Do you want Jesse Benton involved in any capacity in Rand Paul 2016?

Do you want Jesse Benton involved in Rand Paul 2016?

  • Yes, I want Benton to manage the campaign

    Votes: 7 4.8%

  • Yes, I want Benton involved in an advisory role or some smaller capacity.

    Votes: 17 11.6%

  • No, I do not want Jesse Benton involved in any aspect of Rand Paul 2016

    Votes: 123 83.7%
  • Total voters
    147
Status
Not open for further replies.
LibertyEagle said:
Oh, I don't want Benton running Rand's campaign either. I'm sure he's learned a lot, politically, working for McConnell, but even there he got caught with his foot in his mouth.
Click to expand...


Exactly. Benton might end up as a stellar campaign professional after he grows up. But to date, he has not done anything to inspire any confidence in me, that's for sure.
 
Matt Collins said:
For those of you who refuse to support Rand simply because you dislike someone on his staff, realize that when Jeb Bush becomes President, you were complacent in allowing that to happen:


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-to-draft-jeb-bush-for-2016-presidential-run/
Click to expand...

LOL - Is that a threat?

Do you think I care?

I sat on my hands and refused to support Romney over O-Bomb-Ya.

Threatening me with Bush or Hillary is an empty threat at best.

Have you forgotten?

No One But Paul.

If I perceive that Rand is doing something unforgiveably boneheaded or filling his staff with a bunch of Benton clones, I'll happily write in Ron Paul yet again, and sleep soundly on election night.

We may be small in number, but we can make the difference between a win or a loss.

2012 proved that.
 
Last edited:
QCjTX.gif
 
Jeb as president? dont make me laugh. He holds no political office for a start plus is the most boring speaker you can find
 
I have no doubt that Benton was compromised long ago, either by sheer political ladder-climbing desire or directly by elements that would like to see our movement fail....or maybe both. I wouldn't abandon Rand entirely if Benton had a very minor campaign role but it definitely would make me question motives more. If Benton were campaign manager, spokesman, or anything even remotely resembling his positions of influence in Ron's campaigns then I would be majorly disappointed and much, much less involved than I would be otherwise.

No surprise the sock puppet brigade voted YES though, while everyone with join dates before 2012 say NO. That sorta tells me what I need to know about Benton.
 
Last edited:
LibertyEagle said:
Ron's war chest? Are you serious here? We few gave it all we had, but the fact is that Ron's campaign never raised enough money to compete in a national raise. Especially when he also needed to run ads to counteract the lies being spewed about him by the media.

They never hated the "fringe", as you call it. But, one more time.... THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH OF US TO WIN. We are just a drop in the bucket. To win just the Republican nomination, Rand will have to win over one ton of mainstream Republicans. I don't understand why some of you cannot get this. All of you know that the other guys are looking for any opportunity at all to blow up into something worthy of sinking Rand. Why do some here want to help them?
Click to expand...

It is not the grassroots' responsibility to run a campaign that is actually TRYING to win it.

Your point of saying Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough to compete in a national raise, is beyond stupid though.

Ron Paul raised the 2nd most amount of money in 2012, only behind Mitt Romney on the Republican side. Most people involved in political campaigns are very aware of the importance of actually WINNING states in Primaries, to increase fundraising. Had Ron Paul 2012 ACTUALLY been trying to win, and not simply waste millions for some "future campaign", I can only imagine how much Ron Paul 2012 would have raised if RP had won a state's popular vote.

Ron Paul 2012 raised more money than Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, both of which actually won a state with the popular vote. Let that sink in for a bit, and you start to see the incompetence that was/is Ron Paul 2012 with its messaging. Along with your stupid line of thinking Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough to win a national race. Ron Paul never won a SINGLE state's popular vote, AND STILL raised more than candidates that did.

Despite one around here (who received paychecks from the campaign) saying they needed to control its messaging. The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was not a money problem. They had grassroots that would give all, and then some. The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was not having "enough" voters to win. You address that with your messaging and ads (which the campaign didn't do). Showing up to states. Living in states. Asking people to vote for you. (Something Ron Paul didn't even do in Virginia before the primary, but did it for the Republican candidate for governor recently.)

The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was that its messaging was being controlled, and it was being controlled by staffers that had agreed to help Mitt Romney's campaign. I believe this 100%, based on facts/history/actions/non-actions of the campaign.

It's why Ron Paul 2012 was wasting funds attacking Rick Santorum in South Carolina. A state Ron Paul had no chance to win.
It's why Ron Paul 2012 wasted funds attacking Rick Santorum in Michigan. Another state Ron Paul had no chance to win.

It's also why Ron Paul 2012 never ran one single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad in states Ron Paul had a chance to win. Like Maine, New Hampshire, Nevada, and even Virginia.

Which is exactly why Ron Paul 2012 was a horrible, lying and corrupt, campaign, with 100% of the blame for being the failure that it was/is.

Ron Paul 2012 was so incompetently run (if you don't buy the outright dishonestly run), they wasted money attacking Rick Santorum in South Carolina and Michigan. Instead of spending funds on ads to address the "lies" you said the media was spreading. Or, better yet, having their media guy go on to those shows and try and address them when it mattered.

Think about that for a moment. Ron Paul had ONE major issue. ONE. And the incompetent campaign couldn't get RP or anybody on staff to address it in a professional style as the campaign was sinking faster in Iowa than the Titanic did in the North Atlantic Ocean? No, the grassroots had to give money to a PAC that produced an ad to try and help with that issue. After Iowa.

But, you continue to have a defeatist attitude and blame the grassroots for things like, "not getting it". It's not the grassroots responsibility to win it, and ACTUALLY TRY TO WIN IT. But guess what, the grassroots did exactly that. Ron Paul's supporters, though outnumbered by idiots to 1, went above and beyond when called upon. And even when not.

Ron Paul 2012 was a complete failure of a campaign, with incompetent/dishonest campaign workers and staff that were spread throughout the entire campaign.

Don't act like the grassroots didn't understand we didn't have enough to win, when it was those supporters pounding the pavement trying to turn out the votes. Doing the waste of "Phone-from-Home" campaign. And those very same supporters being TURNED AWAY BY THE OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN FROM GOING TO HELP IN IOWA! Supporters doing those things for FREE.

The amount of blaming grassroots and supporters for the incompetent, lying, dishonest campaign staff and workers, is beyond me. I understand we are outnumbered idiots to 1 in many instances. THAT DIDN'T STOP THE GRASSROOTS FROM ACTUALLY TRYING TO WIN IT.

Your stupid idea that Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough money to run a national campaign, falls directly on the campaign. For not actually TRYING to win it, and instead agreeing with and helping Mitt Romney's campaign seal the nomination. THAT IS ON THE CAMPAIGN. Not the grassroots. Your defeatist attitude about the grassroots "not getting it" is 100% wrong, and misplaced.
 
jjdoyle said:
It is not the grassroots' responsibility to run a campaign that is actually TRYING to win it.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly believe that they were trying to win at the beginning, when there was a chance.

Your point of saying Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough to compete in a national raise, is beyond stupid though.
Click to expand...
What's stupid is not to realize that it would take far more money than the others to compete against the 24x7 media onslaught smearing Ron Paul. Pretty much after Iowa, the donation spigot closed.

Ron Paul raised the 2nd most amount of money in 2012, only behind Mitt Romney on the Republican side. Most people involved in political campaigns are very aware of the importance of actually WINNING states in Primaries, to increase fundraising. Had Ron Paul 2012 ACTUALLY been trying to win, and not simply waste millions for some "future campaign", I can only imagine how much Ron Paul 2012 would have raised if RP had won a state's popular vote.
Click to expand...
They tried to win in Iowa. Perhaps you have forgotten what the media was doing to him at the time.

Ron Paul 2012 raised more money than Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, both of which actually won a state with the popular vote. Let that sink in for a bit, and you start to see the incompetence that was/is Ron Paul 2012 with its messaging. Along with your stupid line of thinking Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough to win a national race. Ron Paul never won a SINGLE state's popular vote, AND STILL raised more than candidates that did.
Click to expand...
Yes, and the media was not singularly focused on sliming them, like they were Ron.

Despite one around here (who received paychecks from the campaign) saying they needed to control its messaging. The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was not a money problem. They had grassroots that would give all, and then some. The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was not having "enough" voters to win. You address that with your messaging and ads (which the campaign didn't do). Showing up to states. Living in states. Asking people to vote for you. (Something Ron Paul didn't even do in Virginia before the primary, but did it for the Republican candidate for governor recently.)
Click to expand...
I don't agree with everything the campaign did, either. But, neither did I think any candidate's campaign was run perfectly. But, you just ignore those.

The real problem with Ron Paul 2012 was that its messaging was being controlled, and it was being controlled by staffers that had agreed to help Mitt Romney's campaign. I believe this 100%, based on facts/history/actions/non-actions of the campaign.
Click to expand...
Oh bullshit. Hell yes, the message needed to be controlled so that it was RON PAUL'S message being communicated, not some supposed supporters who believed they earned the right to piggyback off of Ron Paul's campaign because they donated 50 bucks.

Do you have any proof that RP staffers agreed to help Mitt Romney's campaign? Actual proof; not your delusional thoughts.

It's why Ron Paul 2012 was wasting funds attacking Rick Santorum in South Carolina. A state Ron Paul had no chance to win.
It's why Ron Paul 2012 wasted funds attacking Rick Santorum in Michigan. Another state Ron Paul had no chance to win.

It's also why Ron Paul 2012 never ran one single Mitt Romney only TV attack ad in states Ron Paul had a chance to win. Like Maine, New Hampshire, Nevada, and even Virginia.

Which is exactly why Ron Paul 2012 was a horrible, lying and corrupt, campaign, with 100% of the blame for being the failure that it was/is.

Ron Paul 2012 was so incompetently run (if you don't buy the outright dishonestly run), they wasted money attacking Rick Santorum in South Carolina and Michigan. Instead of spending funds on ads to address the "lies" you said the media was spreading. Or, better yet, having their media guy go on to those shows and try and address them when it mattered.

Think about that for a moment. Ron Paul had ONE major issue. ONE. And the incompetent campaign couldn't get RP or anybody on staff to address it in a professional style as the campaign was sinking faster in Iowa than the Titanic did in the North Atlantic Ocean? No, the grassroots had to give money to a PAC that produced an ad to try and help with that issue. After Iowa.

But, you continue to have a defeatist attitude and blame the grassroots for things like, "not getting it". It's not the grassroots responsibility to win it, and ACTUALLY TRY TO WIN IT. But guess what, the grassroots did exactly that. Ron Paul's supporters, though outnumbered by idiots to 1, went above and beyond when called upon. And even when not.

Ron Paul 2012 was a complete failure of a campaign, with incompetent/dishonest campaign workers and staff that were spread throughout the entire campaign.

Don't act like the grassroots didn't understand we didn't have enough to win, when it was those supporters pounding the pavement trying to turn out the votes. Doing the waste of "Phone-from-Home" campaign. And those very same supporters being TURNED AWAY BY THE OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN FROM GOING TO HELP IN IOWA! Supporters doing those things for FREE.

The amount of blaming grassroots and supporters for the incompetent, lying, dishonest campaign staff and workers, is beyond me. I understand we are outnumbered idiots to 1 in many instances. THAT DIDN'T STOP THE GRASSROOTS FROM ACTUALLY TRYING TO WIN IT.

Your stupid idea that Ron Paul 2012 didn't have enough money to run a national campaign, falls directly on the campaign. For not actually TRYING to win it, and instead agreeing with and helping Mitt Romney's campaign seal the nomination. THAT IS ON THE CAMPAIGN. Not the grassroots. Your defeatist attitude about the grassroots "not getting it" is 100% wrong, and misplaced.
Click to expand...

Sorry, stopped reading. Your troll bait posts are getting more than tiring. Hopefully soon, management will have had enough of you.
 
phill4paul said:
Yes, his War Chest. RonPaul2012, Inc. was handed the second largest amount through fundraising second only to Mitt Romney. There WAS enough to compete but for some reason RonPaul2012, Inc. chose not to attack Mitt Romney. That is on RonPaul2012, Inc. not on those that gave all they had. You need to read some of jjdoyles posts to understand what the hell went down.
As far as this issue with Benton goes I hope that if you are serious about not sinking Rand then you, and Rand, will take to heart the message of what 80% of the respondents of this poll are trying to get across.
Click to expand...

I recall most of us understanding at the time that the goal was to make it an ultimate race between Romney and Paul and to force the others out. I don't know if that was a smart move or not, but that is what was being discussed around here at the time. Get the others out and force people to choose between a big government oinker and Paul.
 
phill4paul said:
Annnnd a whole lot of nothing. Why no anti-Romney ad with money in the till?
Click to expand...

I recall most of us understanding at the time that the goal was to make it an ultimate race between Romney and Paul and to force the others out.

After that, you heard what Doug Wead said as much as I did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Matt Collins
Rand Introduces Free Speech Protection Act
Replies
2
Views
672
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
PAF
Murray Rothbard’s Lost Letters on Ayn Rand
Replies
0
Views
306
PAF
PAF
PAF
More Drug-War Murders on the High Seas
Replies
0
Views
185
PAF
PAF
Occam's Banana
The lessons of Ron Paul
Replies
12
Views
472
acptulsa
acptulsa
PAF
Trump’s National Guard Deployment and the Future of Liberty in America
Replies
1
Views
152
acptulsa
acptulsa
Back
Top