From one losing campaign to another that doesn't even share the same principles at all. Working for political campaigns is apparently no different than being panhandler on the street. I'd rather be a 2 dollar whore than be Chip Englander.
Do you have any evidence (like campaign financial disclosures) that any of Rand's staff were being paid more than the going rate in the business?Originally Posted by jkob
...or are you just assuming that they were doing something unethical, because the campaign didn't go as well as you'd hoped?
I don't get it. I mean, I can stomach him jumping to Team Cruz or Team Carson. I still wouldn't like it, but at least Cruz is SEMI-close to Rand's stances. Rubio, on the other hand...WTF?!
Vince Harris is a Southern Baptist, so Ted Cruz is a good fit for him. I'll let that one slide.
However, Chip going to Team Marco...that's a slap in the face. I'm sure Rand is pissed.
This is WORSE than Jesse Benton.
Yeah, sort of. A trial lawyer will advocate vigorously for a client in an attempt to get the jurors to vote a certain way. The lawyer doesn't necessarily believe the narrative he constructs of the client, but (a good lawyer) will usually be able to sell it nonetheless. Even a lawyer will usually hire another lawyer to represent him, because there are certain disadvantages to arguing his own case that stem from being emotionally invested to the client's narrative.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
If the campaign = the candidate; then supporting the Iran nuclear deal, Snowden immunity, and legalizing marijuana to name a few. There are probably more that I'm not remembering but these positions against all of the above seem to have dampened his support from the grassroots.
Last edited by fr33; 02-11-2016 at 12:32 AM.
Hey, at least Rubio voted for Audit the Fed unlike Cruz
Give me a break. Even lawyers are more respectable than neocon campaign managers. We can agree that everyone deserves a fair trial. But we won't agree if you think that neocon globalists like Rubio deserves campaign help or that those who help him are respectable at all.
Just goes to show that the only one who can be trusted to run liberty-movement campaigns is the Collins.
these are just jobs to these guys...they want a paycheck not liberty.
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it."
James Madison
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams
Μολὼν λάβε
Dum Spiro, Pugno
Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito
well, the joke's on Rubio. I don't know of anyone who makes the decision to support a candidate based on who they have on their staff roster.
The logic behind hiring on a Rand Paul staffer so that Rubio can try to tap into the libertarian vote, defies . . . logic.
This is getting silly.T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato
We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me
The rube didn't hire a Rand staffer, Rand hired a rube operative as a staffer. Wouldn't this be the guy responsible for turning out all those students in IA to supposedly vote for Rand, who mysteriously voted for the rube instead? Yeah, this news is really surprising, isn't it? He's simply being further rewarded for the well done job that he did on Rand's campaign in IA.
I have an autographed copy of Revolution: A Manifesto for sale. Mint condition, inquire within. (I don't sign in often, so please allow plenty of time for a response)
That actually is the most logical/reasonable explanation in the thread imo, especially given those tweets posted. Like I said, playing the inside-the-beltway game isn't going to work.The rube didn't hire a Rand staffer, Rand hired a rube operative as a staffer. Wouldn't this be the guy responsible for turning out all those students in IA to supposedly vote for Rand, who mysteriously voted for the rube instead? Yeah, this news is really surprising, isn't it? He's simply being further rewarded for the well done job that he did on Rand's campaign in IA.
Last edited by devil21; 02-11-2016 at 04:50 AM.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Every campaign has this kind of staffer, including every campaign doing better than Rand did.
Oh, and Iowa 10K was all Doug Stafford's idea. Englander was a meh campaign manager but he wasn't in charge.
All you "true believer" kooks need to stay away, they said...LOL
Thread winner.
Like the assassin . . . (from 4:00 min mark on)The rube didn't hire a Rand staffer, Rand hired a rube operative as a staffer. . . .
"What I do is not a bad occupation, someone is always willing to pay"
"There is no need to believe in either side - or any side - there is no cause - there is only yourself"
.
Last edited by Jan2017; 02-11-2016 at 09:20 AM.
Guys, if you can go campaign for a supposedly libertarian candidate then jump to campaign for a total statist, you are a person of little or no principle and not a friend of liberty.
I (probably?) work for a non-libertarian and that's irrelevant- my boss is not running a statist campaign... he is in the business of voluntarily selling products and services to thousands of individuals. If I go take a job at the Brookings Institution then you can call me a hypocrite.
This whole "just trying to make a living" argument has the same foul odor of "just following orders" and other excuses used to explain working for evil causes.
That's not obvious. The campaign started with strong polling and rode it down to oblivion.
Last edited by K466; 02-11-2016 at 03:09 PM.
"Gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice." ~ William Lloyd Garrison
STRATEGY: Three Essential Guidelines for the Liberty Movement
Liberty Policy Journal
Striking at the Root
The majority of these guys and the majority of the electorate have a different notion of good and evil than the majority of people who post on RPFs.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
./
Last edited by specsaregood; 05-16-2016 at 10:36 PM.
What makes you think that Rand's staffers were hired for their ideology in the first place? I don't know about you but I have hired people in the past and while it's nice for them to share similar world views as I, as long as they'll be good at their job and will be an asset to the team I don't give a $#@! what they think politically.
Also what you consider statist is not a reflection of what everyone else believes. It's quite possible that Chip believes Rubio is the best candidate left standing. Hell, I might even like Rubio more than Cruz at this point (not that I'll be voting for or supporting either). And Vincent Harris might believe in Cruz the most now. That's just reality.
I thought voting was voluntary... These candidates are not forcing anyone to vote for them. If the public votes for them, that's ultimately on them - not the staffers.
Apples and oranges IMO. The issue of morality in this comparison isn't even close.
Listen, we'll never achieve anything politically if we burn every bridge we've ever had simply because most people don't pass the purity test that those of us here would like. We will never turn the masses to our beliefs. It's not gunna happen. The only way we succeed is by having the right messages at the right time with the right people and the right talent. Unfortunately that wasn't this time. Even when that happens, only a very small slice of our population will share our beliefs. But when that time comes we will need successful and talented campaign staff to get us there and surprisingly, some may not be libertarians.
This is the original post I replied to. I doubt there was much consideration of staff ideology. And that's probably not a good thing at all. I'm certainly not going to give these operatives a break, call them good guys, etc. They are only friends of liberty when they get a paycheck for it. I say that makes you a sorry person. If you can't make money as a libertarian political operative you need to find an additional/alternate line of work rather than saying your only option is going to the dark side.
You're trying to equate [trading with a non-libertarian running a non-political business] to [trading with a non-libertarian running an anti-libertarian business]. That makes no sense.
Last edited by K466; 02-11-2016 at 07:13 PM.
"Gradualism in theory is perpetuity in practice." ~ William Lloyd Garrison
STRATEGY: Three Essential Guidelines for the Liberty Movement
Liberty Policy Journal
Striking at the Root
Referring to Benton? Is Collins a Benton supporter?
Sanity Check Radio Show
http://www.SanityCheckRadioShow.com
Maybe referring to the campaign store that was run by a third party for profit? Rand saying, and Stafford, they were in it for the long run and he wasn't dropping out?
Maybe a reference to 2012?
Maybe this guy is just "holding his nose", like Benton? Maybe this is his 2020 plan for Rand?
Didn't Benton hold his nose to really benefit Rand in 2016? I'm not sure of the benefit but there is absolutely no way Collins can be a Benton supporter. Benton can't be a good guy according to Collins, because Benton worked for McConnell.
What a scumbag.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the campaign manager would have made the difference between what we saw happen and becoming President in 2016.
Ron Paul was the only anti-establishment candidate in 2008 in the GOP field. The Dems had Gravel and Kucinich, but they were eliminated early on. So RP ended up with nearly 100% of the anti-establishment vote that year. Ron Paul was also the only anti-establishment, running in 2012, in both political parties. He also received 90% of the anti-establishment vote that year, with maybe Gingrich taking a small share. Other people caught on to how effective this worked, took note, and implemented this in their plans for 2016.
In 2016, the anti-establishment vote was greatly diluted, with 3-4 candidates aggressively going for that audience. We know this now by seeing how much of the RP support in the counties he won have now gone to both Trump and Cruz. It's debatable whether these people truly are anti-establishment or not, but that's a debate left for another thread.
I think if Rand runs the same campaign in 2012, he does far far better than 5% in Iowa and being forced to drop out.
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us