DP: The Pieces Are Falling Into Place And I Am Getting Chills ...

This thread brought out all the 07ers...

I'm an 07er. I don't post very much but I've regularly read this forum for years.

I'm also pretty pissed at the campaign. I'm not really sure what to think about it,...why they decided to throw in the towel. But this movement needs to go on either with or without the blessings of the campaign.
 
am in agreement Vet_from_cali~!!!

we are doing now what good folk

wanted done in 2008 and the GOP

knows we exist, indeed! lets be the

wave of the future in a good way!!!
 
There is nothing wrong in positive thinking. There is nothing wrong in reaching for the stars.

If we fall, we will not shatter. We will be here, yet other days, to fight the fight. Why? Not only because (as Obama said) We Can! But as Ron Paul as taught .... WE MUST!
 
There is nothing wrong in positive thinking.

Indeed not, on the contrary.

But there IS something wrong with delusional thinking. And there IS something wrong with counterproductive stubbornness.



There is nothing wrong in reaching for the stars.

Indeed not, on the contrary.

But you don't bet the family farm on a sky's-the-limit long shot.



If we fall, we will not shatter. We will be here, yet other days, to fight the fight. Why? Not only because (as Obama said) We Can! But as Ron Paul as taught .... WE MUST!

Absolutely, yada yada, all of it.

HOWEVER, comma, we have some SERIOUS SHIT coming down the pike. As in, BEFORE 2016. This isn't any old athletic competition, win some, lose some, c'ya next Saturday.
 
Last edited:
Isn't Charlie Webster the Maine GOP chair? Didn't we do better in Maine than anywhere else? Isn't there a GOP chair that we can talk about who prevented us from taking every single delegate that was available? Continuing to scuffle with Webster I don't think serves our interests. We won the delegates in Maine, and we want to make sure every single one of them is seated in Tampa. We also have control of the Maine GOP, and we kinda have a job to do, and it looks like we have to work with Webster to achieve our objectives, likely through 2012.

Interview with Charlie Webster after the Maine Convention.

 
Sola_Fide left me a neg and this remark:

I've been involved in the grassroots liberty movement longer than you. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Because I posted a positive blog piece about Ron Paul delegates winning at state conventions and the fact you have so little control over your own emotions and feelings you must let your rage and anger out on me.

Your comment belies your total lack of connection with reality Sola_Fide. You do not even know me, yet you make declarative statements about me as if they are fact involving some imagined relationship or competition you have with me. Our country is being destroyed our lives are at risk, the time for 30 year old adolescence is behind us.

P.S. Placing 5 thousand posts per year on a forum does not qualify for much in my opinion, other than a symptom of a obsessive/compulsive disorder. Really all of you 10 thousand plus posters, look at yourselves for a moment.
 
Last edited:
Sola_Fide left me a neg and this remark:



Because I posted a positive blog piece about Ron Paul delegates winning at state conventions and the fact you have so little control over your own emotions and feelings you must let your rage and anger out on me.

Your comment belies your total lack of connection with reality Sola_Fide. You do not even know me, yet you make declarative statements about me as if they are fact involving some imagined relationship or competition you have with me. Our country is being destroyed our lives are at risk, the time for 30 year old adolescence is behind us.

P.S. Placing 5 thousand posts per year on a forum does not qualify for much in my opinion, other than a symptom of a obsessive/compulsive disorder. Really all of you 10 thousand plus posters, look at yourselves for a moment.

+rep
You're right. Forgive me for the neg rep. As you can tell, I'm not good at insults:). Although, in all fairness, you left me this neg rep first:

Give up then and take your loser attitude with you.

I don't think your original neg rep to me was from "anger". Neither was mine. So just let bygones be bygones. I never give out neg reps, but I felt like you were not respecting my time and sacrifice for the freedom movement. I was trying to get across that I've seen the coercion of the establishment first hand....its typical. They are resistant to change.

Anyway, I hope my +rep evens you out.
 
Indeed not, on the contrary.

But there IS something wrong with delusional thinking. And there IS something wrong with counterproductive stubbornness.

Indeed not, on the contrary.

But you don't bet the family farm on a sky's-the-limit long shot.

Absolutely, yada yada, all of it.

HOWEVER, comma, we have some SERIOUS SHIT coming down the pike. As in, BEFORE 2016. This isn't any old athletic competition, win some, lose some, c'ya next Saturday.

I'm kind of curious... why are you still posting here if you think Ron Paul has no chance? Do you want his supporters to shift to support other libertarian politicians? Or try and start a third party run? Or to throw people's support to Gary Johnston?

I'm just asking because I'm pretty sure most people here now know your views on Paul's chances of taking the nomination, so repeating it again doesn't make much sense.
 
agree with that. with so much good news from convention, i still dont understand what made the campaign do what they did on those 2 days !!
anyway, maybe they know something i dont !

no he is honest ,no thread kill, the rphq and benton,wead and tate are the real thread killers. The Ron Paul Campaign brought all this bs on themselves with no help from the media. take it with a grain of salt and nothing more. the rphq killed the hype no one else.
 
Which decreases the likelihood of Ron Paul getting the delegates he needs to win the nomination or to prevent Romney from getting the delegates he needs to win the nomination more?

1) Getting fewer delegates than Mitt Romney?

or

2) Talking about the ramifications of getting fewer delegates than Mitt Romney?

Apparently when 1) happens, we either ignore it, or try to spin it into a victory.

You know, in every single state, every one, we have to get (on average) more delegates than Mitt Romney.

There were A LOT of Conventions this weekend. I can't even tell you in how states they were either picking delegates or having a convention.

One of the 5? 6? 7? was Minnesota.

We kicked ass there, a near sweep, hooray!

And in Michigan, we got some delegates. Hooray. Not half, so, in the real world, where moral victories are a little less important, we actually fell behind the curve, we didn't catch up in Michigan, we actually fell behind, but, sure, yes, it's Romneys home state, wow, great we got some delegates there.

Virginia voted on 9 delegates, we got either 2 or 5. They're not done, it's great to win delegates, but I think that these are "bound" delegates.

But what about Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina?
Lots of delegates there that we aren't getting. 3 states worth. Compared to 1 Minnesota.

So what is worse, this happening, or you being told that this is happening?

Our top campaign people were really just telling you what was going on. The campaign moneybomb is at $793K right now, not great like last fall, but it seems better than the last one, at least comparable. So, when the campaign tells us bad news that most of us knew already, it doesn't stop the money from coming in. We just don't have 10 Million dollars to spend for TV in primary races. So the campaign announced it wasn't going to do that any more. The msm wanted to pretend this meant that Ron Paul was dropping out. And Romney wanted to pretend the same thing.

For a victory in August, we pretty much need a series of black swan events. Having these delegates will be helpful if this series of black swan events takes place.
But having delegates won't get us the victory without these black swan events.

These black swan events probably won't happen. But I'm still going forward anyway. Going through this process leads to positive benefits unrelated to Ron Paul getting the Republican Nomination. In Maine, we have control or near control of the Maine State Committee, we should be able to get a Ron Paul chairman in there, they'll probably wait until after November to replace Webster. Ron Paul supporters have these positions because Ron Paul ran for President. The laws in Maine should be better in the future because a Ron Paul Maine GOP Chairman and a Ron Paul Maine GOP State Committee will find Liberty candidates for state senate and state rep, and the money will go to getting these Liberty candidate elected. And when we get the Liberty candidates elected, LePage will have better laws to sign.

And the black swan events could occur.

So, real ancillary benefits take place by pushing forward at the state conventions, and there's a possibility of the necessary black swan events.




all i am saying is the ron paul campaign did the demotivation not us. They could of kept their mouths shut and we wouldn't be at this point and everyone would still be fighting. The rphq brought this whole situation on themselves and that is the fact. do not complain to me i did my job AND WILL CONTINUE!! COMPLAIN TO THE CAMPAIGN FOR OPENING THIS CAN OF WORMS IT IS ALL ON THE CAMPAIGN, but if it makes you feel better blame me. sorry i disagree they are not protecting crap, more like selling out. We followed rules,the gop establishment did not and the rphq threw the state campaigns aka grassroots under the bus no other way to say it. the whole dropping out part was started by benton and crew not the media. maybe you should research posts on when this shit happened it came from the rphq not media. media was blacking out and doing fine. It was the rphq that stopped the blackout by opening their big fat mouths . they should shut the fuck up but damage has already been done not by media but by benton,tate,wead and the rphq.
 
If someone is arguing that the chances of Ron Paul winning are slim, that person does not necessarily have motives apart from Ron Paul. It might be easier to accomplish objectives if you have the facts.

He could think "It's a good idea to get delegates for a number of reasons, even if Ron Paul isn't going to win the nomination."

He could think "we need delegates in case there's a black swan event. There probably won't be a black swan event, but if there is, we need delegates"

He could think "there are a wide variety of small positive outcomes that come from fighting for delegates, we're close to achieving these outcomes, and we should fight, even if it doesn't mean that Ron Paul wins."

He could think "maybe Ron or Rand will get VP if we act politely, but take all the delegates we can"

He could think "Boy, wouldn't it be fun for the Minnesota Delegates, almost all Ron Paul supporters, to be hanging out with Michele Bachmann for a week."

About the above one, I would think yes. Time to educate Michele Bachmann. The Minnesota delegates and alternates should develop and communicate Michele Bachmann strategies. I hear that Michele Bachmann is religious, went to Oral Roberts Law School. Is there any part of the Bible that could be seen to contradict the basic neocon foreign policy tenet, which seems to now be "ask Netanyahu"? Perhaps Bachmann could be reminded of these parts of the Bible in Tampa?

He could think "it would be good for the Maine delegates and alternates to hang out with Paul and Ann LePage for a week. Networking, that sort of thing.

He could think "it's possible that LePage and Bachmann could vote for Ron Paul. Wouldn't that be neat."

Neither LePage or Bachmann strike me as "elite". They aren't natural Romney supporters.

Interesting fact: Romney has known Netanyahu for 36 years, since 1976.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/u...netanyahu-are-old-friends.html?pagewanted=all

But in 1976, the lives of Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netanyahu intersected, briefly but indelibly, in the 16th-floor offices of the Boston Consulting Group, where both had been recruited as corporate advisers. At the most formative time of their careers, they sized each other up during the firm’s weekly brainstorming sessions, absorbing the same profoundly analytical view of the world.

I'm kind of curious... why are you still posting here if you think Ron Paul has no chance? Do you want his supporters to shift to support other libertarian politicians? Or try and start a third party run? Or to throw people's support to Gary Johnston?

I'm just asking because I'm pretty sure most people here now know your views on Paul's chances of taking the nomination, so repeating it again doesn't make much sense.
 
The thinking now, in Maine, about Webster is that we should wait until after the
November elections. We want to get started on recruiting our own candidates after the November elections. At least that's what I think I'm seeing.

Maine was our biggest victory. Charlie Webster was the Chairman of the GOP in that state. Leaving everything else aside, based simply on the result, one could argue that Charlie Webster was the most helpful GOP chair of any state.

In actuality, he wasn't, but you can't argue with the results. I personally thought that the official campaign did not seem to encourage the grassroots approach. I thought that by doing so, by not encouraging grassroots activities, the result might suffer. It did not. The 100% official campaign run effort was a complete 100% success. 21/21 delegates.

You're not going to find your worst boogeyman among the residents of Maine. (Maybe that lawyer / lobbyist fella from Patton Boggs, but he's not a Mainer.)

Interview with Charlie Webster after the Maine Convention.

 
Back
Top