Are you with us or against us?

[Bradley in DC]

not your specific reason, but it doesn't fit in the positive categories.
You enlighten me, because I don't understand the end game you are looking for...
perhaps if you educate me to your enlightened ways, I will join you in your crusade.

I'm really, really bad at pop culture analogies, but would this be Monday morning quarterbacking? :o

The campaign is over, Dr. Paul lost (despite all of our best efforts--and for a wide variety of reasons).

Now IS the time for examining what we did right--and what didn't go well. Some (including two moderators here) still cling to the "dissent is unpatriotic" view and have been personally attacking and banning those who don't put blind faith in select human beings (we all have faults, we all fail at times).

That attitude is destroying the forum (and, me thinks, why Josh suggested one not let the door hit her on the way out)--and the movement. When a moderator puts in her signature personal attacks against another forum member, you know they're not here for the forum or the movement. Dr. Paul himself never makes personal attacks.

You're a "divider" if you don't agree that it's a delusional claim that there simultaneously had to be a brokered convention and that Dr. Paul had support from a majority of the delegates (the definition of a brokered convention is that no one candidate has majority support).

More broadly, if our movement is to succeed (and what we got from this official campaign was failure, plain and simple), we need to ask hard questions and make honest and open analyzes.

Doing the same thing and expecting different results is insanity. If anything, learning to copy what the official Ron Paul presidential campaign--emphatically not the successful congressional ones--is a recipe for more of what we got. We deserve better.

 

[torchbearer]

I'm really, really bad at pop culture analogies, but would this be Monday morning quarterbacking? :o

The campaign is over, Dr. Paul lost (despite all of our best efforts--and for a wide variety of reasons).

Now IS the time for examining what we did right--and what didn't go well. Some (including two moderators here) still cling to the "dissent is unpatriotic" view and have been personally attacking and banning those who don't put blind faith in select human beings (we all have faults, we all fail at times).

That attitude is destroying the forum (and, me thinks, why Josh suggested one not let the door hit her on the way out)--and the movement. When a moderator puts in her signature personal attacks against another forum member, you know they're not here for the forum or the movement. Dr. Paul himself never makes personal attacks.

You're a "divider" if you don't agree that it's a delusional claim that there simultaneously had to be a brokered convention and that Dr. Paul had support from a majority of the delegates (the definition of a brokered convention is that no one candidate has majority support).

More broadly, if our movement is to succeed (and what we got from this official campaign was failure, plain and simple), we need to ask hard questions and make honest and open analyzes.

Doing the same thing and expecting different results is insanity. If anything, learning to copy what the official Ron Paul presidential campaign--emphatically not the successful congressional ones--is a recipe for more of what we got. We deserve better.

what is the endgame? what changes are you trying to make with the information you put on the public forum?

 

[constituent]

I'm really, really bad at pop culture analogies, but would this be Monday morning quarterbacking? :o

Naah, i'll show you Monday morning quarterbacking

Now IS the time for examining what we did right--and what didn't go well.

Person A says:

Ewww, he really slipped on the caps lock there.

Person B says:

Yes indeed person A.

For the proper emphasis, he really should have gone with capsing the definite article.

Such a shame...

^note comma crazy

See, Monday morning quarterbacking is over pointless shit like football games and grammar. What you're talking about is more important things like moving forward, examining the issues that have proven hinderances, "changing course™" AND sUcceeding.

Revolutions are for spinning your wheels (though they always make for one hell of a marketing ploy... ask Ronald Reagan and Comrade Lenin--there is less difference than you think).

 

[Rhys]

You're a "divider" if you don't agree that it's a delusional claim that there simultaneously had to be a brokered convention and that Dr. Paul had support from a majority of the delegates (the definition of a brokered convention is that no one candidate has majority support).

we couldn't even keep the lights on in NV and you think we were winning?

 

[Bradley in DC]

we couldn't even keep the lights on in NV and you think we were winning?

I, for one, was and am hugely impressed with the movement Dr. Paul launched, yes.

Had the campaign been competently led, there were great opportunities.

McCain? Really? That is the best our party could nominate?

 

[Bradley in DC]

what is the endgame? what changes are you trying to make with the information you put on the public forum?

Start a process of critical examination--not the demonizing and banning and personal attacks on those asking the right questions like some mods are in the habit of doing.

One leads to success, the other failure.

(insert pithy and witty pop culture reference here)

 

[Rhys]

I, for one, was and am hugely impressed with the movement Dr. Paul launched, yes.

Had the campaign been competently led, there were great opportunities.

McCain? Really? That is the best our party could nominate?

I didn't ask if you were impressed. Did you think we were winning?

 

[Bradley in DC]

I didn't ask if you were impressed. Did you think we were winning?

There were scenarios where we could have broken out from the pack, yes.

Most REPUBLICANS in Iowa wanted the US out of Iraq in six months.

The most sought after characteristic that NH independents and Republicans wanted was an "independent leader" as the nominee.

Look at the reaction that Sarah Palin is getting (not that I would have known that then, obviously). There was a pent up demand for a new leader who provides a fresh start from Bush and could energize the grassroots.

Sound like anyone?

 

[Rhys]

There were scenarios where we could have broken out from the pack, yes.

Most REPUBLICANS in Iowa wanted the US out of Iraq in six months.

The most sought after characteristic that NH independents and Republicans wanted was an "independent leader" as the nominee.

Look at the reaction that Sarah Palin is getting (not that I would have known that then, obviously). There was a pent up demand for a new leader who provides a fresh start from Bush and could energize the grassroots.

Sound like anyone?

you're reaching... RP 'blames america' remember?

 

[Bradley in DC]

you're reaching... RP 'blames america' remember?

D'oh! I forgot!

 

[klamath]

You guys bumping old threads to show how forward thinking you were two years ago. You are newbies!

 

[Anti Federalist]

So here is the gist of it. RP surounds himself with embezzlers, racists and crooks. He talks a good line, votes no in congress but his real ambition is to steal money and promote white racism. RP only wanted to be president so him and his goons could rob fort knox. He set up C4L to skim money from private donations. Boy have I been had. Now I feel like I did after believing "no nation building". Good God what a bunch of Trash I'm voting for McCain/Palin as at least she is cute.

And Bradley if you think I am voting for tha slimy used car salesman Barr you can think again.

Epic troll is epic.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Moral I get from Bradley's excellent thread: no one knows how to spend your money better than you.

Over the last couple Ron Paul campaigns, I spent some money on signs (from independent, grassroots RP merchandise sites), paint and stencils and Tyvek making my own banners, donuts at the County Convention, and a bunch of stuff like that. I don't regret a penny of that. It was great fun, and we won the county, second go-around.

I also gave some hundreds of dollars to the official campaign. Do I regret that? Not exactly "regret," but it was not a good use of money. They wasted my money on things I did not value, such as bribing Kent Sorenson and lining the pockets of staffers with payments I judge as too big (Jesse Benton's haul, just in 2012: $586,616).

Lesson learned. Spend your own money. Don't donate it to a black box.

I think AF would agree. AF spent some money on newspaper advertising in the 2012 election. Does he regret it? I'll bet he doesn't. I'll bet he thinks it was a good investment that paid off. Donations to Jesse Benton on the other hand? Maybe not so much.

Jesse didn't really need our $586,616. If I had known Dr. Paul was going to give that money to Jesse, I may not have given it to him. But that's how it works with donations: you hand over the money, and then they do whatever in the world they please with it -- probably something very different than you would have done with it.

 

[klamath]

Epic troll is epic.

Epic ass as always. That post went way over your head even 6 years ago.