voting in an irrelevant party.

Fuck, I know people who are huge LP supporters and long-time members of the party that are Republican precinct delegates. They show up not because they are a 'devoted Team Red member' but because they know the GOP is vulnerable and they can cause trouble.

specsaregood

10-30-2014, 08:36 AM

that works both ways, specs. Many Republicans are so hung up on labels they will vote for Team Red without even bothering to listen to what the candidate wants to do. They just vote for him/her because of the party they are a member of.

And it works well for a libertarian minded person! I think that's the point, Team Red already has a large number of people that just vote the party line without any critical thinking, so Randal is saying Run as Team Red and work to remake it in the image of a pro-liberty team. Why are we still even arguing over this? Its the same thing his dad has been saying since this site started.

Bastiat's The Law

10-30-2014, 09:40 AM

The LP will never succeed. The GOP is a disaster and ripe for a takeover. We can overpower them with our numbers even if we don't have their money.

We've proven that in many states. Our people have to realize this is a long war and stay the course. And like any war it's going to take tremendous sacrifice.

philipped

10-30-2014, 06:05 PM

Why are we still even arguing over this? Its the same thing his dad has been saying since this site started.

Question of the year.

NewRightLibertarian

11-01-2014, 12:13 PM

We've proven that in many states. Our people have to realize this is a long war and stay the course. And like any war it's going to take tremendous sacrifice.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting that people join the GOP and lick the boots of the establishment. I'm not even suggesting that they go into the party and kiss ass like Rand is. Libertarians should join to stir the pot and get the ear of Republicans. Otherwise, it will be charlatans like Mark Levin and Glenn Beck that they will look to as their 'liberty leaders.'

philipped

11-01-2014, 12:38 PM

ILL DO IT RAND! YOU AINT GOTTA TELL ME TWICE B. WE LIT FRFR!!!

r3volution 3.0

11-01-2014, 01:00 PM

And it works well for a libertarian minded person! I think that's the point, Team Red already has a large number of people that just vote the party line without any critical thinking, so Randal is saying Run as Team Red and work to remake it in the image of a pro-liberty team. Why are we still even arguing over this? Its the same thing his dad has been saying since this site started.

Exactly.

It's a lot easier for a libertarian to win the Republican nomination than for a Libertarian to win the general election. The former is still difficult, mind you, but the latter is impossible. Put another way: A Libertarian needs to win 51% of the national electorate, while a libertarian running in the GOP only need to win 51% of half the electorate - the half who doesn't vote for him in the primaries will still (mostly) vote for him in the general, because they're blind party loyalists.

invisible

11-01-2014, 01:20 PM

I'm not even suggesting that they go into the party and kiss ass like Rand is.

Other than a few questionable endorsements (romney, mcconnell, brown, etc), by far and away Rand is kicking ass, not kissing it. 2016 promises to be just as much fun as 2008 and 2012 were!

Carlybee

11-01-2014, 01:26 PM

It is very difficult to explain to liberals the concepts of libertarianism when they ask why you vote the same party that includes people like Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz.

invisible

11-01-2014, 01:39 PM

It is very difficult to explain to liberals the concepts of libertarianism when they ask why you vote the same party that includes people like Rick Santorum and Ted Cruz.

Actually, it's not. I've been doing exactly this, and am currently up to my eyeballs in it with Duane C's campaign. Explain that there are good and bad candidates in both parties, and that you refuse to vote for those sort of candidates, just as they do. Then explain how it has been Republicans leading on the issues important to them in recent years, with examples. I can write more in detail about this later if you'd like, but I have to get going and knock more doors for Duane.

Carlybee

11-01-2014, 02:15 PM

Actually, it's not. I've been doing exactly this, and am currently up to my eyeballs in it with Duane C's campaign. Explain that there are good and bad candidates in both parties, and that you refuse to vote for those sort of candidates, just as they do. Then explain how it has been Republicans leading on the issues important to them in recent years, with examples. I can write more in detail about this later if you'd like, but I have to get going and knock more doors for Duane.

Thank you but I really do t even care anymore about trying to convince them after seeing some of their hypocritical hateful rhetoric online. I say let them stew in their own cesspool.

Bastiat's The Law

11-01-2014, 06:13 PM

Yeah, I'm not suggesting that people join the GOP and lick the boots of the establishment. I'm not even suggesting that they go into the party and kiss ass like Rand is. Libertarians should join to stir the pot and get the ear of Republicans. Otherwise, it will be charlatans like Mark Levin and Glenn Beck that they will look to as their 'liberty leaders.'

Stirring the pot is fun!

Pawn3d

11-04-2014, 11:37 AM

“I’m sure it will not only be a great time, but it will also go a long way to proving you and I are the future of the Republican Party.” -Ron Paul

Ron Paul’s dream is to see his supporters take the message of liberty into the heart of the GOP and transform the Republican Party.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/high-tide-and-turn/2012/aug/22/ron-pauls-vision-liberty-people-rnc-date-approache/#ixzz3I7dsqCq2

NOVALibertarian

11-04-2014, 01:19 PM

Thank you but I really do t even care anymore about trying to convince them after seeing some of their hypocritical hateful rhetoric online. I say let them stew in their own cesspool.

It's impossible to convince die-hard Progressives and Liberals to fully come over to our side. You can potentially convince those who used to only vote for Democrats because they're Democrats (I personally know a few former-Obama voters in my family that are sold on Rand Paul), but not those who have actually dedicated time and energy to Democratic candidates and are neck-deep in their ideology. Perhaps you may get them to recognize a problem, but then they'll come to the wrong conclusion on how to solve said problem (In most cases: federal intervention). This is due entirely to their ideology centering around a big federal government.

When someone does that, you just wasted all of your time that could have been spent trying to convince Republican voters, who at least (for the most part) come to the right conclusion once you get them to recognize a problem. However, it's getting them to recognize a problem (such as the War on Drugs) that's the hard part.