Isn't demanding that Rand's supporters second choice isn't Trump a little maniacal?

[GunnyFreedom]

It used to be if someone came here or an existing member questioned policy the brain trust would go into technical detail and political theory why one should support Ron's policy or Ron as a candidate.

Yeah we tried that, and it had no effect. Since the Trumpaloompas seem to respond positively to ridicule and insults, we decided to emulate their idol, and that has been significantly more effective, although it seems the Trumpaloompas only like ridicule and insults when they back up their already predetermined conclusions.

Hucksters, Cruzins, Carsonites, and a few others, those do still listen to reason, so you will note that if/when they come here looking for answers, they will be addressed with policy and reason. Trumpaloompas don't give a darn about reason, so people respond in the same kind of Trump language that they do understand.

I do think it's ironic that the reason Trumpaloompas like Trump so much is that he's a jackass who says whatever he feels like and never backs down, but use the same tactic they love so much from Trump to discredit Trump and y'all go apoplectic. This kinda casts doubt on the claimed reason for liking Trump as that he speaks his mind and damn the consequences. Y'all apparently absolutely HATE people speaking their mind and damn the consequences when those people are on the side of actual...you know...principle.

[klamath]

Yeah we tried that, and it had no effect. Since the Trumpaloompas seem to respond positively to ridicule and insults, we decided to emulate their idol, and that has been significantly more effective, although it seems the Trumpaloompas only like ridicule and insults when they back up their already predetermined conclusions.

Hucksters, Cruzins, Carsonites, and a few others, those do still listen to reason, so you will note that if/when they come here looking for answers, they will be addressed with policy and reason. Trumpaloompas don't give a darn about reason, so people respond in the same kind of Trump language that they do understand.

I do think it's ironic that the reason Trumpaloompas like Trump so much is that he's a jackass who says whatever he feels like and never backs down, but use the same tactic they love so much from Trump to discredit Trump and y'all go apoplectic. This kinda casts doubt on the claimed reason for liking Trump as that he speaks his mind and damn the consequences. Y'all apparently absolutely HATE people speaking their mind and damn the consequences when those people are on the side of actual...you know...principle.

Apparently he isn't going to post anymore. If he has definitely decided to quit supporting Rand then he is doing the respectful thing and I give him a plus rep for that.
In his sig line.

Final RPF post or until if this is ever debunked. - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5975166

Good luck.

[LibertyEagle]

Way to run someone off who wanted to support Rand and was just looking for some answers to a couple questions. Congrats!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well done.

[Dianne]

I've been vocal on all forums. I like Trump for one reason, and one reason alone. I want him to mortally would Jeb Bush and Scott Walker. Let Trump shake the trees, allow Rand to rake the leaves. I'm sad anyone will leave these forums, because we have been here for years for RON, and now throwing our trust into his son, Rand.

[Dianne]

Way to run someone off who wanted to support Rand and was just looking for some answers to a couple questions. Congrats!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well done.

I agree, that kind of sux. I've been here since 2007 and I have misgivings about Rand. No need for anyone to attack me. Let's talk it through. Admittedlly, Rand is not Ron. We are all having a difficult time adjusting to that.

But don't drive anyone out of this forum. The liberty lovers are dwindling at to high rate of speed, as is.

[jkob]

I think we've entered the anger stage of grief as far as Rand's campaign goes

people need to just chill out

[CPUd]

I think we've entered the anger stage of grief as far as Rand's campaign goes

people need to just chill out

Grief about what?

[carlton]

I think we've entered the anger stage of grief as far as Rand's campaign goes

people need to just chill out

Abit premature, seeing as the campaign has really only just begun. So yes, we need to chill out but no, not because we are in grief and mourning the death of the Paul campaign... which sounds like what you would have us believe.

[hells_unicorn]

Way to run someone off who wanted to support Rand and was just looking for some answers to a couple questions. Congrats!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well done.

I'm sorry, but I've been taking notes on Kahless' "questions" since this Trump mania started, and he's had a habit of repeating the same questions and pretending like he didn't hear an answer because he didn't like the one presented. My one major criticism of both Ron Paul's past campaigns and, to a greater degree the general liberty movement, is the lack of a belief that there are people who are positively reprobate from what was being offered and won't accept the truth once its been uttered and repeated ad nauseam.

I stated this on one or two other threads, but the problem here isn't that we have people chasing out potential supporters, but rather that the internal movement has not fully shaken the bonds of MSM influence and have been backsliding into Neo-conservatism via a cult of personality. Between Trump's steadfast supporters here who seem to go into denial when called to the mat, and the lunatic fringe that just want to see the whole system ripped apart and damn whatever unintended consequences may come from that approach, I'm doubtful that we're really ready for prime time.

If we can't all agree that Rand is the superior choice (he is, end of story), we deserve what we'll get. Speaking for myself, I don't want to hear squat about anybody's 2nd and 3rd choices until Rand drops out, and anybody who thinks they can run a campaign better than Rand would do well either run for office, offer their credentials and services to Rand's campaign, or otherwise take their superior campaign abilities to the grassroots and do something constructive. Kahless was doing NOTHING constructive, and if he can't handle being challenged on that, I don't really see a reason for him to keep posting here unless it's to sabotage morale.

[CPUd]

Is it time to bring back "No One But Paul"?

It should be in effect wherever this logo is at the top of the page:

[r3volution 3.0]

As to the OP, no, it is not maniacal; it is simply asking the people to do the very least they could do to save themselves.

...i.e. to not fall for an obviously criminal charlatan.

But, as old Mencken said, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

So, here we are.

[LibertyEagle]

I'm sorry, but I've been taking notes on Kahless' "questions" since this Trump mania started, and he's had a habit of repeating the same questions and pretending like he didn't hear an answer because he didn't like the one presented. My one major criticism of both Ron Paul's past campaigns and, to a greater degree the general liberty movement, is the lack of a belief that there are people who are positively reprobate from what was being offered and won't accept the truth once its been uttered and repeated ad nauseam.

Uh huh and that has been the case for all kinds of things from posts about someone from Ron's campaign having a sky high salary, when they had been shown over and over again that most of that was from reimbursements of campaign expenses; to the C4L supporting that guy from Colorado, when it had Ron's backing; to Ron's newsletters; to specific C4L employees' being character assassinated on here during one of this forum's many witch hunts and oopsy they were wrong, but no apologies when it came out, and on and on and on.

I stated this on one or two other threads, but the problem here isn't that we have people chasing out potential supporters,

Yeah, it is. What the hell is this forum for if not to answer questions of potential supporters? It certainly isn't being used to organize any effort. Mostly, it's just a bitch fest these days and a real desire to keep it "pure".

but rather that the internal movement has not fully shaken the bonds of MSM influence and have been backsliding into Neo-conservatism via a cult of personality.

You do realize that it's a total misuse of the term to characterize neoconservatism as anything that doesn't walk lockstep with the Paul's right? Because if you do, you need to reread Ron's speech on neoconservatism.

Between Trump's steadfast supporters here who seem to go into denial when called to the mat,

Oh bull$#@!. The only "steadfast supporters" of Trump I have seen are AuH20, who is now banned, and Sadler. Yet, there sure has been incessant bitching from a few self-anointed "true believers" who have been unable to get everyone to get in line with their goosestep.

and the lunatic fringe that just want to see the whole system ripped apart and damn whatever unintended consequences may come from that approach, I'm doubtful that we're really ready for prime time.

I've always found it interesting that these latter ones don't receive the same treatment from the self-anointed "true believers".

If we can't all agree that Rand is the superior choice (he is, end of story), we deserve what we'll get.

Not everyone is going to be the same level of supporter. But, their votes all count the same.

Speaking for myself, I don't want to hear squat about anybody's 2nd and 3rd choices until Rand drops out,

That's more than understandable. By the same token, people should be able to mention it without being jumped on by what appears to be a lynch mob.

and anybody who thinks they can run a campaign better than Rand would do well either run for office, offer their credentials and services to Rand's campaign, or otherwise take their superior campaign abilities to the grassroots and do something constructive.

I have to agree with you there. lol. But, that has been pervasive since Ron's first campaign.

Kahless was doing NOTHING constructive, and if he can't handle being challenged on that, I don't really see a reason for him to keep posting here unless it's to sabotage morale.

Constructive? Who is doing anything "constructive", besides Barrex who, God bless him, keeps trying to get people to focus on a moneybomb for Rand and Gage, who takes a lot of great pictures of Rand's campaign? Besides that, there's a lot of bitching and moaning and then a few who appear to think it's their job to do a purity test for not only who is allowed to post here, but also who belongs in the liberty movement. I'm not talking about you here, just in case you are wondering.

Ron had a big following because he attracted people from all over the political spectrum WHO DID NOT AGREE ON EVERYTHING and we didn't demand that they do. I think people have forgotten that.

One thing is for sure. We cannot afford to run off supporters. Especially, low-hanging fruit who are trying to get a couple of questions answered and possibly helped to understand why Rand held those positions and what his goal was.

Because if we cannot or will not accommodate this, we are not helping Rand one bit. In fact, just the opposite.

[LibertyEagle]

Is it time to bring back "No One But Paul"?

It should be in effect wherever this logo is at the top of the page:

For sure in Rand's subforum and that is exactly where that logo appears.

[nikcers]

For sure in Rand's subforum and that is exactly where that logo appears.

I always understood that this is where we discuss non Rand related 2016 candidates. I know its not where we discuss team Rand, but to basically discuss the 2016 election. To me it just seems like Trump supporters come in here acting like it's a black lives matters protest. They come in to the Ron Paul Forums, and call us maniacal for not wanting Paul people to support a false narrative. They complain that Rand isn't choosing to mimic Trump's immigration plan, they complain that he doesn't run on a platform that disenfranchises large amounts of voters. Its almost like people are complaining that Rand Paul is running on an electable platform.

When we explain that Trump is disingenuous on immigration (because he is a democrat that is running on a republican platform) and is going to have a change of heart just like he has done on everything else for the last 30 years else we are called purists and then people say we are chasing away potential supporters, but to me I am pushing people away from supporting Donald Trump. I don't know why someone would want to convince possible Paul supporters that Trump is not the authoritarian anti libertarian that Ron Paul and Rand Paul says he is. I can only guess that they don't want Rand to succeed, and that is all the motivation I need to push harder, to donate more, and to support only Rand because I don't need a second choice because Rand Paul will win in 2016. If you know a better way to talking people out of falling for a trap then I am all ears.

[acptulsa]

I don't choose what I believe by sticking my finger in the air and finding out what the most vociferous members of the forum want me to believe. Sorry. Not to mention the fact that very few of the real meat of what this forum once was are still on here. The brains have left the building, so to speak, and so has the money.

Interesting response, considering I was calling you out for trying to get Gunny to blow with the wind.

It is true though if there was a newbie who right out of the box started posting threads about Obama, I would have canned them ASAP. I would imagine the same thing is done today too if someone new started pitching someone besides Rand.

A not unexpected response from an established member who seems to have thrown principle to the wind.

Yeah right, newbie.

I'll take a principled newbie over an established flip flopper eight days a week.

Oh, and by the way. You might know who you're voting for. But when you say, 'We're voting for...' I can only wonder how you got that mouse in your pocket registered, because you don't know how the OP, or kahless, or anyone else will vote.

Now tell me, if you can. Why is it necessary for Trump to suck all the oxygen in this room as well when the overwhelming majority of us don't want him to?

What is bipolar are those who keep bitching incessantly about who we MIGHT vote if Rand isn't on the ballot, instead of doing something constructive to help Rand so that he not only is on the ballot, but wins the nomination.

What is disingenuous is pretending like there will ever be a ballot that Trump is on and Rand Paul isn't on.

[erowe1]

Way to run someone off who wanted to support Rand and was just looking for some answers to a couple questions. Congrats!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well done.

Where did you get the ridiculous idea that he wanted to support Rand? He was a single-issue anti-immigration voter. He would have supported 10 other Republicans and Bernie Sanders before he would have settled for Rand.

[acptulsa]

It used to be if someone came here or an existing member questioned policy the brain trust would go into technical detail and political theory why one should support Ron's policy or Ron as a candidate. In that respect this forum has totally failed Rand.

A good example of this is when I raised the issue of Rand proposing to increase H-1B immigration as the reason I may not definitively support him and are leaning towards Trump or possibly another candidate and that I just have not made a decision.

Did anyone try to clarify Rand's positions and why I should continue to support Rand. Nope. Not once did someone try to convince me why Rand was a better choice overall or did anyone go into details of his H-1B or immigration policy and why I should support it. No, in fact several people here said the Paul's are ultimately for complete open borders as long as entitlements are closed.

You got your answers. You ignored them and went to spam another thread. There you got your answers. You ignored them and went to spam another thread. And so on, and so on, and then you played the victim card when we got sick of it.

Suit yourself. You can see how many of us are fooled. Exactly one of us--and I'm not sure you fooled her, she's just an old contrarian with an axe to grind, as anyone can see five posts above.

Good thing that Rand IS NOT for open borders. So sorry, erowe, for you. NOT.

Kahless, if it's something that Rand has introduced legislation on, the best thing to do would be to call his Senate office and ask for the legislative director, or aide in charge of that area.

If it's something he proposed as a plank in his campaign, call his campaign.

I think this will get you better answers than you have here.

Or the same answers over and over and over until they sink in. But, of course, if he wants no answers, but rather an excuse to spam...

Now, will somebody please tell me why we should put up with Trump sucking all the oxygen out of this room, as well as every other room in the nation?!

[hells_unicorn]

Uh huh and that has been the case for all kinds of things from posts about someone from Ron's campaign having a sky high salary, when they had been shown over and over again that most of that was from reimbursements of campaign expenses; to the C4L supporting that guy from Colorado, when it had Ron's backing; to Ron's newsletters; to specific C4L employees' being character assassinated on here during one of this forum's many witch hunts and oopsy they were wrong, but no apologies when it came out, and on and on and on.

You're preaching to the choir on this one, I've actually been a tad bit skeptical of peoples' desire to crucify Jesse Benton until they've actually determined what happened in Iowa back in 2012.

Yeah, it is. What the hell is this forum for if not to answer questions of potential supporters? It certainly isn't being used to organize any effort. Mostly, it's just a bitch fest these days and a real desire to keep it "pure".

Preaching to the choir again on the purist thing, I've been away for a while so I may have missed some stuff, but lately what I have been seeing is people reacting to those that are jumping ship to support Trump, and Kahless' posts were sounding pretty damn close to Sadler's.

You do realize that it's a total misuse of the term to characterize neoconservatism as anything that doesn't walk lockstep with the Paul's right? Because if you do, you need to reread Ron's speech on neoconservatism.

Trump's views have too many in common with the Neo-cons, particularly on foreign policy, and his tepid economic views are not too far off from that of Krystol. Come to think of it, I'm having an increasingly hard time figuring out exactly what it is that the Neo-cons don't like about Trump other than the protectionism and his immigration views, it seems less a matter of ideology and more a matter of splitting hairs over who is running things.

Oh bull$#@!. The only "steadfast supporters" of Trump I have seen are AuH20, who is now banned, and Sadler. Yet, there sure has been incessant bitching from a few self-anointed "true believers" who have been unable to get everyone to get in line with their goosestep.

JJ is in the same camp, and Kahless was sounding more and more like them, it's a loud minority on here, but the loudness is indicative of being a "true believer" as you say. And again, preaching to the choir. I've been accused of being a bad Christian by certain parties on this forum for trying to explain Rand's approach to this election. I'm more of a pragmatist than many on here, but I'm not getting caught up in this Trump mania or even thinking about backing anyone else until my 1st choice is out, period.

I've always found it interesting that these latter ones don't receive the same treatment from the self-anointed "true believers".

Feel free to go through my post history, my first couple weeks back here after my hiatus was attempting to set these people straight, and if you think it's bad here, you should see how many "true believers" are running around on Popular Liberty (formerly the Daily Paul), which I left in order to come back here so I could be among saner company. Believe it or not, even with all the Trump people, I still find it better here in that department.

Not everyone is going to be the same level of supporter. But, their votes all count the same.

Kahless' "level of support" was in negative territory by my estimation.

That's more than understandable. By the same token, people should be able to mention it without being jumped on by what appears to be a lynch mob.

The spirit of the debate has been heavily shaped by the more vocal pro-Trump people who have been flooding this forum with his propaganda. I'm not one to play moderator wannabe, but if this had been nipped in the bud earlier, things may have panned out a bit differently.

I have to agree with you there. lol. But, that has been pervasive since Ron's first campaign.

And it was just as annoying then as it is now. Part of the reason why I took a break from this forum was after knocking myself out gathering signatures and going door to door for Ron Paul in both Delaware and Pennsylvania, it got a little annoying to hear these armchair revolutionaries yammer about how they could run a better campaign while not doing any of the leg work.

Constructive? Who is doing anything "constructive", besides Barrex who, God bless him, keeps trying to get people to focus on a moneybomb for Rand and Gage, who takes a lot of great pictures of Rand's campaign? Besides that, there's a lot of bitching and moaning and then a few who appear to think it's their job to do a purity test for not only who is allowed to post here, but also who belongs in the liberty movement. I'm not talking about you here, just in case you are wondering.

Ron had a big following because he attracted people from all over the political spectrum WHO DID NOT AGREE ON EVERYTHING and we didn't demand that they do. I think people have forgotten that.

One thing is for sure. We cannot afford to run off supporters. Especially, low-hanging fruit who are trying to get a couple of questions answered and possibly helped to understand why Rand held those positions and what his goal was.

Because if we cannot or will not accommodate this, we are not helping Rand one bit. In fact, just the opposite.

At the very least, you have to concede that Trump's ubiquity has been a massive hindrance and most of these people are trying to figure out how to fight it as it's an obvious scam. It's one thing to say people like what they hear out of Trump and suggest that Rand form a response for it, but largely the so-called "low hanging fruit" would be better described as wet blankets who have been killing morale on this site and having everybody engage in a fruitless debate over how Rand should run his campaign when nobody here that I'm aware of can claim any expertise on this matter. Come to think of it, my frustration is largely due to the fact that I've been following the MSM a bit more closely than I have in the past 6 years and what I'm hearing out of many people here is the same nonsense I've been hearing from them.

[acptulsa]

A good sheep dog kills the wolf in sheep's clothing, and then holds the disguise up for all to see. It's a crappy sheep dog who stands around debating with a lamb whether the wolf might not become a good sheep if only the sheep dog is nice to him, while the wolf is busy eating his fill of the rest of the herd.

[LibertyEagle]

A good sheep dog kills the wolf in sheep's clothing, and then holds the disguise up for all to see. It's a crappy sheep dog who stands around debating with a lamb whether the wolf might not become a good sheep if only the sheep dog is nice to him, while the wolf is busy eating his fill of the rest of the herd.

Thing is, you and a couple of others are the wolves in sheep's clothing.

EDIT: You have let your frustration get the better of you.

[acptulsa]

Thing is, you and a couple of others are the wolves in sheep's clothing.

EDIT: You have let your frustration get the better of you.

Ah, yes. All those Trump spammers were this close to quitting their job and coming over from the Dark Side, and we were this close to converting them when I got frustrated, and the whole world was watching what happened on this forum, just dying to switch to Rand if only we could win over a Trump spammer or two with kindness. Because everyone knows they all went for Trump because Trump is so nice and polite.

You won me over. I'm just completely convinced.

[acptulsa]

..

I wish I ran into this two weeks ago

[CPUd]

[LibertyEagle]

Ah, yes. All those Trump spammers were this close to quitting their job and coming over from the Dark Side, and we were this close to converting them when I got frustrated, and the whole world was watching what happened on this forum, just dying to switch to Rand if only we could win over a Trump spammer or two with kindness. Because everyone knows they all went for Trump because Trump is so nice and polite.

You won me over. I'm just completely convinced.

Running off ANY voters who could easily be won over to Rand is bad.

[erowe1]

Running off ANY voters who could easily be won over to Rand is bad.

Running off people who are using this site to recruit support for other candidates and undermine Rand's support is good.

[juleswin]

Thing is, you and a couple of others are the wolves in sheep's clothing.

EDIT: You have let your frustration get the better of you.

[LibertyEagle]

Running off people who are using this site to recruit support for other candidates and undermine Rand's support is good.

I don't believe that Kahless was doing that at all.

[devil21]

Quite a psyop underway on RPF these days.

[Anti Federalist]

Many RPF posters have mentioned that Trump is their second choice. After that, they were criticized or attacked by people like acptulsa, Anti Federalist, gunny, and others. Is that a smart strategy?

David Weigel went on a road trip with Rand. He commented:


Link

Whoa whoa whoa...back the $#@! up there a minute Ace.

All I have suggested all along is Trump is an empty suit, that's he's playing people, he's an epic troll and all one needs to do to understand that is review his policy statements and positions over the past forty years.

Past that, people can vote for Bozo the $#@!ing Clown for all I care.

Furthermore I have gone on record stating that Trump supporters should NOT be banned from this forum.

[devil21]

Reminding all REAL members here to review the thread below. Many of the divide and conquer tactics outlined in the below thread are on display in this^^^^^ very thread.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...berty-movement