# Start Here > Ron Paul Forum >  Benton: 'Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor.'

## green73

http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/20...f-p-ar-461801/




> One of Romney's biggest problems with speakers could be how to handle the Ron Paul movement.
> 
>     Paul's political philosophy differs sharply from mainstream Republicanism in key areas including national defense, which Romney won't want to advertise. Paul has a small but dedicated core of followers known for taking on the GOP establishment and who have managed to take over several state delegations.
> 
>     Romney's greatest fear could be a movement to nominate Paul from the floor of the convention, which could happen if five state delegations line up behind him.
> 
>     But Paul, who's about to turn 77 and is retiring after 22 years in Congress and three presidential races, may be seeking to hand off leadership of his movement to his son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.
> 
>     The RNC's announcement that Rand Paul will speak in Tampa, but with no mention of Ron Paul, hints at a deal between the Paul and Romney forces that neither side will confirm  a speaking slot for Rand Paul in return for convention peace.
> ...

----------


## LibertyEagle

Screw that.  Nominate him anyway.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

And just like that, everything I've said about Benton this election cycle is proven to be true.

----------


## SneakyFrenchSpy

The hell with Benton. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt up until now, but this is too much.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Just like I've been saying, to much criticism. There's one small part of the campaign that wants to win, and the rest is selling us out. The "identity crisis." Really, just disgusted.

No wonder they haven't been helping delegates, communicating with grassroots, etc etc. Major snub from the top to thwart efforts.

----------


## jkr

would this guy just shut the $#@! up?

----------


## Matt Collins

Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...


This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.

----------


## Kotin

I'm confused.. Im pretty sure Jesse doesn't say anything that Dr. Paul doesn't approve of.. So Are you guys pretty much telling Ron to stfu?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about...


Don't I recall in a recent interview of Dr. Paul him mentioning something about realizing that his supporters would likely nominate him from the floor, if the GOP kept on with their shenanigans?  Perhaps I am remembering wrong, but that was the impression I got.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

W...............T....................F............  ...........?

----------


## tsai3904

Don't these two sentences contradict each other:




> Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton wouldn't discuss negotiations between the two camps or the timing of Paul's speech, but said, "We have been told that it will be a very prominent time."





> Benton said by email that Ron Paul is not expected to speak

----------


## twomp

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.


So why is the campaign asking for money to help with delegates then? Oh that's right.... to influence the platform right? Don't you work for the campaign too?

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...

----------


## LibertyEagle

That confused me at first too, tsai.  But, I think he's talking about Rand's speech in the first sentence.

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

Perhaps Ron wants to go out differently...as in his supporters not making him look like a fool.

Think about it, how STUPID would it be to nominate Ron Paul at what is virtually the Mitt Romney celebration party? Great way to make division.

----------


## GopBlackList

I think we need to give up the idea of trying to change the party from within strategy. Also, I don't think Rand is going to be decent replacement for Ron.. sorry but he just does not have the same vibe as his father or the same outspokeness that he has. I have to admit, Gary Johnson was right, you can't change the Republican party.

----------


## Carehn

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.


I would put good money on it. Ron is getting old and I believe he wants us to mesh with the GOP and over time bring it back to what it was and should be. I believe Ron does not want to see his movement destroy the GOP. He want to leave peacefully and is doing what he thinks is the right thing to do to achieve this.

We did not win people. But we made good inroads and if we play are cards right maybe can move onwards and upwards from this point. 

I play to win. I wanted to win. But we need to understand that Ron will not be the next prezz and be rational about how we move forward. 

It sucks but I think Ron wants it to be over and does not know how to let some of his supporters know that it is.

He does not want to crush his movement or the GOP. Maybe thats not possible, I don't know.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Matt. It doesn't matter if we nominate him from the floor or not. The fact of the matter is the campaign isn't even doing squat to get the delegates we spent hard time, money, blood, sweat, and tears on to secure. Benton is making it impossible to even influence the platform! This isn't just about nominating from the floor. In many ways, the official campaign has been our own worst enemy...next to the RNC.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

Welp, guess I won't have to eat my underwear and post the video on YouTube.

Easiest prediction I've ever made, though.

----------


## tsai3904

> Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...


To nominate him and give him time to give a speech.  Just because Ron Paul will "not seek" a nomination doesn't mean he won't accept one or wouldn't want one.  It probably just means he's not telling his delegates what to do.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Perhaps Ron wants to go out differently...as in his supporters not making him look like a fool.
> 
> Think about it, how STUPID would it be to nominate Ron Paul at what is virtually the Mitt Romney celebration party? Great way to make division.


I think the idea is to get him his 15 minute unedited speaking time that is really due him.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Why are you operating under the assumption that we'd cause a riot? Hell, our delegates should be there simply to strengthen the platform. But the official campaign is even fighting that.

You'd think it'd help Ron's image (which he's never cared about in the past, btw, with how outspoken he's been) to have a coalition of truly fiscally conservative individuals, a significant portion of which would be the young people the GOP so desperately needs.




> Perhaps Ron wants to go out differently...as in his supporters not making him look like a fool.
> 
> Think about it, how STUPID would it be to nominate Ron Paul at what is virtually the Mitt Romney celebration party? Great way to make division.

----------


## tod evans

Until I hear absolutes directly from Ron Paul I take everything with a grain of salt.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> To nominate him and give him time to give a speech.  Just because Ron Paul will "not seek" a nomination doesn't mean he won't accept one or wouldn't want one.  It probably just means he's not telling his delegates what to do.


If that were the case, why would the campaign announce this?  It shouldn't have to all be on the delegates' shoulders to coordinate the nomination in order for Paul to give his speech.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Same. Anyone could see the official campaign was initiating the "breakup," but "letting us down slowly."




> Welp, guess I won't have to eat my underwear and post the video on YouTube.
> 
> Easiest prediction I've ever made, though.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I think we need to give up the idea of trying to change the party from within strategy. Also, I don't think Rand is going to be decent replacement for Ron.. sorry but he just does not have the same vibe as his father or the same outspokeness that he has. I have to admit, Gary Johnson was right, you can't change the Republican party.


Johnson said that because he got 0 support.  Sour grapes.  

We *are* changing it from within.   Rand Paul, Thomas Massie,  Kerry Bentivolio, Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, Chris Hightower, ....  All Republicans.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Ted Cruz....kind of. 






> Johnson said that because he got 0 support.  Sour grapes.  
> 
> We *are* changing it from within.   Rand Paul, Thomas Massie,  Kerry Bentivolio, Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, Chris Hightower, ....

----------


## GopBlackList

> Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...


To allow the Republicans to pat themselves on the back that they managed to bring the party together. Admittedly it is a waste at this point, I have lost all faith in the Republican party.

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> I think the idea is to get him his 15 minute unedited speaking time that is really duly his.


So nominating him makes that happen?

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> Why are you operating under the assumption that we'd cause a riot? Hell, our delegates should be there simply to strengthen the platform. But the official campaign is even fighting that.
> 
> You'd think it'd help Ron's image (which he's never cared about in the past, btw, with how outspoken he's been) to have a coalition of truly fiscally conservative individuals, a significant portion of which would be the young people the GOP so desperately needs.


Umm, I have seen many people on here talking about how they are going to raise hell at the convention. 

If that isn't the case, I must be reading the wrong posts.

----------


## Pauls' Revere

> Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...


^^ THIS ^^

Third party it is...

----------


## tsai3904

> If that were the case, why would the campaign announce this?  It shouldn't have to all be on the delegates' shoulders to coordinate the nomination in order for Paul to give his speech.


There isn't much coordination.  One of the Nevada delegates said he was given a form and asked who he wanted to nominate for President.  He wrote down Ron Paul and that was it.  How much coordination does there have to be for Ron Paul supporters to write down his name?

----------


## GopBlackList

> Johnson said that because he got 0 support.  Sour grapes.  
> 
> We *are* changing it from within.   Rand Paul, Thomas Massie,  Kerry Bentivolio, Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, Chris Hightower, ....  All Republicans.


They are not going to change. The libertarian wing just like any other niche group of any political party is going to be on the fringe in the major parties. I am really thinking it is time for us to move on. Some of those folks you mentioned have not even been officially elected and are still campaigning.

----------


## twomp

> So nominating him makes that happen?


I believe it says that in the rules, every NOMINEE gets to give an UNEDITED speech BEFORE they start taking votes from the delegates.

----------


## TheGrinch

> Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...


To make as many gains for liberty as possible and make our presence and numbers known...

And cmon people, it was easy to predict that anything mentioning Benton would draw a negative response, but all he said is that Ron himself will not be seeking to be nominated from the floor. Well, I'm sure that's true, but that doesn't really have anything to do with what the delegates choose to do with their numbers.  

Just like it's been for a while, it seems like the campaign is just maintaining a level of plausible deniability should anything damaging to the movement occur.

----------


## paulbot24

I keep telling myself that Jesse Benton is playing the greatest game of politics for the campaign that is impossible for us mere mortals to comprehend at this moment. Keep telling myself that...........Oh that, and also and that I am a God among men and people just don't tell me that because they are all just jealous of me and stuff. You know, like Paris Hilton. Jealous bitches.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> Then what is the point of Paul's delegates showing up to the convention...


This has been at the tip of my tongue for some time now. Compounded by the fact that some delegates have made it clear that they will support Romney. What is worse is that folks don't understand that TEA comes in many flavors and the Koch boys have the market on all brands. Well....except one...I hope.

----------


## Okie RP fan

This campaign has become a circus. They are either playing a great game setting the stage for the future, or a cheating game and screwing all of us. 

Either way, it's terribly confusing. 

I don't know who to blame: us, Benton, Dr. Paul...

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> They are not going to change. The libertarian wing just like any other niche group of any political party is going to be on the fringe in the major parties. I am really thinking it is time for us to move on. Some of those folks you mentioned have not even been officially elected and are still campaigning.


Libertarianism is on the momentum in the GOP. IF you quit that, then what? Failing third parties that only assure Democrat victories?

----------


## GopBlackList

> This campaign has become a circus. 
> 
> I don't know who to blame: us, Benton, Dr. Paul...


I think we have to wake up the fact that Dr. Paul wasn't in it to win it.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> To make as many gains for liberty as possible and make our presence and numbers known...
> 
> And cmon people, it was easy to predict that anything mentioning Benton would draw a negative response, but all he said is that Ron himself will not be seeking to be nominated from the floor. Well, I'm sure that's true, but that doesn't really have anything to do with what the delegates choose to do with their numbers.  
> 
> Just like it's been for a while, it seems like the campaign is just maintaining a level of plausible deniability should anything damaging to the movement occur.


And how is that statement going to motivate the delegates?  I'm sure quite a few already declined the trip to Tampa once the campaign released the "Ron will not be actively campaigning in primary states" email that went out in May and so what are they supposed to think when they hear this crap from Benton?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> They are not going to change. The libertarian wing just like any other niche group of any political party is going to be on the fringe in the major parties. I am really thinking it is time for us to move on.


I would remind you that early in the campaign, Ron Paul had over 20 percent in national polls.  And that doesn't include the people who thought he couldn't win, so they didn't support him for that reason alone.  We have grown by leaps and bounds in 4 years.  We have liberty people in place now in leadership positions in the GOP in several states.  If we would get busy and do that everywhere, getting our candidates elected would be much, much easier.  It would make the cheating that we saw go on this time be much harder to do.  

We have won a lot of hearts and minds in 4 years and are actually getting some of our candidates elected.  And you want to quit now?  That makes no sense to me, whatsoever.  Especially given that it is only the 2 major parties that get in debates and get any media attention whatsoever.   I hate it, but we still have a 2 party system here.  We either deal with it strategically, or we will forever be relegated to the sidelines.

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

> I'm confused.. Im pretty sure Jesse doesn't say anything that Dr. Paul doesn't approve of.. So Are you guys pretty much telling Ron to stfu?


No. There is just some tin foil hat thing going on with Ron's inner circle being compromised (Wead and Jack haters as well) and that family is Paul's weakness and is being exploited by the enemy.

But the last few weeks of active campaigning was a disaster and it seemed deliberate.

----------


## RickyJ

> "Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor," he added.


Sorry Jesse, I don't trust you, I will have to hear that from Ron Paul himself to believe it.

----------


## GopBlackList

> Libertarianism is on the momentum in the GOP. IF you quit that, then what? Failing third parties that only assure Democrat victories?


You are thinking federal level I assume. Focus on local elections and city council as libertarian and move your way up. Most importantly have a trade and earn lots of money so you can finance your own campaign without selling your soul to special interests.

----------


## AJ Antimony

"seek" is the key word there

----------


## Okie RP fan

> You are thinking federal level I assume. Focus on local elections and city council as libertarian and move your way up. Most importantly have a trade and earn lots of money so you can finance your own campaign without selling your soul to special interests.


Right. We all need to start focusing at the local and state levels at this point. Work our way up, establish good relationships with the parties and continue to recruit people to the ideals of liberty.

----------


## RickyJ

> I'm confused.. Im pretty sure Jesse doesn't say anything that Dr. Paul doesn't approve of.. So Are you guys pretty much telling Ron to stfu?



Considering some of things Jesse has said before, I am not sure of that at all. I will wait to hear directly from Ron Paul on this before I believe it.

----------


## Aratus

WHY NOT A MATT COLLINs + JESSE BENTON TICKET FOR 2020?

DANGIT... IF PORE JESSE HAD TO SENT OUT THAT EMAIL THAT

GOT ALEX JONES IN RARIFIED FORM, CUT HIM SOME SLACK, PLEASE!

----------


## GopBlackList

> I would remind you that early in the campaign, Ron Paul had over 20 percent in national polls.  And that doesn't include the people who thought he couldn't win, so they didn't support him for that reason alone.  We have grown by leaps and bounds in 4 years.  We have liberty people in place now in leadership positions in the GOP in several states.  If we would get busy and do that everywhere, getting our candidates elected would be much, much easier.  It would make the cheating that we saw go on this time be much harder to do.  
> 
> We have won a lot of hearts and minds in 4 years and are actually getting some of our candidates elected.  And you want to quit now?  That makes no sense to me, whatsoever.  Especially given that it is only the 2 major parties that get in debates and get any media attention whatsoever.   I hate it, but we still have a 2 party system here.  We either deal with it strategically, or we will forever be relegated to the sidelines.


And that's great that we made inroads.. but look at what's happening with the Republican party.. they selected a Bush-era guy as their VP, they screw over our delegates (I am one of them), and it remains to be seen if any of our positions would make it to the convention platform (NDAA, Internet freedom, etc.).

----------


## TheGrinch

> And how is that statement going to motivate the delegates?  I'm sure quite a few already declined the trip to Tampa once the campaign released the "Ron will not be actively campaigning in primary states" email that went out in May and so what are they supposed to think when they hear this crap from Benton?


Ive gotten many emails to motivate us to show up in Tampa, including the emails in question.  Just because some may choose to be butthurt over him admitting that we only have half the numbers needed for a nomination, doesn't mean he's not still encouraging delegates to make all the gains for liberty they can.

(ETA: and I'd like to think that most of our delegates can read between the lines well enough to not have such kneejerk reactions like this)

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

Look, if I were running the campaign, I would say the same exact words... "Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor".  It fits with the good Doctor's style.  He is not "seeking" something that might cause a ruckus.  He did not say anything about REJECTING such a nomination.  Read between the lines here people.  We need to get 5 states to gather and do the nomination.  Believe me, Ron will not shy away from accepting the nomination and he will use that speaking slot to convince other delegates to vote for him...

Damn, sometimes I think we liberty types are our worst enemies...

----------


## The Gold Standard

That piece of $#@! Benton doesn't want Ron to have an unedited speech because he thinks it will hurt his future (and probably current) employer, Rand Paul.

----------


## RickyJ

> That piece of $#@! Benton doesn't want Ron to have an unedited speech because he thinks it will hurt his future (and probably current) employer, Rand Paul.


His current employer seems more like Romney than it does Rand Paul.

----------


## The Gold Standard

> His current employer seems more like Romney than it does Rand Paul.


I thought Rand was out campaigning for Romney on all of these Fox shows. He just has his groupie Benton doing it too.

----------


## twomp

> His current employer seems more like Romney than it does Rand Paul.


I totally agree. The campaign sure has a way of taking the wind out of people's sails. It hard not to wonder if its not intentional?

----------


## Carlybee

It sounds like a deal was made in exchange for a speaking slot. I don't get this campaign at all.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Look, if I were running the campaign, I would say the same exact words... "Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor".  It fits with the good Doctor's style.  He is not "seeking" something that might cause a ruckus.  He did not say anything about REJECTING such a nomination.  Read between the lines here people.  We need to get 5 states to gather and do the nomination.  Believe me, Ron will not shy away from accepting the nomination and he will use that speaking slot to convince other delegates to vote for him...


That is exactly what ran through my mind too.  I could very well be wrong though.  Who knows?  lol




> Damn, sometimes I think we liberty types are our worst enemies...

----------


## pcosmar

> I'm confused.. Im pretty sure Jesse doesn't say anything that Dr. Paul doesn't approve of.. So Are you guys pretty much telling Ron to stfu?


I don't know that. I don't imagine Ron as a puppet master with his hand up Benton's back and putting words in his mouth.

I honestly wonder how much he is insulated from what is going on around him.

I see two possibilities.
One, Ron has been threatened,,or (more likely) the family threatened,, and has backed off.
or Two. he is trusting people that are actively working against him,, while smiling in his face.

Protecting his wife, children and grandchildren is the only answer that makes logical sense.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> That piece of $#@! Benton doesn't want Ron to have an unedited speech because he thinks it will hurt his future (and probably current) employer, Rand Paul.


Oh, come on.  That's not fair.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> I would remind you that early in the campaign, Ron Paul had over 20 percent in national polls.  And that doesn't include the people who thought he couldn't win, so they didn't support him for that reason alone.  We have grown by leaps and bounds in 4 years.  We have liberty people in place now in leadership positions in the GOP in several states.  If we would get busy and do that everywhere, getting our candidates elected would be much, much easier.  It would make the cheating that we saw go on this time be much harder to do.  
> 
> *We have won a lot of hearts and minds in 4 years and are actually getting some of our candidates elected.  And you want to quit now?*  That makes no sense to me, whatsoever.  Especially given that it is only the 2 major parties that get in debates and get any media attention whatsoever.   I hate it, but we still have a 2 party system here.  We either deal with it strategically, or we will forever be relegated to the sidelines.


The movement has already quit, by moderating the message and separating itself from the more radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas.

----------


## erowe1

> I see two possibilities.
> One, Ron has been threatened,,or (more likely) the family threatened,, and has backed off.
> or Two. he is trusting people that are actively working against him,, while smiling in his face.


Why don't you see the possibility that Ron Paul really doesn't want his supporters to try to nominate him from the floor?

----------


## Lightweis

> I don't know that. I don't imagine Ron as a puppet master with his hand up Benton's back and putting words in his mouth.
> 
> I honestly wonder how much he is insulated from what is going on around him.
> 
> I see two possibilities.
> One, Ron has been threatened,,or (more likely) the family threatened,, and has backed off.
> or Two. he is trusting people that are actively working against him,, while smiling in his face.
> 
> Protecting his wife, children and grandchildren is the only answer that makes logical sense.


OH STOP. Ron Paul does not back down to threats. He's not a pussy.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I don't know that. I don't imagine Ron as a puppet master with his hand up Benton's back and putting words in his mouth.
> 
> I honestly wonder how much he is insulated from what is going on around him.
> 
> I see two possibilities.
> One, Ron has been threatened,,or (more likely) the family threatened,, and has backed off.
> or Two. he is trusting people that are actively working against him,, while smiling in his face.
> 
> Protecting his wife, children and grandchildren is the only answer that makes logical sense.


Oh, come on.  Benton is not going to release something that Ron has not approved.  It's just not going to happen.

What I thought was exactly what Christian Anarchist said, but only because of my take on what he said in a recent interview.

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

i just dont know why it seems everything benton says has a negative impact on morale... it could be said in many ways.

"Dr. Paul is still in the race. Our chances of winning is slim to none, but anything can happen."
"Dr. Paul has not withdrew from the race and we hope to get what we can at the convention."
"Dr. Paul will be at the convention and we hope to get the best outcome for all the hard work that the supporters and delegates have done in the last 4 years."

I dont know.. it seems it progresses to a defeatist attitude.
We are gonna kick ass and chew bubblegum.
We still have a chance in upcoming states.
Dr. Paul's chances are slim to none.
If we dont win nomination, we will go for platform change or speaking spot.
We will not seek nomination.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> *Oh, come on.  Benton is not going to release something that Ron has not approved.  It's just not going to happen.*
> 
> What I thought was exactly what Christian Anarchist said, but only because of my take on what he said in a recent interview.


That's actually completely in Ron's style, and what landed him in a lot of hot water right before Iowa.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> The movement has already quit, by moderating the message and separating itself from the more radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas.


Huh?  What radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas has the movement moderated and separated itself from?

And, maybe you have quit, but a lot of people have not.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> That's actually completely in Ron's style, and what landed him in a lot of hot water right before Iowa.


If you are talking about the newsletters, that is a completely different thing than this campaign.  They do not equate.

----------


## TheGrinch

> Why don't you see the possibility that Ron Paul really doesn't want his supporters to try to nominate him from the floor?


Even that's jumping to a bold conclusion. All that was said was that he's not seeking to be nominated. All that means is that he himself will not be actively lobbying for it. It says nothing about what delegates could/should do, as it should be... 

Again, I think plausible deniability is at play here. The campaign does not want to be seen as inciting a ruckus should it come to that, as it would be even more damaging to our efforts.

----------


## wgadget

A SMALL BUT DEDICATED group whom the Romney campaign can't seem to win without.

Huh. Must be pretty dang small, eh?

----------


## TrishW

OK  So, don't we already know that Ron Paul is not seeking the nomination?  I thought he already made that clear?

But does that mean that he should not be nominated? I don't think so!

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Huh?  What radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas has the movement moderated and separated itself from?


Thomas Massie offered up, without any prompt, that he disagrees with Ron on foreign policy, C4L has removed foreign policy as an issue, "End the Fed" is being replaced by "End Net Neutrality," etc.

----------


## RickyJ

> Why don't you see the possibility that Ron Paul really doesn't want his supporters to try to nominate him from the floor?


If that is the case then why did he keep running, why did he say on many TV interviews that he wanted to give his speech unedited at the convention? That is why many people have a very difficult time believing that this is what Ron Paul really wants.

----------


## TheGrinch

> Huh?  What radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas has the movement moderated and separated itself from?
> 
> And, maybe you have quit, but a lot of people have not.


Don't even bother with the sharks that come swarming whenever they smell even a drop of blood.

I'd really like to hope that it's just butthurt, but sometimes I really wonder about the intentions of those who sensationalize BS more than the damn media...

----------


## twomp

> Thomas Massie offered up, without any prompt, that he disagrees with Ron on foreign policy, C4L has removed foreign policy as an issue, "End the Fed" is being replaced by "End Net Neutrality," etc.


Could you link where Thomas Massie said that? It's not that I don't believe you but more like I'd like proof so that I have a legit reason not to support him anymore.

----------


## erowe1

> Thomas Massie offered up, without any prompt, that he disagrees with Ron on foreign policy, C4L has removed foreign policy as an issue, "End the Fed" is being replaced by "End Net Neutrality," etc.


What are you basing the parts about CFL on? I don't get that impression from this.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/about.php#statement

----------


## DGambler

In regards to us trying to change the party from within, our county Republican apparatus has developed a bunker mentality. We recently found out that they have adopted new bylaws for themselves, arrived at in secret - of course. The substance of these new bylaws is that they supposedly prohibit ANYONE from being eligible for an Executive Board position if they have not already been a member of the Executive Board in the past, have been named a Chairman of a Committee appointed by that board in the past, or have been a member of such a committee.

Basically, it shuts us out... I bet you see this in other counties as well that haven't already been brought to our side.

----------


## erowe1

> If that is the case then why did he keep running


When?

He hasn't been running for a long time.

If you think he has, the reason for that is probably that Sailingaway has sheltered you from opposing points of view by deleting them from the forum whenever they get posted.

----------


## Matt Collins

> I think we have to wake up the fact that Dr. Paul wasn't in it to win it.


Quit spouting untruths.   Ron was the clear winner this cycle, even if he didn't get elected.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Sorry Jesse, I don't trust you, I will have to hear that from Ron Paul himself to believe it.


Jesse is Ron's grandson-in-law, and is at his right hand side most of the time. Do you really thinkg Jesse is going to just start going off the reservation?    Think it through...

----------


## Matt Collins

> Thomas Massie offered up, without any prompt, that he disagrees with Ron on foreign policy, C4L has removed foreign policy as an issue, "End the Fed" is being replaced by "End Net Neutrality," etc.


Cite your sources

----------


## Matt Collins

> The fact of the matter is the campaign isn't even doing squat to get the delegates we spent hard time, money, blood, sweat, and tears on to secure.


Huh?? You don't make any sense

----------


## paulbot24

If Ron Paul was so easy to politcally sabotage, we wouldn't be on this forum named after him right now to ponder these odd statements by this campaign manager. He was calling poeple out for being corrupt hacks long before we realized the Fed was not just an abbreviation for our government.

----------


## RickyJ

> When?
> 
> He hasn't been running for a long time.
> 
> If you think he has, the reason for that is probably that Sailingaway has sheltered you from opposing points of view by deleting them from the forum whenever they get posted.


Officially he has still been running, he just scaled back his campaign to focus on winning delegates at conventions. He has never said he has quit the race, not once.

----------


## erowe1

> Jesse is Ron's grandson-in-law, and is at his right hand side most of the time. Do you really thinkg Jesse is going to just start going off the reservation?    Think it through...


For some people here, NOBP is a religion. Anything contrary to the dogmas of the faith must either be rejected or harmonized to it. If they succeed in training their children according to this faith, then 1,000 years from now their descendants will still enact rituals every 4 years that involve writing in Ron Paul and calling their detractors "quitters."

----------


## RickyJ

> If Ron Paul was so easy to politcally sabotage, we wouldn't be on this forum named after him right now to ponder these odd statements by this campaign manager. He was calling poeple out for being corrupt hacks long before we realized the Fed was not just an abbreviation for our government.


What are you trying to say here? That Ron Paul is trying to manipulate us?

----------


## erowe1

> Officially he has still been running


According to whom? Not him.

----------


## Michigan11

> Officially he has still been running, he just scaled back his campaign to focus on winning delegates at conventions. He has never said he has quit the race, not once.


It's strategy... and yes we are winning. We are taking over the party as well as winning elections and the debate in this country is changing rapidly

----------


## wgadget

And for that matter, did anyone actually see Benton's email that is quoted in the article?

I remember back in 1974 there was an article in the city newspaper about me after having won the regional spelling bee. Well, the reporter came to my house, and being a shy violet, I didn't say a word. You'd be shocked how personable and talkative I turned out to be on the pages of his "fake" story. It was all made up...And at that young age I got a sampling of what the media was about. 

So did he REALLY say Dr. Paul wouldn't be seeking nomination from the floor, or is that just the accepted storyline?

----------


## trey4sports

> Perhaps Ron wants to go out differently...as in his supporters not making him look like a fool.
> 
> Think about it, how STUPID would it be to nominate Ron Paul at what is virtually the Mitt Romney celebration party? Great way to make division.



That is _precisely_ what i've said numerous times. It is time to live with the reality of the situation and move forward.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Thomas Massie offered up, without any prompt, that he disagrees with Ron on foreign policy, C4L has removed foreign policy as an issue, "End the Fed" is being replaced by "End Net Neutrality," etc.


I didn't hear Thomas Massie say that.  Do you have a link, perhaps?   

I think "End the FED" may have left the wrong impression with some people.  Because even Ron doesn't want to end it overnight.  He has talked about what that would do to world markets.  He wants it to die by itself by giving us the choice of the money we use.   So, I don't see the position changing at all.  Just tactics.  Don't forget that we are still dealing with all the disinformation surrounding our attempt at getting the stupid thing audited.

I don't know what's up with the foreign policy deal.  If they are changing the goal, then that will be a problem for me too.  Right now, though, I'm guessing they have decided not to use that as the lead.  Because a lot of people misunderstand and run away before we have a chance to suck them in on other issues.  Like I said, though, if they are dumping it altogether, I will be right with you.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Wrong.

Liberty was 




> Quit spouting untruths.   Ron was the clear winner this cycle, even if he didn't get elected.

----------


## GopBlackList

> It's strategy... and yes we are winning. We are taking over the party as well as winning elections and the debate in this country is changing rapidly


We won't take over the party if don't win general elections. Kurt Bills and Kerry Bentivolio have not been elected by their districts yet. Last time I checked Kurt Bills is trailing behind his Democratic opponent.

----------


## trey4sports

Jesus Christ why does everyone blame Jesse Benton???????


Every major move he does is OK'd by Ron Paul!!!!!!

if you dont like the direction, then blame Ron. Jesse is just the messenger.

----------


## Kotin

> Jesus Christ why does everyone blame Jesse Benton???????
> 
> 
> Every major move he does is OK'd by Ron Paul!!!!!!
> 
> if you dont like the direction, then blame Ron. Jesse is just the messenger.


Yup. This is getting ridiculous.

----------


## erowe1

> The campaign does not want to be seen as inciting a ruckus should it come to that, as it would be even more damaging to our efforts.


Who's "us" and what are "our efforts"?

----------


## Michigan11

> We won't take over the party if don't win general elections. Kurt Bills and Kerry Bentivolio have not been elected by their districts yet. Last time I checked Kurt Bills is trailing behind his Democratic opponent.


Kurt Bills hasn't even won his primary yet. Kerry Bentivolio and Thomas Massie and Justin Amash have all won their republican primaries in republican districts.

----------


## erowe1

+rep to everyone in this thread who gets that Benton speaks for Ron Paul.

Sorry if I missed anyone.

----------


## kill the banks

keep working to get our people into every position possible ... the big picture is just that ... do not get lost in smaller issues along the way ... we are a force and we are miles ahead of our goals than just a few years ago ... keeps clear mind and strong focus on just that ... get the best advice out to our delegates from the sage of our movement independent from all diversion tactics

----------


## trey4sports

> That piece of $#@! Benton doesn't want Ron to have an unedited speech because he thinks it will hurt his future (and probably current) employer, Rand Paul.



If only I had more neg reps to bestow upon you.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Kurt Bills hasn't even won his primary yet. Kerry Bentivolio and Thomas Massie and Justin Amash have all won their republican primaries in republican districts.


Kurt Bills doesn't have a primary. His nomination was decided in May during the MNGOP Convention.

----------


## trey4sports

> I don't know that. I don't imagine Ron as a puppet master with his hand up Benton's back and putting words in his mouth.
> 
> I honestly wonder how much he is insulated from what is going on around him.
> 
> I see two possibilities.
> One, Ron has been threatened,,or (more likely) the family threatened,, and has backed off.
> or Two. he is trusting people that are actively working against him,, while smiling in his face.
> 
> Protecting his wife, children and grandchildren is the only answer that makes logical sense.



What is going on is Ron is making the decision to avoid confrontation at the RNC in order to help pave the way for Rand. I'm sure the core of the convention strategy has been crafted with Rand Paul and the future of the movement in mind.

----------


## Michigan11

> Kurt Bills doesn't have a primary. His nomination was decided in May during the MNGOP Convention.


Are you sure about that?

----------


## Philosophy_of_Politics

Jesse doesn't speak for Ron Paul, sorry. I've never once seen Ron Paul allow anyone to speak for him on any major topic.

----------


## TheGrinch

> Who's "us" and what are "our efforts"?


I cannot think of an answer that isn't so abundantly obvious to be worth taking the time to write, but here it goes....

We may see different means as the solution, but I think it goes without saying what our collective efforts are.... Ummm, how about end the fed, end the wars, end cronyism, limit the scope and size of government and MIC run amok, etc., etc., etc.

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

> What is going on is Ron is making the decision to avoid confrontation at the RNC in order to help pave the way for Rand. I'm sure the core of the convention strategy has been crafted with Rand Paul and the future of the movement in mind.


If thats the case.. I hope Obama wins. lol. 2016 is our year! Neocon's like Rand and some RP people (dont have exact number) is ok with Rand.

We have to compete against Paul Ryan or maybe even Santorum will come back in 2016...

----------


## erowe1

> Jesse doesn't speak for Ron Paul, sorry. I've never once seen Ron Paul allow anyone to speak for him on any major topic.


Yes you have. You've seen Jesse Benton speak for him many times. Who do you think writes those emails you get with Ron Paul's signature at the bottom?

----------


## Michigan11

> Jesse doesn't speak for Ron Paul, sorry. I've never once seen Ron Paul allow anyone to speak for him on any major topic.


Let's say he doesn't..... then how does that make Ron look, having a rouge campaign manager?

----------


## erowe1

> I cannot think of an answer that isn't so abundantly obvious to be worth taking the time to write, but here it goes....
> 
> We may see different means as the solution, but I think it goes without saying what our collective efforts are.... Ummm, how about end the fed, end the wars, end cronyism, limit the scope and size of government and MIC run amok, etc., etc., etc.


OK. Sorry. I wrote my question with the assumption that you were talking about some stealth delegate strategy.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> I didn't hear Thomas Massie say that.  Do you have a link, perhaps?   
> 
> I think "End the FED" may have left the wrong impression with some people.  Because even Ron doesn't want to end it overnight.  He has talked about what that would do to world markets.  He wants it to die by itself by giving us the choice of the money we use.   So, I don't see the position changing at all.  Just tactics.  Don't forget that we are still dealing with all the disinformation surrounding our attempt at getting the stupid thing audited.
> 
> I don't know what's up with the foreign policy deal.  If they are changing the goal, then that will be a problem for me too.  Right now, though, I'm guessing they have decided not to use that as the lead.  Because a lot of people misunderstand and run away before we have a chance to suck them in on other issues.  Like I said, though, if they are dumping it altogether, I will be right with you.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feYFm...layer_embedded

9 minute mark.

----------


## The Dude

Wow. This is what I've known all along. Ron doesn't want to win, he wants to tinker with a platform that nobody follows anyway. Hard work paying off.

----------


## paulbot24

> What are you trying to say here? That Ron Paul is trying to manipulate us?


Not at all. I'm saying I trust Ron Paul to always speak his mind and clarify any misunderstandings from anybody's mouth. The "Obsession with Iran Act of 2012" quote by him recently comes to mind. He's the only balls on the Hill. You don't have to resort to manipulation when you speak the truth.

----------


## erowe1

> Wow. This is what I've known all along. Ron doesn't want to win, he wants to tinker with a platform that nobody follows anyway. Hard work paying off.


Winning has not been an option for him for a long time. Why should he pretend it is? He's in the same boat Santorum and Gingrich are in. He's just not in denial about it the way some of his supporters are.

----------


## Carlybee

> The movement has already quit, by moderating the message and separating itself from the more radical Ron Paul proposals and ideas.


Radical? Oh you mean like ending the wars and asking the govt to stop stealing from taxpayers?  I don't think the movement has quit..factions have been hijacked though.

----------


## Lightweis

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feYFm...layer_embedded
> 
> 9 minute mark.


HMM Interesting. I will have to ask him about this. Sounds like he was just trying to play politics now that Ron Paul will not be our nominee

----------


## TheGrinch

> Wow. This is what I've known all along. Ron doesn't want to win, he wants to tinker with a platform that nobody follows anyway. Hard work paying off.

----------


## The Dude

> What is going on is Ron is making the decision to avoid confrontation at the RNC in order to help pave the way for Rand. I'm sure the core of the convention strategy has been crafted with Rand Paul and the future of the movement in mind.


Which is a decision that is hanging this movement out to dry. We are the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Rand Paul Revolution. Rand isn't nearly as trustworthy or appealing as his father. Not only that, the 2016 field will be populated by people such as Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, etc. Rand doesn't stand a chance. It'll be even harder for Rand to win in that field and he'll also lose some of the passionate support that Ron had because people like myself won't nearly support Rand as much if at all, and the average neocon Republican that Rand tries so hard to appeal to will be enamored with the other candidates. This is a man who endorsed Mitt Romney. That's all I need to know.

Time to move on folks. The interests of the Pauls has clearly deviated from this movement.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> HMM Interesting. I will have to ask him about this. Sounds like he was just trying to play politics now that Ron Paul will not be our nominee


That interview was from January 18.

----------


## CaptUSA

> Winning has not been an option for him for a long time. Why should he pretend it is? He's in the same boat Santorum and Gingrich are in. He's just not in denial about it the way some of his supporters are.


Exactly true.  Which is why I can't wait for this election to finally be over so we can move on to our goal of reforming the Republican party by getting like-minded people in positions of authority.  All of our victories this cycle have happened where we had majorities (or at least big presences) in the local and state parties.  In order to expand upon these victories, the path should be clear.  Yeah, we didn't get there this year, but we have been shown the way.

----------


## erowe1

> Time to move on folks.


Bye.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feYFm...layer_embedded
> 
> 9 minute mark.


Yes, you are right.  He did say he didn't agree with RP on foreign policy.  He did talk about not wanting to give foreign aid to anyone, so that's good.  I would like to find out exactly what he believes in regard to foreign policy.  But, I will admit that what he said made me a bit uneasy, because now I don't know what he does believe.

----------


## July

> HMM Interesting. I will have to ask him about this. Sounds like he was just trying to play politics now that Ron Paul will not be our nominee


He said the biggest threat to our national security is the debt.

----------


## Michigan11

> Which is a decision that is hanging this movement out to dry. We are the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Rand Paul Revolution. Rand isn't nearly as trustworthy or appealing as his father. Not only that, the 2016 field will be populated by people such as Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, etc. Rand doesn't stand a chance. It'll be even harder for Rand to win in that field and he'll also lose some of the passionate support that Ron had because people like myself won't nearly support Rand as much if at all, and the average neocon Republican that Rand tries so hard to appeal to will be enamored with the other candidates. This is a man who endorsed Mitt Romney. That's all I need to know.
> 
> Time to move on folks. The interests of the Pauls has clearly deviated from this movement.


What is up with tearing down our own, especially Ron's own son? I personally watch voting records not rhetoric in politics.

----------


## paulbot24

> Wow. This is what I've known all along. Ron doesn't want to win, he wants to tinker with a platform that nobody follows anyway. Hard work paying off.


You've been a member of these forums since 2009 and that is your mindset? How did you feel about all his "hard work" before this "critical" moment? I sure hope it at least was paying off for him before. He's just such a swell guy and everything.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Which is a decision that is hanging this movement out to dry. We are the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Rand Paul Revolution. Rand isn't nearly as trustworthy or appealing as his father. Not only that, the 2016 field will be populated by people such as Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, etc. Rand doesn't stand a chance. It'll be even harder for Rand to win in that field and he'll also lose some of the passionate support that Ron had because people like myself won't nearly support Rand as much if at all, and the average neocon Republican that Rand tries so hard to appeal to will be enamored with the other candidates. This is a man who endorsed Mitt Romney. That's all I need to know.
> 
> Time to move on folks. The interests of the Pauls has clearly deviated from this movement.


Ha ha.  Yeah, right.

----------


## CaptUSA

> What is up with tearing down our own, especially Ron's own son? I personally watch voting records not rhetoric in politics.


Interesting how we instinctly do this with other politicians, but when it comes to those who are on our side, many of us suddenly pay more attention to rhetoric than records.

I don't care what you say, show me how you vote.

----------


## Aratus

our matt collins has made at least five to ten postings in this thread and
elsewhere in the last 48 hours that i agree with to a hundred percentile. 
 yes,  i am wondering if this rehashing is being anyway at all constructive 
or is way more indicative of these muggy long hot dawg days of summer.

----------


## July

//

----------


## Lightweis

> Which is a decision that is hanging this movement out to dry. We are the Ron Paul Revolution, not the Rand Paul Revolution. Rand isn't nearly as trustworthy or appealing as his father. Not only that, the 2016 field will be populated by people such as Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, etc. Rand doesn't stand a chance. It'll be even harder for Rand to win in that field and he'll also lose some of the passionate support that Ron had because people like myself won't nearly support Rand as much if at all, and the average neocon Republican that Rand tries so hard to appeal to will be enamored with the other candidates. This is a man who endorsed Mitt Romney. That's all I need to know.
> 
> Time to move on folks. The interests of the Pauls has clearly deviated from this movement.



I think that is a little ridiculous. Rand Paul will have the same donor list and voter ID list as his fathers. He will have a great chance of winning the nomination. If you don't support Rand Paul, who are you going to be supporting? Find me another electable liberty politician in the United States with his voting record that can run in 2016.

----------


## trey4sports

> Yes, you are right.  He did say he didn't agree with RP on foreign policy.  He did talk about not wanting to give foreign aid to anyone, so that's good.  I would like to find out exactly what he believes in regard to foreign policy.  But, I will admit that what he said made me a bit uneasy, because now I don't know what he does believe.


yeah this was discussed pretty ad nasuem around the time it happened. Thomas knows that Ron's foreign policy doesnt play well in KY. So does Rand for that matter. I really don't know how much he agrees/disagrees with Ron's foreign policy. You can look up his SN and send him a message though if you are concerned. 

My guess would be that he is probably pretty close to Ron Paul. He _did_ donate to his campaign ya know.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> You can tell what they really think by their economic positions, IMO.


Yeah, well, he supports a flat income tax that all people have to pay, no exceptions. Doubling the tax base is a disastrous proposal.

----------


## trey4sports

> I think that is a little ridiculous. Rand Paul will have the same donor list and voter ID list as his fathers. He will have a great chance of winning the nomination. If you don't support Rand Paul, who are you going to be supporting? Find me another electable liberty politician in the United States with his voting record that can run in 2016.



I agree with this completely. People will be biting off their nose to spite their face if they don't vote for Rand Paul. He may not be perfect but he is still lightyears better than the others, and, in my humble opinion, a quality liberty candidate.

----------


## Miss Annie

> Look, if I were running the campaign, I would say the same exact words... "Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor".  It fits with the good Doctor's style.  He is not "seeking" something that might cause a ruckus.  He did not say anything about REJECTING such a nomination.  Read between the lines here people.  We need to get 5 states to gather and do the nomination.  Believe me, Ron will not shy away from accepting the nomination and he will use that speaking slot to convince other delegates to vote for him...
> 
> Damn, sometimes I think we liberty types are our worst enemies...


This!  I completely agree with this!  We can't give up when we are almost at the finish line!  That is not Dr Paul's style at all.  Dr Paul thinks and chooses his words very carefully - always.  Focus, focus, focus!   If he is nominated on the floor and refuses the nomination ...... we cross that bridge when we come to it.  Until then, we are on the same path!

----------


## paulbot24

> Interesting how we instinctly do this with other politicians, but when it comes to those who are on our side, many of us suddenly pay more attention to rhetoric than records.
> 
> I don't care what you say, show me how you vote.


/\/\/\THIS. We elect them to vote on issues, not to marvel at their amazing wit and be dazzled by their remarkable ability to say virtually nothing in 1000 word diatribes. Isn't that what the media is for?

----------


## erowe1

> This!  I completely agree with this!  We can't give up when we are almost at the finish line!  That is not Dr Paul's style at all.  Dr Paul thinks and chooses his words very carefully - always.  Focus, focus, focus!   If he is nominated on the floor and refuses the nomination ...... we cross that bridge when we come to it.  Until then, we are on the same path!


The only people who really have anything to do, who have a finish line or not, and who have a bridge to cross or not cross, are the delegates themselves. I have a feeling that between now and the convention they'll get more communication from Ron Paul about what he hopes for from them.

Everyone else here who likes to talk about quitting versus keeping up the fight is just the peanut gallery.

----------


## Bruno

Nvm

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.


Thank you for bringing reality back to the situation.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I think we need to give up the idea of trying to change the party from within strategy. Also, I don't think Rand is going to be decent replacement for Ron.. sorry but he just does not have the same vibe as his father or the same outspokeness that he has. I have to admit, Gary Johnson was right, you can't change the Republican party.


You know who laughs at this comment?

Kerry Bentivolio




Thomas Massie

----------


## jointhefightforfreedom

> Screw that.  Nominate him anyway.


agreed!

getting some views into the GOP platform that nobody reads or follows isn't gonna do squat for liberty!

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Johnson said that because he got 0 support.  Sour grapes.  
> 
> We *are* changing it from within.   Rand Paul, Thomas Massie,  Kerry Bentivolio, Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, Chris Hightower, ....  All Republicans.


Here, Here!

----------


## erowe1

> agreed!
> 
> getting some views into the GOP platform that nobody reads or follows isn't gonna do squat for liberty!


You think nominating him is going to do anything for liberty?

----------


## sailingaway

The delegates should nominate him anyway.  I was a little concerned when I saw the 'plans' for Tampa with the delegates being sort of conquering heros feted by all (which they absolutely deserve, but that isn't my point).  I wondered if they were just trying to mend fences or sweet talk them into something they wouldn't normally like.  It sounds like the latter.

In the end it is up to the delegates who were elected by those supporting Ron Paul's nomination.  However, were it me, I would ignore Benton and nominate Ron from the floor. That is what all our time, effort and money has been for, and Benton seems confused on this point.

OK. now I'll go back and read the rest of the thread

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ted Cruz....kind of.


I'm not claiming him, yet.  

To me, he was just light years better than the guy he was running against.  But, I never really believed that he was one of us.

----------


## sailingaway

> You think nominating him is going to do anything for liberty?


Yes, he is the Pied Piper of liberty and this entire campaign and the 39 million donated and hours of work were to shine the brightest possible spot light on the last campaign of the best draw for liberty probably in most of our lifetimes.  You can't ignore what is said by someone whose record backs it up. Otherwise, it is easy to speak charmingly and pander authoritatively and be brushed off completely, imho.

Nothing else on the horizon is worth giving up any part of that.

----------


## Philosophy_of_Politics

Honestly, I'm sick of the bickering over the GOP, The Conventions, Tampa, etc.

I'm ready to make it official by declaring to Washington D.C., that if the constitution is not obeyed, their laws will not be obeyed either. As well as encouraging all American's to join us in that cause as well.

----------


## erowe1

> Yes, he is the Pied Piper of liberty and this entire campaign and the 39 million donated and hours of work were to shine the brightest possible spot light on the last campaign of the best draw for liberty probably in most of our lifetimes.  You can't ignore what is said by someone whose record backs it up. Otherwise, it is easy to speak charmingly and brushed off entirely, imho.


Apparently Ron Paul disagrees. Why should we not respect that?

----------


## sailingaway

Nevermind, I don't have time to go through the whole thread now, I have a bunch of projects to get out. I'll have to come back and look at this.  It seems like betrayal of everyone who supports Ron Paul, not just as a cog in a movement but as the specific candidate worked for and donated to in this campaign, however.

----------


## sailingaway

> Apparently Ron Paul disagrees. Why should we not respect that?


Because I value him more than he values himself. You have a different agenda that 'wants' that, so you 'respect' that.  I think he is surrounded by people who are looking 'past' him and has too much humility to push himself in their way.  But wasting this is betrayal.

----------


## CaptainAmerica

James Garfield did not want to be nominated either, but he was!

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Why don't you see the possibility that Ron Paul really doesn't want his supporters to try to nominate him from the floor?


It's obvious the campaign has been trying to let supporters come down from the nomination cloud easy for months, but many still don't get it.  I hope Ron releases a video soon and hits a good portion of supporters with a 2X4 between the eyes that his nomination is over and to move onto other endeavors like House and Senate races.

----------


## Michigan11

> Honestly, I'm sick of the bickering over the GOP, The Conventions, Tampa, etc.
> 
> I'm ready to make it official by declaring to Washington D.C., that if the constitution is not obeyed, their laws will not be obeyed either. As well as encouraging all American's to join us in that cause as well.


Absolutely, that is why we need to cut the bull$#@! here and start focusing on getting 500 Pauls into elected office around the country, like we did delegates.

----------


## sailingaway

> Absolutely, that is why we need to cut the bull$#@! here and start focusing on getting 500 Pauls into elected office around the country, like we did delegates.


in their campaign subforums not this one --OVER the guy whose forum it is.

----------


## sailingaway

> It's obvious the campaign has been trying to let supporters come down from the nomination cloud easy for months, but many still don't get it.  I hope Ron releases a video soon and hits a good portion of supporters with a 2X4 between the eyes that his nomination is over and to move onto other endeavors like House and Senate races.


'get it'?  He is nominated if the delegates nominate him.  The campaign is the one that doesn't seem to 'get it'.

----------


## erowe1

> Because I value him more than he values himself. You have a different agenda that 'wants' that, so you 'respect' that.  I think he is surrounded by people who are looking 'past' him and has too much humility to push himself in their way.  But wasting this is betrayal.


It's only betrayal to those who thought that electing him president was still the goal after he himself stop having it as a goal long ago. You've been on a different agenda than he has for months. This website would be right where he is if it weren't for you managing what people can and can't see here, spreading your personal propaganda that has no basis in reality. We're just lucky you were gone long enough for this thread to get viewed a bunch of times before you had a chance to delete it.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> That is _precisely_ what i've said numerous times. It is time to live with the reality of the situation and move forward.


Absolutely.  It's long overdue.

----------


## erowe1

> 'get it'?  He is nominated if the delegates nominate him.  The campaign is the one that doesn't seem to 'get it'.


Somebody boot this moron from being a mod.

----------


## sailingaway

> yeah this was discussed pretty ad nasuem around the time it happened. Thomas knows that Ron's foreign policy doesnt play well in KY. So does Rand for that matter. I really don't know how much he agrees/disagrees with Ron's foreign policy. You can look up his SN and send him a message though if you are concerned. 
> 
> My guess would be that he is probably pretty close to Ron Paul. He _did_ donate to his campaign ya know.


unfortunately a whole lot is lost if they don't champion it but only vote for it when the votes are often losing votes.

----------


## paulbot24

> You think nominating him is going to do anything for liberty?


It will do everything for liberty when he addresses the people and they hear common sense from a politician for the first time in their lives. I will never forget hearing him speak for the first time on a youtube video and him completely shattering the lies I'd been taught in school, fed by the media, and everything I "thought" I knew about "the way it is."

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> It's obvious the campaign has been trying to let supporters come down from the nomination cloud easy for months, but many still don't get it.  I hope Ron releases a video soon and hits a good portion of supporters with a 2X4 between the eyes that his nomination is over and to move onto other endeavors like House and Senate races.


The only reason I want him nominated is so he can give his speech on national TV.

----------


## sailingaway

> It will do everything for liberty when he addresses the people and they hear common sense from a politician for the first time in their lives. I will never forget hearing him speak for the first time on a youtube video and him completely shattering the lies I'd been taught in school, fed by the media, and everything I "thought" I knew about "the way it is."


I so agree with this.  Benton is telling them they aren't going to stir the delegates up, but RON said he wanted conventions to be like the one in 1976 where the people decided the nominee.

----------


## The Free Hornet

> When?
> 
> He hasn't been running for a long time.
> 
> If you think he has, the reason for that is probably that Sailingaway has sheltered you from opposing points of view by deleting them from the forum whenever they get posted.


Detractors have no business in the grassroots forum just as hippies have no business in the war room.




> "Lead, follow, or get out of the way."
>   --  Thomas Paine

----------


## sailingaway

> The only reason I want him nominated is so he can give his speech on national TV.


and for the historical significance and not-shove-under-the-rug-gable implications of our organizational strength.  It hasn't happened since 1976 and throwing away that tribute would be unspeakable, imho.

----------


## Michigan11

Sailingaway, you need to stop pushing this agenda, back in 08' after Ron lost, we were all depressed as well, yet we recovered without any dellusions of reality. 2 years later we won a US Senate seat and a US Rep seat. Let's stop the madness before we lose the donors in this forum

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Jesus Christ why does everyone blame Jesse Benton???????
> 
> 
> Every major move he does is OK'd by Ron Paul!!!!!!
> 
> if you dont like the direction, then blame Ron. Jesse is just the messenger.


They need an easy scapegoat.  And this is fast becoming a personality cult mentality.

----------


## erowe1

> It will do everything for liberty when he addresses the people and they hear common sense from a politician for the first time in their lives. I will never forget hearing him speak for the first time on a youtube video and him completely shattering the lies I'd been taught in school, fed by the media, and everything I "thought" I knew about "the way it is."


That speech you heard on Youtube... that wasn't a nomination speech at the RNC. He still addresses people, and they still hear him if they want to. There will be tons of media present at his rally before the RNC. And there will be more opportunities after that. This would not be the case if he went out of his way to do something that screams to the world, "I'm living in a different universe!"

----------


## sailingaway

> Detractors have no business in the grassroots forum just as hippies have no business in the war room.


they have no business coming in here and drumming the same drum against the nomination over and over. No one was sheltered from hearing any point of view so many times it became harassment of those here to discuss Ron with other actual supporters of his nomination.

----------


## sailingaway

> That speech you heard on Youtube... that wasn't a nomination speech at the RNC. He still addresses people, and they still hear him if they want to. There will be tons of media present at his rally before the RNC. And there will be more opportunities after that. This would not be the case if he went out of his way to do something that screams to the world, "I'm living in a different universe!"


bull $#@!.

----------


## erowe1

> Detractors have no business in the grassroots forum just as hippies have no business in the war room.


Detractors from who? Ron Paul? Or Sailingaway?

----------


## sailingaway

OK, I'm not going to get too upset about this until I see the full email if it is out there.  I have heard statements from Benton completely twisted to use his words out of context in a way very different from what he was saying.  For all I know there was a whole paragraph about under what circumstances Ron wouldn't seek to be nominated from the floor which may end up existing or not, and we just don't see it.  It also might be otherwise in which case my prior statements stand.  But Romney clearly wants us to back off and he has a lot more connections in media than we do and people pushing his agenda, so I come away from that not even sure what Benton was conveying, given how his words have been twisted before.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Detractors from who? Ron Paul? Or Sailingaway?


Right now, that seems to be one in the same, "We are all Ron Paul" type of thing.
She is running the race to the end, and so am I.  
We get what we can, but won't give up until it done.

----------


## erowe1

> they have no business coming in here and drumming the same drum against the nomination over and over.


What do you think all the people you've been allowing to share their opinions here have been doing? Have they not been drumming the same drum in favor of nominating him over and over?

You don't care about people saying the same thing too many times. You only care about making sure that it's your opinion that keeps getting repeated.

----------


## erowe1

..

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Detractors from who? Ron Paul? Or Sailingaway?


Right now, that seems to be one in the same, "We are all Ron Paul" type of thing.
She is running the race to the end, and so am I.  
We get what we can, but won't give up until it done.

----------


## paulbot24

The 1976 convention is on youtube and it is a thing of beauty to watch. *That* convention is what frightens them the most about *this* convention. Watch it and you will know what I mean. "You can't stop an idea whose time has come." Interesting how Willard's father was actively attempting to quiet the "unrest" happening then. I can't wait for what could only be described as perhaps the greatest moment of karmic irony I've ever seen.

----------


## erowe1

> Right now, that seems to be one in the same, "We are all Ron Paul" type of thing.
> She is running the race to the end, and so am I.  
> We get what we can, but won't give up until it done.


Neither you nor she are running any race. You're posting opinions on the internet. That's all.

----------


## sailingaway

> Detractors from who? Ron Paul? Or Sailingaway?


People detract from me all the time and I give it more leeway than I do attacks on others actually.  But no, in a candidates campaign forum the people should not be harrrassed for trying to get that candidate elected and nominated, however unlikely it may seem in the later stages of a campaign.  That is true for all candidates with subforums here, and certainly true for Ron of all people.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

@Sailingaway,

Perhaps "Pro Ron Paul Grassroots Central"?  Just to make sure everyone understands.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Exactly true.  Which is why I can't wait for this election to finally be over so we can move on to our goal of reforming the Republican party by getting like-minded people in positions of authority.  All of our victories this cycle have happened where we had majorities (or at least big presences) in the local and state parties.  In order to expand upon these victories, the path should be clear.  Yeah, we didn't get there this year, but we have been shown the way.


I can't wait for the convention and election to be over either for the same reasons.  We have too many supporters living in denial here.  Hopefully they wake up in the next 2 weeks.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

@Sailingaway,

Perhaps "Pro Ron Paul Grassroots Central"?  Just to make sure everyone understands.

----------


## trey4sports

> It's obvious the campaign has been trying to let supporters come down from the nomination cloud easy for months, but many still don't get it.  I hope Ron releases a video soon and hits a good portion of supporters with a 2X4 between the eyes that his nomination is over and to move onto other endeavors like House and Senate races.



absolutely.

----------


## trey4sports

> It's only betrayal to those who thought that electing him president was still the goal after he himself stop having it as a goal long ago. You've been on a different agenda than he has for months. This website would be right where he is if it weren't for you managing what people can and can't see here, spreading your personal propaganda that has no basis in reality. We're just lucky you were gone long enough for this thread to get viewed a bunch of times before you had a chance to delete it.



apparently i am out of Rep to give to you. You are correct though.

----------


## wgadget

YEAH. 

DON"T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ON THE INTERNET, PEOPLE.

We, of all people, should know not to trust the media, of any sort.

----------


## sailingaway

> Sailingaway, you need to stop pushing this agenda, back in 08' after Ron lost, we were all depressed as well, yet we recovered without any dellusions of reality. 2 years later we won a US Senate seat and a US Rep seat. Let's stop the madness before we lose the donors in this forum


Trying to get Ron nominated is not what is driving people away imho, what is driving people away is harassing them over supporting the politician they like best in favor of some future that seems very pale by comparison and actually wanting them to give up what can be achieved for the one in favor of the other.  The donors donated to get Ron elected and secondarily, _since that was always a long shot_ to have him out there in the hottest spotlight as the best ever Pied Piper for liberty.  Those who are excited by the other candidates will be here for them. Those who think they are being betrayed in this election may not.

----------


## Michigan11

You banned Erowe1?

That's not good for this forum

----------


## trey4sports

> unfortunately a whole lot is lost if they don't champion it but only vote for it when the votes are often losing votes.



yeah i agree to an extent, but you also have to understand that had Massie ran with Ron's foreign policy we most likely wouldn't have his voice/vote being heard at all. You have to take what you can get to a certain extent and Ron's role has been that of an intellectual godfather but it is now time to get things done.

----------


## Revolution9

> Let's say he doesn't..... then how does that make Ron look, having a rouge campaign manager?


So, you think perhaps chartreuse or taupe would have been a better color for his campaign manager. i don't get yer drift

Rev9

----------


## sailingaway

> apparently i am out of Rep to give to you. You are correct though.


For a long time both views were here and it was driving people away and diminishing enthusiasm.  It is true if the forum had whole heartedly said Ron's nomination isn't important any more to work for, things might be different.  I'm not sure better, but different.

----------


## trey4sports

> Somebody boot this moron from being a mod.


that is a bit uncalled for. Sailing has done a very good job at moderating. With the exception of the last portion of Ron's campaign.

----------


## Revolution9

> You banned Erowe1?
> 
> That's not good for this forum


He is a broken record. Has been for a long time. Good for the real supporters left as they don't have to filter his subtle FUD gambits in every goddamned thread he can apply it.

Rev9

----------


## Revolution9

> that is a bit uncalled for. Sailing has done a very good job at moderating. With the exception of the last portion of Ron's campaign.


Proof is that little word banned under Erowe1's handle.

Rev9

----------


## Michigan11

> Trying to get Ron nominated is not what is driving people away imho, what is driving people away is harassing them over supporting the politician they like best in favor of some future that seems very pale by comparison and actually wanting them to give up what can be achieved for the one in favor of the other.  The donors donated to get Ron elected and secondarily, _since that was always a long shot_ to have him out there in the hottest spotlight as the best ever Pied Piper for liberty.  Those who are excited by the other candidates will be here for them. Those who think they are being betrayed in this election may not.


I strongly disagree, and was around in 08', we all recovered from that with out any dillusions. We are dumbing down people in here at this point, and I am in this movment forever and will do everything I possibly can to further the ideology of Ron Paul. I like you Sailingaway, and I see RP supporters as friends, and hate to disagree, but this has to stop. I'm not seeing alot of people in here anymore that I used to see. 

I'm sure this won't change your mind or others, but I think it's time to take a breather here, this movment is much bigger than Ron or anyone of us, and we need to be careful of how we are presenting ourselves to others watching.

----------


## sailingaway

> absolutely.


just supposing people were working on those because he was a top of the ticket and don't as much care with him not in the mix? Particularly if it is seen as at the expense of what they were actually working for?  Again you have an agenda that people turn the enthusiasm for Ron into enthusiasm for the candidates you like.  That isn't your call, and I think enthusiasm for Ron is what has driven much of the enthusiasm for other candidates, particularly those who aren't very vocal about liberty.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> in their campaign subforums not this one --OVER the guy whose forum it is.


Over the guy that is retiring in a matter of months...let it go already.

----------


## trey4sports

> For a long time both views were here and it was driving people away and diminishing enthusiasm.  It is true if the forum had whole heartedly said Ron's nomination isn't important any more to work for, things might be different.  I'm not sure better, but different.



look, i'm fine with people doing whatever they want to support their cause, but i'm not going to sit idly by while people live in la-la land. I am going to at least try and help bring some folks back to reality.

----------


## sailingaway

> Over the guy that is retiring in a matter of months...let it go already.


why on earth can't you wait those months?

that's like saying 'bury him, he's ALMOST dead...'

----------


## kathy88

Any delegate that decides not to go because of this don't let the door hit you on your way out. You were a baby neocon anyway. A true RP delegate is still in it to win it.

----------


## RickyJ

> Trying to get Ron nominated is not what is driving people away imho, what is driving people away is harassing them over supporting the politician they like best in favor of some future that seems very pale by comparison and actually wanting them to give up what can be achieved for the one in favor of the other.  The donors donated to get Ron elected and secondarily, _since that was always a long shot_ to have him out there in the hottest spotlight as the best ever Pied Piper for liberty.  Those who are excited by the other candidates will be here for them. Those who think they are being betrayed in this election may not.



I can't understand why people are so ready to give up when so much is at stake. It is not over yet, there is no reason to give up. Yes our chances of getting Ron Paul the republican nomination are slim, we know that, but even a slim chance is better than no chance! We may never get another chance like this, we must give it our very best and our all till the very end.

----------


## sailingaway

> look, i'm fine with people doing whatever they want to support their cause, but i'm not going to sit idly by while people live in la-la land. I am going to at least try and help bring some folks back to reality.


harass them into leaving altogether or doing what you want, you mean.  Not in this subforum

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Neither you nor she are running any race. You're posting opinions on the internet. That's all.


Hey buddy, I have been running a race, and I am a precinct committeeman (to help on the ground), because I ran for that, I also ran for delegate but lost by 4 votes.  And I'm reading case law trying to help L4RP (so is sailing and others) to see if we can help.  We don't just chat on our asses.

----------


## paulbot24

I'm seeing this one to the end. You can't defeat an idea. I believe a certain group of patriots who didn't even have shoes in the winter cold did something similar somewhere around the Potomac a couple of hundred years ago. Something about a revolution.....I don't put myself in that category with that kind of admirable fortitude but I will never give up. The idea of liberty is stronger than any standing army and certainly more powerful than any media blackout.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Sailingaway, you need to stop pushing this agenda, back in 08' after Ron lost, we were all depressed as well, yet we recovered without any dellusions of reality. 2 years later we won a US Senate seat and a US Rep seat. Let's stop the madness before we lose the donors in this forum


I agree.  Banning 2007 members that donate at every level is very bad taste.  This is not an echo chamber, people will be disappointed, but we will rise out of that stronger and more focused than ever.

----------


## sailingaway

> You banned Erowe1?
> 
> That's not good for this forum


this constant harassment by tag teams in this forum isn't either, and a week may help him think of a more constructive way to achieve his goals -- or to give them up, as he keeps demanding we give up ours, if they aren't achievable.  You don't seem to recognize that your own diversion goals may be as unachievable as anything else under discussion.

----------


## RickyJ

> look, i'm fine with people doing whatever they want to support their cause, but i'm not going to sit idly by while people live in la-la land. I am going to at least try and help bring some folks back to reality.


Says the guy who actually campaigned for McCain after Ron dropped out in 2008.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Right now, that seems to be one in the same, "We are all Ron Paul" type of thing.
> She is running the race to the end, and so am I.  
> We get what we can, but won't give up until it done.


Well I'm glad there's only two weeks left until we can put the nomination talk to bed and get back to brass tacks of electing our people to Congress and Senate.

----------


## trey4sports

> *For a long time both views were here and it was driving people away and diminishing enthusiasm.*  It is true if the forum had whole heartedly said Ron's nomination isn't important any more to work for, things might be different.  I'm not sure better, but different.



With all due respect that is not what i've seen. 

Ron Paul Forums now has a _DIRECT_ competitor not because of an opposing viewpoint, but because exactly what just happened to Erowe1. He was a bit crass but his viewpoint was more often than not quite constructive.

----------


## paulbot24

I was under the impression that our passion for *principle* over picking the "sure winner" in the horse race is why most of us are here.

----------


## sailingaway

> I agree.  Banning 2007 members that donate at every level is very bad taste.  This is not an echo chamber, people will be disappointed, but we will rise out of that stronger and more focused than ever.


No one stopped the positions from being discussed, it was demanding people agree to the point of harassment that I object to. Whatever happened to 'agree to disagree'?

----------


## sailingaway

> With all due respect that is not what i've seen. 
> 
> Ron Paul Forums now has a _DIRECT_ competitor not because of an opposing viewpoint, but because exactly what just happened to Erowe1. He was a bit crass but his viewpoint was more often than not quite constructive.


Its a week ban and may end up shorter because he couldn't stop.  It isn't permanent.  You are firmly convinced your idea is better, but why can't you just leave those who disagree with you and want to act differently to do that without dumping on it?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> yeah i agree to an extent, but you also have to understand that had Massie ran with Ron's foreign policy we most likely wouldn't have his voice/vote being heard at all. You have to take what you can get to a certain extent and Ron's role has been that of an intellectual godfather but it is now time to get things done.


And the way you frame things matter.  I agree wholeheartedly with Ron Paul's foreign policy, but it was also cringe worthy when he cited bin Laden during the debates.  There's much better ways to get your point across.

----------


## Michigan11

> this constant harassment by tag teams in this forum isn't either, and a week may help him think of a more constructive way to achieve his goals -- or to give them up, as he keeps demanding we give up ours, if they aren't achievable.  You don't seem to recognize that your own diversion goals may be as unachievable as anything else under discussion.


Your not a libra by any chance are you? LOL Anyways, the problem that many of us are seeing, isn't the support for Ron, it's the fact that there is a cheerleading affect going on here to keep the focus on a presidential race that has ended. My opinion is that, after the convention, many will be so depressed they won't be around after that, or even 4 years from now. Especially you being a moderator, allowing these same threads and posts to be bumped continuously. Either way, we disagree, not a big deal I hope, nothing personal here, so I guess I will just stay out of here for now...

----------


## trey4sports

> Says the guy who actually campaigned for McCain after Ron dropped out in 2008.


yeah. 

Bump that $#@!. 

I dare ya. 




Guess who Greene County ended up supporting in '12? 

Ron Paul. 

ya know why? 

Because the youth took over the Greene county GOP over the last 4 years.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I strongly disagree, and was around in 08', we all recovered from that with out any dillusions. We are dumbing down people in here at this point, and I am in this movment forever and will do everything I possibly can to further the ideology of Ron Paul. I like you Sailingaway, and I see RP supporters as friends, and hate to disagree, but this has to stop. I'm not seeing alot of people in here anymore that I used to see. 
> 
> I'm sure this won't change your mind or others, but I think it's time to take a breather here, this movement is much bigger than Ron or anyone of us, and we need to be careful of how we are presenting ourselves to others watching.


Major + Rep

----------


## paulbot24

> And the way you frame things matter.  I agree wholeheartedly with Ron Paul's foreign policy, but it was also cringe worthy when he cited bin Laden during the debates.  There's much better ways to get your point across.


Oh yeah. Was this before or after he was asked to apologize to the people in New York for insinuating that our foreign policy inspires hatred. The American people need to hear the truth "by any means necessary." Malcom X used that phrase. Is that cringe worthy? The truth has a way of making people cringe when they are accustomed to sweet sounding excuses and sugar-coated stories.

----------


## RickyJ

> I was under the impression that our passion for *principle* over picking the "sure winner" in the horse race is why most of us are here.


I was too. Somewhere, for some reason, some people lost sight of that and winning became everything to them, even more important than principle. That is when movements become irrelevant, they lose their focus and become part of the problem they were originally trying to solve.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> why on earth can't you wait those months?
> 
> that's like saying 'bury him, he's ALMOST dead...'


Because you ignore Ron Paul's own words regarding the nomination and miss the fact that this movement is bigger than one man.  Ron himself admits this.  It's unhealthy for a movement to hinge upon one person and movements quickly dissolve when that person steps down.  Don't fall into idol worship.  You actually do a disservice to the movement by expending time, energy, and resources on fruitless endeavors when we could marshal those forces in races going on right now!  In two weeks you'll realize I'm right after your Rongasm tapers off.

----------


## MRoCkEd

I think it's insulting to Ron to say we know better than him and act like he is still in the race when clearly he has moved on and asked us to do the same. I agree with many in here that it's time to focus on where we can make a difference and not be distracted by fantasies.

----------


## sailingaway

> Your not a libra by any chance are you? LOL Anyways, the problem that many of us are seeing, isn't the support for Ron, it's the fact that there is a cheerleading affect going on here to keep the focus on a presidential race that has ended. My opinion is that, after the convention, many will be so depressed they won't be around after that, or even 4 years from now. Especially you being a moderator, allowing these same threads and posts to be bumped continuously. Either way, we disagree, not a big deal I hope, nothing personal here, so I guess I will just stay out of here for now...


what if those people wouldn't be here at all otherwise and while they are here they get interested, sometimes in some of those others but otherwise wouldn't at all? Again your whole position assumes these people would transfer their efforts for Ron somewhere you want it if they weren't doing this.  And is it really your place to say that? and to try to make it so by making it unpleasant for them?  How does that work with the nonaggression principle?

----------


## sailingaway

> I think it's insulting to Ron to say we know better than him and act like he is still in the race when clearly he has moved on and asked us to do the same. I agree with many in here that it's time to focus on where we can make a difference and not be distracted by fantasies.


Who is stopping those who want to do that?  Or even harassing them to do differently?

----------


## MRoCkEd

> Who is stopping those who want to do that?  Or even harassing them to do differently?


Infractions, bans, deleted posts for people stating the obvious

----------


## trey4sports

I'm going to leave it at this..... I hope that we can just continue to work to promote liberty and hear everyone out.

----------


## sailingaway

> Because you ignore Ron Paul's own words regarding the nomination and miss the fact that this movement is bigger than one man.  Ron himself admits this.  It's unhealthy for a movement to hinge upon one person and movements quickly dissolve when that person steps down.  Don't fall into idol worship.  You actually do a disservice to the movement by expending time, energy, and resources on fruitless endeavors when we could marshal those forces in races going on right now!  In two weeks you'll realize I'm right after your Rongasm tapers off.


what if everyone has their own opinion on that subject and why can't they each have their own opinion without having people jump on them about it over and over and over?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I can't understand why people are so ready to give up when so much is at stake. It is not over yet, there is no reason to give up. Yes our chances of getting Ron Paul the republican nomination are slim, we know that, but even a slim chance is better than no chance! We may never get another chance like this, we must give it our very best and our all till the very end.


Slim makes it sound like there's still a percentile chance.  Ron said its impossible.  Math doesn't lie; and besides it would make our movement the laughing stock of politics.  I've seen how hardcore Paul supporters (borderline cultists) turn off average voters.  Sometimes we're our own worst enemy.

----------


## RickyJ

> Slim makes it sound like there's still a percentile chance. * Ron said its impossible.*  Math doesn't lie; and besides it would make our movement the laughing stock of politics.  I've seen how hardcore Paul supporters (borderline cultists) turn off average voters.  Sometimes we're our own worst enemy.


I have never seen or heard Ron say it was "impossible" for him to get the nomination. Do you have a source for this, or are you the source?

----------


## sailingaway

> Infractions, bans, deleted posts for people stating the obvious


saying it over and over and over isn't communication.

----------


## Michigan11

> what if those people wouldn't be here at all otherwise and while they are here they get interested, sometimes in some of those others but otherwise wouldn't at all? Again your whole position assumes these people would transfer their efforts for Ron somewhere you want it if they weren't doing this.  And is it really your place to say that? and to try to make it so by making it unpleasant for them?  How does that work with the nonaggression principle?


I am on the same page as you, I know what you are trying to do. We discussed this after the 08' campaign too back then as well. Once awoke, people continue on... although the faster they recover emotionally the faster they come back and continue on. It's sort of like after a shock, you go through 5 stages and one of them is denial, we need to not continue this, otherwise they don't get to the next stage. It is damn depressing the reality we face in this world, but we are growing leaps and bounds, by focusing an entire forum on discussing a reality that does not exist, excludes the majority of this movement that persists.

----------


## paulbot24

> Because you ignore Ron Paul's own words regarding the nomination and miss the fact that this movement is bigger than one man.  Ron himself admits this.  You actually do a disservice to the movement by expending time, energy, and resources on fruitless endeavors when we could marshal those forces in races going on right now!  In two weeks you'll realize I'm right after your Rongasm tapers off.


We'll realize you're right when Ron Paul loses? Are we picking the candidate simply so we can brag to friends and family when he wins so we can say "I told you. I was right!" Ron is fighting for his delegates in multiple states as we speak. It is not about being right and picking the "winner." If that were the case, we'd be waving Obama signs right now because that is who it will be IF Ron Paul does not succeed. Why is he organizing his own event in Tampa the night before? Is that when he's finally going to formally tell everybody it's time to give up? "Thanks for showing up everybody! I hope it wasn't too much money, effort, or emotion for everybody since I'm officially giving up now. Just wanted to rent this huge arena so I could tell so many people in-person! Don't be sad! They've got great beaches here to cheer you up." Unbelievable.

----------


## trey4sports

Look i get Sailings point, i really do. 

She is saying, quite simply, don't denigrate or try to lessen Ron Paul's chances of winning in his own subforum. 

But here's the deal... Ron is not even seeking to be nominated from the floor. His own son (a sitting US Senator) has now endorsed Romney. He has even sent out an email saying the race is over and *we can make a difference in other ways*.

Pretending that we are still going to win the nomination is not doing anything constructive to help anyone.

Shouldn't Ron Paul Grassroots Central really be about doing things that are promoting Ron Paul's message? I mean it is pretty clear Ron is now doing things with an eye toward 2016 rather than 2012. That in my opinion is what Ron Paul Grassroots Central should be about. Maybe that means we need to start looking at the objectives of RPGC in a different light, because Ron himself has even said electoral victory is out of reach.


That is my last post in this thread. Everything that I need to say has been said.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Oh yeah. Was this before or after he was asked to apologize to the people in New York for insinuating that our foreign policy inspires hatred. The American people need to hear the truth "by any means necessary." Malcom X used that phrase. Is that cringe worthy? The truth has a way of making people cringe when they are accustomed to sweet sounding excuses and sugar-coated stories.


How about having an understanding of basic human psychology and citing an expert in the field, like Michael Scheuer.  At the very least you don't come across like an al-Qaeda apologists.  Average voters are very ignorant and that was their take away.

----------


## low preference guy

> Let's say he doesn't..... then how does that make Ron look, having a rouge campaign manager?


nothing new. remember the newsletters?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> what if everyone has their own opinion on that subject and why can't they each have their own opinion without having people jump on them about it over and over and over?


I just don't want to see a Jim Jones Peoples Temple moment when Ron doesn't get the nomination and quietly retires to be with his family.  We want people to keep active in this movement and not put all your eggs in the Ron nomination basket.  People that do will likely drop out from disappointment.

----------


## sailingaway

> How about having an understanding of basic human psychology and citing an expert in the field, like Michael Scheuer.  At the very least you don't come across like an al-Qaeda apologists.  Average voters are very ignorant and that was their take away.


He could have said it differently, but when you raise Ron's less than perfect moments you seem to think Rand would do it better. And to that I would suggest you compare Maddow and Rand to Chris Matthews and Ron both on the civil rights act, and heck, Matthews threw in 'legalizing heroin' too.  Even verbally, they each have their skills and when it comes to needing experience and understanding of many ways to express the principles of liberty. Ron's about as good as they come imho.

But Ron is *now* with *this* campaign and likely won't campaign again.  Can't you leave his supporters his last campaign to work on even if it is just because they will miss him and want it to be the highest tribute to him possible in terms of achievement?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I have never seen or heard Ron say it was "impossible" for him to get the nomination. Do you have a source for this, or are you the source?


Ron said so in interviews and the campaign admitted it months ago.

----------


## Barrex

After Erowe1 insulted sailingaway (calling her a moron) she had every right to ban him....Another moderator coming here and commenting in a manner he did is not smart or collegial. It should have been dealt with among moderators....but I digress

For those who are pushing people to stop fighting to give Ron Paul 15 min. prime time speech, place at RNC etc.: You were fighting same battle for a year(?) and now you are near end (one way or the other) and you are screaming STOP FIGHTING!!!.... I dont get it. It is like running a marathon and stopping few meters before finish line and start screaming: STOP DONT RUN!!! This movement is not over (hopefully) when this race is over.... but making a stand and ensuring  Ron Pauls 15 minutes of unedited, free speech is achievable and it is going benefit this movement tremendously. If you gave up you dont have to drag, scream, spam everyone else to stop fighting. After all it is only few more days.
This movement, or revolution lacks clear goals and unifying forces. Ron Paul is strongest force in this movement that is keeping him together. Like it or not best course is to stick with him as long as possible.

Get him that 15 minutes prime time speech.

----------


## Michigan11

> nothing new. remember the newsletters?


That's true, and he made a mistake back then, that he learned from. It's not as if a campaign manager is putting out false information though. Or is he? If he is, and for this long, where is Ron at? Unless Ron agrees or is on the same page or Ron doesn't care?

----------


## sailingaway

> Ron said so in interviews and the campaign admitted it months ago.


he did not in interviews use the word 'impossible',

----------


## sailingaway

> That's true, and he made a mistake back then, that he learned from. It's not as if a campaign manager is putting out false information though. Or is he? If he is, and for this long, where is Ron at? Unless Ron agrees or is on the same page or Ron doesn't care?


Or Ron is doesn't want to push in.  I think those around him have a plan and he may not want to oppose it. As he says, he maintains low expectations, always.

But we may value his being nominated on the floor against the alternative differently than those around him.  It happens.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I am on the same page as you, I know what you are trying to do. We discussed this after the 08' campaign too back then as well. Once awoke, people continue on... although the faster they recover emotionally the faster they come back and continue on. It's sort of like after a shock, you go through 5 stages and one of them is denial, we need to not continue this, otherwise they don't get to the next stage. It is damn depressing the reality we face in this world, but we are growing leaps and bounds, by focusing an entire forum on discussing a reality that does not exist, excludes the majority of this movement that persists.


I'm in total agreement of the 5 stages.  I hit my bottom with the Iowa caucus results, took some time to get back on the horse and then got very excited about the Thomas Massie and Bentivolio races and the prospect of Rand 2016.

I honestly think if it wasn't for the Liberty For All Super PAC we wouldn't be making these gains because so many Paul supporters still cling to some nomination fantasy and forget to support our other candidates.  I'm glad somebody still has their eye on the ball and the future.

----------


## Michigan11

> Or Ron is doesn't want to push in.  I think those around him have a plan and he may not want to oppose it. As he says, he maintains low expectations, always.
> 
> But we may value his being nominated on the floor against the alternative differently than those around him.  It happens.


By this implication, Ron would be a horrible president, allowing others to put words in his mouth or run his office for him.

----------


## Aratus

... if ... improbable or not very likely
implies a slight slim possibility and we
must avoid hyperbole whenever possible
it might be rather difficult to throw the
tampa convention open or brokered.

----------


## sailingaway

> I'm in total agreement of the 5 stages.  I hit my bottom with the Iowa caucus results, took some time to get back on the horse and then got very excited about the Thomas Massie and Bentivolio races and the prospect of Rand 2016.
> 
> I honestly think if it wasn't for the Liberty For All Super PAC we wouldn't be making these gains because so many Paul supporters still cling to some nomination fantasy and forget to support our other candidates.  I'm glad somebody still has their eye on the ball and the future.


But there shouldn't be any reason you shouldn't be able to look at the more distant future and let others spend their own time as they wish.

----------


## RonRules

AFTER the RNC convention, I will start a new thread that you'll all find interesting.

I prefer to wait.  I won't forget.

----------


## Ekrub

My bet is that Ron doesn't want to be nominated, and Jesse is just the messenger of this. 

Ive come to the conclusion that the Republican party won't change until the old guard dies off. Another 20-30 years is what I'd give it. We are in position to take over then, and damaging the liberty brand only threatens our advances (rand, Amash, massie, etc...) I think Ron realizes he is the Goldwater to the eventual Reagan.

Not the inspiring 1000 post that I thought I might give. But the truth as I see it.

----------


## sailingaway

> true... improbable or not very likely
> implies a slight slim possibility and we
> must avoid hyperbole whenever possible.
> it might be rather difficult to throw the
> tampa convention open or brokered.


people are talking about getting 5 states.  Brokered or any of that would take a highly unusual circumstance.  Occassionally people here want to talk about 'what if' there is a highly unusual circumstance, which isn't a crime to do.

----------


## jay_dub

> After Erowe1 insulted sailingaway (calling her a moron) she had every right to ban him....Another moderator coming here and commenting in a manner he did is not smart or collegial. It should have been dealt with among moderators....but I digress
> 
> For those who are pushing people to stop fighting to give Ron Paul 15 min. prime time speech, place at RNC etc.: You were fighting same battle for a year(?) and now you are near end (one way or the other) and you are screaming STOP FIGHTING!!!.... I dont get it. It is like running a marathon and stopping few meters before finish line and start screaming: STOP DONT RUN!!! This movement is not over (hopefully) when this race is over.... but making a stand and ensuring  Ron Pauls 15 minutes of unedited, free speech is achievable and it is going benefit this movement tremendously. If you gave up you dont have to drag, scream, spam everyone else to stop fighting. After all it is only few more days.
> This movement, or revolution lacks clear goals and unifying forces. Ron Paul is strongest force in this movement that is keeping him together. Like it or not best course is to stick with him as long as possible.
> 
> Get him that 15 minutes prime time speech.


Nailed it....start to finish.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> By this implication, Ron would be a horrible president, allowing others to put words in his mouth or run his office for him.


That's a legitimate criticism of Ron, one that there isn't a good response to.

----------


## Aratus

personally, had he won 1150 GOP delegates & if POTUS BHO is within days
of one HUGE scandal like TEAPOT DOME or Watergate... i might have expected 
to see Dr. Ron Paul being a very decisive C-I-C as we see a Pentagon audit.

----------


## low preference guy

> That's true, and he made a mistake back then, that *he learned from*.


no, he hasn't. he still surrounds himself with awful people like benton and jack hunter, who defended an endorsement of Mitt Romney in Ron's official page. i would've wanted Ron to win anyway because he would not delegate the vetoing of bills, he would've done that himself.

----------


## paulbot24

> How about having an understanding of  basic human psychology and citing an expert in the field, like Michael  Scheuer.  At the very least you don't come across like an al-Qaeda  apologists.  Average voters are very ignorant and that was their take  away.


Explaining how our foreign policy promotes hatred  and actually hurts America does not make one an al-Qaida sympathizer or  apologist. The reason why "average voters are very ignorant" is because  they do not hear multiple perspectives presented and it is the *duty* of  all politicians to explain and help the public understand how and why  events and atrocities happen, not to coddle us with an agreed upon  rationalization and "theory" repeated enough to become "truth." If we as  adults lack the basic human psychology to handle multiple perspectives  on current events then we don't deserve to be called adults. We deserve  to be called what we are....children, in need of parents and clearly  incapable of understanding citations from any experts.

----------


## sailingaway

> I just don't want to see a Jim Jones Peoples Temple moment when Ron doesn't get the nomination and quietly retires to be with his family.  We want people to keep active in this movement and not put all your eggs in the Ron nomination basket.  People that do will likely drop out from disappointment.


It is two weeks.  Just wait. Honestly, what imho hurt the movement most and I know you won't like me saying so, is Rand's endorsement.  I had a future for the movement I could get excited about before then.  Now, I may support him in 2016, but I'm not excited.  I know a lot of people who feel the same way.  

I'm trying to get excited about Amash, and he's helping me out, daily....

I apparently don't work like you do.  I need a living symbol of what I'm fighting for as a focus, apparently.  I can then support more watered down incremental candidates who are a step towards that ideal, but it is the ideal that keeps me excited, and the principled candidate, even if he isn't 'winning an election' that keeps me involved.

----------


## AJ Antimony

The 20 members of RPF again going nuts over a non-issue.

Read the quote. "Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor."

See that word in there? "seek"? That just means that Ron will not personally order his delegates to nominate him. However, Ron, like many others, is not a convention ignoramus. He understands how conventions work. Er, at least how they are supposed to work: The delegates nominate whoever they want to, in accordance with the rules.

So, it doesn't really matter what Ron seeks. Whether he seeks it or not, if he has 5 states, then he can be nominated.

Now, if Ron actually has a desire NOT to be nominated and thus ruin Romney's Sweet 16 party, then he's going to have to meet with the delegates himself and convince them not to. He could probably convince them with nothing more than his grandfatherly sincerity. But I'm sure striking some sort of deal with Romney and getting something out of it will help too. 

Make no mistake, if Ron has 5 states, then he will have serious leverage.

----------


## Michigan11

> That's a legitimate criticism of Ron, one that there isn't a good response to.


Thats the thing, we all know he would be an awesome president, but I think he is an awesome beginning leader of a movment, he struck back in 07' and we are all here for the same damn reason and so is he. He like us wants to see the ideology of ending the federal reserve, advance, and he like our founders and current revolutionaries are showing us the blueprints to do just that. He is saying full force ahead where we can advance like a master chess player, only 3 dimensional. We are kicking ass and taking names right now, I've never been more excited, yet I also know many that joined this forum from this past prez cycle need time to recoop... I get that, and I want them to, and then while they do, the rest of us can continue to advance other liberty candidates, because in 2014 we are going to be looking at literally taking over 10 fold of what we did 2012.

----------


## Aratus

make it 1200 totally loyal rEVOLUTIOn RNC delegates and a whopping and obvious Obamagate scandal
breaking and Dr. Ron Paul would have been a shoe-in in the fall election. mitt did have several victories 
under his belt in addition to tons of GOP fatcat greenbacks. i feel we need to focus on the party platform
and 2016's rules just so we have something to feel proud about in december. ron paul was very close to
the eventual nomination in december of 2011 and that timed hatchet jobbie that arrived was no fluke.

----------


## eleganz

> You think nominating him is going to do anything for liberty?


Dumbest post in RPF history. And by a five year veteran with 11000 posts. You must be proud

----------


## Natural Citizen

[QUOTE=paulbot24;4578590]Explaining how our foreign policy promotes hatred  and actually hurts America does not make one an al-Qaida sympathizer or  apologist. QUOTE]

What that is though is the tried and true spin on language comparable to Luntz and that brood. This method comes courtesy of the Koch way of logic but do be thankful that by their fruit these spin masters will always be known. Sour TEA.....

----------


## Michigan11

> no, he hasn't. he still surrounds himself with awful people like benton and jack hunter, who defended an endorsement of Mitt Romney in Ron's official page. i would've wanted Ron to win anyway because he would not delegate the vetoing of bills, he would've done that himself.


I think he did learn from a common mistake, that was painful to watch in 08', the media pounding him for that. Ron isn't dumb in politics, he knows who he is and what he is doing. He is building the road. The drivers are coming, and that is our job to see that

----------


## Aratus

> It is two weeks.  Just wait. Honestly, what imho hurt the movement most and I know you won't like me saying so, is Rand's endorsement.  I had a future for the movement I could get excited about before then.  Now, I may support him in 2016, but I'm not excited.  I know a lot of people who feel the same way.  
> 
> I'm trying to get excited about Amash, and he's helping me out, daily....
> 
> 
> I apparently don't work like you do.  I need a living symbol of what I'm fighting for as a focus, apparently.  I can then support more watered down incremental candidates who are a step towards that ideal, but it is the ideal that keeps me excited, and the principled candidate, even if he isn't 'winning an election' that keeps me involved.



rand needed to back the ticket to be thought GOP enuff even though he is being very correct how superficial paul ryan's plan actually is.
lets see this as a 20th century typical GOP ticket trying to fray futher FDR's dustbowl coalition as we debate gary johnson's moxie totally.

----------


## thoughtomator

Back in the day I stood up for Benton, giving him the benefit of the doubt.

The doubt is gone, he is a horrible excuse for a campaign manager. With the resources we made available - people and money - a good campaign manager would have won this primary for Paul, or at the very least secured him major influence in the party from here forward.

Benton seems to be acting on behalf of those who want to marginalize Ron Paul. He behaves as if he has been paid off by a rival.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> It is two weeks.  Just wait. Honestly, what imho hurt the movement most and I know you won't like me saying so, is Rand's endorsement.  I had a future for the movement I could get excited about before then.  Now, I may support him in 2016, but I'm not excited.  I know a lot of people who feel the same way.  
> 
> I'm trying to get excited about Amash, and he's helping me out, daily....
> 
> I apparently don't work like you do.  I need a living symbol of what I'm fighting for as a focus, apparently.  I can then support more watered down incremental candidates who are a step towards that ideal, but it is the ideal that keeps me excited, and the principled candidate, even if he isn't 'winning an election' that keeps me involved.


I just wish you'd remember your "over and over" comment and apply it before you get ready to put Rand down again about the same subject yet again.

----------


## Aratus

> no, he hasn't. he still surrounds himself with awful people like benton and jack hunter, who defended an endorsement of Mitt Romney in Ron's official page. i would've wanted Ron to win anyway because he would not delegate the vetoing of bills, he would've done that himself.


i like jack hunter and think he might be able to challenge lindsey graham in a very droll highly principled manner eventually in S.C

so are we now into the sport of rubbing the noses of fellow movement members who seem neophyte into the mass media effluvia if

only to salvage our own wounded pride? can we eventually forgive ourselves for our lack of pragmatism instead of high principles?

----------


## sailingaway

> I just wish you'd remember your "over and over" comment and apply it before you get ready to put Rand down again about the same subject yet again.


I don't think that was what what I said was about. My point here is one I haven't made over and over, and it is that it isn't Ron losing the GOP nomination that would make people leave it is being told they can't even fight for him, when his light is so bright.

I like bright lights.

----------


## parocks

> And just like that, everything I've said about Benton this election cycle is proven to be true.


Bull$#@!.

Everybody has been blaming Benton for passing along the official Ron Paul message which comes from Ron Paul.

Benton isn't off the reservation.  Benton would be fired by now if the things he's been saying weren't what Ron Paul wanted him to say.

Ron Paul doesn't hate the Republicans as much as many here do.  Ron Paul doesn't want the Republicans to hate him (and Rand).  

Ron Paul doesn't want to act as if a black swan event (Romney eaten by sharks) is a certainty.  Ron Paul doesn't want to say "it's over, go home now"
because often Ron Paul supporters have fragile psyches.

Remember when Santorum just dropped out?  Just dropped out.  Are there people who continue to criticize whoever Santorums manager was for Santorum dropping out? Are there Santorum supporters who think Santorum will win in Tampa.  After all, Santorum actually won a good number of states.  And we didn't win any.  (Except at the delegate stage where we really did great).

I should add that I'm in Maine and I want the people I voted for at the convention to vote for Ron Paul.  I want our delegates to rip $#@! up if we can't vote for Ron Paul.  But I have no problem with Ron Paul saying "hey, that's not me setting the arena on fire, those are my crazy delegates".

----------


## LibertyEagle

This whole thing is sad.  We need to be rowing together.  Not beating the $#@! out of each other.

----------


## Aratus

way way way way way way way way way back in 1944 ole harry truman got on FDR's 
ticket becuz he looked at the way the pentagon in ww2 spent the taxpayer's money...

asking for a pentagon audit has rand paul sounding like a very astute principled senator. 
i wish wish wish wish wish this could be a platform plank that goes the tampa distance.

----------


## RickyJ

> Back in the day I stood up for Benton, giving him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> The doubt is gone, he is a horrible excuse for a campaign manager. With the resources we made available - people and money - a good campaign manager would have won this primary for Paul, or at the very least secured him major influence in the party from here forward.
> 
> Benton seems to be acting on behalf of those who want to marginalize Ron Paul. He behaves as if he has been paid off by a rival.


To be honest I never cared for the guy from day one even before he became the campaign manager this election. Ron Paul has a great message and ideas, but his weakness appears to be in who he trusts to work with him on those goals. Even in 2008 the official campaign didn't seem to be on the ball as much as the grassroots and in some cases it appeared they were working against them.

----------


## cajuncocoa

I'm confused.  And this  post might get me banned, but I'm going to speak out anyway.

A few months ago many activists (myself included) expressed the idea that we want nothing to do with the GOP in the future.  And we were told by many on this board that  we have to stay with the GOP and try to "reform" it -- *because that's what Dr. Paul wants us to do.*

I don't think that's a good idea at all.  The GOP has made it clear as it can be that we're not wanted in their party, and they will do whatever they need to do; they will  break any rule (or hips and fingers) to keep us out.

But because that's what Ron Paul said he wants, we have to do it, because this is the Ron Paul forum.

Many of us were thoroughly disgusted by Rand's endorsement of Romney on Sean Hannity's show.

We were told that the Pauls know what they're doing.  The endorsement is meaningless, and Rand is just setting up for 2016.


Now, the campaign is telling us Ron Paul doesn't want to be nominated from the floor....and in spite of what RP wants, *the delegates are going to do what they want to do anyway!*

What if Ron doesn't want to rock the boat because nominating him from the floor would hurt Rand's chances in 2016?

Personally, I don't give a $hit about that...I would say "nominate him anyway!"  

But that's me.  Where the consistency from the "whatever Ron Paul wants, that's what we do" crowd?

----------


## parocks

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.


Boo Matt Collins who might know what he's talking about.

Boo realism.

There are a lot of people here who think that bad news doesn't happen unless you talk about it.  And Benton's the guy who talks about the bad news about not winning.

I think the delegates should nominate him from the floor.  But Ron Paul distancing himself from this effort is what I would expect.

----------


## TheGrinch

> I'm confused.  And this  post might get me banned, but I'm going to speak out anyway.
> 
> A few months ago many activists (myself included) expressed the idea that we want nothing to do with the GOP in the future.  And we were told by many on this board that  we have to stay with the GOP and try to "reform" it -- *because that's what Dr. Paul wants us to do.*
> 
> I don't think that's a good idea at all.  The GOP has made it clear as it can be that we're not wanted in their party, and they will do whatever they need to do; they will  break any rule (or hips and fingers) to keep us out.
> 
> But because that's what Ron Paul said he wants, we have to do it, because this is the Ron Paul forum.
> 
> Many of us were thoroughly disgusted by Rand's endorsement of Romney on Sean Hannity's show.
> ...


For one thing, Ron and Benton said *they* were not going to be *seeking* a nomination from the floor. Nowhere have they ever even hinted that the delegates should not.

Now of course it's debatable if it's worth causing that kind of ruckus if we don't have the numbers, which according to Dr. Paul's emails we do not, but Ron did say for the delegates to make as many gains for liberty as they possibly can....

----------


## Aratus

if if if if if if there is an actual grassroots fervor coming from the floor of the tampa convention that does not have an ounce of artificial astroturf
to it as we at home see a motivated momentum & energized sincere call for doctor ron paul, middle america would forgive us if a very long set of
ballot votes takes things from early afternoon to maybe 3 a.m EST even though mitt's dedicated people would be passing around tums aplenty...

----------


## Natural Citizen

> Slim makes it sound like there's still a percentile chance.  Ron said its impossible.  Math doesn't lie; and besides it would make our movement the laughing stock of politics.  I've seen how hardcore Paul supporters (borderline cultists) turn off average voters.  Sometimes we're our own worst enemy.


I don't understand what an average voter is. What is that? Where does the comparison lay relevant to this theoretical above average voter you hint toward? 

Also...I don't know what a hardcore Paul supporter means. Sounds like some Frank Luntz spin to me. Can you tell us what that means? Because there are millions of people who know and understand the idea of Liberty. These folks are not borderline cultists. That fodder reminds me of the old gag of pulling folks over or labeling them terroristic because they had a Ron Paul sticker on their bumper.

Now, I have no intention of squabbling about it. In fact, I don't evn care if you respond. But the spin on language I read in many of your postings is, in my view, borderline and are comparable to some of the spew read on extreme right wing platforms.

Correct me if I'm mistaken but I only comment on things as they appear to me. I would like to know what an average voter is though. Do tell, please. Share with us your wisdom...

----------


## paulbot24

> I don't think that was what what I said was about. My point here is one I haven't made over and over, and it is that it isn't Ron losing that makes people leave it is not having him to fight for because his light is so bright.
> 
> I like bright lights.


THIS/\/\/\ People get discouraged in politics because they feel that nobody is fighting for their rights and for "the little guy" anymore. Discouragement becomes apathy, which becomes corruption when politicians feel nobody cares enough to be "watching" or to hold them accountable. Apathy and its associated unaccountability is what has created the mess we have on Capitol Hill. We've already seen what happens when Ron and others speak out vehemently against legislation like NDAA and the TSA. Not much changes but we at least know he won't stop giving them hell for trampling on our liberties. What happens when those few begin to disappear and retire? He is keeping an already deteriorating situation from spiraling into an even deeper abyss of hopelessness and despair which will only serve to embolden Congress to finish off our civil liberties and rights. I like bright lights too, especially as everything seems to get darker around us.

----------


## Aratus

we need to ban artificial astroturf from tampa, we need to keep the vote honest and upright.

----------


## Starfield

> Dr. Paul will not seek to be nominated from the floor.


So... did he change his mind, or was the "delegate strategy" a load of crap from the beginning? How was the "delegate strategy" supposed to work without getting nominated from the floor‽

----------


## pcosmar

A good a place for this as any.




*On One But Paul.*

----------


## RickyJ

> yeah. 
> 
> Bump that $#@!. 
> 
> I dare ya. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bump you saying you are working your ass off for McCain? 

You could have taken over the county without ever once working your ass off for John McCain!

----------


## TheGrinch

> So... did he change his mind, or was the "delegate strategy" a load of crap from the beginning? How was the "delegate strategy" supposed to work without getting nominated from the floor‽


Again:

1) He's not seeking it. It doesn't mean he wouldn't accept it if the delegates did.

2) He let us know quite a while ago that we only have about half the delegates needed to nominate him... Thus, I'm not sure why he'd be seeking something that he's told us himself he doesn't think we have the numbers to do, barring something unexpected.

People, please just stop with jumping to these brash conclusions. Use your head, because this is getting really old...

----------


## LibertyEagle

The nomination is right around the corner.  Is this really worth all this arguing?

----------


## Aratus

this all has a front porch campaign logic to it. bill mckinley was coaxed to run from 
canton ohio, ole george washington when out riding was asked to be C-I-C in 1789.
you have to have dr. ron paul thinking this one over in a good way without forging 
a metaphoric verbal weapon barack obama can utilize in the fall campain against his
hypothetical challenger, our gentleman mitt from the baystate. so far we have not 
seen dr. ron paul give the official nod to a rival competator as he tosses in his towel.

----------


## sailingaway

> I'm confused.  And this  post might get me banned, but I'm going to speak out anyway.
> 
> A few months ago many activists (myself included) expressed the idea that we want nothing to do with the GOP in the future.  And we were told by many on this board that  we have to stay with the GOP and try to "reform" it -- *because that's what Dr. Paul wants us to do.*
> 
> I don't think that's a good idea at all.  The GOP has made it clear as it can be that we're not wanted in their party, and they will do whatever they need to do; they will  break any rule (or hips and fingers) to keep us out.
> 
> But because that's what Ron Paul said he wants, we have to do it, because this is the Ron Paul forum.
> 
> Many of us were thoroughly disgusted by Rand's endorsement of Romney on Sean Hannity's show.
> ...


Different people were always saying different things. Why don't you go through those threads and find out which ones from those threads are the ones taking which positions now.  But working in the GOP and throwing away a chance for Ron to be nominated from the floor are not the same thing IF that in fact is what Benton was even saying.  Working within the GOP could as easily mean fighting with Ron being nominated on the floor as this year's Goldwater to be an elder statesmen of the party still carrying his banner and letting supporters follow him.   None of that stops people from working inside the GOP.

If, as speculation only, this were to try to position Rand as the head of the movement it is a bad idea, imho.  PARTICULARLY if he is going to be making 'pragmatic political calculations' because the leader should be the beacon of liberty for people to be attracted to, and hiding your light under a bushel basket doesn't serve that purpose.

And to me that beacon is Ron in the forseeable future, at least, and nominating him from the floor, assuming we can possibly do it, is the only way to go.

Frankly, the GOP should want it too.   ROMNEY won't be the change people are looking for, but people looking for change will see that the only place offering it is within the GOP.

----------


## sailingaway

> Again:
> 
> 1) He's not seeking it. It doesn't mean he wouldn't accept it if the delegates did.
> 
> 2) He let us know quite a while ago that we only have about half the delegates needed to nominate him... Thus, I'm not sure why he'd be seeking something that he's told us himself he doesn't think we have the numbers to do, barring something unexpected.
> 
> People, please just stop with jumping to these brash conclusions. Use your head, because this is getting really old...


this is what I believe as well.

----------


## RickyJ

> So... did he change his mind, or was the "delegate strategy" a load of crap from the beginning? How was the "delegate strategy" supposed to work without getting nominated from the floor‽


I don't think he changed his mind. If Ron Paul didn't want to be nominated from the floor he would tell us himself. I wouldn't pay much mind to what comes out of Benton's mouth.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Ha ha.  Well, I guess it is.

----------


## paulbot24

> this all has a front porch campaign logic to it. bill mckinley was coaxed to run from 
> canton ohio, ole george washington when out riding was asked to be C-I-C in 1789.
> you have to have dr. ron paul thinking this one over in a good way without forging 
> a metaphoric verbal weapon barack obama can utilize in the fall campain against his
> hypothetical challenger, our gentleman mitt from the baystate. so far we have not 
> seen dr. ron paul give the official nod to a rival competator as he tosses in his towel.


EXACTLY. Since when have we ever seen Ron give up on anything EVER?

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Different people were always saying different things. Why don't you go through those threads and find out which ones from those threads are the ones taking which positions now.  But working in the GOP and throwing away a chance for Ron to be nominated from the floor are not the same thing IF that in fact is what Benton was even saying.  Working within the GOP could as easily mean fighting with Ron being nominated on the floor as this year's Goldwater to be an elder statesmen of the party still carrying his banner and letting supporters follow him.   None of that stops people from working inside the GOP.


Before you misunderstand where I'm coming from with this argument, let me state that *

I WANT HIM NOMINATED FROM THE FLOOR. *  

But others in this thread who are also saying that *ARE* some of the same ones who used the argument that it was what RP wanted when confronted with opposition to working in the GOP. 

Just sayin'

And don't worry....I'm not sticking around to argue this ad nauseum.  The last word will be yours.

----------


## thoughtomator

I fail to see how a "shut up and go along with the program" strategy advances our cause in any way at all.

We should be tearing down the house and making it impossible for them to conduct business or be successful in any way without making major accommodations to us. You don't build political power by being a pansy and a pushover. You build power by accomplishing something meaningful.

For example, if we pushed the GOP convention into disarray and made four days straight of national headlines, that would get our message out to millions of people who aren't aware of Ron Paul or think we are just fringers instead of a major component of the party (as well as a _necessary_ component of _any_ winning GOP coalition).

----------


## parocks

> I'm confused.  And this  post might get me banned, but I'm going to speak out anyway.
> 
> A few months ago many activists (myself included) expressed the idea that we want nothing to do with the GOP in the future.  And we were told by many on this board that  we have to stay with the GOP and try to "reform" it -- *because that's what Dr. Paul wants us to do.*
> 
> I don't think that's a good idea at all.  The GOP has made it clear as it can be that we're not wanted in their party, and they will do whatever they need to do; they will  break any rule (or hips and fingers) to keep us out.
> 
> But because that's what Ron Paul said he wants, we have to do it, because this is the Ron Paul forum.
> 
> Many of us were thoroughly disgusted by Rand's endorsement of Romney on Sean Hannity's show.
> ...


Your post won't get you banned.  Well, "stick with the GOP" is just a good idea.  You have to understand that finger breaking or whatnot is not unheard of.  We're trying to take a valuable thing away from the people who have had it for years.  They aren't going to like it.  But the conservatives have been part of the GOP since Taft at least.  The GOP is where we belong.  Yeah, we've been $#@! on by them since Taft.  We just have to fight and keep fighting.

About Tampa, well, Ron Paul has made a statement that he doesn't want this.  He's covering his ass here. Good, smart move.  Now we do what we want to do.  Which is probably what Ron Paul really wants, but is smart enough to say he doesn't.

The fact that Ron Paul supporters have acted like $#@!s almost non stop since the Summer of 07 is a good thing.  Ron Paul can say for the 100th time "I don't control my supporters" and people will believe him, or should believe him, because it's true.  Ron Paul doesn't tell his supporters to boo at debates, but we do anyway.  People know this.  As long as Ron Paul makes it clear that it's not his thing, he's off the hook.  And that's what Benton just did.  Rand saved his own butt (good job Rand!) by issuing the meaningless Romney endorse, and now Ron is saving his (and Rands) by saying this.

----------


## sailingaway

> Before you misunderstand where I'm coming from with this argument, let me state that *
> 
> I WANT HIM NOMINATED FROM THE FLOOR. *  
> 
> But others in this thread who are also saying that *ARE* some of the same ones who used the argument that it was what RP wanted when confronted with opposition to working in the GOP. 
> 
> Just sayin'
> 
> And don't worry....I'm not sticking around to argue this ad nauseum.  The last word will be yours.


Just because what Ron wants is often persuasive doesn't mean it will always tip the balance...

----------


## LibertyEagle

> But others in this thread who are also saying that *ARE* some of the same ones who used the argument that it was what RP wanted when confronted with opposition to working in the GOP. 
> 
> Just sayin'


Yet again, it might be that you are interpreting Benton's memo differently than others of us.  Benton didn't say that Dr. Paul didn't want to be nominated.  He said they weren't seeking it, which to me says the campaign isn't pushing it.  That could very well be a political move.

That actually was explained several times in this thread.  This is the first occurrence, I think.  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post4578078

Could we be wrong?  Yup.

The only thing this is about is getting him his 15 minutes of unedited speaking time that is due him.

----------


## parocks

> I fail to see how a "shut up and go along with the program" strategy advances our cause in any way at all.
> 
> We should be tearing down the house and making it impossible for them to conduct business or be successful in any way without making major accommodations to us. You don't build political power by being a pansy and a pushover. You build power by accomplishing something meaningful.
> 
> For example, if we pushed the GOP convention into disarray and made four days straight of national headlines, that would get our message out to millions of people who aren't aware of Ron Paul or think we are just fringers instead of a major component of the party (as well as a _necessary_ component of _any_ winning GOP coalition).


Nothing in the world of Ron Paul that has happened in the last couple months has been surprising in the least.

We are not prepared to do the damage we should be preparing to do.  Ron Paul grassroots is not mighty.  I've been talking about preparing for this for months and no one seems to be actually doing anything.  

The convention is a tv show.  We have have hundreds of actors, set designers, cameramen.  Make it the Ron Paul show.  Have our stealth delegates, bound to Romney, wearing Romney garb, beating up a Ron Paul supporter wearing Ron Paul garb.  This is done exactly as planned, is videoed, exactly as planned, is uploaded to the youtube channel set up for this purpose, and is made viral by the people who were watching the youtube channel because they knew that interesting stuff would happen.

The bag of tricks that the Ron Paul supporters have include chanting "Ron Paul" but very little else.  Would think we'd advance beyond that in 5 years. But I don't think so.

----------


## fisharmor

> Yet again, it might be that you are interpreting Benton's memo differently than others of us.  Benton didn't say that Dr. Paul didn't want to be nominated.  He said they weren't seeking it, which to me says the campaign isn't pushing it.  That could very well be a political move.


Yeah, with dozens of statements identical in nature to the one we're arguing about, it very much is a political move.
It's a $#@!ing torpedo.
Benton has repeatedly left the media and mainstream America with the impression that Dr. Paul's heart was never really in this and that he has never been serious about winning.

If he was never serious about winning then he's never going to win.  It's as simple as that.  People aren't going to back a loser and Benton is all loser talk.

You all can dither all day long about how it didn't say he's against getting nominated, but the bottom line is that this is one of a long string of statements _that spell out exactly that._

----------


## Aratus

would america be in shock if rand paul called for a most patriotic audit on our vast maze of complexities that is our pentagon????
we may see america being educated by the choises that are open to us as free people, if we think this all through most logically.

----------


## MelissaCato

Ron Paul 2012!! Darn it !!

----------


## John F Kennedy III

I hope we're not still pretending Benton isn't a neocon plant.

----------


## Aratus

JFK3  --- jesse benton is jesse benton, an original. trust me on this.

to be truly classically neocon its helps to know who slim pickens was.

----------


## parocks

> So... did he change his mind, or was the "delegate strategy" a load of crap from the beginning? How was the "delegate strategy" supposed to work without getting nominated from the floor‽


The delegate strategy meant getting more delegates than we got.  We didn't get enough delegates for the delegate strategy to work.  But we did get some delegates and the delegates we got were gotten through the "fight hard in smaller caucus states through state conventions" delegate strategy.  We didn't win a single primary.

----------


## parocks

> JFK3  --- jesse benton is jesse benton, an original. trust me on this.
> 
> to be truly classically neocon its helps to know who slim pickens was.


No, the desire to ride a bomb makes you a hawk.  Neocons aren't the same thing as hawks.  When Dr. Strangelove came out (1964?) Irving Kristol was still a Democrat.

----------


## Aratus

tis true... also... 

our "ronulans"
can vote for
platform planks.

----------


## parocks

> Yet again, it might be that you are interpreting Benton's memo differently than others of us.  Benton didn't say that Dr. Paul didn't want to be nominated.  He said they weren't seeking it, which to me says the campaign isn't pushing it.  That could very well be a political move.
> 
> That actually was explained several times in this thread.  This is the first occurrence, I think.  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post4578078
> 
> Could we be wrong?  Yup.
> 
> The only thing this is about is getting him his 15 minutes of unedited speaking time that is due him.


As much as a speech, it's about letting the delegates vote.

----------


## rb3b3

Listen fellas, this is the bottom line in all of this.. I don't give a rats ass what Benton has to say at all!! Just like so many of you, I've dumped a shtload of money into this years campaign and if we have the plurality of delagates in 5 states then you bet your ass Ron Paul wil be getting nominated from the floor!!! He will give his unedited speech, and maybe we can still win this thing!! I still have hope!!! Benton got me very depressed after that first email awhile back basically waving the white flag!! I really don't like Benton, I feel he has no care as to how many of us pumped our hard earned money into this!!!! Fk what Benton has to say, ON WITH THE MOVEMENT!!! See you in Tampa!!! Let's get ron nominated from the floor and go from there !!

----------


## Aratus

i feel the neocons and the hawks had less of a phobia over radioactive private parts, 
as i remember the vintage seminal flic of a film with peter sellers. i actually liked poor
adlai stevenson as a person but the potus scenes in that flic rang true and were funny.

----------


## trey4sports

> Bump you saying you are working your ass off for McCain? 
> 
> *You could have taken over the county without ever once working your ass off for John McCain!*



The GOP would cede power to someone who didn't even support the nominee? That's news to me. 

Hell, that's news to Rand Paul and Thomas Massie as well. They both endorsed the nominee.

----------


## mac_hine

> A good a place for this as any.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *On One But Paul.*


This is why Ron *NEEDS* to be nominated from the floor so he can give his speech. There is too much at stake. He will not win, but it is imperative that all of America(and the world) hear his message in prime time. Brush fires will be lit, and the collective consciousness of the planet will be made aware of what's at stake if we continue this doomsday course we're currently traveling on.  Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once its realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.

----------


## MelissaWV

I'm sorry, but does that video say "On One But Paul"?

----------


## Athan

> would this guy just shut the $#@! up?


Ditto.

----------


## shane77m

This campaign sure likes to kick its supporters in the crotch.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Your post won't get you banned.  Well, "stick with the GOP" is just a good idea.  You have to understand that finger breaking or whatnot is not unheard of.  We're trying to take a valuable thing away from the people who have had it for years.  They aren't going to like it.  But the conservatives have been part of the GOP since Taft at least.  *The GOP is where we belong.  Yeah, we've been $#@! on by them since Taft.  We just have to fight and keep fighting.*
> 
> About Tampa, well, Ron Paul has made a statement that he doesn't want this.  He's covering his ass here. Good, smart move.  Now we do what we want to do.  Which is probably what Ron Paul really wants, but is smart enough to say he doesn't.
> 
> The fact that Ron Paul supporters have acted like $#@!s almost non stop since the Summer of 07 is a good thing.  Ron Paul can say for the 100th time "I don't control my supporters" and people will believe him, or should believe him, because it's true.  Ron Paul doesn't tell his supporters to boo at debates, but we do anyway.  People know this.  As long as Ron Paul makes it clear that it's not his thing, he's off the hook.  And that's what Benton just did.  Rand saved his own butt (good job Rand!) by issuing the meaningless Romney endorse, and now Ron is saving his (and Rands) by saying this.


Careful about using the royal "We", sonny.  Not all of us are conservative or GOP.

----------


## Aratus

which taft? potus taft or his son?

----------


## cstarace

...

----------


## MelissaWV

> ...


What... the f...

----------


## low preference guy

> This campaign sure likes to kick its supporters in the crotch.


crushing your balls for liberty.

----------


## newbitech

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.


incomprehensible matt.  the whole plan was to be nominated unconventionally (no pun intended).  Or am I kidding myself in thinking that the campaign actually had the goal of competing or maybe even winning the nomination process? 

As unlikely as it may seem, Ron Paul, by allowing his campaign to be run the way it has been for the last few months is really reversing a ton of momentum in a way that only the campaign and Ron Paul himself can do.  

I'm not really shocked or surprised, but I find it difficult that anyone would seriously consider up until this point that Ron might NOT want to be nominated from the floor.   WHY would they?  

Mixed signals since Iowa.  Just gut wrenching.

----------


## MelissaWV

> Dude's a prick, always has been, always will be. Looks like a sociopath more and more everyday, and Kokesh's story sounds more and more believable.


Upon which you base your assertion that he's beating his wife.

Because he looks like it to you.

Oh that just makes you awesome.

----------


## JacobG18

Well, that's the ball game folks.

----------


## devil21

Thing is, throughout this campaign and the 2008 campaign, Ron has said over and over that he can't control what his supporters do and he doesn't want to control them.  He's said to have fun, he's said to spread the message, he's said to have an impact.  Now at the last minute, once again BENTON, not Ron, comes out to counter all of that and attempt to shut down enthusiasm.  There's no mistaking that the enthusiasm is coming back with the rallies and convention only weeks away and the lawsuit gaining steam.  But Benton sure does pop up with his needle to pop the balloon right on time whenever the enthusiasm is growing leading up to big events.  Sorry but I stopped listening to BENTON a long time ago.  I listen to what Ron himself says.  He's been a liability both campaigns and he's clearly padding his own nest in the process and trying to make a name for himself.  

"Hey folks see?  Im the guy that can kill an opposing populist movement!  Hire ME!"

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Bull$#@!.
> 
> Everybody has been blaming Benton for passing along the official Ron Paul message which comes from Ron Paul.
> 
> Benton isn't off the reservation.  Benton would be fired by now if the things he's been saying weren't what Ron Paul wanted him to say.
> 
> Ron Paul doesn't hate the Republicans as much as many here do.  Ron Paul doesn't want the Republicans to hate him (and Rand).  
> 
> Ron Paul doesn't want to act as if a black swan event (Romney eaten by sharks) is a certainty.  Ron Paul doesn't want to say "it's over, go home now"
> ...


How exactly does our delegates acting like bratty 12 year olds at the convention benefit the movement as a whole?  We're still in the minority, so we should be on our best behavior and carry ourselves with the same restraint and dignity Ron Paul would himself.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> This whole thing is sad.  We need to be rowing together.  Not beating the $#@! out of each other.


I'm rowing the way that actually gets results, electing Thomas Massie and Bentivolio...not the way that encourages our minority number of delegates to through temper tantrums and make our movement the laughing stock of politics and dragging the Paul brand through the mud.

----------


## newbitech

> How exactly does our delegates acting like bratty 12 year olds at the convention benefit the movement as a whole?  We're still in the minority, so we should be on our best behavior and carry ourselves with the same restraint and dignity Ron Paul would himself.


So once we become the majority, THEN can we start flinging feces?

----------


## wgadget

Does anyone else remember Ron saying at the debates, "I don't want to run the economy. I don't want to run your life"?

He's a libertarian. It's his style, it's his essence. But he's also an experienced politician who has won many elections.  Why the heck would he come out telling the whole political-media universe that he's planning to storm the convention? I don't think that would go over well with our beloved GOP. He is still nit saying that his delegates don't have the freedom to play by the rules civilly and nominate him from the floor.

----------


## wgadget

SUPPOSEDLY. Remember, it's just a blog. 




> Thing is, throughout this campaign and the 2008 campaign, Ron has said over and over that he can't control what his supporters do and he doesn't want to control them.  He's said to have fun, he's said to spread the message, he's said to have an impact.  Now at the last minute, once again BENTON, not Ron, comes out to counter all of that and attempt to shut down enthusiasm.  There's no mistaking that the enthusiasm is coming back with the rallies and convention only weeks away and the lawsuit gaining steam.  But Benton sure does pop up with his needle to pop the balloon right on time whenever the enthusiasm is growing leading up to big events.  Sorry but I stopped listening to BENTON a long time ago.  I listen to what Ron himself says.  He's been a liability both campaigns and he's clearly padding his own nest in the process and trying to make a name for himself.  
> 
> "Hey folks see?  Im the guy that can kill an opposing populist movement!  Hire ME!"

----------


## devil21

> How exactly does our delegates acting like bratty 12 year olds at the convention benefit the movement as a whole?  We're still in the minority, so we should be on our best behavior and carry ourselves with the same restraint and dignity Ron Paul would himself.


Odd comment.  I don't understand hardly any of it.  "Restraint" and "dignity" are very different things, as is "best behavior".  Ron Paul is anything but restrained.  He is dignified while being unrestrained though.  That is something our delegates can attain.  You can be dignified while kicking the opposition's ass.  What's my definition of Best Behavior?  Fighting to win.  No one went through the long, expensive process of being elected national delegates just to go to Tampa to sit down and shut up and look pretty.

----------


## parocks

> which taft? potus taft or his son?


I use Robert Taft as a touchstone.  Things are easy to explain from there.  Democrats, Republicans who go along with the new deal, and Republicans who didn't go along with the new deal.  And Ron Paul is probably more similar to Taft than Goldwater.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> My bet is that Ron doesn't want to be nominated, and Jesse is just the messenger of this. 
> 
> Ive come to the conclusion that the Republican party won't change until the old guard dies off. Another 20-30 years is what I'd give it. We are in position to take over then, and damaging the liberty brand only threatens our advances (Rand, Amash, Massie, Bentivolio, etc...) I think Ron realizes he is the Goldwater to the eventual Reagan.
> 
> Not the inspiring 1000 post that I thought I might give. But the truth as I see it.


I see it along those lines, but I think your time scale is off.  Goldwater to Reagan didn't take 30 years.  Information travels quicker now and and Ron to Rand could be coming faster than ever.  Rand is a great campaigner and he will bring a lot of liberty-minded candidates along for the ride in 2016.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Explaining how our foreign policy promotes hatred  and actually hurts America does not make one an al-Qaida sympathizer or  apologist. The reason why "average voters are very ignorant" is because  they do not hear multiple perspectives presented and it is the *duty* of  all politicians to explain and help the public understand how and why  events and atrocities happen, not to coddle us with an agreed upon  rationalization and "theory" repeated enough to become "truth." If we as  adults lack the basic human psychology to handle multiple perspectives  on current events then we don't deserve to be called adults. We deserve  to be called what we are....children, in need of parents and clearly  incapable of understanding citations from any experts.


And that is why you don't work for any campaign now or in the future.

----------


## parocks

> How exactly does our delegates acting like bratty 12 year olds at the convention benefit the movement as a whole?  We're still in the minority, so we should be on our best behavior and carry ourselves with the same restraint and dignity Ron Paul would himself.


Well, "acting like bratty 12 year olds" isn't exactly what I was suggesting.  Of course, you have a point.  We don't have any other modes than "bratty 12 year old".  It would've been nice if we had a "smart" mode.  Where we do something other than chant Ron Paul.  But we don't.  You seem to think that there are 2 choices 1) be nice, which is your suggestion 2) bratty 12 year olds, which is what we do when we're not nice, and 3) something else.  I like 3).  I don't think we have it in us.  Part of 3) includes not hurting Ron Paul.  We don't seem to have any idea of doing anything besides arguing with people about the merits of Ron Paul and Liberty.  And chanting those things.  And there are so many things that we could be doing, that have nothing to do with hyping Ron Paul, and everything to do with hurting Mitt Romney.  Romney seems to think that it's acceptable to try to take away our delegates.  It isn't.  And we should be pussies either.  

How about this.  Whenever someone mentions Israel.  It should happen all the time every day.  Start an Israel chant.  Is-ra-el.  Not boo, and Ron Paul, but Is-ra-el.  Hey, isn't that the kind of enthusiasm that they're looking for?  Oh, sure, it makes Republicans look like fringe, it hurts Mitt Romney, but, hey, you against Israel?

----------


## pacu44

> This campaign has become a circus. They are either playing a great game setting the stage for the future, or a cheating game and screwing all of us. 
> 
> Either way, it's terribly confusing. 
> 
> I don't know who to blame: us, Benton, Dr. Paul...


The latter? I keep getting Romney mail, email and phone calls... Everytime i respond, RON PAUL.

----------


## parocks

> Careful about using the royal "We", sonny.  Not all of us are conservative or GOP.


Oh, I know, there are plenty of people who make no secret about their hatred of Republicans.  They were not helpful.

----------


## newbitech

> Well, "acting like bratty 12 year olds" isn't exactly what I was suggesting.  Of course, you have a point.  We don't have any other modes than "bratty 12 year old".  It would've been nice if we had a "smart" mode.  Where we do something other than chant Ron Paul.  But we don't.  You seem to think that there are 2 choices 1) be nice, which is your suggestion 2) bratty 12 year olds, which is what we do when we're not nice, and 3) something else.  I like 3).  I don't think we have it in us.  Part of 3) includes not hurting Ron Paul.  We don't seem to have any idea of doing anything besides arguing with people about the merits of Ron Paul and Liberty.  And chanting those things.  And there are so many things that we could be doing, that have nothing to do with hyping Ron Paul, and everything to do with hurting Mitt Romney.  Romney seems to think that it's acceptable to try to take away our delegates.  It isn't.  And we should be pussies either.  
> 
> How about this.  Whenever someone mentions Israel.  It should happen all the time every day.  Start an Israel chant.  Is-ra-el.  Not boo, and Ron Paul, but Is-ra-el.  Hey, isn't that the kind of enthusiasm that they're looking for?  Oh, sure, it makes Republicans look like fringe, it hurts Mitt Romney, but, hey, you against Israel?


the whole problem that is trying to be worked out here is that Ron Paul supporters think outside the box.  And I am not talking about the meme of thinking outside the box, I really do mean most of us here, whether we agree, disagree or whatever on any issue, we all pretty much think outside the box.  In fact, we have made that "cool".  I have noticed a big competition welling up of thinking outside the box.  

The problem of course is that when that thinking outside the box starts to introduce "cool" ideas that threaten the status quo, then it becomes a scramble to hurry up and get back inside the box before any one notices who started that cool anti-status quo idea.  

So you end up having half the Ron Paul supporters trying to hurry up and get back inside the box so they can shout something cool and anti-status quo later on, and the other half saying , just stay out of the box and everything you say will be cool!

Well, the way I see it is, half of the one half is wrong and half of the other half is right. 

So Yeah, speak outside the box all the time, but every once in a while, throw a bone to the status quo.  What I mean is, the movement and anyone associated should look for that absolute best time to speak out against the status quo.  In my mind that is when the focus is on the status quo, a la the convention.  

Now is the time to speak out the most heavily against the status quo.  And not just the republican status quo either.  But this movement isn't mature enough to work both sides of the isle.

Hell, the movement isn't even mature enough to understand that the time to throw the bone is in the off years when the focus isn't on the results as much as the focus is on the pandering and coalition building time.  And with that said,

the time to build coalition within the GOP and throw them bones is 2009,2010,2011.  It's 2012, this is when you want to stand fast.  Not buckle at the last minute.  


There absolutely is a 3rd option, and that is to stick with the original goal.  That is, continue doing what has been done to this point.  No one won a delegate slot or any type of position in the GOP by acting like a 12 year old.  Neither did they do that by sucking up.

----------


## eleganz

For those that are claiming that Benton is doing what Ron wants, know for a FACT that Carol Paul publicly stated that Ron did NOT know Rand was going to endorse Romney.  He didn't know until only 30 minutes before Rand was scheduled to say it.

Of course, don't forget Tom Woods' publicly sharing his disappointment with how Benton, "RIPPED my(his) head off" for making suggestions and kicking him out.



And of course, don't forget Penny Freeman publicly sharing Benton's connection to the GOP and his status with the Pauls' as 'idiot of the family'.

And just to bring it full circle (although it shouldn't be taken as seriously as Carol/Tom/Penny's public statements but definitely strengthens the argument).



> From multiple sources: Jesse Benton is target of fed'l investigation, may be fired soon, Dr Paul already ignores at meetings.


And of course, I know many hardworking volunteers who had great ideas who sent them up the chain only to get ignored by the heads because only the heads can have great ideas and only the heads can take credit for them.

----------


## parocks

> Well, that's the ball game folks.


Oh, you thought that we might win in Tampa?  For months now, a win in Tampa REQUIRED multiple Black Swan events.  That's the "Romney eaten by sharks" scenario.  But Romney is still there.  Basically, Romney had to collapse.  And he hasn't.  We should still move forward, because the historical record should include the fact that Maine wants the "don't blame Maine, we voted for Ron Paul" bumper sticker.  We should have that.

And the country clubbers need to know that if they want to $#@! with the Ron Paul people, they're going to get seriously hurt.  Romney thinks that he can be a $#@!, try to ban our delegates.  Make the RNC look like a terrible joke, and do so without hurting Ron Paul in the process.  We have to send a message - do not $#@! with Ron Paul.  Romney had the opportunity months ago to play nice, and decided not to do so.  Now it's time for him to pay the price.

In 1964, George Romney did not play nice.  Rockefeller did not play nice. Scanton did not play nice.  Why should we?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> It is two weeks.  Just wait. Honestly, what imho hurt the movement most and I know you won't like me saying so, is Rand's endorsement.  I had a future for the movement I could get excited about before then.  Now, I may support him in 2016, but I'm not excited.  I know a lot of people who feel the same way.  
> 
> I'm trying to get excited about Amash, and he's helping me out, daily....
> 
> I apparently don't work like you do.  I need a living symbol of what I'm fighting for as a focus, apparently.  I can then support more watered down incremental candidates who are a step towards that ideal, but it is the ideal that keeps me excited, and the principled candidate, even if he isn't 'winning an election' that keeps me involved.


Well I just hope our people don't jeopardize the great work Ron has done over the years and throw it all away acting the fool on the convention floor.  Let's flex our muscle in a respectful way and start a dialogue with others.  I've seen that have tremendous positive results, especially when party people expected us to be ranting and raving, but we didn't; we were calm and focused and we did our homework and knew our stuff when discussing the issues.  

Rand knows how to play the game of politics better than anyone on this forum, after all he got elected overwhelmingly in Kentucky which isn't exactly a hotbed of libertarian thought or activism.  He also fought against and defeated the McConnell machine, which was unprecedented.  He's our most successful and highest ranking liberty candidate.  He's obviously doing something right in that regard.  We hold Rand to these unrealistic standards because we're just anonymous posters on an internet forum, but he's a United States Senator now with Presidential ambitions (we hope) so the rules of the game and how you play it are slightly different for someone in his position.  It's a tight balancing act Rand is doing and its obvious many don't appreciate the subtlety, even though it is for the ultimate benefit of the liberty movement as a whole.  Nonetheless, it has to be done this way if we are to succeed.

----------


## eleganz

^^^ loool Rand and his political savvy did not win his senate seat....

The grassroots did....were you even around for the Kentucky race?

Moneybombs and the phone-system won, his victory was powered by us.  The phone-system is what made us strong in caucus states.

----------


## jay_dub

> would america be in shock if rand paul called for a most patriotic audit on our vast maze of complexities that is our pentagon????
> we may see america being educated by the choises that are open to us as free people, if we think this all through most logically.


Rumsfeld was asking about a couple of trillion missing over there on Sept. 10, 2001. There doesn't seem to be much interest since then.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> ^^^ loool Rand and his political savvy did not win his senate seat....
> 
> The grassroots did....were you even around for the Kentucky race?


Yes, I was.

It took both.  But, if Rand had not run a great race, it wouldn't have mattered how much help the grassroots were.

----------


## thoughtomator

> I see it along those lines, but I think your time scale is off.  Goldwater to Reagan didn't take 30 years.  Information travels quicker now and and Ron to Rand could be coming faster than ever.  Rand is a great campaigner and he will bring a lot of liberty-minded candidates along for the ride in 2016.


The question is will Rand talk the talk without walking the walk like Reagan did?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> For those that are claiming that Benton is doing what Ron wants, know for a FACT that Carol Paul publicly stated that Ron did NOT know Rand was going to endorse Romney until only 30 minutes before he was scheduled to say it.
> 
> Of course, don't forget Tom Woods' publicly sharing his disappointment in the way Benton handled the campaign:
> 
> And of course, don't forget Penny Freeman publicly sharing Benton's connection to the GOP and his status with the Pauls' as 'idiot of the family'.
> 
> And just to bring it full circle (although it shouldn't be taken as seriously as Carol/Tom/Penny's public statements but definitely strengthens the argument).


Seriously, what do you think you are doing?  Do you think you are helping anything by posting this?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> The question is will Rand talk the talk without walking the walk like Reagan did?


Rand has already done a lot more walking the walk than Reagan ever did.

----------


## moostraks

> How about this.  Whenever someone mentions Israel.  It should happen all the time every day.  Start an Israel chant.  Is-ra-el.  Not boo, and Ron Paul, but Is-ra-el.  Hey, isn't that the kind of enthusiasm that they're looking for?  Oh, sure, it makes Republicans look like fringe, it hurts Mitt Romney, but, hey, you against Israel?


now this would be interesting to see....

----------


## eleganz

> Seriously, what do you think you are doing?  Do you think you are helping anything by posting this?


We have several veteran RPF members coming out and saying how Benton is doing what Ron wants and how all opposing views is ignorance of the facts.  Well, I'm proving them wrong.

The truth bomb wasn't for you, and obviously you don't want it to be.

----------


## TrishW

It really doesn't matter what we decide on this forum.  Our people have done themselves proud at all the caucus and conventions. I don't see any reason why this will not continue.  Tampa is going to be cool!  As much as Romney wants to be the only player, its a fact... he's not!  So have fun!!

----------


## parocks

Ron Paul supporters typically DON'T think outside the box.  Many are simply antiwar protesters who enjoy chanting.  And, on average, they might want the right thing, but they aren't smarter than Romney supporters.  Holding signs, chanting Ron Paul is something that we did in 2007, and we do in 2012.  I'd say that we were thinking outside the box in October-November 2007.  After the Tea Party, not much.  We just have different preferences, and we're more passionate because typically we don't have a Presidential candidate to get excited about.

The way we should proceed (or, more accurately, we should've started 2 months ago, because everything is going pretty much the way one would predict, but now it's pretty much too late unless people have been working on it) is say either A) we get what we want or B) we wreck the convention.

2 months ago it was pretty hard to predict exactly how bad Romney would be to us.  And he's been terrible.  Romneys behavior deserves a serious response.  If he had just said "fine, whatever, we'll win, it doesn't matter" we wouldn't be so pissed off.  But he decided to be an $#@! unnecessarily.  

The question is - does Ron Paul name get put in nomination?  If so, and if Maine, Minnesota, Iowa, etc., place Ron Paul votes, we won't be pissed.  If Maine is not for Ron Paul with the votes, then we will be pissed, and we should be bringing the pain.

And bringing the pain does not mean chanting Ron Paul.  At all.  We are pissed off delegates who didn't get to vote for who the voters wanted us to vote for. 

If you do A, you get X, if you do B, you get Y.




> the whole problem that is trying to be worked out here is that Ron Paul supporters think outside the box.  And I am not talking about the meme of thinking outside the box, I really do mean most of us here, whether we agree, disagree or whatever on any issue, we all pretty much think outside the box.  In fact, we have made that "cool".  I have noticed a big competition welling up of thinking outside the box.  
> 
> The problem of course is that when that thinking outside the box starts to introduce "cool" ideas that threaten the status quo, then it becomes a scramble to hurry up and get back inside the box before any one notices who started that cool anti-status quo idea.  
> 
> So you end up having half the Ron Paul supporters trying to hurry up and get back inside the box so they can shout something cool and anti-status quo later on, and the other half saying , just stay out of the box and everything you say will be cool!
> 
> Well, the way I see it is, half of the one half is wrong and half of the other half is right. 
> 
> So Yeah, speak outside the box all the time, but every once in a while, throw a bone to the status quo.  What I mean is, the movement and anyone associated should look for that absolute best time to speak out against the status quo.  In my mind that is when the focus is on the status quo, a la the convention.  
> ...

----------


## freedomordeath

I haven't read whole thread, but here is my take on it.

America is a REPUBLIC NOT A DEMOCRACY.... so when you meet up in your area, poeple that live in your street that know each other by name come together and *select a representitive (delegate) a person they trust to DO THE RIGHT THING.*

This responsiblity as a delegate MUST BE TAKEN FCKING SERIOUSLY (excuse language). If you are gona bitch and moan then you should not have taken the job. You are not a walking fixed vote bot, you are a living breathing precious entity with a huge responsibilty to use the thing between your ears to make the correct decision as the process goes along on behalf of the people you represent. *As the circumstances change, the poeple you represent TRUST YOU TO MAKE THE RIGHT DESCION.*

If you feel as a delegate the right decision is to vote for Ron Paul THEN YOU FCKING DO IT. Esp if you have an Isreal firster like Mitt Romney wanting to send living breathing American beings to die in senseless wars. If he refuses the nomination you can go back to your street with your head held high and have a good sleep because you did the right thing... you DID YOUR FCKING JOB.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> We have several veteran RPF members coming out and saying how Benton is doing what Ron wants and how all opposing views is ignorance of the facts.  Well, I'm proving them wrong.
> 
> The truth bomb wasn't for you, and obviously you don't want it to be.


Thing is, most of what you posted was hearsay and last time I checked, Tom Woods, as much as I respect him, doesn't know jack about winning elections.  Publicly smearing one of our own guys is, in my opinion, really skimming the bottom of the pond.  It is beneath this movement and you know as well as I do that neither Ron or Carol Paul would agree with it being done.  We are better than this.  Come on.

----------


## freedomordeath

Lets support our delegates, prosecute the fraud and work with what we can control and let the side show sort itself out....

----------


## eleganz

> Thing is, most of what you posted was hearsay and last time I checked, Tom Woods, as much as I respect him, doesn't know jack about winning elections.  Publicly smearing one of our own guys is, in my opinion, really skimming the bottom of the pond.  It is beneath this movement and you know as well as I do that neither Ron or Carol Paul would agree with it being done.  We are better than this.  Come on.


The fact that you consider Benton as one of our own is really good for you.   I just don't agree with that.

You see a rat, you call him out, we've had a lot of experience with calling out rats here in our own Los Angeles grassroots group.

I know what I've done for this campaign and everything I've experienced about Benton, it all adds up.  If you don't like it, don't respond to it.

Carol Paul, in her own words said that Ron was not involved in Rand's endorsement, they kept him in the dark up until 30 minutes before the announcement.

I don't need a lecture from you and you don't need a lecture from me.

----------


## coffeewithchess

> Carol Paul, in her own words said that Ron was not involved in Rand's endorsement, they kept him in the dark up until 30 minutes before the announcement.


Where was this said? The only interview I have heard, was where she said Rand didn't talk to her about it. Do you have a link for it? I would like to hear it.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> The fact that you consider Benton as one of our own is really good for you.   I just don't agree with that.
> 
> You see a rat, you call him out, we've had a lot of experience with calling out rats here in our own Los Angeles grassroots group.
> 
> I know what I've done for this campaign and everything I've experienced about Benton, it all adds up.  If you don't like it, don't respond to it.
> 
> Carol Paul, in her own words said that Ron was not involved in Rand's endorsement, they kept him in the dark up until 30 minutes before the announcement.
> 
> I don't need a lecture from you and you don't need a lecture from me.


Eleganz, all I am saying is that you should have FACTS before going off smearing someone.  Not hearsay.  But, if you want to do that, there's not a thing I can do about it.

----------


## wgadget

Mama always said there'd be threads like this...

----------


## JacobG18

> Oh, you thought that we might win in Tampa?  For months now, a win in Tampa REQUIRED multiple Black Swan events.  That's the "Romney eaten by sharks" scenario.  But Romney is still there.  Basically, Romney had to collapse.  And he hasn't.  We should still move forward, because the historical record should include the fact that Maine wants the "don't blame Maine, we voted for Ron Paul" bumper sticker.  We should have that.
> 
> And the country clubbers need to know that if they want to $#@! with the Ron Paul people, they're going to get seriously hurt.  Romney thinks that he can be a $#@!, try to ban our delegates.  Make the RNC look like a terrible joke, and do so without hurting Ron Paul in the process.  We have to send a message - do not $#@! with Ron Paul.  Romney had the opportunity months ago to play nice, and decided not to do so.  Now it's time for him to pay the price.
> 
> In 1964, George Romney did not play nice.  Rockefeller did not play nice. Scanton did not play nice.  Why should we?


No I did not think that, I was just saying that's is it for this round. You don't have to play nice if you don't want to, go for their throat if you can.

----------


## parocks

> now this would be interesting to see....


Wouldn't it though?  

Wouldn't Ron Paul supporters saying over the top ridiculous things, praise, of Romney, be fun too.

"I like Rick Santorum, but I'm supporting Mitt Romney now, because Obama hasn't killed enough Muslims."  

All of these fun talking points should (ve) been developed a while ago, without any input from the official campaign because there's no way Ron Paul could officially authorize this stuff.  We're there, and if we're screwed, we have lots of fun.

"Well, I'm rich, so I support Romney.  I'm also old, so I'm hoping that society doesn't collapse before I'm dead.  I think that if I was younger, I'd support Ron Paul, because he seems to care about the collapse.  But, again, I'm old and"I'm rich, so Romney's perfectly fine with me.  He understands the needs of old, rich people, and he'll be able to keep things going just long enough for me."

"Well, I'm for open borders, because I really need gardeners, and Americans won't work for what I want to pay. The social costs are not my problem."

And this goes on TV, the time Americans are paying attention.

Our delegates are Actors.

----------


## sailingaway

> Lets support our delegates, prosecute the fraud and work with what we can control and let the side show sort itself out....


this, let's be constructive.  I haven't looked at the last 15 pages or so, because I'm working on projects today, but this stands out as a good approach, imho.

----------


## parocks

> No I did not think that, I was just saying that's is it for this round. You don't have to play nice if you don't want to, go for their throat if you can.


We should still have the vote, and Maine should still be saying 20 or 21 votes for Ron Paul.

We should be have a reason for them not to $#@! with us, and that's our ability to make the convention our own little tv show that amuses us.

Write sketches, have the delegates perform roles in the sketches, videotape the sketches, put them on youtube.

----------


## freedomordeath

> Where was this said? The only interview I have heard, was where she said Rand didn't talk to her about it. Do you have a link for it? I would like to hear it.


I saw that interview, Carol siad he is a grown man with kids and can't control what he does.

----------


## freedomordeath

This is what we up against... saw this on dailypaul. 26 standing ovations, 26 standing ovations, and poeple get into a hissy fit when someone says something they don't like despite knowing what awesome power we up against, the power to create a prison for your mind... Take responsibilty for your own actions and lets support our delegates, thats all that matters now until TAMPA, after TAMPA we still got time for tactics.

I personally don't care what Isreal does, I'm not anti-Isreal simply pro American and what it stands for as per founding fathers.

----------


## VanBummel

Ron Paul has always had a vote for who you want / support who you want / do what you want attitude, and I don't believe that has changed after all these years.

Forget the "Fire Jesse Benton" movement, point me to the "Tar and Feather Jesse Benton" movement.

----------


## parocks

> Rumsfeld was asking about a couple of trillion missing over there on Sept. 10, 2001. There doesn't seem to be much interest since then.


see: Dov Zacheim, now a Romney advisor.

----------


## newbitech

> Ron Paul supporters typically DON'T think outside the box.  Many are simply antiwar protesters who enjoy chanting.  And, on average, they might want the right thing, but they aren't smarter than Romney supporters.  Holding signs, chanting Ron Paul is something that we did in 2007, and we do in 2012.  I'd say that we were thinking outside the box in October-November 2007.  After the Tea Party, not much.  We just have different preferences, and we're more passionate because typically we don't have a Presidential candidate to get excited about.
> 
> The way we should proceed (or, more accurately, we should've started 2 months ago, because everything is going pretty much the way one would predict, but now it's pretty much too late unless people have been working on it) is say either A) we get what we want or B) we wreck the convention.
> 
> 2 months ago it was pretty hard to predict exactly how bad Romney would be to us.  And he's been terrible.  Romneys behavior deserves a serious response.  If he had just said "fine, whatever, we'll win, it doesn't matter" we wouldn't be so pissed off.  But he decided to be an $#@! unnecessarily.  
> 
> The question is - does Ron Paul name get put in nomination?  If so, and if Maine, Minnesota, Iowa, etc., place Ron Paul votes, we won't be pissed.  If Maine is not for Ron Paul with the votes, then we will be pissed, and we should be bringing the pain.
> 
> And bringing the pain does not mean chanting Ron Paul.  At all.  We are pissed off delegates who didn't get to vote for who the voters wanted us to vote for. 
> ...


I think your characterization of the typical Ron Paul supporter is a little off base from where I am sitting.  What fraction of Ron Paul supporters do you know that participated in sign waves?  I will say this, in the 2008 cycle the ratio of sign wavers to voters was much higher, and personally, the majority of Ron Paul voters I know aren't the sign waving types.  

I am not sure how you have come to your conclusion, but I think you may want to reevaluate that box we were talking about.  For the most part, I have learned that trying to put all the individual parts of this movement into the same box usually ends up being a mistake.  It's just that you have to be so careful not to classify Ron Paul supporters.  That is what confounds the media and the GOP in particular.  

I think you also have a bad read on the passion.  I would say that the passion is driven more by people hearing a message that has been in their hearts but suppressed since childhood.  Simply, it's the message of truth.  It's like putting on a pair of glasses and seeing 20/20 for the first time in your life.  The world as you knew it is just not the same and that is exciting!  You want to share that and find out more about it, basically you want to see it all, again for the first time. 

That is more of a passion driver than simply having a candidate to get excited about.  There are plenty of people excited about their candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.  Romney's not having a problem at all raising money and drawing big crowds of sign wavers and chanters.  I think that is the more typical type you are describing.  These people aren't thinking outside the box.  Just look at the ideas spawned from the Ron Paul grassroots.  Look at how individuals who support the message of liberty how found ways to spread the message despite concerted moneyed interests to stop it.  

SO yes, I believe overwhelmingly that the Ron Paul inspired movement is the driver in making dissident activism "cool".  And I don't mean this in the immature sense.  I mean this is the extremely focused action of not only raising awareness of things like the secrecy of the Federal Reserve, but of actually driving those same flag wavers, Romney is the man, people to not only think "outside the box" but to reject the box altogether.  It is cool now to question the authority of money.  That's a big problem that is not going away with Ron Paul or his campaign.  There are so much more on the local level like that.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Well, "acting like bratty 12 year olds" isn't exactly what I was suggesting.  Of course, you have a point.  We don't have any other modes than "bratty 12 year old".  It would've been nice if we had a "smart" mode.  Where we do something other than chant Ron Paul.  But we don't.  You seem to think that there are 2 choices 1) be nice, which is your suggestion 2) bratty 12 year olds, which is what we do when we're not nice, and 3) something else.  I like 3).  I don't think we have it in us.  Part of 3) includes not hurting Ron Paul.  We don't seem to have any idea of doing anything besides arguing with people about the merits of Ron Paul and Liberty.  And chanting those things.  And there are so many things that we could be doing, that have nothing to do with hyping Ron Paul, and everything to do with hurting Mitt Romney.  Romney seems to think that it's acceptable to try to take away our delegates.  It isn't.  And we should be pussies either.  
> 
> How about this.  Whenever someone mentions Israel.  It should happen all the time every day.  Start an Israel chant.  Is-ra-el.  Not boo, and Ron Paul, but Is-ra-el.  Hey, isn't that the kind of enthusiasm that they're looking for?  Oh, sure, it makes Republicans look like fringe, it hurts Mitt Romney, but, hey, you against Israel?


How about buy your time and play the game smarter.  This is just the beginning.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> ^^^ loool Rand and his political savvy did not win his senate seat....
> 
> The grassroots did....were you even around for the Kentucky race?
> 
> Moneybombs and the phone-system won, his victory was powered by us.  The phone-system is what made us strong in caucus states.


By that token Ron Paul should've won the state of Kentucky because of pure grassroots involvement.  Fact of the matter is Kentucky was one of our worst states in 2008, which isn't too surprising, since the south is our weakest region.  Rand won in the south because he's a great candidate, outstanding communicator, and tireless campaigner.  Grassroots and money play a major part, but only once you have the first three criteria in place.

----------


## Revolution9

> see: Dov Zacheim, now a Romney advisor.


Great. The Rabbi behind a three trillion dollar transfer of funds to Israeli banks.

Revb9

----------


## sailingaway

> By that token Ron Paul should've won the state of Kentucky because of pure grassroots involvement.  Fact of the matter is Kentucky was one of our worst states in 2008, which isn't too surprising, since the south is our weakest region.  Rand won in the south because he's a great candidate, outstanding communicator, and tireless campaigner.  Grassroots and money play a major part, but only once you have the first three criteria in place.


No, Rand is more of a traditional 'southern conservative', it was that PLUS grass roots. All the same if KY had happened when Iowa did and if Ron put the same personal time into KY as Rand did, and got the same favorable media treatment in the primary as Rand generally did (they turned on him only in the general), I think Ron would have done pretty well there.

----------


## Aratus

the media eased up on rand initially because they thought trey grayson was a shoe-in

----------


## anaconda

> would this guy just shut the $#@! up?


I'm not a Benton hater, but what the heck is going on, here? Benton is starting to try my patience...

----------


## anaconda

> The question is will Rand talk the talk without walking the walk like Reagan did?


Ronald "raise the debt ceiling 18 times" Reagan.

----------


## parocks

> I think your characterization of the typical Ron Paul supporter is a little off base from where I am sitting.  What fraction of Ron Paul supporters do you know that participated in sign waves?  I will say this, in the 2008 cycle the ratio of sign wavers to voters was much higher, and personally, the majority of Ron Paul voters I know aren't the sign waving types.  
> 
> I am not sure how you have come to your conclusion, but I think you may want to reevaluate that box we were talking about.  For the most part, I have learned that trying to put all the individual parts of this movement into the same box usually ends up being a mistake.  It's just that you have to be so careful not to classify Ron Paul supporters.  That is what confounds the media and the GOP in particular.  
> 
> I think you also have a bad read on the passion.  I would say that the passion is driven more by people hearing a message that has been in their hearts but suppressed since childhood.  Simply, it's the message of truth.  It's like putting on a pair of glasses and seeing 20/20 for the first time in your life.  The world as you knew it is just not the same and that is exciting!  You want to share that and find out more about it, basically you want to see it all, again for the first time. 
> 
> That is more of a passion driver than simply having a candidate to get excited about.  There are plenty of people excited about their candidates Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.  Romney's not having a problem at all raising money and drawing big crowds of sign wavers and chanters.  I think that is the more typical type you are describing.  These people aren't thinking outside the box.  Just look at the ideas spawned from the Ron Paul grassroots.  Look at how individuals who support the message of liberty how found ways to spread the message despite concerted moneyed interests to stop it.  
> 
> SO yes, I believe overwhelmingly that the Ron Paul inspired movement is the driver in making dissident activism "cool".  And I don't mean this in the immature sense.  I mean this is the extremely focused action of not only raising awareness of things like the secrecy of the Federal Reserve, but of actually driving those same flag wavers, Romney is the man, people to not only think "outside the box" but to reject the box altogether.  It is cool now to question the authority of money.  That's a big problem that is not going away with Ron Paul or his campaign.  There are so much more on the local level like that.


Well, the delegates are not likely to be the sign wavers, too.  And you're certainly correct that we aren't talking about the majority here. 

In Maine, we won without doing much of the sign waving.  I'd say we just had the numbers.  Prior to the caucuses there was a feeling that we would be better off if we didn't do any extra hyping of Ron Paul.  There was no desire for sign waves and that type of thing, freelance, grassroots.  Basically, it did have the feel of a campaign, where people behaved appropriately, throughout the entire process.  But there is that "grassroots" element as well.  The Maine delegates that I voted for who won are going to behave appropriately, I'd assume.  And you're right about the difference between 08 and 12.

----------


## parocks

> How about buy your time and play the game smarter.  This is just the beginning.


Well, if they $#@! us, I would think that the appropriate response is to hurt Mitt Romney while minimizing blowback.

----------


## Badger Paul

I guess will just have to nominate him anyway.

----------


## Badger Paul

_"Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron. This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory. "_

So what? Have "y'all" considered a lot of people worked their arses off to get to Tampa for express purpose of actually NOMINATING RON PAUL? Is this how you're going to reward those efforts, by forcing them to be a part of the big Romney/Ryan production? Screw that.  

I don't care what you and Rand or Jesse or Jack or Trygve or anyone else in the upper echelon of the campaign does anymore. Go play croquet with the Romney sons on their manor lawn if that makes you feel important. The individual state delegations are now running the show and they aren't taking any orders from "up top" now that they know this "deal" was all about a campaign video. They fought their way to get to Tampa and don't need your help, especially when you fellows sit on a three million dollar kitty and won't even help said delegates with expenses to this Nuremburg Rally you wish us to partake in. 

This isn't about the Pauls anymore. It's about what they stand for, which is a hell a lot more important than your bloody ego or your "status" in the political world. You don't wanna fight? Fine, go away. We don't need you anymore. Go stand on the sidelines and look like you're doing something productive while those who earned their way to the convention do a little conventioneering instead being sheep in a pen thank you very much.

----------


## Badger Paul

You wanna party with Mitt, you go right ahead. Those who want a real convention instead of a party will carry on.

----------


## parocks

> _"Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron. This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory. "_
> 
> So what? Have "y'all" considered a lot of people worked their arses off to get to Tampa for express purpose of actually NOMINATING RON PAUL? Is this how you're going to reward those efforts, by forcing them to be a part of the big Romney/Ryan production? Screw that.  
> 
> I don't care what you and Rand or Jesse or Jack or Trygve or anyone else in the upper echelon of the campaign does anymore. Go play croquet with the Romney sons on their manor lawn if that makes you feel important. The individual state delegations are now running the show and they aren't taking any orders from "up top" now that they know this "deal" was all about a campaign video. They fought their way to get to Tampa and don't need your help, especially when you fellows sit on a three million dollar kitty and won't even help said delegates with expenses to this Nuremburg Rally you wish us to partake in. 
> 
> This isn't about the Pauls anymore. It's about what they stand for, which is a hell a lot more important than your bloody ego or your "status" in the political world. You don't wanna fight? Fine, go away. We don't need you anymore. Go stand on the sidelines and look like you're doing something productive while those who earned their way to the convention do a little conventioneering instead being sheep in a pen thank you very much.


I think RP wants the delegates to do their thing.  He just can't say it.  And we should understand this.  So he's saying he's not planning anything.  But he has just got to expect that we're going to do what we're intending to do.  If he tells the delegates explicitly not to do it, that's a different story.

----------


## Badger Paul

To me it's not a question of winning or losing. It's question of reaching the end of a journey. That's why RP's nomination is important,  because it's one of the few things in a convention that isn't scripted anymore. What many have fought against over the past five years are people who don't want "democracy" in political party. They want it as their perpetual little social club. The GOP is the Kiwanis or the Lions club in their view. That's not what its about. Getting nominated is the first part of breaking that mentality which will ultimately benefit the Liberty Movement in the years to come.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Well, if they $#@! us, I would think that the appropriate response is to hurt Mitt Romney while minimizing blowback.


Define "$#@! us"?  Nobody in their right mind says we have the numbers for the nomination.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> No, Rand is more of a traditional 'southern conservative', it was that PLUS grass roots. All the same if KY had happened when Iowa did and if Ron put the same personal time into KY as Rand did, and got the same favorable media treatment in the primary as Rand generally did (they turned on him only in the general), I think Ron would have done pretty well there.


No.  Rand is 1000 X the campaigner and 1000 X the communicator Ron is.  That is just a fact.  Rand's message got through to the electorate.  It took time and Rand was a blip in the early polling, but Rand campaigned in every inch of Kentucky, put on major mileage on his SUV.

----------


## ONUV

is there going to be some drama at the convention? that's the only way i'll watch.

----------


## affa

Neither Romney nor Obama will even come close to fixing this country.  In fact, both will further destroy it, causing us to fall deeper into debt, continuing the endless wars, stripping us of our liberties, furthering the downfall of everything this country once stood for.

and if we can't get Ron Paul in office -- what with our grassroots, the energy, the viral videos, the pure excitement and passion Ron Paul created in our country... then I weep for our country.  Because if we can't do it now, it's not going to get done.   Not in 2016, not in 2020, not anytime... because they'll only be that much more prepared to deal with the next 'Ron Paul' that comes along, if one ever does.

It sickens me that we're expected to settle down, and shut up, and get in line, as not just 2012, but our very future as a country crumbles in front of us.   Screw that.   

Nominate him from the floor.   Let him speak.  Let him speak, because then  every man and women at that convention that hears him speak truth to power, and then goes on to vote for Romney, will one day look back and realize they betrayed their country, betrayed their fellow man, and betrayed liberty.    

And maybe, just maybe, a miracle happens. Because you know what?  We need one.  This country, and the rest of the world, really needs one.

----------


## parocks

> Neither Romney nor Obama will even come close to fixing this country.  In fact, both will further destroy it, causing us to fall deeper into debt, continuing the endless wars, stripping us of our liberties, furthering the downfall of everything this country once stood for.
> 
> and if we can't get Ron Paul in office -- what with our grassroots, the energy, the viral videos, the pure excitement and passion Ron Paul created in our country... then I weep for our country.  Because if we can't do it now, it's not going to get done.   Not in 2016, not in 2020, not anytime... because they'll only be that much more prepared to deal with the next 'Ron Paul' that comes along, if one ever does.
> 
> It sickens me that we're expected to settle down, and shut up, and get in line, as not just 2012, but our very future as a country crumbles in front of us.   Screw that.   
> 
> Nominate him from the floor.   Let him speak.  Let him speak, because then  every man and women at that convention that hears him speak truth to power, and then goes on to vote for Romney, will one day look back and realize they betrayed their country, betrayed their fellow man, and betrayed liberty.    
> 
> And maybe, just maybe, a miracle happens. Because you know what?  We need one.  This country, and the rest of the world, really needs one.


I wouldn't worry quite so much, although you might be right.  Your assessment of our strengths is off the mark.  No, we weren't as mighty as you think.  Much of that effort was wasted.  You can argue that they'll be better prepared to deal with it, but they didn't have to try very hard.  We won 0 primaries, and you really don't get the nomination when you win 0 primaries.  You can pick up delegates in caucus states, and we did.  But you really have to win primaries, too, and get some of those delegates.  We wouldn't seen something different from msm if Ron Paul actually was close to winning.  And it wouldn't have been nice at all.

There are other considerations as well.  Ron Paul is 76.  That didn't help.  Not a Senator or a Governor but a US Rep, that's a factor.  There's a conservative wing of the republican party.  Sometimes a conservative gets the nomination.  The eastern establishment wing didn't like Taft, Goldwater, Reagan, Buchanan, Paul.  They use the same methods against all of them.  Sometimes they do win.

----------


## NorfolkPCSolutions

> Matt. It doesn't matter if we nominate him from the floor or not. The fact of the matter is the campaign isn't even doing squat to get the delegates we spent hard time, money, blood, sweat, and tears on to secure. Benton is making it impossible to even influence the platform! This isn't just about nominating from the floor. In many ways, the official campaign has been our own worst enemy...next to the RNC.


For truth.

----------


## torchbearer

> I'm confused.. Im pretty sure Jesse doesn't say anything that Dr. Paul doesn't approve of.. So Are you guys pretty much telling Ron to stfu?


Jesse has lied previous, especially when talking about how the RNC is welcoming us with open arms. i don't think ron is that involved with the campaign.

----------


## airborne373

Ron nor Rand Paul was ever going to 'save us." We must do this one person and one action at a time for as long as it takes. Start by changing your life today, ask yourself what can you do that will improve and strengthen your material prima while weakening the criminal conspiracy that infects this nation.

----------


## moostraks

> No.  Rand is 1000 X the campaigner and 1000 X the communicator Ron is.  That is just a fact.  Rand's message got through to the electorate.  It took time and Rand was a blip in the early polling, but Rand campaigned in every inch of Kentucky, put on major mileage on his SUV.


There is a difference regarding age and the area to be covered (state vs. national). There is also a difference in what they appear to view as the mission they are on. I do not think Rand will fair well on the national stage either. You can speak their language all you want to but you really have to sell your soul to make it to be the President.

----------


## ChristianAnarchist

Time to wise up to a certain FACT that many in the liberty movement don't get (but I think the founders were in touch...).

NOBODY'S PERFECT !!!   Not me, not you not Benton, not Ron Paul...  This movement will ultimately succeed or we will be slaves.  Technology gives the ultimate power to a few well connected people unless we counteract it while we can.  Will there be a 2016??  I don't know but we have to work as if there will be and if there isn't, we need to adapt to other methods.  

ONE THING IS CERTAIN, the end of the FRN is right around the corner and when the collapse comes, we need to have enough power to pick up the pieces and get the multitude on the same page.  Liberty or slavery are the only two possible resolutions.

Now stop bickering and picking apart the mistakes of your allies and start to focus on the enemy.

----------


## BestVirginia

> Great. The Rabbi behind a three trillion dollar transfer of funds to Israeli banks.
> 
> Revb9



Incorrect. The money has been accounted for since 2007:

"On February 20th, 2002, Gerry J. Gilmore of the American Forces Press Service reported that, "DoD financial experts, Zakheim said, are making good progress reconciling the department's "lost" expenditures, trimming them from a prior estimated total of $2.3 trillion to $700 billion. And, he added, the amount continues to drop.""

----------


## cmo4ever

$#@! this guy. No other words. 

 I'm going to the Rally in Tampa, and I'll be outside the convention, not to cheer Romney on, but to burn the GOP to the $#@!ing ground this election cycle and remake it after November. As is the party is corrupt and unchangeable. This summer has reinforced that opinion, that the whole thing is just totally broken. I'm writing in Ron Paul in November, and nothing Jesse Benton says can change that.

I hope Ron realizes the movement is no longer in his control. 

There really is not all that much time till the economy defaults, and the police state laws in place will become effective. I hope alot of you realize we are near the end of peaceful solutions to government, so why pussy-foot around and try the "bide our time" approach. There is no time. Ron Paul was and is the last gasp chance for America before the Police State happens. Politics is no longer the solution after this cycle.

----------


## Revolution9

> Incorrect. The money has been accounted for since 2007:
> 
> "On February 20th, 2002, Gerry J. Gilmore of the American Forces Press Service reported that, "DoD financial experts, Zakheim said, are making good progress reconciling the department's "lost" expenditures, trimming them from a prior estimated total of $2.3 trillion to $700 billion. And, he added, the amount continues to drop.""


A likely story. Only 700 billion missing. Oh..well that's OK then..heh

Rev9

----------


## Romulus

> I would put good money on it. Ron is getting old and I believe he wants us to mesh with the GOP and over time bring it back to what it was and should be. I believe Ron does not want to see his movement destroy the GOP. He want to leave peacefully and is doing what he thinks is the right thing to do to achieve this.
> 
> We did not win people. But we made good inroads and if we play are cards right maybe can move onwards and upwards from this point. 
> 
> I play to win. I wanted to win. But we need to understand that Ron will not be the next prezz and be rational about how we move forward. 
> 
> It sucks but I think Ron wants it to be over and does not know how to let some of his supporters know that it is.
> 
> He does not want to crush his movement or the GOP. Maybe thats not possible, I don't know.


We don't like to hear it but I agree with this and think it's true... Ron has been a R for his life... that is the way he view victory.. to change the hearts and minds and build the R party.... as much as we hate that.

----------


## sailingaway

this was posted at daily paul by a national delegate as a response to Benton's comment.

----------


## sailingaway

> A likely story. Only 700 billion missing. Oh..well that's OK then..heh
> 
> Rev9


and the legislative response was to change the law so the entire Pentagon is no longer audited, so of course we can't check his numbers.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> There is a difference regarding age and the area to be covered (state vs. national). There is also a difference in what they appear to view as the mission they are on. I do not think Rand will fair well on the national stage either. You can speak their language all you want to *but you really have to sell your soul to make it to be the President.*


 I believe this is true.

----------


## sailingaway

> $#@! this guy. No other words. 
> 
>  I'm going to the Rally in Tampa, and I'll be outside the convention, not to cheer Romney on, but to burn the GOP to the $#@!ing ground this election cycle and remake it after November. As is the party is corrupt and unchangeable. This summer has reinforced that opinion, that the whole thing is just totally broken. I'm writing in Ron Paul in November, and nothing Jesse Benton says can change that.
> 
> I hope Ron realizes the movement is no longer in his control. 
> 
> There really is not all that much time till the economy defaults, and the police state laws in place will become effective. I hope alot of you realize we are near the end of peaceful solutions to government, so why pussy-foot around and try the "bide our time" approach. There is no time. Ron Paul was and is the last gasp chance for America before the Police State happens. Politics is no longer the solution after this cycle.


I honestly think that the most Ron might be doing is not fighting against the campaign, maybe convinced himself that he can't be nominated from the floor or we wouldn't want to. His Texas speech - in fact everything I have seen HIM say still looked like he was in it for whatever he could get, just that at the end he didn't think it would be as much as he had previously hoped.

I hope the delegates don't get sweet talked or pressured into not nominating Ron from the floor. If we have the numbers, that would be ridiculous.

----------


## jbauer

Well screw the campaign.  The question I ask is did we waste a bunch of time and money on all this?

----------


## cajuncocoa

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but ever since Rand's endorsement (and the stated reasons for said endorsement: setting up for 2016), I've been thinking that Ron would need to pull back on making waves at the RNC in Tampa.  If Ron's delegates make it difficult for Romney, the RNC will double down on making it difficult for Rand going forward.  They probably won't even let him win back his Senate seat.  

If y'all think about it, you should have been expecting this if you accept the conventional wisdom behind Rand's endorsement.

----------


## JK/SEA

> _"Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron. This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory. "_
> 
> So what? Have "y'all" considered a lot of people worked their arses off to get to Tampa for express purpose of actually NOMINATING RON PAUL? Is this how you're going to reward those efforts, by forcing them to be a part of the big Romney/Ryan production? Screw that.  
> 
> I don't care what you and Rand or Jesse or Jack or Trygve or anyone else in the upper echelon of the campaign does anymore. Go play croquet with the Romney sons on their manor lawn if that makes you feel important. The individual state delegations are now running the show and they aren't taking any orders from "up top" now that they know this "deal" was all about a campaign video. They fought their way to get to Tampa and don't need your help, especially when you fellows sit on a three million dollar kitty and won't even help said delegates with expenses to this Nuremburg Rally you wish us to partake in. 
> 
> This isn't about the Pauls anymore. It's about what they stand for, which is a hell a lot more important than your bloody ego or your "status" in the political world. You don't wanna fight? Fine, go away. We don't need you anymore. Go stand on the sidelines and look like you're doing something productive while those who earned their way to the convention do a little conventioneering instead being sheep in a pen thank you very much.


yes, what he said.

----------


## Nirvikalpa

> $#@! this guy. No other words. 
> 
>  I'm going to the Rally in Tampa, and I'll be outside the convention, not to cheer Romney on, but to burn the GOP to the $#@!ing ground this election cycle and remake it after November. As is the party is corrupt and unchangeable. This summer has reinforced that opinion, that the whole thing is just totally broken. I'm writing in Ron Paul in November, and nothing Jesse Benton says can change that.
> 
> I hope Ron realizes the movement is no longer in his control. 
> 
> There really is not all that much time till the economy defaults, and the police state laws in place will become effective. *I hope alot of you realize we are near the end of peaceful solutions to government, so why pussy-foot around and try the "bide our time" approach*. There is no time. Ron Paul was and is the last gasp chance for America before the Police State happens. Politics is no longer the solution after this cycle.


You're extremely hypocritical.  Ron Paul would be disappointed in anything but peaceful solutions to the government, as a moral and religious man.  You're free to be as immoral as you wish, though.

----------


## cmo4ever

> You're extremely hypocritical.  Ron Paul would be disappointed in anything but peaceful solutions to the government, as a moral and religious man.  You're free to be as immoral as you wish, though.


  The Founders were peaceful and religious men. Of course, all peaceful options are exhausted to change a situation first, that's politics. At some point when the grievances become too much, and the government oppression reaches certain stages, politics can no longer solve the problem. We faught a Revolution with the King over less than we are experiencing now. Still peaceful solutions are to try and be reached. The time is coming, and probably not too far off, when social unrest becomes widespread, and the police state is called into action. All the laws passed like the NDAA will have their use, against the people of this country. 

   When peaceful solutions are exhausted it on occasion becomes necessary to fight tyranny with force. It's not there yet, but things aren't that far off either.

By your assessment the Founders were immoral for resorting to a non-peaceful solution with the King.

----------


## dannno

> "seek" is the key word there


Ya we could really be spinning our wheels over nothing here.

How does the nominee seek to be nominated when it is their delegates that seek to nominate?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> There is a difference regarding age and the area to be covered (state vs. national). There is also a difference in what they appear to view as the mission they are on. I do not think Rand will fair well on the national stage either. You can speak their language all you want to but you really have to sell your soul to make it to be the President.


Many here pretend age isn't a factor, and want Ron to run again in 2016 when he's 80!!  The fact of the matter is its a huge factor and Ron doesn't enjoy campaigning to begin with, so you're already behind the 8 ball.  The Presidential race for Ron came down to winning Iowa, he could have hunkered down there ala Santorum.  Rand will be great on the national stage and a breath of fresh air for those that Ron Paul couldn't reach.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> We don't like to hear it but I agree with this and think it's true... Ron has been a R for his life... that is the way he view victory.. to change the hearts and minds and build the R party.... as much as we hate that.


It's been working though, can't argue with the results.  No third party can hold a candle to what we've accomplished in the span of a few short years.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I honestly think that the most Ron might be doing is not fighting against the campaign, maybe convinced himself that he can't be nominated from the floor or we wouldn't want to. His Texas speech - in fact everything I have seen HIM say still looked like he was in it for whatever he could get, just that at the end he didn't think it would be as much as he had previously hoped.
> 
> I hope the delegates don't get sweet talked or pressured into not nominating Ron from the floor. If we have the numbers, that would be ridiculous.


We don't have the numbers.  Best estimate is 1/6 of the convention.

----------


## July

//

----------


## Romulus

Ross Perot all over again...

The system is setup against one. Ron knows it, the best we can do is change hearts and minds within the system and they will come. As sucky as the R party is, Ron lead by example and through that we achieved great things so far..

----------


## moostraks

> Many here pretend age isn't a factor, and want Ron to run again in 2016 when he's 80!!  The fact of the matter is its a huge factor and Ron doesn't enjoy campaigning to begin with, so you're already behind the 8 ball.  The Presidential race for Ron came down to winning Iowa, he could have hunkered down there ala Santorum.  Rand will be great on the national stage and a breath of fresh air for those that Ron Paul couldn't reach.


I think once you witness how corrupt the establishment is at just the delegate level your eyes open up to just how far tptb probably go to further up the food chain. I think Rand could be tornadic and he still won't get anywhere near the whitehouse without conceeding every bit of what could make a difference. There are people behind the scenes that script the future years in advance and the system in my estimation is under tight security from any real agent of change making a difference. Doesn't mean we should stop trying to infiltrate. No one wins the lottery unless they buy a ticket, kwim?

----------


## freedomordeath

> I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but ever since Rand's endorsement (and the stated reasons for said endorsement: setting up for 2016), I've been thinking that Ron would need to pull back on making waves at the RNC in Tampa. If Ron's delegates make it difficult for Romney, the RNC will double down on making it difficult for Rand going forward. They probably won't even let him win back his Senate seat.
> 
> If y'all think about it, you should have been expecting this if you accept the conventional wisdom behind Rand's endorsement.


As per Carol, Rand made that decision himself, she said he is a grown man with kids and he makes his own decisions. They obviously discuss these matters of tactics around dinner table, have their disagreements like any normal family, but Ron is not the type to force his ideas on someone. 

Ron might and that IS A MIGHT, have decided to let Rand make most of the campaign decisions as Ron realizes he is getting old (I personally think he could easily run at 80). Ron realizes with all the flaws of his son, he will carry on the legacy in some shape or form. Ron might not be happy about it as any Father debates issues with their children.

----------


## trey4sports

I hate this attitude that prevails in the forum. This notion that the power establishment simply cannot be brought down. 

yes, it can. 

There is nothing superhuman or god-like about TPTB. All establishments before us have been brought down. 

You and I changing the current establishment is no different than the freedom fighters who fought for and successfully abolished slavery.

----------


## torchbearer

> I hate this attitude that prevails in the forum. This notion that the power establishment simply cannot be brought down. 
> 
> yes, it can. 
> 
> There is nothing superhuman or god-like about TPTB. All establishments before us have been brought down. 
> 
> You and I changing the current establishment is no different than the freedom fighters who fought for and successfully abolished slavery.


this same kind of self-flagellation can be seen in the LP too. it is never productive.

----------


## freedomordeath

To the poeple that ARE GOING ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT 2016.... give it a break already. As a South African I've seen the many stages that a country goes through that you guys are only starting to experience. Before you know it you are done, the masses will be used against you and there is nothing you can do about it. Its not too late for you guys, why do you think so many poeple around the world are rooting for you guys, because they know this is the LAST STAND.

Etch a Sketch, if you are good little boys and girls they will ETCH A SKETCH YOUR ASS. They already conditioning the masses into viewing Ron Paulers as trouble makers even though our supporters get bones broken.

Conventions ARE MEAN'T TO BE A FIGHT, a battle between the opposing factions. This is by fcking design.... now you got people running around saying don't make waves..... WTF. Screw these poeple, no one is saying get in fist fights or throw food, but you are merely DOING YOUR JOB AS A DELEGATE. You are representing the poeple in your street, how u gonna look them in the eye when you get back to your street and you didn't do your fcking job because you were told not to make waves. I want to hear END THE FED END THE FED. This can be done respectively. No one is saying shout speakers down like morons, but if you get a gap you scream your lungs out.

Ron Paul needs to speak.... once Ron has done his job, then the Delegates need to do theirs, and if the delegates want to be asshats and vote Mitt the _ _ _ _ then they are morons. “Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.” ― Ron Paul

----------


## sailingaway

> Many here pretend age isn't a factor, and want Ron to run again in 2016 when he's 80!!  The fact of the matter is its a huge factor and Ron doesn't enjoy campaigning to begin with, so you're already behind the 8 ball.  The Presidential race for Ron came down to winning Iowa, he could have hunkered down there ala Santorum.  Rand will be great on the national stage and a breath of fresh air for those that Ron Paul couldn't reach.


It would be Ron's choice if he ran but I'd absolutely prefer him to any alternative even if we had to carry him around.  The last brain cell that man ever has will be pure liberty.

I suspect by then we'll have had to find someone else though.  Unless he runs the back porch campaign one of us keeps suggesting.  I mean, heck with Skype there are options....

But with two weeks before convention, sitting down this close to the finish line seems like nonsense.

----------


## Paulistinian

What is the "back porch campaign", sailing?

----------


## freedomordeath

> It would be Ron's choice if he ran but I'd absolutely prefer him to any alternative even if we had to carry him around. The last brain cell that man ever has will be pure liberty.


He'll still be in better health then that fatty Newt, Ron Paul 2016 if we make it to 2016.

----------


## anaconda

> I hate this attitude that prevails in the forum. This notion that the power establishment simply cannot be brought down. 
> 
> yes, it can. 
> 
> There is nothing superhuman or god-like about TPTB. All establishments before us have been brought down. 
> 
> You and I changing the current establishment is no different than the freedom fighters who fought for and successfully abolished slavery.


Nice. Thank you for saying this.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> It would be Ron's choice if he ran but I'd absolutely prefer him to any alternative even if we had to carry him around.  The last brain cell that man ever has will be pure liberty.
> 
> I suspect by then we'll have had to find someone else though.  Unless he runs the back porch campaign one of us keeps suggesting.  I mean, heck with Skype there are options....
> 
> But with two weeks before convention, sitting down this close to the finish line seems like nonsense.


No 80 year old will be elected in modern times and carrying Ron Paul around Weekend-at-Bernie's style is what makes people label this movement a cult of personality.

----------


## Freespeech468

Jesse you Represent NO ONE. Shut up and watch us vote the person we want to vote for.

----------


## RickyJ

> No 80 year old will be elected in modern times and carrying Ron Paul around Weekend-at-Bernie's style is what makes people label this movement a cult of personality.


I don't see why not, an 80 year old that is perfectly capable of thinking clearly and making decisions should be preferred to a 50 year old that can do the same. Experience counts for something if you want to believe it or not.

----------


## freedomordeath

> No 80 year old will be elected in modern times and carrying Ron Paul around Weekend-at-Bernie's style is what makes people label this movement a cult of personality.


I disagree. This 76 year old is healtheir then all the others combined and he can out debate them all. Ron paul 2016

----------


## RickyJ

> I disagree. This 76 year old is healtheir then all the others combined and he can out debate them all. Ron paul 2016


If he keeps his health and mind up I don't see anyone that would be better for the job in 2016 right now. But I prefer it be as his second term then instead of his first. We need him now!

----------


## trey4sports

> I don't see why not, *an 80 year old that is perfectly capable of thinking clearly and making decisions should be preferred to a 50 year old that can do the same*. Experience counts for something if you want to believe it or not.



quite frankly it doesn't matter if he would do a better job than the other guy. An 80 year old non-incumbent presidential contender is simply not going to get elected.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I think once you witness how corrupt the establishment is at just the delegate level your eyes open up to just how far tptb probably go to further up the food chain. I think Rand could be tornadic and he still won't get anywhere near the whitehouse without conceeding every bit of what could make a difference. There are people behind the scenes that script the future years in advance and the system in my estimation is under tight security from any real agent of change making a difference. Doesn't mean we should stop trying to infiltrate. No one wins the lottery unless they buy a ticket, kwim?


I don't buy into dime store conspiracy theories.  If someone has an adult comment please post it.  Take this to the Alex Jones forums.

----------


## wgadget

I like how you think, Freedomordeath. It's now or never.

----------


## pacelli

I spent all day, off and on, reading this entire thread.  All I have to say is this:

The BEST CASE SCENARIO for the United States is that Ron Paul will be nominated at the convention in 2 weeks.  

Even if we are successful in nominating him from the convention floor, we will not be successful in preventing the economic depression that Ron predicted back in 07.

Folks, you had better get prepared for harder times, even if the best case scenario happens (i.e. PRESIDENT RON PAUL).  If Rumdumb Romney or O-bummer are (s)elected, you will have gained much and lost nothing.  

And I agree with the sentiment expressed by many in this thread:  If this is truly Ron's victory lap, then for heaven's sake, repeat 1976 RNC again.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I don't see why not, an 80 year old that is perfectly capable of thinking clearly and making decisions should be preferred to a 50 year old that can do the same. Experience counts for something if you want to believe it or not.


Maybe in that realm of your own imagination, but in reality there is no way an 80 year old candidate will get the tens of millions of votes needed to succeed.

----------


## Paulistinian

Can someone explain the "back porch campaign" ?

----------


## RickyJ

> Maybe in that realm of your own imagination, but in reality there is no way an 80 year old candidate will get the tens of millions of votes needed to succeed.


He will if 10's of millions of 70, 80 and 90 year olds vote for him. Ron Paul pulling in the senior vote as well as the youth vote will make him unstoppable. You are so wrong to think there is not a way for Ron to win or any politician to win at 80. Strom Thurmond was 95 when elected to the Senate and didn't leave until he was 100. 80 is a spring chicken compared to 95!

----------


## Michigan11

> He will if 10's of millions of 70, 80 and 90 year olds vote for him. Ron Paul pulling in the senior vote as well as the youth vote will make him unstoppable. You are so wrong to think there is not a way for Ron to win or any politician to win at 80. Strom Thurmond was 95 when elected to the Senate and didn't leave until he was 100. 80 is a spring chicken compared to 95!


Ron running again, can't even be taken seriously and I am all about Ron Paul, I talk about him continuously to others, when I can. Running at 80 isn't even an option.

----------


## Michigan11

> I spent all day, off and on, reading this entire thread.  All I have to say is this:
> 
> The BEST CASE SCENARIO for the United States is that Ron Paul will be nominated at the convention in 2 weeks.  
> 
> Even if we are successful in nominating him from the convention floor, we will not be successful in preventing the economic depression that Ron predicted back in 07.
> 
> Folks, you had better get prepared for harder times, even if the best case scenario happens (i.e. PRESIDENT RON PAUL).  If Rumdumb Romney or O-bummer are (s)elected, you will have gained much and lost nothing.  
> 
> And I agree with the sentiment expressed by many in this thread:  If this is truly Ron's victory lap, then for heaven's sake, repeat 1976 RNC again.


Think of what Ron Paul the Congressman has done for this country from his office, and then running for the office of Prez... we need to fill the power structure in this country with as many RP's as we have the opportunity to do so.

----------


## sailingaway

> What is the "back porch campaign", sailing?



Aratus suggests it from time to time, I suspect he/she is joking but brings up a historic president who ran for president from his back porch and people had to come to see him.  In this day and age we could use skype and video.  But it isn't a serious suggestion, I don't see Ron wanting to run in 2016.  However, I'll support him as long and as often as he is willing to run.  As others here have said, one of his caliber is pretty much a once in a lifetime thing -- unless seeds he plant take root, and we elect those, which is what I'm hoping.

----------


## sailingaway

> Think of what Ron Paul the Congressman has done for this country from his office, and then running for the office of Prez... we need to fill the power structure in this country with as many RP's as we have the opportunity to do so.


except there aren't other Ron Paul's yet, and there still IS the original, which is NOT always going to be true.

----------


## sailingaway

> No 80 year old will be elected in modern times and carrying Ron Paul around Weekend-at-Bernie's style is what makes people label this movement a cult of personality.


Except that is merely a smear because if there were another with his principles we'd be happy. You say 'elect a hundred Ron Pauls' then in the next breath tell us how we have to be 'reasonable' and 'settle' for people who 'aren't as pure'.

We HAVE pure now.  How long will we be able to say that?  Show off what got us into this to begin with, I say.  Compromising principles isn't going to light brushfires imho.

----------


## Aratus

technically its a "front porch" campaign!!!

warren g. harding is the last candidate

who ran a classic front porch campaign.

if doctor ron paul gives this an internet

era twist, we might have the 19th century

and the 21st century upending the "rules"

of the second half of the twentieth century.

Some farm houses have  two to four porches

and its up to the candidate as to where to sit!

----------


## sailingaway

> technically its a "front porch" campaign!!!
> 
> warren g. harding is the last candidate
> 
> who ran a classic front porch campaign.
> 
> if doctor ron paul gives this an internet
> 
> era twist, we might have the 19th century
> ...


Indeed. 



 With Ron perhaps it would be by the pool.

----------


## Michigan11

> except there aren't other Ron Paul's yet, and there still IS the original, which is NOT always going to be true.


Are there other Ron Paul's that have different names yet are espousing the same ideology?
or voting to advance the same ideology?

Or are we talking about something else here that I dono?

----------


## sailingaway

> Are there other Ron Paul's that have different names yet are espousing the same ideology?
> or voting to advance the same ideology?
> 
> Or are we talking about something else here that I dono?


I don't know what you are saying.  The number of times you have told people they have to settle for less should be evidence enough there isn't another Ron Paul.

----------


## Michigan11

> I don't know what you are saying.  The number of times you have told people they have to settle for less should be evidence enough there isn't another Ron Paul.


I have never told people to settle for less, I only support those that are alligned with our ideology. Others here know that's not true. Look through my posts and threads.

I have been very consistent with who I support and promote in this forum, I take it very seriously.

Anyways.... I think Ron showed us all the blueprint as our founding fathers did, we have the people and the tools to take this all the way.

----------


## jay_dub

> I hate this attitude that prevails in the forum. This notion that the power establishment simply cannot be brought down. 
> 
> yes, it can. 
> 
> There is nothing superhuman or god-like about TPTB. All establishments before us have been brought down. 
> 
> You and I changing the current establishment is no different than the freedom fighters who fought for and successfully abolished slavery.


Yes, all other governments have fallen one way or another. It's arguable if the change has been for the best.

The problem with trying to inject liberty and personal freedom back into our system is that the people are not active participants. They just don't care so long as they have their creature comforts. And, as our Founders pointed out in many ways, a virtuous government can only rise from a virtuous people.

While we can effect changes in policy, an army of Ron Pauls won't change the hearts of men. Of course, policy changes are a good place to start to get them on the path. Kind of like take the matches away from a kid and he won't start fires anymore. The kid will remain a work in progress, though.

I would totally disagree with you that 'freedom fighters' abolished slavery. The abolition of slavery was a by-product of a war fought to consolidate power in a central government. Not exactly the model I wish to follow.

----------


## ninepointfive

> To the poeple that ARE GOING ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT 2016.... give it a break already. As a South African I've seen the many stages that a country goes through that you guys are only starting to experience. Before you know it you are done, the masses will be used against you and there is nothing you can do about it. Its not too late for you guys, why do you think so many poeple around the world are rooting for you guys, because they know this is the LAST STAND.
> 
> Etch a Sketch, if you are good little boys and girls they will ETCH A SKETCH YOUR ASS. They already conditioning the masses into viewing Ron Paulers as trouble makers even though our supporters get bones broken.
> 
> Conventions ARE MEAN'T TO BE A FIGHT, a battle between the opposing factions. This is by fcking design.... now you got people running around saying don't make waves..... WTF. Screw these poeple, no one is saying get in fist fights or throw food, but you are merely DOING YOUR JOB AS A DELEGATE. You are representing the poeple in your street, how u gonna look them in the eye when you get back to your street and you didn't do your fcking job because you were told not to make waves. I want to hear END THE FED END THE FED. This can be done respectively. No one is saying shout speakers down like morons, but if you get a gap you scream your lungs out.
> 
> Ron Paul needs to speak.... once Ron has done his job, then the Delegates need to do theirs, and if the delegates want to be asshats and vote Mitt the _ _ _ _ then they are morons. Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once its realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. ― Ron Paul


Best comment yet!

----------


## parocks

> To the poeple that ARE GOING ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT 2016.... give it a break already. As a South African I've seen the many stages that a country goes through that you guys are only starting to experience. Before you know it you are done, the masses will be used against you and there is nothing you can do about it. Its not too late for you guys, why do you think so many poeple around the world are rooting for you guys, because they know this is the LAST STAND.
> 
> Etch a Sketch, if you are good little boys and girls they will ETCH A SKETCH YOUR ASS. They already conditioning the masses into viewing Ron Paulers as trouble makers even though our supporters get bones broken.
> 
> Conventions ARE MEAN'T TO BE A FIGHT, a battle between the opposing factions. This is by fcking design.... now you got people running around saying don't make waves..... WTF. Screw these poeple, no one is saying get in fist fights or throw food, but you are merely DOING YOUR JOB AS A DELEGATE. You are representing the poeple in your street, how u gonna look them in the eye when you get back to your street and you didn't do your fcking job because you were told not to make waves. I want to hear END THE FED END THE FED. This can be done respectively. No one is saying shout speakers down like morons, but if you get a gap you scream your lungs out.
> 
> Ron Paul needs to speak.... once Ron has done his job, then the Delegates need to do theirs, and if the delegates want to be asshats and vote Mitt the _ _ _ _ then they are morons. “Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.” ― Ron Paul


No one is saying to throw food?  No one?

----------


## CPUd



----------


## jax

This entire campaign since 2008 has been about making a stand for our liberties and premise that our country was founded on. To be told,by the campaign, to basically shut up and be quiet at our last stand is insulting. I feel betrayed and left out to dry. Where is the fighting spirit that this whole thing was fueled by?

The Paul campaign just laying down at the final battle is almost as disheartening as Rand endorsing Romney over his own father

----------


## trey4sports

> This entire campaign since 2008 has been about making a stand for our liberties and premise that our country was founded on. To be told,by the campaign, to basically shut up and be quiet at our last stand is insulting. I feel betrayed and left out to dry. Where is the fighting spirit that this whole thing was fueled by?
> 
> The Paul campaign just laying down at the final battle is almost as disheartening as Rand endorsing Romney over his own father



I get where you're coming from but i disagree that the campaign is laying down and giving up. 

The Ron Paul 2012 Campaign is doing what Ron and company believe will provide us the best opportunity to *WIN* going forward. They want us to fold into the GOP and change it from within. 

It would feel great to cause Romney some serious headaches at the convention but will only serve to alienate us from the party going forward. Of course i'm sure that Rand and Ron are both hoping that we make the strategic decision and support Obama in the ballot booth.

Unfortunately there is no immediate gratification and it will take years to measure the success of the plan.

----------


## Eisenhower

> This entire campaign since 2008 has been about making a stand for our liberties and premise that our country was founded on. To be told,by the campaign, to basically shut up and be quiet at our last stand is insulting. I feel betrayed and left out to dry. Where is the fighting spirit that this whole thing was fueled by?
> 
> The Paul campaign just laying down at the final battle is almost as disheartening as Rand endorsing Romney over his own father


BUMP this post, fantastic my friend

----------


## Westfall

This has probably been mentioned, but just FYI, I am a national delegate and I can state with absolute confidence that Paul will accept the nomination, but it is the delegates job to get to that point.

----------


## Paulistinian

+rep


> This has probably been mentioned, but just FYI, I am a national delegate and I can state with absolute confidence that Paul will accept the nomination, but it is the delegates job to get to that point.

----------


## Sola_Fide

//

----------


## MrWalker

In the end ist the Ron Paul campaign and Ron Paul himself that has the responibility. Delegates should not feel hesitant about going to Florida or not - the way i see it. Remember that Ron Paul picked Jesse Benton himself as the spokesperson for the campaign.
So this is Ron Pauls own will, no matter how strange it sounds, In the end he has to take the responsebility if he wants to seek the nomination or not. So Bentons words are valid here; there will be no nomination of Ron Paul as a presidential candidate in the Republican National Convention of 2012.

----------


## walt

> Screw that.  Nominate him anyway.


Finally you said something that makes sense and I agree with. *faints*

(Too bad you supported that Benton clown for 5 years.)

----------


## walt

> And just like that, everything I've said about Benton this election cycle is proven to be true.


And everything I've said since 2007 has proven true. *yet again*

----------


## walt

> Have yall considered that maybe Ron doesn't want to be nominated from the floor? I don't know either way, but I'm just saying, perhaps it's possible that Jesse is just doing what Ron wants? Something to think about seeing as Jesse works for Ron...
> 
> 
> This is besides the fact that a nomination from the floor would not actually lead to an electoral victory.



Point of information: People have nominated candidates without their knowledge in the past. It does not mean they have to accept.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Finally you said something that makes sense and I agree with. *faints*


It's too bad I cannot say the same for you.




> (Too bad you supported that Benton clown for 5 years.)


I am not unsupportive of him now, either.  So sorry for you.

----------


## jdmyprez_deo_vindice

In the interest of clarity I will say that I am the one who banned Walt. The reason why is because of a wish for violent acts against others. While I am sure he was not serious (or at least hope he was not serious), threats or calls for violence towards others is an extreme violation of forum guidelines that can result in legal ramifications for the forums. Due to the fact that the offending user has a history of forum guidelines violations and considering the nature of the violation - I gave him a ban period of two years time.

----------


## RickyJ

> In the interest of clarity I will say that I am the one who banned Walt. The reason why is because of a wish for violent acts against others. While I am sure he was not serious (or at least hope he was not serious), threats or calls for violence towards others is an extreme violation of forum guidelines that can result in legal ramifications for the forums. Due to the fact that the offending user has a history of forum guidelines violations and considering the nature of the violation - I gave him a ban period of two years time.


Don't know what he said, but can the forum really be held liable for what a poster says? Anyone could say anything at anytime, I highly doubt the forum can be held responsible for what independent posters post.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> In the interest of clarity I will say that I am the one who banned Walt. The reason why is because of a wish for violent acts against others. While I am sure he was not serious (or at least hope he was not serious), threats or calls for violence towards others is an extreme violation of forum guidelines that can result in legal ramifications for the forums. Due to the fact that the offending user has a history of forum guidelines violations and considering the nature of the violation - I gave him a ban period of two years time.

----------


## torchbearer

don't talk about fight club

----------


## torchbearer

> Don't know what he said, but can the forum really be held liable for what a poster says? Anyone could say anything at anytime, I highly doubt the forum can be held responsible for what independent posters post.


a forum is kinda like a magazine. if it is monitored and has editors- it can be held liable. if it is not moderated and has no editors- it can't be held liable.
this site is monitored and edited by mods. thus- it can be held liable, the same as a magazine.

----------


## satchelmcqueen

as always, until ron himself says this, i wont believe it. sorry but i didnt spend the last 6 years of my life and money i didnt have to just not try anymore. until the convention is over, i will fight for ron to be nominated.

----------


## georgiaboy

No need to seek us out, Ron.   You've done enough of that over the years, and we've responded.  We'll do the seeking now.  You just stay rested and be patient for a little while longer.

----------

