Okay, I see a problem here, what's the solution?

[thoughtomator]

They grew up, added responsibilities, they had kids, got mortgages, other interests. Unfortunately for this election cycle, there was more competition in specific niches for the new blood and other candidates focusing on top interests that took away old blood.

That's not what happened. Rand Paul all but told us to shut up and sit down because we were embarrassing him, with the act of stuffing his own father in the closet.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

As members of RPF, loving liberty and wishing to pursue the proper course of action to achieve more liberty, what are our choices in this presidential election?

With the current list of candidates, what is the best case scenario we can hope for?

I see a lot of argumentation about one certain candidate. I'm not even going to say his name, but I do want some input here.

What outcome from this mess should be our objective?

Who do you want to see nominated in the primary?

I suppose one option is that we are supposed to just sit this one out and hope for the best?

As there are no liberty candidates running now, there will be no consensus on a candidate. People will have their own ideas on lesser of evils or blocking greater evils or sitting back and watching the circus.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I only take comfort that we are not the first group of people to watch society go down in flames and not be able to do a thing to stop it. Others had lived through it in the past. I may just enjoy more quality time with friends and family.

This.

I have no dog in this hunt.

I joke about Vermin Supreme, but why not?

I'll be writing in either his name or Ron's, if I bother at all.

Right now it seems it will be one of the three: Trump, Sanders or Clinton.

The first is a bombastic fool, who says a few things I like, the second a command and control commie, who says a few things I like, the third is just plain evil.

What a choice...I'm out.

Enjoy more quality time at home, do my best to carve out a tiny slice of freedom in an unfree world, and stop badgering people about this.

They don't care anyway.

 

[Anti Federalist]

That's not what happened. Rand Paul all but told us to shut up and sit down because we were embarrassing him, with the act of stuffing his own father in the closet.

Took the wind right out of our sails, didn't it?

 

[thoughtomator]

Took the wind right out of our sails, didn't it?

More than ANYTHING any of our enemies could have done.

But as I mentioned, it did end up establishing one crucially important fact: The establishment will never work with us, assist us, cooperate with us, play fair with us, or in any other way be anything but the most hardcore of enemies to our cause, even if we throw our own families on the altar as a sacrifice.

This makes them mortal enemies, and relieves us of any moral obligation to give them any quarter. If Hitler were reincarnated and promised to line them up against the wall and shoot every one of them, it would be a strategic imperative for us to vote for him.

It is absolutely necessary to our survival to smash the establishment first and foremost, and let the chips fall where they may. They have assured beyond any doubt and taken every possible measure to insure that there is no other alternative left to us.

 

[RJB]

You know, I may just have fun. I took part in some of the satire forums in 2008 and was pretty much obnoxious on the internet pretending to be a neocon, but in real life I've been exceedingly nice.

I may just buy a bunch of Trump and Hillary bumper stickers and cut people off, give them the finger and act like a jackass when I drive. Live satire in real life.

Ever since I put the RP 2008 bumper sticker, I've been driving like an elderly nun. It may be time to shuck that thing and have some fun.

ETA: I'm not sure whether I'm kidding around or not with this post

 

[Dr.3D]

As there are no liberty candidates running now, there will be no consensus on a candidate. People will have their own ideas on lesser of evils or blocking greater evils or sitting back and watching the circus.

Well, I hope this doesn't destroy what we have been working on for the past eight years.

Perhaps things will brighten up when the primary is over.

Let's just sit and watch the circus.....

/* sniffs for elephants */

 

[Valli6]

No solution for what's already occurred, but how shall we deal with the outcome?

I see no possible “solution” for what's happened.
But what are some possible outcomes that we could be ready to respond to?

My most optimistic thoughts:

1) If - at the convention, the RNC treats Trump and his delegates, the same way they treated Ron Paul and his delegates in 2012 - the media will have a much harder time hiding it from the public. I don’t see any replacement Republican (Rubio, Ryan) being accepted by Trump’s supporters and it’s not hard to imagine something close to a riot occurring at the convention. Less concerned than RP delegates with following rules, or trying to be reasonable, they may tear the place apart! The RNC will be utterly exposed, destroyed, and out of the presidential election business. Trump may be left without a party.

The Libertarian party would be ripe to pick up the pieces. They are the only ones that will be on the ballot in every state. It’s too late for an Independent to get on. Where else could any voter go if they consider themselves even just a little conservative, or pro-freedom, or anti-PC culture, anti-interventionist, pro-free-market, etc?

2) If Trump were to actually win, the (mostly) duopoly-approved members of the Senate and the House would both HATE him so much, they would finally begin to take back their power from the executive branch. They’d fight him on everything and would suddenly lose their fear of threatening a president with impeachment - might even try it.​

Too much of a stretch?

(Personally, I will be voting for Rand Paul in the primary and most likely the Libertarian in the general.)

 

[thoughtomator]

@Valli - hop on over to freerepublic.com and search on the word "libertarian". They despise libertarians and use the word as an epithet. By their actions their preference for Democrats over Libertarians is palpable. These are your hoo-rah Eagle Bacon flag-waving "conservative" evangelical "Christian" types. They hate us with a passion and will stay home before they vote Libertarian.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The only argument I've heard as to why Ted Cruz is supposedly worse than Donald Trump is that Cruz received sacks of the Gold man's money. (Goldman Sachs money). So? Rand Paul received Peter Thiel money and Thiel is a member of the Bilderberg Group and they're just as bad as Gold man's sacks. I don't like Cruz being such a freaking Israel firster though. (Forgot about his asshattery of trying to tell Middle East Christians that if they didn't "stand with Israel" he couldn't "stand with them." Ugggghh!)

I may not vote.

That, and he was a very strong advocate of TPA/TPP. Which fits nicely with his wife being on the CFR task force to build a North American Union.

 

[seapilot]

I see no possible “solution” for what's happened.
But what are some possible outcomes that we could be ready to respond to?

My most optimistic thoughts:

1) If - at the convention, the RNC treats Trump and his delegates, the same way they treated Ron Paul and his delegates in 2012 - the media will have a much harder time hiding it from the public. I don’t see any replacement Republican (Rubio, Ryan) being accepted by Trump’s supporters and it’s not hard to imagine something close to a riot occurring at the convention. Less concerned than RP delegates with following rules, or trying to be reasonable, they may tear the place apart! The RNC will be utterly exposed, destroyed, and out of the presidential election business. Trump may be left without a party.

The Libertarian party would be ripe to pick up the pieces. They are the only ones that will be on the ballot in every state. It’s too late for an Independent to get on. Where else could any voter go if they consider themselves even just a little conservative, or pro-freedom, or anti-PC culture, anti-interventionist, pro-free-market, etc?

2) If Trump were to actually win, the (mostly) duopoly-approved members of the Senate and the House would both HATE him so much, they would finally begin to take back their power from the executive branch. They’d fight him on everything and would suddenly lose their fear of threatening a president with impeachment - might even try it.​

Too much of a stretch?

(Personally, I will be voting for Rand Paul in the primary and most likely the Libertarian in the general.)

Number 2 would be a positive outcome and is realistic. Obama and Republican did not come to agreement and shut down govt a few times. It would get 10 times worse with Trump, both trying to make the other look bad. They might override his power and pass budgets without him. Then Trump would use every alphabet agency to get even with congress. Power struggles get messy.

 

[wmmonk]

Took the wind right out of our sails, didn't it?

It didn't take the wind "right out of our sails". It just redirected us!
We didn't see it at the time, but we should have jumped directly to Vermin Supreme.
We knew in 2012 (and 2008) he would be running again in 2016. He has been running for President since 1992.
The media hates him. The establishment hates him. Proof?

How many Americans know who Vermin Supreme is, and what his stands for?
EXACTLY! He is ignored, or called crazy at best (probably) when he is talked about.
They make fun of what he wears, not what he says. Because he IS the candidate of THE FUTURE!

Sure, there were some around these parts apparently saying this strategy Rand attempted wouldn't work, and it was a mistake. BUT GUESS WHAT, THOSE PEOPLE WERE RUN OFF! THEY WERE "THROWN IN THE CLOSET"!

When they said and showed how Rand's strategy and game playing wouldn't work, they were told to SHUT UP!

AND GUESS WHAT!? RIGHTLY SOOOO!
Those people weren't VOTING HARD ENOUGH! They weren't DONATING HARD ENOUGH! They weren't VOLUNTEERING HARD ENOUGH!
Had just 1% of those people been voting, donating, and volunteering for Vermin Supreme, he probably could have taken New Hampshire.

But, what did we get? Hillary? Trump?

When the wind was taken out of our sails, you know what we should have done and could have done? LAUNCHED A BLIMP!
BLIMPS travel better in light/no wind, and this is what we missed!

 

[Dr.3D]

That, and he was a very strong advocate of TPA/TPP. Which fits nicely with his wife being on the CFR task force to build a North American Union.

Strange how people seem to neglect that part of the equation.

 

[erowe1]

As members of RPF, loving liberty and wishing to pursue the proper course of action to achieve more liberty, what are our choices in this presidential election?

With the current list of candidates, what is the best case scenario we can hope for?

I see a lot of argumentation about one certain candidate. I'm not even going to say his name, but I do want some input here.

What outcome from this mess should be our objective?

Who do you want to see nominated in the primary?

I suppose one option is that we are supposed to just sit this one out and hope for the best?

I don't think it's possible to predict at this point. I think the best case is whichever president ends up in the most gridlock with Congress, or else the one most likely to prompt radical measures on the parts of states that oppose them and finally having enough and asserting their sovereignty. It's not just about what they stand for but a complex function of countless factors. I honestly think it's best just to sit out the election, and even make a concerted effort to keep voter turnout as low as possible, and focus on other things.

 

[Danke]

If you don't vote, you have nothing to complain about.

 

[dude58677]

HOW ABOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NOMINEE NEEDS MAJORITY OF VOTES IN EACH STATE AND IF NOT IT BECOMES A CONTESTED CONVENTION AND VOTE FOR RAND?

He is STILL on the ballot!

 

[thoughtomator]

I don't think it's possible to predict at this point. I think the best case is whichever president ends up in the most gridlock with Congress, or else the one most likely to prompt radical measures on the parts of states that oppose them and finally having enough and asserting their sovereignty. It's not just about what they stand for but a complex function of countless factors. I honestly think it's best just to sit out the election, and even make a concerted effort to keep voter turnout as low as possible, and focus on other things.

Congressional gridlock is a myth. GOP Congresses are false opposition to Democrat Presidents, and in the reverse case a GOP President always concedes anything in order to get his war spending.

 

[HVACTech]

If you don't vote, you have nothing to complain about.

there are other things on the ballot besides the presidential race.

 

[MelissaWV]

HOW ABOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NOMINEE NEEDS MAJORITY OF VOTES IN EACH STATE AND IF NOT IT BECOMES A CONTESTED CONVENTION AND VOTE FOR RAND?

He is STILL on the ballot!

That's strange. You should tell that to previous elections.

Those are the first place finishes by popular vote in the 2012 GOP primary.

Orange is Romney with 42 states/territories, with Newt in purple at 2 states/territories, and Rick Santorum in green with 11 states/territories, and Ron with one.

Of note is that Mitt didn't win the plurality of delegates in every state, either, though I suppose you could say this proves your point that it leads to a contested convention since there were 3 "first place finishes by convention roll call" for Ron according to the same page.

 

[Dr.3D]

If you don't vote, you have nothing to complain about.

The biggest complaint I have is that there is seldom anybody on the ballot worth voting for.