Explaining the liberty purity scale

[Bastiat's The Law]

I love the liberty scale because you sort of know what you're getting. It's also a prudent approach to moving this movement forward without throwing the baby out with the bathwater; and by that I mean we're creating a political environment in Congress that will either wholeheartedly agree with our ideas or be sympathetic to it and potential allies in other areas. Is this a good summation of the scale?


★★★★★ - Green Five stars is essentially Ron Paul incarnate. So good you have to slap yourself silly to believe this person really exists!

★★★★★ - Five stars you're getting someone that agrees with us 99.9% of the time and will be one of the best House or Senator members in decades!

★★★★ - Four stars you're essentially getting a Mike Lee who is damn good on nearly everything, but might have to dial back their rhetoric concerning an issue or two. We'll still agree 90-95% of the time and they'll be a great ally at your side on the issues we do agree upon.

★★★ - Three stars you're mostly getting a Jim Demint type. Someone that is a fiscal hawk and wants to slash and burn the size of government. There's still good potential they can be brought around on other liberty issues. We'll agree 70-80% of the time on most pressing issues.

★★ - Two stars We'll agree on maybe 40-50% of the issues. A Jeff Flake could probably fit into this category, unless you guys have a better example of a two star Congressman or Senator.

★ - One star you're getting someone that is a one trick pony, a candidate that *might* be of help in one focused area of the liberty spectrum, usually curtailing government spending or maybe a civil liberties lion. Think Dennis Kucinich yelling at Congress to pass the Audit the Fed bill. These one star rated candidates rarely get financial backing from Paul supporters, but could get their vote in the general election because their opponent is such a horrible alternative.

No stars you are the arch enemy of liberty and we WILL defeat you! I'm looking at you Chuck Schumer!

[sailingaway]

Except that my understanding is the scale doesn't even include civil liberties, unless you are revamping it. So the person could actually BE Flake, who despite voting down the Smith Amash bill to remove indefinite detention of American citizens without trial, and despite voting to make the Patriot Act permanent, is considered 'higher in the Liberty Index than Ron Paul' by some.

I think you need to give the requirements in topics for the rankings for people to be able to judge.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Except that my understanding is the scale doesn't even include civil liberties, unless you are revamping it. So the person could actually BE Flake, who despite voting down the Smith Amash bill to remove indefinite detention of American citizens without trial, and despite voting to make the Patriot Act permanent, is considered 'higher in the Liberty Index than Ron Paul' by some.

I think you need to give the requirements in topics for the rankings for people to be able to judge.

I sort of took it as a whole, if that's revamping, then I'm revamping it. And there's no way Flake is higher than Ron Paul on any scale on any planet. The most important part in all this is that "throwing the baby out with the bath water" effect. When we have the opportunity to trade up and replace a zero star loser for a one, two, or three star candidate we do that. From there we can build upon this and swap out for even better candidates in the future incrementally. Far too often people wait on the sidelines for a perfect messiah candidate to arrive, and that person doesn't exist and movements fizzle out before they began.

[jmdrake]

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/candidatesurvey.php

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/ma...e%20Survey.pdf