Msg from Jonathan Bydlak -- willing to answer questions

[Matthew P.]

I'm sorry, Jonathan, but this one kinda ticks me off. You see, I've run Production for a Fortune 500 company, so I know how this thing works. Yes, I agree that Elam was unable to handle the volume and perhaps that was not known until 11/5. But, after that point in time, one, deals should have been immediately made with a couple of larger printers in different regions of the country, and two, the deals themselves should have been such that the campaign actually made a profit off of the materials, rather than making the printer a millionaire by giving him all of the profits. That is the kind of deal one makes perhaps to run a small Congressional race, but certainly isn't what one should do with a Presidential campaign. Deals can be made such that the printer still does all the warehousing and shipping, but materials are printed in large quantities, so that volume discounts are available to the supporters for even small orders. In fact, the materials would have been so cheap that the campaign might have offered them again for free to at least Meetup groups and made sure they were in plentiful supply at the various campaign offices.

This sounds like all hindsight, but you need to know that I raised this on more than one occasion with the campaign. At the time, I thought someone might want to know there was an easier, cheaper and much more efficient way. But, I was wrong. BRICK WALL again.

Oh, and hiring someone to work in the store that actually knows how to run such an enterprise would have been a smart move too. Neither person who did this job had one clue about running this type of thing. Orders were lost. Orders were delayed for months. Orders were not even shipped to more than one huge event that I am personally aware of and it wasn't like the person wasn't repeatedly reminded. Last time I checked, the entirety of the order never did arrive. The part that didn't arrive was unfortunately the Slim Jims. Inexcusable.

Liberty Eagle, your comments are informative and made with a good deal of experience backing them. It's too bad you weren't able to be on the official campaign staff - things could have turned out a lot differently. As I read through this and see this, rather unfortunate side of the campaign I can see how the Revolution could have been exponentially more effective. The message is still popular and that is very, very good. The question is - does it have enough momentum behind it to do this again in the future? From the sounds of it, from Ron Paul himself, even though he is not out, he's certainly not "in" - but "scaled down" - whatever that means.

I'll tell you what that means. It means that we, the supporters of Ron Paul have to try and do this all on our own as a scattered, large, unorganized group. What chances do we stand with that kind of strategy against these other fascist campaigns that have the organization and strategy? If Ron Paul gets to the National Convention and there is buzz about him and even press coverage, it won't be because he did it, or headquarters, it will be due to the blood, sweat, and tears of his faithful supporters. Oh that he would have tapped into the vast wealth of knowledge that was available to him!!!

 

[Matthew P.]

Steve,

This is just bizarre. Don was a big help to us in various ways in Minnesota. He was always a guy I could call up if we needed something. I've never heard anyone say anything negative about him.

Marianne
MN Coordinator

Marianne,

I appreciate all your hard work that you have put (and are continuing to put) into the state of Minnesota for Ron Paul! You have helped me personally as well as many others and I am looking forward to the upcoming Congressional Ron Paul meeting.

I sincerely hope that people aren't giving up now - there is so much work to be done. I have expressed my disappointment as I have grown to understand some of the foibles of HQ but that matters not - we must press on. See you in a few. . .

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

I suggest that you are dead wrong on this - Steve is simply starting to ask the right questions.

BS, Steve asking questions that the OP declines to expound upon is not a reason to hijack the thread from the rest of the people who are STILL CAMPAIGNING!!!

Now I am certainly not the sharpest knife in this drawer, but where I come from you save yer bitchin for after the whistle so as not to bum-out the guys on the field. There are other threads to discuss any issue your heart desires, this one is for HQ-types to answer whatever questions they choose.

It has bugger all to do with lifestyle per se - who cares - but with the impact on performance, IF that lifestyle does not stay at home while on the job; and I suspect that most complainants must know this as well. The hijacking is done by those arguing lifestyle out of context.

Off-topic BS Please find the Gay Buddist Conspiracy thread , thanks

Another germain question would be concerning the neocon association of some of the principals. When I first heard about that one (on the day of their hiring), I suggested to wait and see, since people working in the selection racket don't have much of a choice if they want to be employed, but...

Personally, I have stopped having questions some months ago. For clarity, just look at the actions when the MSM went on their "Paul quit" operation. Several staffers and ex-staffers reinforced that misinformation, when they could have stopped the falsehood right in the first minute; be it in interviews or personal blogs.

What? You don't have the capacity to ask a direct question? sheesh...

As to negativity - what negativity? Critique and a search for comprehending is not negative. For negativity, I would (did) look between the lines of several tens of 'professional' supporters and campaign staffers.

Being 'popular' or among the many is no measure of worth, often quit to the contrary - especially in politics...

If you cannot see what is meant by excessive negativity... I don't think I could ever answer to your satisfaction.

Sorry

 

[Proemio]

..., this one is for HQ-types to answer whatever questions they choose.

Nice. Then what's the point of the exercise? Grandstanding? Gatekeeping?
Would you show the same cute deference to White House-types or FED-types. etc.?
When analizing what was an improbable keystone operation, everything related becomes germane by default.

What? You don't have the capacity to ask a direct question? sheesh...

Anything particularly unclear about "Personally, I have stopped having questions some months ago."?
Or, does being flippant taste better in the morning or late at night?

Sorry

Forget it...

 

[SteveMartin]

Proemio,

Welcome to the Sh*t list, friend!

 

[Bradley in DC]

Such is politics, but it blows my mind that we're more willing to eat our own kind (whether it's libertarians attacking Ron or supporters attacking HQ) than go after the bigger beasts. It's part of that mentality that's brought us one step closer to 100 years of the war in Iraq.

Jonathan, what about HQ attacking supporters?

 

[JonathanBydlak]

Jonathan, what about HQ attacking supporters?

Can you please elaborate on your question?

 

[Bradley in DC]

Can you please elaborate on your question?

Sure, start with me.

 

[JonathanBydlak]

Sure, start with me.

Well, I don't know who on our campaign staff attacked you. But then again, perhaps you might want to start by explaining your involvement with DC ballot access.

Have you told people on these forums that you asked the campaign for $10,000 to obtain just 600 signatures?

Have you explained how you left the campaign high and dry when your request was declined?

Are you aware of the fact that some of the few signatures you did acquire single-handedly almost resulted in Ron Paul's name not being on the ballot in DC?

Do you know how much official staff time was needed to rectify that situation, rather than working on other things?

While I do not believe publicly attacking anyone (either HQ --> grassroots or grassroots --> HQ) really is appropriate, you may not be the best example here, because this seems to me like behavior that is far more inappropriate than many of the things you have criticized other people for.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Well, I don't know who on our campaign staff attacked you. But then again, perhaps you might want to start by explaining your involvement with DC ballot access.

Have you told people on these forums that you asked the campaign for $10,000 to obtain just 600 signatures?

Have you explained how you left the campaign high and dry when your request was declined?

Are you aware of the fact that some of the few signatures you did acquire single-handedly almost resulted in Ron Paul's name not being on the ballot in DC?

Do you know how much official staff time was needed to rectify that situation, rather than working on other things?

While I do not believe publicly attacking anyone (either HQ --> grassroots or grassroots --> HQ) really is appropriate, you may not be the best example here, because this seems to me like behavior that is far more inappropriate than many of the things you have criticized other people for.

Since you bring it up, you do know of what HQ was saying about me (eg., being fired from the Congressional office despite the Congressional office repeatedly refuting the lies that HQ would then continue to repeat knowing they're lies), etc.

Go back and read my posts about my exchange with McHugh and HQ sabotaging the DC grassroots effort.

I was a VOLUNTEER DC ballot access coordinator. I was doing the job for free without asking for any money but would not take the blame for HQ's incompetence and hostility to the DC grassroots activists if we didn't get on the ballot for pennies.

And yes, if I were going to be treated the way McHugh was treating me (and for which Becker apologized on behalf on the campaign) as a volunteer, it would have taken a lot of money for me to put up with that to work for him--and the money requested was to do a GOTV project to win DC that HQ refused to discuss (or do, for that matter).

Did I explain leaving HQ high and dry? I believe I used "F*ck you" to explain it repeatedly here (what? six weeks before the deadline after HQ wouldn't let us contact the DC supporters in their database for more weeks than that AFTER the ballot petitioning started!).

Please explain this as it makes no sense at all to me:

"Are you aware of the fact that some of the few signatures you did acquire single-handedly almost resulted in Ron Paul's name not being on the ballot in DC?"

After it became crystal clear McHugh and HQ have no clue about the delegate process (the RP website still gets wrong nearly all of the states since they don't even understand the RNC summary file) and incorporating GOTV into it, I've done all I could to publicly warn other grassroots activists not to delay deferring to HQ and do the job themselves (for which I've been thanked by grassroots supporters in Ohio and other places). For that, I make no apologies. I'm in this to support Dr. Paul.

 

[RonPaulFever]

 

[Akus]

It's been my observation that at times there has been a disconnect in communication between the campaign and grassroots supporters...

talk about an understatement of the century.....

 

[Mckarnin]

Welcome! For now that's all but I may have some questions as time goes by.

Katharine

 

[RonPaulFever]

Why would a person need 10,000 dollars to collect a few hundred signatures? Me and a handful of others collected 1,200 for free, lol. I've always suspected something was fishy with this Bradley character.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Why would a person need 10,000 dollars to collect a few hundred signatures? Me and a handful of others collected 1,200 for free, lol. I've always suspected something was fishy with this Bradley character.

Ah, and the apologists for HQ incompetence are out.

First off, you have no idea what you're talking about (not that that stops HQ staffers). And you would not have been able to collect those signatures from eligible Rs in DC (apples and oranges).

Two, I said I wanted a commitment of money and available resources not only for ballot petitioning but as part of a professional GOTV effort to win the primary (explicitly access to the RP supporters in the district so we could turn them out to vote). McHugh's response had nothing to do with money but a clear statement they would not do GOTV here--not even an option to discuss (and therefore that they had no intention of actually trying to win). At that point, I walked away. What would be the point?

I sent this email to Joe Becker a month before the deadline (after I had told HQ) to which he apologized to me on behalf of the campaign (and explained how problematic McHugh was for him too):

Mike called unexpectedly on Saturday. I told him I had tenants moving in and out and couldn't deal with him that day. Instead of just respecting that, he called and emailed incessantly, threatened me, lied to me, harassed me, insulted me, kept saying I said things I never said (even during the same conversations saying I was saying things I wasn't but that he wanted to hear). He gave me an ultimatum requiring an answer "in an hour" so, in effect, I told him to fuck off. Great way to treat the volunteers busting their tails off for the campaign. I will no longer be involved with the DC ballot access project. I made this clear to Mike, Debbie and Lew. Sorry, I guess I should have copied you as well.​

So, in short, I asked Bydlack about HQ's attacks on me and gave a factual example of them lying that I had been fired from the Congressional office despite that office repeatedly telling them there is no truth to it.

His response is to then repeat OTHER baseless and untrue attacks on me. When that fails, their apologists come out.

 

[The Lantern]

I've always suspected something was fishy with this Bradley character.

Anyone who has over 8,000 posts has to be committed to the cause. If Bradley wasn't committed he would have quit after the first 5,000.

 

[yongrel]

Why would a person need 10,000 dollars to collect a few hundred signatures? Me and a handful of others collected 1,200 for free, lol. I've always suspected something was fishy with this Bradley character.

Don't be so quick to pass judgment. All we have to go on is the word of Bradley and the word of Jonathan. As they conflict and we have no evidence to support one or the other, it would be a mistake to arrive at a conclusion right now.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Don't be so quick to pass judgment. All we have to go on is the word of Bradley and the word of Jonathan. As they conflict and we have no evidence to support one or the other, it would be a mistake to arrive at a conclusion right now.

Right now, it's better that everyone focus on important questions that continue to elude HQ (I have directed people--including several on this forum--to the Congressional office to debunk HQ's lie campaign but don't want to overwhelm them now with Congress back in session):
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=128018

and everyone work on their own state's GOTV (and ask for help here if you need it):
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=72640

 

[0zzy]

Bradley worked for the congressional staff, knows a lot of them pretty well.
He did a speech at the Mises Institute about the gold standard.
He has a company that is dedicated to individual liberty and education of it.
He has 8,000 posts.
He and I talk a lot online, he wants young people to get involved and start joining programs to learn more about Dr. Paul's message.

And yet, people doubt it. They'd rather believe a campaign that has proven itself incompetent. Even the Congressional Chief-of-Staff called them out.

Just because you are loyal to Paul doesn't mean you have to be loyal to his staff. Anyone remember Eric Dondero?

 

[amy31416]

Just because you are loyal to Paul doesn't mean you have to be loyal to his staff. Anyone remember Eric Dondero?

Good point Ozzy. Dondero did a lot of damage.