Waste of money and likely not going to achieve anything. Lindsey Graham should be the target.
Waste of money and likely not going to achieve anything. Lindsey Graham should be the target.
Close only counts in horseshoes. McConnell won't be touched. You should take the long-term view of this, since the outlook is very hopeful. This could very well be McConnell's last term before he retires. He's old and his time is coming to a close. By the time McConnell is done, Massie will have the household name recognition to ease into his Senate seat without much of a fight at all. He's just keeping it warm for Thomas.
Yes, you could say that. But I, for one, would much prefer an electoral process that provided a level playing field. Trying to get the right people in office is never going to happen at a fast enough pace to make any difference as long as money controls the process. The money power will always win out. Not trying to be a Debbie Downer, but I'm just not 'feelin it' these days.
Do you think the word "Republican" behind Dr. Paul here was an accident? What about the phrase "We Are The Future"? This was in direct response to supporters wanting to give up and leave the party. Keeping the liberty movement focused on what actually works has always been the agenda from Ron Paul on down. I'm sorry you just got the memo.
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b3gK-goWD20/0.jpg
Memo to you! It's your approach, Genius! Get it? And besides, you're never going to get liberty-minded people all on the same page of political action, nor should you want to. Restoring freedom in this country requires a multi-pronged approach (including but not limited to infiltrating BOTH parties), and either you're going to have to trust the people to move in the right direction - or NOT! But you don't get to insult other members while sitting on your high horse trying to corral everyone into thinking and acting the way you deem we should. Just knock it off.
but the point is you spend your resources others spend theirs. You don't want people cutting down efforts you find worthy of spending your money on, and might want to be considerate of other people's efforts as well,
It isn't like there is a pot of money and a democratic control of where it goes. Each spend their own money.
Infiltrating the democratic party? Seriously?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07fTsF5BiSM
Yes, seriously. Remember the Blue Republicans? If Robin K ran as a D I'd back him. I hope he'd run Gop because we have more organization there, but there are states where R makes no sense. Ron has said our ideas have to be in all parties, just as the bad ideas are, and I agree with him.
Ron is friends with Dennis Kucinich as I'm certain you know. That video is a small sampling of democratic voters. Any Democrat could go around a Republican event and scrounge up just as many boneheads. If we're ever going to get anywhere, we have to move beyond the right-left paradigm - it's how they are able to distract us - by dividing us. We get liberty-minded individuals into office as Dems, as well as Republicans, then we may actually change the hearts and minds of a nation.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's going a little too far. In most cases both party's main candidates have enough money to compete for the Senate, so it isn't 'bought' when it comes down to the general. The primary can be bought though, and most people don't have the kind of money needed to run.
but usually both funded candidates are funded because they will get goodies at taxpayer expense for different special interests, so it is still bought, just on both sides.
The point is, there are races that are winnable and races that aren't. Every cycle, good money is thrown at candidate's who couldn't win their race under any circumstances. John Dennis, Peter Schiff, Art Robinson, and Kurt Bills come to mind. This Kentucky Senate Race looks like a loser. McConnell has the entire establishment behind him. He will have over $10 million if he wants it, probably more. He can call for help at any moment. He is also known as one of the greatest politicos in the history of the state. There are winnable races out there where money would matter more.
Everyone can do what they want with their own money, but I caution that this may not be the best use of that money.
The Democrat Party is a waste of time.
Anyone who is slightly to the right is now beaten down hard by progressives and spendaholics.
The Blue Dogs are practically extinct.
It is an Obama, uber liberal party now.
The good news is that because they're overrun with progressives they won't get the House for a long time.
Then why is the strategy of running liberty Democrats starting to work in NH? Why are Democrats getting elected in town after town in local elections and also as state reps? In fact, 6 of the stat rep. races won by FSPers in NH were FSPers running as Democrats. Perhaps where you live Democrats are different. Where I live, even the Democrats work hard to prevent a state income or state sales tax.
I think you are WAY too over generalizing and collectivizing. I'm not sure why you are doing it but it's distasteful at best.
I like a lot of what you said but using that word is also divisive and distracting. I mean don't get me wrong, what you said is certainly an improvement over what itshappening said but it is still counterproductive (IMO) to use that type of political language in public. Maybe use that type of language in a back room filled with cigar smoke. It certainly isn't going to run you any friends when you or your friends are running for office and it is used against you on the radio, online and in debates.
The main thing that people can do in their state to make it easier to knock off these rinos is to push to scrap your primary system in favor for party delegates picking nominees at state conventions and local nominees at county conventions. Each C4L state group should be pushing for this in an unofficial capacity if needed. This should be the main question asked of candidates running for state chair and those for exec comm spots. Forget blowing absurd amounts of money in primaries as it's damaging to the party itself as well as to the taxpayers that foot the election tab. There's where the additional power of precinct delegates come into play and many more changes can happen relatively sooner on a broad scale.
I don't support replacing voting by the people with major decisions like these being made in cigar smoking rooms.
How is discussing the strategy of infiltration counterproductive? It's an excellent strategy, just ask the KGB during the Cold War. It's done all the time, and it's time for this movement to seriously consider it, afterall, it wouldn't be for subversive purposes. It would be to restore freedom, the Constitution, and the Republic.
I don't intend to run for office, I'm not a pundit, and I highly doubt anything I say on these forums gets reported back to the shadow gov't. LOL. However, I am aware that ideas discussed here can permeate the subconscious and stir in the soul, and can potentially become successful strategies.
Let's say, for the purpose of argument, that this was used against our movement on the radio, online, and in debates. So what? Explain to me how an adversary can, with intellectual honesty, accuse us of wanting to be destructive to the country by implanting liberty-minded individuals in the Democratic party, or any other party?
It is the use of the word infiltration. It many people it is a negative word. It is a word that a decent opponent would use against you in a campaign, and they should. After all, it is a present you gave them to use against you. They should play that you (or whomever uses it) isn't a real Democrat and so on. Why give the opposition so much to use against you? It doesn't seem like smart politics to me. Someone runs as a Democrat because they like this and that about the Party, not because they want to infiltrate the Party. I recommend doing it for the right reasons.
Keith, I get what you're saying. It would be ridiculous for someone to use the word in a highly visible venue while campaigning. LOL. I'm not suggesting that, I promise. hehe. I'm attempting to bring awareness to the strategy of running in a party that desperately needs reforming from within. What do you think we've been doing with the Republican party? How many Libertarians run as Republicans now? You may not like the use of the word, but as Shakespeare so eloquently put it: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." In this case, infiltration is a sweet smelling rose in that it produces a positive effect for the mindset of a nation, and thus its government. How many democrats left the party when they learned about Ron? I personally know of many. They could legitimately run as Democrats.
My belief is that we are running out of time in this country. We must activate all courses of action, in the most timely of fashions. The two-party system is entrenched and isn't going away any time soon. Our political philosophy (Ron's political philosophy) must permeate both parties as we don't have time to build an effective new party. My use of the word "infiltration" may be offensive and concerning to others, but even if the opposition knows of our intentions, they will most likely never be able to pin it on any one candidate. I'm not paranoid enough to think anyone from the opposition cares about what I've written in this post, or will ever read it. And if it plants seeds in the minds of doers, then I've accomplished my objective.
The insiders can buy the votes of the "people" during primaries while the conservative base tends to come up short, not to mention non-pro-party platform people vote in these primaries for what should be a private party's officers picking their nominees. Party officers are like the electors that pick the prez, it's called a republican form of government. Plus, we surely don't want a democracy w/i the GOP, esp the way the media gets around. Yall don't have to do that in NH if you don't want but I'd want nothing to do with Ayotte or the other broad and my advice is to make it easier on yourselves and go for state convention nominee-picking route. Of course, many of you are content to send the worst of the worst to DC not caring much for the rest of the country, I've long since sensed that and got that impression when I lived there.
We don't have the numbers to infiltrate both major parties. Besides, the democrats are irreversibly hopeless.
Then why are liberty Democrats getting elected and doing great things? Why are decent Democrats beating hopeless Democrats in major Democratic primaries?Quote:
We don't have the numbers to bother to care about and work with both major parties. Besides, the Democrats are irreversibly hopeless.