Mitch McConnell hires Jesse Benton to run his 2014 re-election bid

[cajuncocoa]

You may find yourself standing without Ron Paul's base if your goal is to become the mainstream. However the agendas here are becoming blatently apparent. We will fight this one way or another.

And I guess this is where we get accused of being divisive to the movement again.

 

[The Gold Standard]

Really? Exactly how many of Ron's 2M supporters even know the name of the guy who ran the campaign? Very few.

How many are going to know that Benton ran Ron's and Mitches campaign? Even fewer

How many out there that aren't living and breathing politics can name one campaign manager from ANY race over the past 50 years? Even fewer

The only people that even give a rats arse about this is the diehards and those absorbed in politics.

How did any of that address anything I said? Mitch McConnell is a piece of shit. You can't even refute that without making a fool of yourself.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I don't care what Rand does. That is up to him and he can deal with the consequences.

As far as coalitions go, it seems many of you want to parrot what Ron says about them, but you have no idea what he meant. Building coalitions means working with others on issues YOU AGREE ON. Like working with Kucinich on bringing the troops home. Or working with Kucinich on a Fed audit even though they have totally different ideas about monetary policy. You work with those people to gain support for actual legislation that would do some good.

Ron never went out and campaigned for Kucinich, because much of what he believes in is disgusting to us. Hiding your liberty positions to blend in the Republican party is not a coalition. Is warmonger McConnell going to suddenly vote to end these wars because Rand campaigns for him? Of course not. He voted for Rand's budget because he knew it had no chance to pass, but now he can hold that over the heads of the gullible.

Again, a coalition, as Ron uses the term, is working with different people on issues YOU AGREE ON. A coalition is not hiding behind what you believe in to make friends with people you don't agree with.

QFT

 

[tod evans]

McConnell, the epitome of wasteful government spending...

Buying worn out depleted goods for well above market value and trumpeting their value to his constituency..

 

[RonRules]

McConnell was never that strong of a candidate:

1984 McConnell 49.9% Walter Huddleston Democratic 49.5%
1990 McConnell 52.2% Harvey I. Sloane Democratic 47.8%
1996 McConnell 55.5% Steve Beshear Democratic 42.8%
2002 McConnell 64.7% Lois Combs Weinberg Democratic 35.3%
2008 McConnell 53.0% Bruce Lunsford Democratic 47.0%

He can be beat.

 

[orenbus]

As far as coalitions go, it seems many of you want to parrot what Ron says about them, but you have no idea what he meant. Building coalitions means working with others on issues YOU AGREE ON. Like working with Kucinich on bringing the troops home. Or working with Kucinich on a Fed audit even though they have totally different ideas about monetary policy. You work with those people to gain support for actual legislation that would do some good.

This ^

+Rep

 

[newbitech]

Then my guess is you are going to be really pissed if and when Rand campaigns for him. Chances of that occurring are pretty strong.

Like I mentioned earlier, I don't think some folks are cut out for partisan politics, and what it takes to build a coalition and grow a movement within the party. Pretty much everything that has occurred outside of the Ron Paul campaign has pissed off most of the people on this site. Whether it is this Benton story, or Rand's endorsement, Bill's endorsement, Rand speaking at FreePac, Rand going on Hannity, Ted Cruz backing Romney, the platform inclusions, etc, etc, etc -- every one of these stories gets a similar response from the majority of folks on here.

I am pretty sure the potential voters on the sidelines that came out of the woodwork to drive Ron Paul's success in the last 5-6 years give 2 shits less about partisan politics.

One huge success of Ron Paul's campaigning since I have been interested is the evisceration of so called partisan politics.

If I had to pick one thing going extremely well politically in the US it would be the disembowelment of the left-right paradigm.

I don't see how hanging on to that paradigm serves any purpose at all. True, it may be useful to have insurgent politician "take over" those parties, but ultimately the radical changes we are looking for will come without the old status quo. These hangers on like McConnell are working on borrowed time IMO. Delaying the inevitable has worked for the establishment so far, but it cannot be sustained.

Why is Benton on the trajectory he is on? Why are we seeing what appears to be the caving of what many of us hoped would be staunch and unrelenting pressure on the status quo from a viable and grassroots supported challenge?

Is it smoke and mirrors? My guess is, yes.

I for one can do without all the posturing and crony type BS coming from people who were raised up by the grassroots. I'd much rather follow a policy of no entangling alliances. Sure establish friendships, trade ideas etc. But where is the need or desire to forge alliances with a party and people who have time and again proven themselves to be worthless and disastrous to the ideas of freedom and liberty?

Good luck with partisan politics. It's proven to be a shell game at best. At worst, it has duped many honest Americans into believing they have some choice or say in the affairs of the state.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

You may find yourself standing without Ron Paul's base if your goal is to become the mainstream. However the agendas here are becoming blatently apparent. We will fight this one way or another.

Well as I see it from reading this site and others, there are two divergent paths that are taking place. We see Rand and the rest building bridges with others within the GOP, and then we see folks who prefer to take an absolutist position and only want to work with those whom they agree with 100%. As time goes on, and with each new news story that comes out I think you will see that Rand and company are moving further away from the strategy that is promoted here by most. As I mentioned earlier, it seems that every thing that has taken place outside of the Ron Paul campaign this year has been harshly criticized by folks on here. Which I why I concluded that maybe a place like the LP or CP might be better suited for some people, so that you can take a more dogmatic approach to things.

 

[kathy88]

McConnell was never that strong of a candidate:

1984 McConnell 49.9% Walter Huddleston Democratic 49.5%
1990 McConnell 52.2% Harvey I. Sloane Democratic 47.8%
1996 McConnell 55.5% Steve Beshear Democratic 42.8%
2002 McConnell 64.7% Lois Combs Weinberg Democratic 35.3%
2008 McConnell 53.0% Bruce Lunsford Democratic 47.0%

He can be beat.

Ma-ssie, Ma-ssie, Ma-ssie I'll max if he runs, who's with me?

 

[specsaregood]

McConnell was never that strong of a candidate:

1984 McConnell 49.9% Walter Huddleston Democratic 49.5%
1990 McConnell 52.2% Harvey I. Sloane Democratic 47.8%
1996 McConnell 55.5% Steve Beshear Democratic 42.8%
2002 McConnell 64.7% Lois Combs Weinberg Democratic 35.3%
2008 McConnell 53.0% Bruce Lunsford Democratic 47.0%

He can be beat.

Considering that Dems outnumber republicans in KY by a wide margin? Republicans are up to 36% now (an all time high) and dems are now at 56% (an all time low).
When you consider that, it makes McConnell appear to be a remarkably successful candidate winning statewide office on the minority party ticket.

 

[ninepointfive]

I wonder if you can sue or at least report some violation like can-spam laws.

If that happens, then make a post about it - and all those with the same email spam can press "spam" in their email client.

 

[orenbus]

Why do I feel like I'm being brainwashed, just a few years ago we saw MM as the worst of them, now we are going to be asked to support him?

This is straight out of 1984, lol, "We've always been at war with Eastasia".

 

[erowe1]

Really? Exactly how many of Ron's 2M supporters even know the name of the guy who ran the campaign? Very few.

How many are going to know that Benton ran Ron's and Mitches campaign? Even fewer

How many out there that aren't living and breathing politics can name one campaign manager from ANY race over the past 50 years? Even fewer

The only people that even give a rats arse about this is the diehards and those absorbed in politics.

You're saying that the number of people who can name one campaign manager from the past 50 years is fewer than the number of people who can name Ron Paul's most recent campaign manager?

Logically, how does that work?

 

[ninepointfive]

Why do I feel like I'm being brainwashed, just a few years ago we saw MM as the worst of them, now we are going to be asked to support him?

This is straight out of 1984, lol, "We've always been at war with Eastasia".

You're right. I'd say that letting this come to pass is the best option - there's really not much to do if we are going to allow Jesse and MM to fail while putting efforts into a positive outcome elsewhere.

 

[Carlybee]

Well as I see it from reading this site and others, there are two divergent paths that are taking place. We see Rand and the rest building bridges with others within the GOP, and then we see folks who prefer to take an absolutist position and only want to work with those whom they agree with 100%. As time goes on, and with each new news story that comes out I think you will see that Rand and company are moving further away from the strategy that is promoted here by most. As I mentioned earlier, it seems that every thing that has taken place outside of the Ron Paul campaign this year has been harshly criticized by folks on here. Which I why I concluded that maybe a place like the LP or CP might be better suited for some people, so that you can take a more dogmatic approach to things.

The principles of liberty are not negotiable. Neither are the tenets of the Constitution and if you think compromising either of those is a good political move then yes a schizm will form. Supporting someone who has repeatedly voted against those things we hold dear is not acceptable. How dare you tell people who have been part of the Ron Paul movement for years which party they should belong to? That is not your call. What is our call though is to reject these Borgian maneuvers and thinly disguised propaganda meant to try and co_opt the RON Paul supporters into mainstreaming.

 

[Brett85]

How did any of that address anything I said? Mitch McConnell is a piece of shit. You can't even refute that without making a fool of yourself.

I don't see why you have to personally attack people just because you disagree with how they vote.

 

[angelatc]

My bet is on a lot fewer, and then it will be spun as it was part of JB's 'learning curve'.

NO, the mistakes were all the fault of the fringe grassroots!

 

[nobody's_hero]

Well as I see it from reading this site and others, there are two divergent paths that are taking place. We see Rand and the rest building bridges with others within the GOP, and then we see folks who prefer to take an absolutist position and only want to work with those whom they agree with 100%. As time goes on, and with each new news story that comes out I think you will see that Rand and company are moving further away from the strategy that is promoted here by most. As I mentioned earlier, it seems that every thing that has taken place outside of the Ron Paul campaign this year has been harshly criticized by folks on here. Which I why I concluded that maybe a place like the LP or CP might be better suited for some people, so that you can take a more dogmatic approach to things.

The strategy promoted here by most is what got us involved in the first place. Do you think Ron Paul could have ever inspired young, apathetic people to join up if he had adopted the 'strategy' of, "let's just go along to get along and see what happens"? What if Ron Paul had just 'blended in' with the 5 or 6 neocons surrounding him on stage in 2007-08? I wouldn't have noticed him, for certain. We didn't get a $15 trillion debt because of people who refused to compromise, or were stubborn, or simply "dogmatic." We got a $15 trillion debt because people were "pragmatic" and mistakenly believed that by 'going with the flow', they could somehow reverse the direction of the river.

We need a dam. Stop the river. Some people will get swept away by the current, it will happen. So, we'd better be ready to find more to replace them.

That river's got McConnell. Who wants to plug the gap?

 

[specsaregood]

Also, Congratulations Jesse! I look forward to you showing us how this advances the cause of liberty.

 

[angelatc]

I wonder if you can sue or at least report some violation like can-spam laws.

I don't know about email, but the politicians wrote themselves an exemption from the phone solicitation rules. I expect phone and mail contacts to be coming from McConnell now.