Marianne Stebbins to run for Bachmann's seat?

[luctor-et-emergo]

Questions for any candidate:

- are they going to commit to never for a larger budget, more spending, or to expand government?
- are they going to commit to never raise taxes?
- are they going to commit to never limit individual liberties?

I would add, "do you understand and can you explain the meaning of the above questions ?"
People may say they would never limit individual liberties but if they do not understand what individual liberties are, well then they may say they won't but they will.
I think it's more important to figure out if a candidate actually understands these questions than answers them correctly.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

I have heard mixed reviews of Stebbins, but have no intimate knowledge having not worked with her.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Never said or claimed to have any proof that she will not run the same way you do not have proof that she will run. Look back at what I said: if she is not going to run. If, not when. Let's call it as we said it, not what we imply.

THIS is what you said.

Unless you know said reason, it's all speculation. The fact is that if Stebbins is not going to and has no intentions on running, it's pointless to speculate at this point and waste time on what will not be.

If you have no proof, stop making the claim.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The guy seemed to imply she was talking down Rand and Bills. That's probably the reason you're looking for.

I don't know about Rand, but Bills pretty much purged his campaign of liberty people at the end, choosing establishment Republicans instead. While I can understand the need to bring in some people with some needed experience, it was rather shocking to me to see him do a wholesale purge. I would think that would have concerned Marianne whose team had worked very hard to bring him to that point.

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

THIS is what you said.



If you have no proof, stop making the claim.

Again, you seem to ignore the giant IF. IF. If doesn't mean definitively. If I said WHEN, then your case would hold more water. As I said IF she's not going to run and not when, it's still not a claim. It's a presumption.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Again, you seem to ignore the giant IF. IF. If doesn't mean definitively. If I said WHEN, then your case would hold more water. As I said IF she's not going to run and not when, it's still not a claim. It's a presumption.

That's fair. My fault. My apologies.

 

[sailingaway]

The guy seemed to imply she was talking down Rand and Bills. That's probably the reason you're looking for.

Not without more specificity. There was a lot of talk here, too, over specific events as they occurred, and if she was just talking with other supporters, as we do, I don't see why it would lead to that level of anger.

 

[KenInMontiMN]

Not without more specificity. There was a lot of talk here, too, over specific events as they occurred, and if she was just talking with other supporters, as we do, I don't see why it would lead to that level of anger.

Not anger, though I'll grant that it can be difficult to read through the printed word to separate the difference between anger and indifferent bemusement. Her constant criticism of not just Bills or Paul or Emmer but almost all those working toward holding office, working for others looking to hold office and especially those who actually are a threat to succeed in the endeavor has lead to a remarkable level of indifference to her criticisms. Nobody here cares does not equate to anger, though if you want to run her for Congress out in your district it probably wouldn't be too hard to drum up the donations here towards her full travel expenses.

 

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

I appreciate your candor, Ken. As I've told you before, I still like you. And to be honest, I can understand why, if your perception is as you describe, you may not care for me. One of my personality faults is that I don't often explain my actions well, or even at all. That whole INTJ thing again. You and I never worked very closely, so you have to base your opinion on what you've observed. Matt and I did work closely, so he understood the methodology and reasoning.

Truly, I have no plans to run for Bachmann's seat. Never said I did. I very much appreciate Matt's faith in me -- there's another guy who can be misunderstood if you don't know him, but he has a good heart. If I lived in the 6th, it might be worth considering. Even then, I don't care to be the center of attention, and would much rather put my efforts behind a good liberty candidate. Unfortunately, the best types of would-be office-holders are also introverts and aren't inclined to run. Our system lends itself to those who want the power.

If I am accused of not being pragmatic, in my defense, that is true. ;-) With Rand, for example, I've both praised and criticized various actions. Given loyalty to principles, I tend to evaluate specific actions and votes, not names and personalities. A purist? Not necessarily. But I only desire to put time and effort behind those who, while we may not agree on every issue, have a basic understanding of liberty. About Emmer, while he may have grown since his last campaign, and I like a lot about him, I'll have to still give him the (admittedly backhanded) praise that I often do for decent non-liberty types, that he's a "good conservative."

There's plenty to do in the liberty movement, and it doesn't all revolve around politics. So I'll keep quite occupied, electorally or not!

 

[Matt Collins]

Truly, I have no plans to run for Bachmann's seat. Never said I did. I very much appreciate Matt's faith in me

Yes, I just wanted to see if there were any traction with the idea, which is why I tossed it out there to see if it would stick

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

I appreciate your candor, Ken. As I've told you before, I still like you. And to be honest, I can understand why, if your perception is as you describe, you may not care for me. One of my personality faults is that I don't often explain my actions well, or even at all. That whole INTJ thing again. You and I never worked very closely, so you have to base your opinion on what you've observed. Matt and I did work closely, so he understood the methodology and reasoning.

Truly, I have no plans to run for Bachmann's seat. Never said I did. I very much appreciate Matt's faith in me -- there's another guy who can be misunderstood if you don't know him, but he has a good heart. If I lived in the 6th, it might be worth considering. Even then, I don't care to be the center of attention, and would much rather put my efforts behind a good liberty candidate. Unfortunately, the best types of would-be office-holders are also introverts and aren't inclined to run. Our system lends itself to those who want the power.

If I am accused of not being pragmatic, in my defense, that is true. ;-) With Rand, for example, I've both praised and criticized various actions. Given loyalty to principles, I tend to evaluate specific actions and votes, not names and personalities. A purist? Not necessarily. But I only desire to put time and effort behind those who, while we may not agree on every issue, have a basic understanding of liberty. About Emmer, while he may have grown since his last campaign, and I like a lot about him, I'll have to still give him the (admittedly backhanded) praise that I often do for decent non-liberty types, that he's a "good conservative."

There's plenty to do in the liberty movement, and it doesn't all revolve around politics. So I'll keep quite occupied, electorally or not!

People sometimes forget that you do need some brilliant people behind good candidates to run a campaign...

 

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

Yes, I just wanted to see if there were any traction with the idea, which is why I tossed it out there to see if it would stick

To be fair to Matt, I didn't say no to him. I told him there were some people who didn't like me, though.

 

[sailingaway]

To be fair to Matt, I didn't say no to him. I told him there were some people who didn't like me, though.

I do.



I really wish you'd run. I do understand why you might not want to, but I think you'd be one of our best.

The principles thing isn't a negative with me, though.

 

[KenInMontiMN]

In a perfect world, Marianne, you'd make a run at the 5th where the heart of the metro would resonate and throb to the liberty message quite well and the major local press would have to cover, being right in their laps; and over in the 4th which is more socially conservative than most casual observers realize, it would warm the cockles of my ol' heart to see Harold Shudlick dropped in, maybe by parachute into a roaring crowd of college kids. Where does he live, anyway, the 2nd?

Emmer's announcement will happen in his hometown of Delano on Wednesday:
http://www.eventbrite.com/event/6941302623/efblike

 

[Vastroc]

So where does Emmer stand on the liberty scale?

Amash/Massie awesome?
Mike Lee great, but extremely careful and with some concessions?
Broun/McKlintock(SP?) good, but wafflers to pressure?
Paul Ryan good liberty talker but terrible in reality?

 

[RickyJ]

Anyone else think this is a good idea? I do!

It is a great idea! Since you say you were largely responsible for helping Ron Paul win Minnesota, then you need to contact her if she decides to run so she can get you on her campaign staff pronto before the opposition snaps you up.

 

[Matt Collins]

It is a great idea! Since you say you were largely responsible for helping Ron Paul win Minnesota, then you need to contact her if she decides to run so she can get you on her campaign staff pronto before the opposition snaps you up.

I've been talking to her the entire time. But I'm already committed to a race in 2014, besides, I don't think she's going to do this one.

 

[RickyJ]

It's actually much easier given the way their caucus / convention system is set up, and the fact that the Ron Paul crowd (us) has a plurality in many areas there. I think she could walk in there and take it without much effort.

The process is that the MNGOP has Congressional District conventions that nominate a candidate. This is in lieu of a primary. If you own the nominating convention, then you can get anyone you want nominated as the Republican for that seat. That's how Ron won 34/37 seats to the RNC from MN. I know because I was there engineering it.

How does such a humble person like yourself ever receive any credit?

 

[TaftFan]

What about this William DeBerg guy posting in the Facebook group?

 

[lib3rtarian]

So where does Emmer stand on the liberty scale?

Amash/Massie awesome?
Mike Lee great, but extremely careful and with some concessions?
Broun/McKlintock(SP?) good, but wafflers to pressure?
Paul Ryan good liberty talker but terrible in reality?

I would also like to know this. So far, the only conclusion I have reached is that Emmer is "alright", but not "awesome".