LibertyEagle
Paleoconservative
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 52,730
Ha ha. Well, I guess it is.



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.
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.
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?
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.
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'
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).
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.
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‽
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.
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/showth...m-the-floor.&p=4578078&viewfull=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.
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!