Insiders Reveal Rand Paul Campaign's Downward Spiral

eleganz said:
You were the one that made the post about "we" grouping yourself in with the truthers and megaphoners. You grouped yourself in with them and you used WE so forgive me if I assumed that you wanted to be grouped in with them.

Now, are you going to just discredit me for attacking you (I wasn't) or are you going to respond to the post I took time to write you?
Click to expand...

I didn't group myself with anyone other than Ron Paul supporters. Are you saying all Ron Paul supporters are truthers and megaphoners?
As for my comments about Revolution 2.0, after Ron's run it wasn't immediately a done deal that Rand would even run. There was momentum lost. In that period, we were told that if and when Rand decided to run, he really didn't need his dad's supporters because he would have big money support and that really Ron's message would hurt his campaign. If you don't remember that, maybe you weren't on the receiving end of it. A revolution doesn't generally involve siding with the enemy, therefore it's a bit of a stretch to think this is anywhere near what it was for Ron. Ron excited people...Ron's message didn't waver and it resonated. I never agreed to play this game that's being played out now where huge compromises in the liberty position have been made. You don't know me or other people here or what we've done or who we've donated to however you seem to think if anyone takes exception to anything Rand does, that gives you the right to ridicule because I guess we aren't towing the line. Good luck with that. Maybe you should stop and think that some people put principle over winning at whatever cost. It's not being a purist, it's called having integrity and not diluting the message to the point that it starts to look like the status quo. If that's what it takes to win, then maybe winning is really just putting lipstick on a pig.
 
No hope for little ole me Collins? Well then welcome to your world because there's been no hope for a political class flunkie like you (of which Tom Woods will confirm) for the past three years. So as one person with no hope to another, let me ask you this: Is there anything in the Politico article that's an out and out lie, that is not true or just wrong? Anything? Here's your opportunity to discredit the both article and the author. I'll give you platform to tell the board why this article is full of crap. If you can't give anything specific, then you're not doing your online job of reassurance to the base online.

Speaking of full of crap, whoever said something about street corners and 9-11 Truth should quit dragging around that red herring. I would argue persons of those persuasions are long since gone, knowing they've been beaten in the movement especially with Ron in semi-retirement (although do you consider it 9-11 truth to ask about the Saudis role in the attack, hmmm?). Nobody is out on any street corners (although that should tell you how excited the grassroots are about Rand. Eight years ago I was giving out bottle water and slim jims to persons at a festival in Minnesota on a hot July day asking them to vote for Ron Paul. I'm sure many others were doing similar things. Where are they now?) and to be considered "fringe" for expressing legitimate concerns about the campaign is the height of hypocrisy since the campaign certainly doesn't care how "fringe" we are to constantly ask us for money. I guess the color of money knows no boundaries when it comes to conspiracy theory so long as you give often.

Some believe some Rand Paul campaign workers are just in it for the money. Where have I heard that before? :rolleyes:

The bottom line is the polls are right there in front of us and it shows his support slipping considerably over the past month. Maybe it's all due to the Trump and that's fine. I imagine he'll implode at some point. But how can Rand pick up the pieces after the explosion if doesn't give a sh*t? And that's what this is really all about? Does Rand really want to be President? Does he really want to be in politics at all. If a campaign is a reflection of a candidate, then a listless, uninspired effort filled with backbiting is not surprising considering the candidate has been describe as not that enthusiastic about the process. Again, is the article wrong about this or not?

You say wait for the debates and everything will change. Fine then, I'll watch the debates and watch Rand very closely. And if he shows the same kind of effort at debating as he's doing towards fundraising, then he should quit immediately. Either quit politics altogether or the Presidential race and focus on the Senate because he's not doing the movement any favors by going through the motions. And if he's phoning it in, you expect the rest of us to make phone calls? "Vote for Rand the Half-Hearted?", "Vote for Rand, a half-assed President from day one?"
 
Badger Paul said:
No hope for little ole me Collins? Well then welcome to your world because there's been no hope for a political class flunkie like you (of which Tom Woods will confirm) for the past three years. So as one person with no hope to another, let me ask you this: Is there anything in the Politico article that's an out and out lie, that is not true or just wrong? Anything? Here's your opportunity to discredit the both article and the author. I'll give you platform to tell the board why this article is full of crap. If you can't give anything specific, then you're not doing your online job of reassurance to the base online.

Speaking of full of crap, whoever said something about street corners and 9-11 Truth should quit dragging around that red herring. I would argue persons of those persuasions are long since gone, knowing they've been beaten in the movement especially with Ron in semi-retirement (although do you consider it 9-11 truth to ask about the Saudis role in the attack, hmmm?). Nobody is out on any street corners (although that should tell you how excited the grassroots are about Rand. Eight years ago I was giving out bottle water and slim jims to persons at a festival in Minnesota on a hot July day asking them to vote for Ron Paul. I'm sure many others were doing similar things. Where are they now?) and to be considered "fringe" for expressing legitimate concerns about the campaign is the height of hypocrisy since the campaign certainly doesn't care how "fringe" we are to constantly ask us for money. I guess the color of money knows no boundaries when it comes to conspiracy theory so long as you give often.

Some believe some Rand Paul campaign workers are just in it for the money. Where have I heard that before? :rolleyes:

The bottom line is the polls are right there in front of us and it shows his support slipping considerably over the past month. Maybe it's all due to the Trump and that's fine. I imagine he'll implode at some point. But how can Rand pick up the pieces after the explosion if doesn't give a sh*t? And that's what this is really all about? Does Rand really want to be President? Does he really want to be in politics at all. If a campaign is a reflection of a candidate, then a listless, uninspired effort filled with backbiting is not surprising considering the candidate has been describe as not that enthusiastic about the process. Again, is the article wrong about this or not?

You say wait for the debates and everything will change. Fine then, I'll watch the debates and watch Rand very closely. And if he shows the same kind of effort at debating as he's doing towards fundraising, then he should quit immediately. Either quit politics altogether or the Presidential race and focus on the Senate because he's not doing the movement any favors by going through the motions. And if he's phoning it in, you expect the rest of us to make phone calls? "Vote for Rand the Half-Hearted?", "Vote for Rand, a half-assed President from day one?"
Click to expand...

You're basing all of that off of one article with anonymous sources.
 
I think the bottom line in all of this is that it's still over 6 months until the Iowa caucus, so it's still too early to declare that Rand's campaign is over. I mean, if he does poorly in the Iowa caucus in February, then it would be more appropriate to discuss then what went wrong and whether the watering down of the message had more of a negative affect than a positive affect. But people who think that Rand's campaign is over 6 months before the election apparently don't know much about politics. 6 months is an eternity in politics, and anything can happen.
 
Last edited:
Matt Collins said:
Methinks you don't know what the hell you are talking about
Click to expand...

I know this much.

For every self important little stuffed shirt that's squawking their ignorant ass political game crap on the internet, there's thousands who have bailed out of the Liberty Movement because of it.

(mod edit)
 
The Rand campaign obituaries are in full swing it seems. Remember how John McCain's campaign was over in the summer of 07?

The truth of the matter is that these things are very difficult to predict. Look how fast Trump rose out of nothing. The same can happen to any candidate. What frustrates me the most at this point is that the GOP base is proving how stupid it is. Who would even want to lead this F'ed up group? The kind of things they respond to are the opposite of what will win a general election.
 
Jonathan Bydlak proud to stand with Jimmy LaSalvia...

 
I really wouldn't blame Rand if he has lost his desire to be President, or especially swim through the sewage we call campaigning.

This might be a reality check for him, and he soon gets over it - perhaps by debate time.

There may have even been an incident of some sort - may have even involved his loved ones. It wouldn't be the first time.

If he decides to bail, however, I still wish him well.
 
Crashland said:
The Rand campaign obituaries are in full swing it seems. Remember how John McCain's campaign was over in the summer of 07?

The truth of the matter is that these things are very difficult to predict. Look how fast Trump rose out of nothing. The same can happen to any candidate. What frustrates me the most at this point is that the GOP base is proving how stupid it is. Who would even want to lead this F'ed up group? The kind of things they respond to are the opposite of what will win a general election.
Click to expand...

The General Election is useless. Do you even think the GOP congress would assist a President Rand Paul? And the same goes for Trump. As Jules the Street Philosopher said, "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men...."
 
Last edited:
Matt Collins said:
Incorrect, the media matters a lot less than people think.

It's the job of the incumbent's opponent to let the voters know how their legislator voted.
Click to expand...

And if the media turns his microphone off every time he mentions it?

Then the tree falls in the forest, and the air does move, but there are no ears to hear it. Right?

We know how much the media matters, Collinz. While you were busy strutting around, telling people how incorrect they are, and attempting to aggrandize yourself, we were trying desperately to find a way to do an end run around them. Perhaps you were too busy to notice.

LibertyExtremist said:
If he has virtually no shot at winning, why not be brutally honest at the debates and go scorched earth on those establishment neocon bastards?
Click to expand...

Nobody says he has virtually no shot but the media, and no one believes he has virtually no shot but those who would rather diet on media pablum than think for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Matt Collins said:
Incorrect, the media matters a lot less than people think.
Click to expand...

More specifically (for those who have not been following along at home), Matt means that the media matters when he wants it to matter - and that it doesn't when he doesn't ...

For example:
Matt Collins said:
[Ron Paul didn't win Iowa because] the media puffed up Santorum at the last minute which is what made the difference.
Click to expand...
 
AuH20 said:
I don't blame Rand for not being 100% into it. It must suck to grovel to rich strangers when you realize how messed up the country is. It sounds like this is going to be his first & last run at the presidency.
Click to expand...

Yup, this...politics is poison.

Might likely be a one term senator as well.

Freedom is not popular.
 
geezus ...some of you act like the election is next week...

lots of impatient youngsters in here...

seems you all want to throw in the towel and burn your Don't Tread on Me flag already...

at this point in time, i'm not seeing or hearing anyone better than Rand...

if thats the majority opinion in here, then there really is no point in engaging any longer...
 
Carlybee said:
I didn't group myself with anyone other than Ron Paul supporters. Are you saying all Ron Paul supporters are truthers and megaphoners?
Click to expand...

Am I saying what??

No, if I didn't say it, then I didn't say it. Is that hard to understand?? Is it even harder to understand that a Rand Paul supporter can also be a Ron Paul supporter like myself? Yea you're right, I have no idea what you've done and you have no clue what I've done. I never said you or others didn't do anything, you said that all on your own, I hope you're not insecure about that.

Do you want to be a purist, have it all or have nothing? Should Rand cancel his anti-NSA dinner dates with Ron Wyden because they disagree on every economic issue? I mean is it either have it all or have nothing?

People should do what they think has the most effect, nobody is forcing you to like Rand but its happening and Ron has endorsed him. Theres money being raised, people are activating and and Rand will talk about liberty issues (just not 100% of the ones you like).

You always have Trump or you know... Gary Johnson.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top