• 11-08-2012

      by Published on 11-09-2012 11:48 AM



      America is over $16 trillion in debt. The "official" unemployment rate still hovers around 8%.

      Our federal government claims the right to spy on American citizens, indefinitely detain them, and even assassinate them without trial.

      Domestic drones fly over the country for civilian surveillance.

      Twelve million fewer Americans voted in 2012 than in 2008, yet political pundits scratch their heads.

      It's not hard to see why, though.

      To go along with endorsing a never-ending policy of bailouts, "stimulus packages," and foreign military adventurism, the establishment of neither major party questions the assaults on Americans' liberties I’ve named above.

      As my campaign showed, the American people are fed up. Many realized heading into Tuesday that regardless of who won the presidential election, the status quo would be the real victor.

      GOP leadership is now questioning why they didn't perform better.

      They're looking at demographic changes in the United States and implying minorities can only be brought into the party by loudly advocating for abandoning what little remains of their limited government platform and endorsing more statist policies.

      My presidential campaign proved that standing for freedom brings people together.

      Liberty is popular – regardless of race, religion, or creed.

      As long as the GOP establishment continues to not only reject the liberty message, but actively drive away the young, diverse coalition that supports those principles, it will see results similar to Tuesday’s outcome.

      A renewed respect for liberty is the only way forward for the Republican Party and for our country.

      I urge all my Republican colleagues to join the liberty movement in fighting for a brighter future.


      http://www.facebook.com/ronpaul/posts/10152139410646686
      by Published on 11-09-2012 10:30 AM

      I had a Republican friend of mine post the following on Facebook blaming Ron Paul for Mitt's loss:

      I know, I know, if's and but's. But, if Ron Paul would have endorsed Romney/Ryan , would we have had a different outcome? How many republican votes were wasted on him, when he had no chance? Just sayin.

      Here is my response to him:

      When we lose a race, we first start out in a somber mood and then after thinking about the loss over and over we begin to rationalize how we lost and cast blame. We justify the loss by blaming someone or something else and most times we blame others when we shouldn't be. This is one of those times.

      Ron Paul's supporters are one of the most missunderstood subjects for the general Republican. His supporters aren't the same as a Santorum supporter or a Newt supporter or even a Bachmann supporter. Those who support any of those three candidates are in the "general Republican" demographic, meaning they are a Republican who will support all Republicans regardless of who that Republican is. When Bachmann dropped out of the Presidential race, her supporters latched onto the Republican candidate that was their second choice, perhaps someone like Newt. This is how the general Republican's work. Steve, you fit in his demographic and that's not a bad thing, mind you. "General Republicans" tend to have a hard time understanding why Ron Paul's supporters don't do this and that's because they view the Ron Paul supporters as "general Republicans" when in fact they are not.

      Ron Paul's supporters come from a variety of areas. I would break down his supporters into the following percentages:

      25% General Republicans
      25% Disenfranchised Democrats
      25% Libertarians
      25% Independents

      These percentages explain alot. The general Republican assumes that Mitt Romney would have received all of the votes from the Ron Paul supporters IF Ron Paul had thrown his support and endorsement behind Romney and this is not true.

      During this election, the 25% of Ron Paul supporters that were in the "General Republican" category ended up voting for Romney. This happened regardless of a Paul endorsement.

      The 25% of Paul supporters that were Democrat went back to voting for Democrats, mainly Obama. They ONLY voted "Republican" because they liked Ron Paul and not because they had an epiphany and seen the light only to switch parties. These supporters would only vote for a Republican Presidential nominee if that nominee were Ron Paul. When that wasn't the case, they went back to the Democrat party.

      The 25% of Paul supporters that were Libertarian, like the Paul Democrats, went back to voting for the Libertarian Party candidates. Paul brought them in and they were only going to stay if he were the nominee. In their eyes, Romney was so far left and nowhere near their Libertarian beliefs, that they would NEVER vote for him and they didn't. Those votes went to Gary Johnson. It is worth noting, the Libertarian Party and Gary Johnson both said they wouldn't run a Presidential candidate if the Republican's had nominated Ron Paul.

      Now the other 25% of Paul supporters are a mix of disenfranchised Green Party voters, Constitution Party voters, etc. They, most likely, went back to voting for their Party's candidates, although I'm sure a few voted for Romney, Obama and Gary Johnson also.

      The reason I point all this out is because Ron Paul brought in ALOT of potential voters to the Republican Party and when Romney won the nomination, close to 75% of those voters left the Republican Party.

      It's easy to blame Ron Paul for Mitt Romney's loss but this is a wrong. The one person we should blame for Mitt's loss is Mitt himself. This is proven by the losses the Republicans suffered in the lower races. In Presidential election years, the top of the ticket tends to influence how the rest of the ticket does. Meaning, the stronger the Presidential candidate, the more votes the lower candidates get because they ride on his or her coattails. Mitt was not a strong candidate and thus didn't bring in a lot of enthusiasm to the party so there wasn't any enthusiasm to carry over into the congressional races, senate races and state races.

      At this point, those of us that are "general Republicans" need to step back and assess our Party's future and plan for two years from now and four years from now. My first suggestion is to stay away from nominating moderates and nominate a conservative.
    • Follow us on Twitter! Like us on Facebook! Subscribe to our top news RSS Feed! New! Subscribe to us on YouTube!







    • Tom Woods's - Liberty Classroom