Plant the seeds now: Mark Sandford 2012

[scandinaviany3]

i know that is so fantastic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4qtgTAg_7o
I'll pass on Mark Sanford.

absolutely love that video...cant even lie for the party...too sweet

 

[scandinaviany3]

who's settling

We don't need party lapdogs. We have guys within the GOP like Johnson and guys outside like Ventura and Baldwin who had the courage to take the political hit and support a true patriot like Ron Paul. Why settle for less?

Johnson's policies on drugs will keep him from winning the primary.

Thus he will never get the chance to run against the democrats..sad to say...

We have to read the full resume and have no possible baggage for the party..not for us..

 

[newmedia4ron]

Johnson's policies on drugs will keep him from winning the primary.

Thus he will never get the chance to run against the democrats..sad to say...

We have to read the full resume and have no possible baggage for the party..not for us..

I agree.

Sanford for potus in 2012.

Flake for Senate. Judge Nap for the House. Johnson for the senate?

Jesse Ventura for potus if Sanford fails.

 

[kirkblitz]

whats ironic is sanford was the only person who voted with RP on the majority of his votes while they were in the house together, the GOP in our state hates him because he keeps cutting the budget and vetoing unconstiutional bills.

GO SANFORD!!!!

 

[newmedia4ron]

whats ironic is sanford was the only person who voted with RP on the majority of his votes while they were in the house together, the GOP in our state hates him because he keeps cutting the budget and vetoing unconstiutional bills.

GO SANFORD!!!!

I have bad eyes. Use bigger font next time.

 

[scandinaviany3]

Agreed bigger font

I have bad eyes. Use bigger font next time.

agreed bigger font

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

Johnson's policies on drugs will keep him from winning the primary.

Thus he will never get the chance to run against the democrats..sad to say...

We have to read the full resume and have no possible baggage for the party..not for us..

I don't expect us to win the GOP, because any real liberty candidate will have trouble there. I expect us to be supporting Ventura in 2012. However, if we're going to take a shot at the GOP nod, let it be Johnson.

Why do people keep bringing up ex-War and Patriot Act supporter Jeff "Bob Barr" Flake and McCain supporter Mark Sanford? We need candidates with some real political integrity to galvanize the base.

 

[JoshLowry]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4qtgTAg_7o
I'll pass on Mark Sanford.

+1

If I saw a video of Ron Paul sticking up for Bush in the 2004 election I wouldn't have trusted him.

 

[pastortony]

From what I have read so far, Sanford seems to be a very good candidate for 2012. In order to win we need someone with name recognition, experience and good political skills.

So what if he was at Bilderberg. Personally, I think they were sizing him up for a VP slot and saw that he wouldn't play ball with them. So what that he flubbed an interview on CNN. Sometimes as a politician you have to play ball with the party in order to further an agenda in the future - that's just a fact of life.

I've seen some other names thrown out there and while they are decent men, they simply do not have the national apppeal that a Southern Governor would have. Historically the only outsider that has ever contended for the presidency was when they had a bankroll the size of Texas, and even still he wasn't successful. We should learn from this past campaign that even with a very enthusiastic grassroots movement a candidate can only go so far as a virtual unknown.

For these and other reasons, Sanford is now on my short list for 2012.

 

[Truth Warrior]

From what I have read so far, Sanford seems to be a very good candidate for 2012. In order to win we need someone with name recognition, experience and good political skills.

So what if he was at Bilderberg. Personally, I think they were sizing him up for a VP slot and saw that he wouldn't play ball with them. So what that he flubbed an interview on CNN. Sometimes as a politician you have to play ball with the party in order to further an agenda in the future - that's just a fact of life.

I've seen some other names thrown out there and while they are decent men, they simply do not have the national apppeal that a Southern Governor would have. Historically the only outsider that has ever contended for the presidency was when they had a bankroll the size of Texas, and even still he wasn't successful. We should learn from this past campaign that even with a very enthusiastic grassroots movement a candidate can only go so far as a virtual unknown.

For these and other reasons, Sanford is now on my short list for 2012.

Bilderberg seems to really prefer the "sock puppet" politicians that will further the NWO agenda, without a qualm or fuss.

 

[sratiug]

Johnson's policies on drugs will keep him from winning the primary.

Thus he will never get the chance to run against the democrats..sad to say...

We have to read the full resume and have no possible baggage for the party..not for us..

No candidtate deserves our support without calling for an end to the drug war. And all the other elective wars.

 

[Varin]

Would have to agree with previous posters, Mark Sanford seems to bee very a good candidate for you (Not from the US explains grammar and spelling :o) in 2012.

from wiki

"He often would be one of two members of Congress, along with Ron Paul, voting against bills that otherwise got unanimous support."

"Sanford has sometimes had a contentious relationship with the South Carolina General Assembly, even though it is controlled by his party. The Republican-led SC House of Representatives overrode 105 of Sanford's 106 budget vetoes on May 26, 2004.[6] The following day, Sanford brought live pigs into the House chamber as a visual protest against "pork projects""

"Sanford professes to be a firm supporter of limited government, and many pundits have described his views as being libertarian in nature. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sanford

Although maybe not as good on all the issues as say Johnson I find him more charismatic and imo would find more support among average republicans. On top of that he strikes me as a very thoughtful person which is something I would look for in any politician.

His main problem seems to bee really sticking up for what he obviously believes in. Let hope thats something he can overcome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsS-6euWOf4&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXS5Iji9iOQ&feature=channel

Good damit just tell him no!

 

[scandinaviany3]

the drug war will never sell

No candidtate deserves our support without calling for an end to the drug war. And all the other elective wars.

IF you want to loose then make the hallmark issue for a candidate or even a hallmark issue be about drugs.

There is no point not dealing with reality and the electorate in the primary season.

Unless this person wants to run as an independent the republican party will not support him.

If this person can NEVER get through because of major opposition baggage then lets not waste our time being foolish.

People can overcome these oppositions only when either they completely take the party away from the other side like the pro life group did with the goldwater bunch. Not likely to be done by best estimates within 3 years when this candidate must start running.

Path of least resistance is the way to win, reviewing successes and losses and being smarter, instead of working infinitely harder for no return.

But Johnson could come in as vp and the spinsters would just have to work through this.

 

[itshappening]

the bilderberg thing makes me very suspicious of Sanford, he could be like Reagan/Bush, say all the right things and turn to shit when in office

the reason BB would seek him out is because he has potential, he's from SC which is a big primary state. if they could get him through the early primaries he would have a good chance of getting the nomination. that would be, on the face of it good news but if he's owned then is it really ?

 

[scandinaviany3]

that is why people approach him offline and ask about this from the cfl

the bilderberg thing makes me very suspicious of Sanford, he could be like Reagan/Bush, say all the right things and turn to shit when in office

if a group wants to promote a candidate and they feel there is something not known in the public but very important to their consitutients. That groups leaders privately meet with the person and go over the why's and what fors of that issue or event.

The bilderberg conference seems to be the one key thing to wonder on. Supporting the nominated republican candidate in the event you want to run for president isnt illogical. One must choose ones battles carefully in politics and timing. Those that show their cards up front most often loose. Those that honestly change who they are at the 11th hour loose. The slow and steady path, exploring, testing and being in the public eye, over and over again for the issues of liberty is unargueable. Also his ability to get the southern and evangelical vote we will need if we are to over come the neo cons of the northeast and DC area, their money and power

Lets not do another NH plan here and neglect Iowa to the last minute...we must work smarter ...or we will never, ever succeed.

Takeovering the party must be strategic, it wont be by them mind melding with us and seeing the light. Any candidate that has hot button issues the party will completely oppose. So no takeover will ever occur and no handoff of power to one generation to the next.

 

[0zzy]

my vote is for Stanford.
I can do Johnson too, but he wouldn't be as successful.

 

[justinc.1089]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4qtgTAg_7o
I'll pass on Mark Sanford.

Lol if you were a major figure in the Republican party, therefore you naturally have to endorse your party's candidate or be thrown out of the party and lose your position, could you really have done any better trying to say why to support John McCain? I wonder if Sanford didn't do that on purpose so he could say he supported McCain but not actually support him lol....

 

[justinc.1089]

http://www.nolanchart.com/article3995.html

I'll pass on supporting him.

Sanford is meeting with Buildberg!!!!!

I am in total disbelief. It has to be that he wants to know what is going on there. I absolutely do not believe Sanford is thinking about being connected with people like that. I mean I can remember at the SC presidential republican primary debate him doing a local news interview on camera with no one around but him and a few news people, and noticing me standing behind the camera while he was doing the interview, and then he actually waited around so I could talk to him for a second. The only other politician I have seen as humble as Sanford is Paul. I got a very, very, very strong impression Sanford STRONGLY wanted to endorse Paul but knew it was political suicide. He said he liked Paul, and started to tell me about how they were often the only people voting together on some things while in congress together, which I already knew. I told him us Paul supporters would love to see an endorsement, so I think he was trying to tell me he really wanted to do that, although he didn't get into implying why he had not done so at that time. I think he said he was not planning on endorsing any of the candidates at that time if I remember the conversation correctly. Mainly he just wanted me to know that he REALLY liked Paul a lot lol, and that he was often the ONLY OTHER GUY WITH PAUL a lot of times.

The only politicians I have seen I trust are Paul, Sanford, Ventura, and Baldwin, if he counts lol. I can't think of too many others right now really if there are any others lol.

I strongly suggest that we urge Sanford to run. But why not Sanford AND Johnson?

Thats another thing, instead of supporting one liberty-minded candidate, we should aim to get 3 candidates nominated to increase the chances of getting one elected. Imagine if there had been 3 Ron Pauls running..... afterall, there was Giuliani, McCain, and Romney for big government, more moderate Republicans, then there was Thompson and Huckabee for pro-war but more conservative typical Republicans, and then there was lonely Ron Paul for liberty and peace loving Reagan Republicans. Catch my drift here? The worst faction of the Republicans won, and had the best chance all along since they had better numbers of candidates too in my opinion. Next election we should have 3 libertarian Paulite Republicans running to increase our chances of winning. Plus they might endorse one of the other 2 candidates when the first and second have to drop out, which would further increase the chance of one of the liberty candidates winning.

 

[RCA]

no thanks

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Gary Johnson > Mark Sandford