Discussion of Working inside the GOP

[cheapseats]

...Ron's liberty movement will succeed, where other movements have failed, because we have a unifying theme of Liberty and we're working inside a major party. That party will incrementally be imbued with our Liberty values. Our people will be in positions to help newbies getting their feet wet in the political process. We'll revolutionize the party and new voters will come flooding in.

And everyone lives happily ever.

The End.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

Oh, for the love of God, are we still talking about bailing on our tangible gains in the GOP in favor for circle jerking in the LP??! I can see how some people may feel a little sticky about being in the GOP and basically being a republican in the average persons' eye. But, as we keep injecting our ideas and comrades into said party, the terminology of a perceived republican will change. If being a republican becomes closely synonymous with being a libertarian then who cares. Bottom line is this, Ron has clearly laid out the reasoning as why we should continue our reclamation of the GOP and it's already showing signs of success in more than just a few venues. Contrast that with how we'll be doing in two years or with that if we bailed, splintered back to normal and played the third party dead end. I guess we need a thread like this once per week to keep the target in the forefront. There's nothing I can do to help those that refuse to participate because of whatever excuse they put forward to justify their personal umbrage to this direction of pushing for our cause. Stay the course!

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

And this is why we are saying lets get the RP voter block to vote LP in 2012, then they will be in the debates!
If we can get the LP to break the 15% barrier, they will have a podium at the debates for the general election!

You all do realize that Ron Paul ran on the LP ticket in 88 for president, don't you?

I'm not convinced Gary Johnson wouldn't get schooled by more polished politicians. He just doesn't look ready for primetime in front of the camera. The Commission on Presidential Debates runs the show and they are an arm of both parties. They'd have no issue with moving the goalposts to obstruct Gary if need be. The only reason Perot got into the debates is because he was a billionaire who could fight the system and Bush's team wanted him included to hurt Clinton, which of course backfired. I don't think Johnson has the charisma it would take to reach 15% nationally, he certainly doesn't have the budget to do it either. Ron Paul realized what a lost cause running third party was and promptly switched tactics. I think by us just being here having this discussion on this forum speaks volumes as to Ron making the correct choice post-1988 to ditch the LP.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Oh, for the love of God, are we still talking about bailing on our tangible gains in the GOP in favor for circle jerking in the LP??! I can see how some people may feel a little sticky about being in the GOP and basically being a republican in the average persons' eye. But, as we keep injecting our ideas and comrades into said party, the terminology of a perceived republican will change. If being a republican becomes closely synonymous with being a libertarian then who cares. Bottom line is this, Ron has clearly laid out the reasoning as why we should continue our reclamation of the GOP and it's already showing signs of success in more than just a few venues. Contrast that with how we'll be doing in two years or with that if we bailed, splintered back to normal and played the third party dead end. I guess we need a thread like this once per week to keep the target in the forefront. There's nothing I can do to help those that refuse to participate because of whatever excuse they put forward to justify their personal umbrage to this direction of pushing for our cause. Stay the course!

Stay the course Paulites, we've come too damn far to give up now!

 

[LibertyEagle]

Why are some arguing to bail when we are finally starting to see success? It makes zero sense. What RP supporters did in Iowa and Missouri, needs to be duplicated all over the country. We don't need RP to tell us what to do after the convention. He has already told us.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Yeah, and looking at old candidates I can even see ones I would have liked, but I have a sort of 'what on earth happened' feeling when I look at those the LP has picked since I was really focusing on them, for President, at least. "Party of Principles" sings to me, but I just don't see it. I'm not trying to be bashing, I'm giving my honest assessment of one reason why I pretty much forclosed for myself the idea of going to the LP. A new party is still theoretically open in my mind if we could make a go of it, but it seems as if what happened to the GOP also happened in the LP, the 'pragmaticism', and I can get that in the GOP, amongst candidates I don't like, and they might win.

You would need a young, charismatic, billionaire just to compete, and even then you'd likely still lose. You would need someone along the lines of a Peter Thiel. Of course Thiel was born in Germany so that ends that little postulate. The two-party system is too ingrained into American consciousness at this point. If you introduce anything else in its place, you start getting glitches in the Matrix.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

Thought provoking, allow me to retort.

http://www.lp.org/

Good luck with that!

Post of the year.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Why are some arguing to bail when we are finally starting to see success? It makes zero sense. What RP supporters did in Iowa and Missouri, needs to be duplicated all over the country. We don't need RP to tell us what to do after the convention. He has already told us.

+1776

 

[cajuncocoa]

No, I don't believe that is what he had to say.

That's what I had to say.

 

[sailingaway]

Yeah, so don't try. You don't herd cats, you attract them with something they want.

We found RON, he didn't find us. We have to find others. And grow our own.

You show us the next guy who sticks to the standard like Ron Paul and you won't be able to beat us off with a stick.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Why are some arguing to bail when we are finally starting to see success? It makes zero sense. What RP supporters did in Iowa and Missouri, needs to be duplicated all over the country. We don't need RP to tell us what to do after the convention. He has already told us.

It's not bailing, it's not being sold on it as being the best plan to proceed with in the first place. This is because:

1) While clearly there have been some successes, we clearly see the dark side the strategy also leads to (Rand Paul's practical decision to compromise by endorsing AND campaigning for Romney, and future compromises to come). This overall guarantees the current corrupt GOP "more war/more Fed/more false flag" partisans will continue to be never held accountable for their dirty pool tactics, because we will end up "being respectful" and never challenging the fraud, or the purges (in order to forever 'position' ourselves for future election cycles). Preoccupation with positioning and politics is not prioritizing principle, and never will be.

2) The other shoe has not dropped, although the hammer has already stated to come down by TPTB. This is not the first alternative 'takeover' movement that has come to the dance, just the latest. As with all other attempts to transform the Republican world, the Empire will strike back---by changing the rules on a dime, as seen in the state delegate battles, and likely performing a purge of Paulites from their positions in the state parties after the election, unless they drop or suppress their liberty issues. Get in line with the tea party, and other former insurgents, the giant corporate and elite interests running both big parties only accept that we be co-opted or marginalized. They have the immense resources to ensure that they remain the ringmasters of the big tent.

3) There is a better way, namely using both major parties as leverage vehicles only, and running a principled liberty campaign as either Democrats or Republicans, in primaries where there is an open seat (the Ron Paul campaigns of 2008 and 2012 are themselves examples of this method, and his achievements speak as much to this approach as they do the 'transform the GOP' plan). The LP continues to run educational campaigns to seed present and future pro-liberty voters, while also vetting the authentic liberty candidates who can then run the "Ron Paul" principled campaign in the right major party primaries. This creates an independent, virtual party or political power structure not dependent on either major party, and takes over or replaces the statist establishment over time without being co-opted, neutered or marginalized.

This is a reasonable alternative, probably a more successful one long term, and its supporters are not going away, or going to be run off. There are different approaches that should be accepted as persistent in the movement, without one side dictating to the other to drop their preference.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Oh, for the love of God, are we still talking about bailing on our tangible gains in the GOP in favor for circle jerking in the LP??! I can see how some people may feel a little sticky about being in the GOP and basically being a republican in the average persons' eye. But, as we keep injecting our ideas and comrades into said party, the terminology of a perceived republican will change. If being a republican becomes closely synonymous with being a libertarian then who cares. Bottom line is this, Ron has clearly laid out the reasoning as why we should continue our reclamation of the GOP and it's already showing signs of success in more than just a few venues. Contrast that with how we'll be doing in two years or with that if we bailed, splintered back to normal and played the third party dead end. I guess we need a thread like this once per week to keep the target in the forefront. There's nothing I can do to help those that refuse to participate because of whatever excuse they put forward to justify their personal umbrage to this direction of pushing for our cause. Stay the course!

The rhetoric can be turned around, as in, for the love of God, Paul didn't succeed in winning a single primary in two runs for the GOP nomination, so are we STILL talking about "working inside the GOP" to achieve change? Are we still believing that the current establishment leadership can be converted from within through a fair process, without plainly and openly addressing election fraud, or false flags, big party co-opting tactics, or coordinating with third party movements instead of dumping on them? There is a better outside path available for winning elections (see my above post) that does not involve settling for educational campaigns, that has also shown some success. Let's stop fighting, and respect both approaches.

 

[TheGrinch]

Let's stop fighting, and respect both approaches.

I agree, and I like point #3 in your previous post about a long term goal of making 3rd parties viable. But without gaining support to be able to do that within the major parties, that strategy has proved more doomed to fail so far.

And no matter whether you think the takeover strategy will be fruitful in policy change or not, it nonetheless is effective in exposing the corruption of the local GOPs (still holding out hope that this lawsuit can expose it nationally). This is only growing our numbers to take it back with folks who will never go back after seeing the light of liberty and darkness of corruption. We've seen with majorities at many conventions where we've even taken over some of them, and I was amazed how close we actually were to a majority in my homestate and Republican establishment-stronghold, Georgia (even despite them throwing out the Athens slate and other delegates that should have been ours).

The fact that they're fighting us so hard, even after they're trying to call the nomination to Romney, should show that we don't need need to be afraid of them as their numbers are waning. They need to be afraid of us as our numbers only continue to grow. Their actions suggest that they already are...

 

[FSP-Rebel]

The rhetoric can be turned around, as in, for the love of God, Paul didn't succeed in winning a single primary in two runs for the GOP nomination, so are we STILL talking about "working inside the GOP" to achieve change? Are we still believing that the current establishment leadership can be converted from within through a fair process, without plainly and openly addressing election fraud, or false flags, big party co-opting tactics, or coordinating with third party movements instead of dumping on them? There is a better outside path available for winning elections (see my above post) that does not involve settling for educational campaigns, that has also shown some success. Let's stop fighting, and respect both approaches.

Point taken, let me rephrase. When it comes to delegates, which is based on organizing, we have at least 5 or 6 legit wins and plenty more success when all is said and done. We were never going to win a primary with the media's abuse of the Ron Paul name which is why Rand is employing his stealth strategy to beat them and the political class at their own game. I grew up in the LP and got bored with the lack of tangible success and I'm convinced as of this election season that all we have to do is keep vamping up our numbers in the GOP to continue to reclaim it to where we want it to be. Since there's only so much that our set number of activists can do, using different approaches pinches our overall numbers at Ron's state goal of restoring the GOP. There are many Paul enthusiasts that do just about nothing in terms of activism which, imo, doesn't include voting since it's a prerequisite for anyone that claims to be a citizen (not getting into sovereignty debates). So, we need all hands (activists) on deck to focus our attention toward one common goal to make up for those we lose in the enthusiasts do-nothing camp. The common goal should be where the most amount of success can be had in the shortest amount of time. Outside of the FSP, restoring the GOP would be that common goal that constitutionalists should rally behind by virtue of our recent successes. People will do what they want either way but it should be obvious that success hasn't come from third parties, otherwise I'd be open to it.

 

[cheapseats]

...These parties are so entrenched and willing to protect each other to keep a new party out, 3rd party has no chance until we can retake one of the existing and open the doors for a 3rd.

...and it's evident that this is the only route we even have a chance to make change in the short-term.

I dunno what part of this Schemers don't GET but, by the time GOP TAKEOVER FOLKS get far enough INTO the Republican Party, they (like legions of well-intended before them) will NOT support a third party...which could only ERODE THEIR POWER.

A third party WILL erode the power of the "Big Two".

Not to suggest a third party is suddenly bigger or badder than either 'D' or 'R', but it DOES detract from both. EXCELLENT.

 

[cheapseats]

I hear "get Gary Johnson in the debates!" - but the two parties RUN the debates. They will never allow a 3rd party in. Our only choice is to RETAKE (not infiltrate) the GOP!

Fact stands that the two-party monopoly exists to make it far more difficult for a 3rd party to gain traction. It's been tried for years to little avail...

Yeah, if people were serious about trying to get other candidates in those debates, they would team up the LP, CP, GP, etc party supporters and start an organized effort to target the sponsors telling them they'll boycott or whatever if they sponsor the exclusive debates. Since they don't yet have listed sponsors for these next debates I guess it would be good to preempt by contacting last years sponsors (conveniently listed on their website)

“In day-to-day commerce, television is not so much interested in the business of communications as in the business of delivering audiences to advertisers. People are the merchandise, not the shows. The shows are merely the bait.” - Les Brown

 

[romancito]

Things have changed since 1988.

We have fought two wars at the sacrificial expense of blood and limbs and paid two trillion to do them, to bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan.

I 'sigh' and dismay at what all of you have said above about keeping Dr. Paul's policies and philosophies within the Republican party. I also have to laugh. Romney last week met at a private resort with 300 of his rich supporters and the Republican party bosses and Ron Paul was not even given the slightest minimum thought. The Republican party will never be about 'liberty.' It will always be about power and the power of money.

Look at Egypt and how difficult it has been for them just to get one man on first base.

I feel sorry that Dr. Paul is unable to free himself from the shackles of power grabbing and shake himself loose of the binds of the Republican party. I don't see him exercising the 'liberty' he so much promotes.

Creating the Ron Paul Party seems to me the best course of action at this time. With his own political party he will be able to get his causes, policies and philosophy advance with the strongest possible outcome. Let those Republicans that feel betrayed by their party to join the Ron Paul party instead of asking Democrats and others to join the Republican party in a contortionist bid to fit a square peg into a round hole. My two cents.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

I 'sigh' and dismay at what all of you have said above about keeping Dr. Paul's policies and philosophies within the Republican party. I also have to laugh. Romney last week met at a private resort with 300 of his rich supporters and the Republican party bosses and Ron Paul was not even given the slightest minimum thought. The Republican party will never be about 'liberty.' It will always be about power and the power of money.

Creating the Ron Paul Party seems to me the best course of action at this time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the lawsuit didn't make for a topic of discussion at their shindig. Anywho, the concept of liberty has been relegated to obscurity until Ron brought it out in the GOP. The Fed is now a broad issue that is receiving significant observance from conservatives everywhere, even getting a com hearing in a week or so. As far as keeping these ideas in the GOP, if we didn't we'd have to play catchup elsewhere. We're also poised in many states to continue reclaiming state and local parties which adds to furthering the liberty momentum in the GOP. The lion's share of the Paul movement is focused on restoring our liberty through strengthening our helm in the GOP but those that choose otherwise can do so. Helping a 2nd or 3rd option will be a tough task when the bulk are focusing on building upon our successes in reshaping the GOP.

 

[Keith and stuff]

Working inside the GOP is going great for me. For example, I won an election because no New Hampshire Republican would run against me. I guess it depends where you live. I live in a state where the majority of the GOP leadership is welcoming to pro-liberty volunteers, candidates and leadership. I don't attend a lot of the GOP events I find boring. I tend to attend the events I find interesting and only get involved with the projects that interest me. No one in the NH GOP leadership has ever been rude or disrespectful to me.

 

[mstrmac1]

Even if by some miracle we able to infiltrate and capture our message with in the GOP, our message would get watered down. It's best to start a new brand Because the old brand dilutes the new.