Revisiting the Romney endorsement 4 years later (split)

[Anti Federalist]

But yet his dad endorsed every incumbent Republican in the state of Texas.

Were his own children running against each one of them?

[Brett85]

Were his own children running against each one of them?

No. I guess you're repeating the claim that "Rand endorsed Romney over his own father." Of course, this is despite the fact that Rand campaigned for Ron in the early primary states, appeared in TV ads for him, was a surrogate for him on TV, and only endorsed Romney after Romney had collected the amount of delegates necessary to win the GOP nomination.

[cajuncocoa]

Were his own children running against each one of them?


No. I guess you're repeating the claim that "Rand endorsed Romney over his own father." Of course, this is despite the fact that Rand campaigned for Ron in the early primary states, appeared in TV ads for him, was a surrogate for him on TV, and only endorsed Romney after Romney had collected the amount of delegates necessary to win the GOP nomination.
How many times must it be said?

This article is dated May 14, 2012...about 3 weeks before Rand appeared on Sean Hannity's show to endorse Romney:


Texas Rep. Ron Paul said on Monday he will no longer be actively campaigning in the GOP presidential primaries but won't formally suspend his campaign. Instead, the libertarian candidate's organization will continue to accumulate delegates to send to the Republican National Convention.

"Our campaign will continue to work in the state convention process. We will continue to take leadership positions, win delegates, and carry a strong message to the Republican National Convention that Liberty is the way of the future," said a statement from Paul that was distributed by his campaign. "Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted. Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ron-paul-suspends-active-campaigning/

[specsaregood]

No. I guess you're repeating the claim that "Rand endorsed Romney over his own father." Of course, this is despite the fact that Rand campaigned for Ron in the early primary states, appeared in TV ads for him, was a surrogate for him on TV, and only endorsed Romney after Romney had collected the amount of delegates necessary to win the GOP nomination.

I don't even know why you would bother responding to that level of petty trollish tripe any longer. Seriously, if people want to continue to act out as whiny little bitches, then nothing you say is gonna make them stop.

[fisharmor]

I don't even know why you would bother responding to that level of petty trollish tripe any longer. Seriously, if people want to continue to act out as whiny little bitches, then nothing you say is gonna make them stop.

Yeah, the freedom train is going full steam ahead, and because of the long string of successes we've had recently, there's no reason to stop and think about stuff that happened four years ago.

:rolleyes:

[specsaregood]

Yeah, the freedom train is going full steam ahead, and because of the long string of successes we've had recently, there's no reason to stop and think about stuff that happened four years ago.

:rolleyes:

There is a big difference between looking at history and making constructive criticism and suggesting alternative approaches vs. being a whiny resentful bitch. The people still bitching about the Romney endorsement are on the latter half of that comparison.

[jct74]

Yeah, the freedom train is going full steam ahead, and because of the long string of successes we've had recently, there's no reason to stop and think about stuff that happened four years ago.

:rolleyes:

But the thread was not about the Romney endorsement. I know some people still feel strongly 4 years later and don't hesitate to invite that topic into any thread where it can be discussed, but nothing much is accomplished by that. It's a very divisive topic and I doubt anyone's mind will be changed by arguing about it some more. Especially by derailing threads and doing so in Rand Paul Forum, which is not the right way to go about it nor the right place. That's just going to inflame people and then you have both sides attacking each other all over again. Do it in a dedicated thread at least, outside of Rand's forum. I split this thread off though so now there is a place for it.

[Anti Federalist]

There is a big difference between looking at history and making constructive criticism and suggesting alternative approaches vs. being a whiny resentful bitch. The people still bitching about the Romney endorsement are on the latter half of that comparison.

That was, far and away, the single biggest reason for the failure of 2016.

The historical revisionism is what is going to allow it to happen again sometime in the future.

[Anti Federalist]

How many times must it be said?

This article is dated May 14, 2012...about 3 weeks before Rand appeared on Sean Hannity's show to endorse Romney:


but won't formally suspend his campaign

So, that leaves us with only two options, and to date, there has not been a reasonable explanation from the Paul camp as to which one it is, which is why whining little f a g g o t s and bitches like me, continue to whine and bitch.

1 - Rand cynically and without regard, threw his own father under the bus for political gain. (Gain that turned out to be ephemeral)

2 - Ron supported his decision, and then grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars out of well meaning people who thought, wrongly, based on Ron's own words, that he still had some sort of campaign and real effort to contribute to.

[cajuncocoa]

So, that leaves us with only two options, and to date, there has not been a reasonable explanation from the Paul camp as to which one it is, which is why whining little f a g g o t s and bitches like me, continue to whine and bitch.

1 - Rand cynically and without regard, threw his own father under the bus for political gain. (Gain that turned out to be ephemeral)

2 - Ron supported his decision, and then grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars out of well meaning people who thought, wrongly, based on Ron's own words, that he still had some sort of campaign and real effort to contribute to.
You're not alone in feeling this way. I stopped bitching about it sometime in 2013, around the time I decided to get on the Rand bandwagon (because what else was there to do?) But that endorsement, especially that it took place on Sean Hannity's show, was like getting stabbed in the back. I don't care if no one else feels that way...but I know at least two other people who do (that's counting you, AF.)

[Anti Federalist]

You're not alone in feeling this way. I stopped bitching about it sometime in 2013, around the time I decided to get on the Rand bandwagon (because what else was there to do?) But that endorsement, especially that it took place on Sean Hannity's show, was like getting stabbed in the back. I don't care if no one else feels that way...but I know at least two other people who do (that's counting you, AF.)

Obviously the results speak for themselves, quite a few people felt the same way.

I know five myself, IRL, including my own mother, who would not have anything to do with him after that.

And no, it wasn't me putting the bug in their ear, in fact, they saw the same Hannity interview we did.

[CPUd]

May 14 2012:

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul issued the following statement to supporters and the general public concerning the continuation of his historic bid for the GOP nomination.

The statement tees up forthcoming information the campaign will release concerning its fruitful delegate-attainment strategy still occurring at delegate-selection events such as state conventions ahead of the Republican National Convention in Tampa.

Below please find comments from Congressman Paul:

“As I reflect on our 2012 Presidential campaign, I am humbled by the supporters who have worked so hard and sacrificed so much. And I am so proud of what we have accomplished. We will not stop until we have restored what once made America the greatest country in human history.

“This campaign fought hard and won electoral success that the talking heads and pundits never thought possible. But, this campaign is also about more than just the 2012 election. It has been part of a quest I began 40 years ago and that so many have joined. It is about the campaign for Liberty, which has taken a tremendous leap forward in this election and will continue to grow stronger in the future until we finally win.

“Our campaign will continue to work in the state convention process. We will continue to take leadership positions, win delegates, and carry a strong message to the Republican National Convention that Liberty is the way of the future.

“Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted. Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have. I encourage all supporters of Liberty to make sure you get to the polls and make your voices heard, particularly in the local, state, and Congressional elections, where so many defenders of Freedom are fighting and need your support.

“I hope all supporters of Liberty will remain deeply involved – become delegates, win office, and take leadership positions. I will be right there with you. In the coming days, my campaign leadership will lay out to you our delegate strategy and what you can do to help, so please stay tuned.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul.”



June 7, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c5odNzKVbk

June 12, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3CX1RQjXf0

[Matt Collins]

2 - Ron supported his decision, and then grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars out of well meaning people who thought, wrongly, based on Ron's own words, that he still had some sort of campaign and real effort to contribute to.
False dichotomy / premise.

Just because he suspended his campaign did not mean that he didn't still have a real effort to contribute to.

[thoughtomator]

Here's the bottom line:

Rand lied to us.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Y5Ntwk2PU

"We're in it to win it, we're in for the long haul."

And then promptly folds the campaign after one contest.

Anyone who isn't angry at this is a cultist. We deserve answers from both the Pauls on this one: Rand for his action, Ron for his abdication.

[CPUd]

Here's the bottom line:

Rand lied to us.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Y5Ntwk2PU

"We're in it to win it, we're in for the long haul."

And then promptly folds the campaign after one contest.

Anyone who isn't angry at this is a cultist. We deserve answers from both the Pauls on this one: Rand for his action, Ron for his abdication.

They are always going to say they are in it to win, if you followed his pre-campaign, he said on several occasions if he has no path he will end it.

I'm interested in the back story as well, but I don't expect them to talk about it until after the election season. I'm not angry, it was a bit unexpected though. From the different accounts of his campaign staff, he was set to campaign through NH the night of the Iowa caucuses. Later that night, he got on the plane and somewhere in there had a phone conversation with Steve Munisteri. After he got off the plane, he decided to suspend, presumably on Steve's advice.

[Matt Collins]

it was a bit unexpected though. Not to anyone who was paying attention.

[CPUd]

Not to anyone who was paying attention.

Were you paying attention? All you ever did on here during that time was show your ass.

[thoughtomator]

They are always going to say they are in it to win, if you followed his pre-campaign, he said on several occasions if he has no path he will end it.

I'm interested in the back story as well, but I don't expect them to talk about it until after the election season. I'm not angry, it was a bit unexpected though. From the different accounts of his campaign staff, he was set to campaign through NH the night of the Iowa caucuses. Later that night, he got on the plane and somewhere in there had a phone conversation with Steve Munisteri. After he got off the plane, he decided to suspend, presumably on Steve's advice.

The problem here is that by not being seriously in it to win it, he sucked up all the oxygen and prevented any other liberty candidate from making a go at it.

Rand had a fallback position - keeping his Senate seat.

The liberty movement had no fallback position. Our position became "under the bus".

And that is NOT satisfying. At all.

[CPUd]

The problem here is that by not being seriously in it to win it, he sucked up all the oxygen and prevented any other liberty candidate from making a go at it.

Rand had a fallback position - keeping his Senate seat.

The liberty movement had no fallback position. Our position became "under the bus".

And that is NOT satisfying. At all.

He did around 150 events in the days leading up to Iowa. You don't do that unless you are serious. He had a strategy that ultimately could not get him any traction in the polls. NH he would have probably come in somewhere between Bush and Carson. After Iowa, I thought he would stick it out until after NH and seeing he wasn't gaining in NV, drop at that time, The only strategy that works this cycle is to go out there and say he wants to kick out all the unAmericans while bombing the shit out of Iraq and Syria.

[Anti Federalist]

False dichotomy / premise.

Just because he suspended his campaign did not mean that he didn't still have a real effort to contribute to.

Mealy, smarmy, used car salesman talk.

So, he grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars, many of which from people who could barely afford it.

And you defend it.

Fucking shameful, all around.

[Krugminator2]

Mealy, smarmy, used car salesman talk.

So, he grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars, many of which from people who could barely afford it.

And you defend it.

$#@!ing shameful, all around.

It is immoral to let a sucker keep his money. Ron Paul was done after South Carolina which was in January 2012. Rand endorsed in JUNE. The race was over for five months. Ron won zero states and finished a distant 4th in the vote tally.

Anyone who donated to Ron Paul with the expectation of him winning, especially after the first few primaries, is a life fish and is going to blow money their money on televangelists, herbal remedies, homeopathy, astrology, 900 number psychics, etc. It may well go to Ron where it is going to put to some good use promoting liberty candidates. Ron asked. People voluntarily gave. I have no sympathy.

[Krugminator2]

Here's the bottom line:

Rand lied to us.

"We're in it to win it, we're in for the long haul."

.

Rand lost. He had no way forward. That is why he dropped out. He left on a high note getting 5th in Iowa. It was only getting worse in NH and SC.

Rand answering that he is in it for the long haul is the equivalent of the CEO of Bear Stearns saying the company is solvent in March of 2008. If he doesn't answer that way he creates a self-fulfilling prophesy that guarantees failure. He took all the steps necessary to have a campaign that could compete for the long haul. But he got decimated.

[Matt Collins]

Mealy, smarmy, used car salesman talk.

So, he grifted hundreds of thousands of dollars, many of which from people who could barely afford it.

And you defend it.

$#@!ing shameful, all around.
No, people voluntarily gave their money and it was their choice to do so, but it wasn't put to waste. It was actually used to promote the cause by continuing to amass delegates.

You do realize that because of those efforts and fundraising that the GOP is in the position it is in now, right? (civil war)


Ron, because he continued to amass delegates, has effectively created the conditions that allowed the GOP to be split.

If we didn't have any or many delegates in 2012 then we would not have been able to cause the establishment to change the rules on us at the Convention because we wouldn't have been a threat. After Iowa Ron wasn't a threat to win the nomination but he was a threat to upset the apple cart which he did very well in Tampa. He exposed the establishment for what they are. That helped to create a massive anti-establishment sentiment which is what lead to the rise of Trump. I don't support Trump but he is taking 2012 to its logical conclusion; hammering the wedge in the Party.

[Matt Collins]

Anyone who donated to Ron Paul with the expectation of him winning, especially after the first few primaries,At that point the goal wasn't for him to get the nomination, but for him to acquire as many delegates as possible.

[Anti Federalist]

Anyone who donated to Ron Paul with the expectation of him winning, especially after the first few primaries, is a life fish and is going to blow money their money on televangelists, herbal remedies, homeopathy, astrology, 900 number psychics, etc. It may well go to Ron where it is going to put to some good use promoting liberty candidates. Ron asked. People voluntarily gave. I have no sympathy.

That's exactly my point.

If the Rand action was all agreed upon and delivered in a nice shiny package to Sean Hannity, according to whatever political metric they were using, and for whatever political gain they they they could garner, then that left any further fundraising efforts for Ron's campaign to be relegated to the level of Jimmy Swaggart begging for money on teevee, just like any other political whore.

I suppose you're right, it's my fault.

I let an inner hope (here's a politician that is a statesman, that I can actually trust) override my natural bitter cynicism.

The fact that Ron is out there hawking Porter Stansberry's doom porn is telling.

Won't ever make that mistake again in my lifetime.

Ya'll carry on and have fun.

[thoughtomator]

AntiFederalist that people are actually comparing Rand to a line-up of scammers and hucksters as a method of defending him is remarkable, and telling.

[Krugminator2]

The fact that Ron is out there hawking Porter Stansberry's doom porn is telling.



It shouldn't tarnish your view of him because it is completely in line with his life history. Ron is great but he is basically an effective salesman and marketer, which I see as a positive. He isn't a saint though and he certainly isn't above being politician.


@AntiFederalist (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=1866) that people are actually comparing Rand to a line-up of scammers and hucksters as a method of defending him is remarkable, and telling.

I don't see anyone defending Rand comparing him to scammers and hucksters. You are doing that . Rand worked a grueling schedule and kept up his Senate duties for the privilege of low support and constant irrational complaints.

Rand and Goldwater are the only two major liberty candidates in the last 200 years. These kinds of candidates don't grow on trees. There was no one to get out of the way for.