Newt to Mitt: Don't ignore Ron Paul supporters

[alucard13mmfmj]

At least Newt pandered to the Ron Paul supporters by superficially supporting the auditing/ending of fed.

 

[coffeewithchess]

At least Newt pandered to the Ron Paul supporters by superficially supporting the auditing/ending of fed.

Then that went in the tank quickly when RP revealed him as the fraud he was on the Fannie and Freddie issue, and not to mention Newt saying he wouldn't vote for RP if/when he gets the nomination...so why should RP supporters listen to ANYTHING that Newt says?

 

[Smitty]

There is nothing to be gained by the Liberty movement by attaching itself, in any manner, to Romney.

What's occurring across America is much larger than an election. This is an awakening,...an enlightenment of a generation.

Having either Ron or Rand Paul as Romney's veep would be viewed as a validation of Romney and would be a catastrophic set back to the Liberty movement.

 

[speciallyblend]

There is nothing to be gained by the Liberty movement by attaching itself, in any manner, to Romney.

What's occurring across America is much larger than an election. This is an awakening,...an enlightenment of a generation.

Having either Ron or Rand Paul as Romney's veep would be viewed as a validation of Romney and would be a catastrophic set back to the Liberty movement.

Smitty Knows

 

[69360]

Calling it now... what we'll get offered is a FULL audit of the FED and position for Ron he might not even want to take.

Anything they try to appease us on will be FED related and it will be all smoke and mirrors.

Probably

And what exactly did Dick Cheney or has Joe Biden done?

They weren't opposition VPs. An opposition VP would hold a lot of power. The threat of your VP speaking out against you publicly would keep a president in line. Plus Ron or Rand would demand policy changes to be on the ticket.

 

[BestVirginia]

And what exactly did Dick Cheney or has Joe Biden done?

Google NEPDG sometime

 

[Todd]

Only way Romney could get my vote was with Ron or Rand as vp.

I have trouble with that one. VP is pretty worthless position to influence policy. And you have to cow to the administrations talking points. (Remember how sickening it was listening to John Edwards, Biden and Palin?)

 

[69360]

I have trouble with that one. VP is pretty worthless position to influence policy. And you have to cow to the administrations talking points. (Remember how sickening it was listening to John Edwards, Biden and Palin?)

Not worthless if you speak your mind publicly as VP. Just because in recent history VP's have towed the president's line doesn't mean Ron or Rand would, you should know better.

 

[The Goat]

And you are entitled to that opinion. However, there are Paul supporters that may vote for that ticket. Keep in mind that not every person that voted for Paul in the primaries is a hardcore Ron Paul or nothing type of activist. In reality, the majority of the folks that voted for Paul in the primaries, are average Republicans that just happened to prefer Paul over the rest of the field.

Any move the Romney campaign makes really isn't a move to court the hardcore Paul activist. It only takes a few moments of browsing this site and DP to see that the few thousand of the hardcore activists won't be satisfied with anything but Paul on the ticket (and even some won't even support it unless Ron is at the top of the ticket). They get that, and they realize the hardcore Paul support is a lost cause for them. But there are plenty of other people out there that like Paul, but are still able to be won over - those are the ones any courting would be directed to.

My point is why would we screw our selves over in the long run to promote the establishment in DeMint. I like DeMint, I've voted for him. but this is about advancing our cause, not turning it over to the establishment. Any one that would vote for Romney/DeMint would just as soon vote for Romney/Lindsay Graham. That wouldn't be a hand out for Paul supporters, it would be a hand out to Neo-cons that don't like romney.

 

[69360]

I would vote for Demint as a candidate by himself. But not for Romney/Demint.

 

[tbone717]

My point is why would we screw our selves over in the long run to promote the establishment in DeMint. I like DeMint, I've voted for him. but this is about advancing our cause, not turning it over to the establishment. Any one that would vote for Romney/DeMint would just as soon vote for Romney/Lindsay Graham. That wouldn't be a hand out for Paul supporters, it would be a hand out to Neo-cons that don't like romney.

And I tend to agree, but you do need to realize that there is a difference between "us" (RPF, DP types) and Paul supporters as a whole. We (the RPF/DP types) are a minority in a minority. We just need to realize that barring Paul winning the remaining states and forcing a brokered convention, there are many things that will come to pass without the least bit of consideration for the hardcore Paul base. As I mentioned earlier, Romney's least concern is the 50,000 of us (or whatever the number is) that are the hardcore dedicated folks, its the remainder of the 1.5 million that have voted for Paul that he is trying to court.

 

[Smitty]

And I tend to agree, but you do need to realize that there is a difference between "us" (RPF, DP types) and Paul supporters as a whole. We (the RPF/DP types) are a minority in a minority. We just need to realize that barring Paul winning the remaining states and forcing a brokered convention, there are many things that will come to pass without the least bit of consideration for the hardcore Paul base. As I mentioned earlier, Romney's least concern is the 50,000 of us (or whatever the number is) that are the hardcore dedicated folks, its the remainder of the 1.5 million that have voted for Paul that he is trying to court.

The Liberty movement isn't just another example of "patty cake" politics.

It's the construction of a political machine which, if successful, will radically alter the course of a culture and a nation and prevent its descent into tyranny.

Neither Rand nor Ron Paul will ever agree to be the veep in an administration which is financed by Goldman Sachs. An administration which is financed by Goldman Sachs will never ask Ron or Rand Paul to be its veep.

 

[tbone717]

The Liberty movement isn't just another example of "patty cake" politics.

It's the construction of a political machine which, if successful, will radically alter the course of a culture and a nation and prevent its descent into tyranny.

Neither Rand nor Ron Paul will ever agree to be the veep in an administration which is financed by Goldman Sachs. An administration which is financed by Goldman Sachs will never ask Ron or Rand Paul to be its veep.

Agreed, but again it is the issue of how big is the movement? 1.5 million voted for Paul so far, are 1.5 million part of the movement? If so, then we did a shitty job at reaching out to the average voter. If the movement is made up of only those that donated, then we have 200,000 people. If it is a fraction of those that donated, say 50,000 people then the movement itself (while it can be a strong force at turning the tide in American politics) is a small percentage of the overall electorate, and not a significant enough percentage of the electorate that any nominee would pay great attention to.

The point being if the movement in total is around 50,000 people that are hardcore activists, that makes us 0.03% of the electorate, and not a group that anyone is going to worry about catering to.

Now that is not to say that the 50,000 of us cannot effect change at the local, state and federal level - we can. But my points here have been merely observational as to what Romney's VP selection might be if he were to try to court the 1.5 million that voted for Paul. My guess if he did want to sway some of those folks to the ticket, he would choose DeMint. In all likelihood though, his focus is going to be more so on the Santorum and Newt voters rather than the Paul voters.

 

[WilliamC]

I'd consider voting for Romney if he filled the positions of power around him with people that I trusted to do the good work we've been pushing for.

Mitt Romney is a puppet. We talk about it all the time. He'll change his tune to whatever it needs to be to get elected. If doing what *we want* is what he needs to do to get elected and to stay there, then I'm fine with that. If he's going to be our puppet while we can extend the message of liberty into the reaches of power, why not?

Do I think that will happen? Probably not, the chances of that happening are probably as low as Dr. Paul's chances of securing the nomination on a first round ballot. The establishment will cling to the status quo unto their dying breath. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that, for me personally, there are absolutely no conditions under which I'd be willing to consider casting my vote for Romney.

Ron Paul doesn't speak in absolutes either.

Romney could be controlled with the right people, but like you said the chances of him surrounding himself with those people are only slightly higher than Ron Paul winning outright.

But don't neg the man for being honest, I don't disagree with him.

 

[Smitty]

The Santorum and Gingrich campaigns were nothing more than a flash in the pan.

The Liberty movement is a generational paradign change which has been gaining an enormous amount of momentum over the past few months.

I no longer view it as simply a political expression. It represents a fundamental alteration in the perspective of a nation. But at this point, it's mostly contained within Generation X and the Millenials.

It's just a matter of time until it reaches majority status.

The established order understands this and will attempt to coop the movements influence into its agenda, but they will fail.

There's no reason for the movement to ingratiate itself to the established order or to accept any of it's false patronism.

 

[TheGrinch]

BTW, the OP seems to have forgetten the "wink" part in the title. It should read, "Newt to Mitt: Don't ignore Ron Paul supporters ", and maybe a :lol: in there to drive home that they can't possibly be serious...

 

[tbone717]

The Santorum and Gingrich campaigns were nothing more than a flash in the pan.

The Liberty movement is a generational paradign change which has been gaining an enormous amount of momentum over the past few months.

I no longer view it as simply a political expression. It represents a fundamental alteration in the perspective of a nation. But at this point, it's mostly contained within Generation X and the Millenials.

It's just a matter of time until it reaches majority status.

The established order understands this and will attempt to coop the movements influence into its agenda, but they will fail.

There's no reason for the movement to ingratiate itself to the established order or to accept any of it's false patronism.

All that sounds great, but the here and now is that Romney is going to choose a VP nominee, whomever that nominee is will signal which wing of the party he is tipping his hat to - if it is a DeMint then he is courting the libertarian wing, if it is a Rubio then he is vying for the social conservatives. All of this has little, if anything to do with the activists that make up the liberty movement. As I stated earlier there is a big difference in numbers between the movement and the total number of Paul primary voters. I highly doubt that Romney is losing any sleep over the fact that the members of RPF won't support him regardless of who he chooses for VP.

 

[sailingaway]

All that sounds great, but the here and now is that Romney is going to choose a VP nominee, whomever that nominee is will signal which wing of the party he is tipping his hat to - if it is a DeMint then he is courting the libertarian wing, if it is a Rubio then he is vying for the social conservatives. All of this has little, if anything to do with the activists that make up the liberty movement. As I stated earlier there is a big difference in numbers between the movement and the total number of Paul primary voters. I highly doubt that Romney is losing any sleep over the fact that the members of RPF won't support him regardless of who he chooses for VP.

DeMint isn't libertarian. He's somewhat fiscally conservative, but try telling Santorum folks who love him that he is libertarian.

 

[tbone717]

DeMint isn't libertarian. He's somewhat fiscally conservative, but try telling Santorum folks who love him that he is libertarian.

That all depends on how one defines libertarian. Heck there are some that say that Ron Paul is not a libertarian.

 

[Smitty]

That all depends on how one defines libertarian. Heck there are some that say that Ron Paul is not a libertarian.

And there are some who say that you're a Romney supporter.