Question about donating

[Agent Chameleon]

I have this moral dilemma, and I'm hoping that fellow RP supporters can help me out.

Basically, I want to support these pro-RP candidates running throughout the country, but I also have a big moral problem with getting involved in elections that I can't vote in.

I'm in a congressional district where as far as I know, there's no RP candidate running for office. So that means I would be free to back other candidates.

But I feel like that if I donate money to other candidates that I'm butting my nose in other people's elections. I know I wouldn't like it if some Marxist ran in my district and whole swarm of Marxists from the West Coast flooded money to this guy. I think I would resent it as interference in a election that supposed to only matter for me and fellow people in my district.

I understand that all candidates receive outside funding, but it still bothers me nevertheless.

What do you guys think?

 

[Kludge]

I was actually thinking this same thing around an hour ago... The congressional candidates are really supposed to be representing their own district, NOT the United States. It's almost as though we actually are an insurgency.

 

[pacelli]

We're all following a member of Congress from a district in Texas. The presidential campaign is over, and we still hang on every speech he makes and every interview he does. And our support has made a huge difference. I believe we'd be doing the same thing even if the CFL wasn't formed.

Unfortunately our distribution of patriots is so spread out, that it is important to come together at the moment in order to get our people in office. In the same way, we need our side of the fence to hold the criminals in our government responsible. Without organization, they'll just continue along the same path and our local districts will continue to be complacent.

 

[votefreedomfirst]

That's what it takes. Constitutional candidates don't have the backing of special interests like those who adhere to the status-quo do. Even Ron Paul would never have been elected (and reelected) without leaning on his nationwide network of freedom minded supporters.

Besides, in the end, it's the people in the districts who make the final call. We just allow them the opportunity to hear our message and decide its worthiness for themselves

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

Where the money comes from is immaterial in this age of special interests. It is the voters who decide on their reps. It is almost like saying a super rich guy who finances his own campaign is somehow less valid

IMO the best way to support liberty candidates is the Liberty Straw Poll

Of course, if your ethics prevent you from that, you can always help us spread the message and spread the roots. There is a fundraising group in this thread

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=149615

Please pick one (or more) and give them a boost. We are simply promoting adherance to the rule of law

www.walk4freedom.org

 

[pacelli]

I was actually thinking this same thing around an hour ago... The congressional candidates are really supposed to be representing their own district, NOT the United States. It's almost as though we actually are an insurgency.

They take this oath, and I'm committed to holding them to it. It does not mention anything about their own district:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00003331----000-.html

Article VI clause 3 of the US Constitution states:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

 

[Cowlesy]

walk4freedom direct chip-in here:

http://walk4freedom.chipin.com/walk4freedom-pa

 

[Kludge]

They take this oath, and I'm committed to holding them to it. It does not mention anything about their own district:

But for ourselves, there appears to be an ethically grey area... Would this be any different then if an (and I apologize, I couldn't think of a better example) Israeli organization funded Zionist candidates, arguing that the decisions of the United States affect the entire world, Israel included?


Edit: there was a recent thread reminding us that we are not one nation, but 50 sovereign states voluntarily unified. What business is it of mine to affect the outcome of an election outside of my state?

 

[RickyJ]

What do you guys think?

I think that only the people voting are going to decide an election no matter where the candidates get their campaign money from so you shouldn't feel bad about donating to their campaigns. Your donation to their campaign is not going to make a person in their district vote for them, it will just let them know about this person's views and allow them to make an informed decision about that candidate.

 

[Kludge]

I think that only the people voting are going to decide a election no matter where the candidates get their campaign money from so you shouldn't feel bad about donating to their campaigns. Your donation to their campaign is not going to make a person in their district vote for them, it will just let them know about this person's views and allow them to make an informed decision about that candidate.

If that's truly our intention and our belief, shouldn't we call for our state and town/city/village to further regulate or even fund political campaigns, giving them a level playing field, or at least call on parties to equalize funding to prevent special interest groups and nationally funded PACs?

 

[RP4EVER]

People forget most Incumbents get their money from companies; isnt the purpose of elected representatives to represent the PEOPLE......not special interest companies? If their purpose is to represent the people....and the constitition doesnt say they represent solely their districts; whats wrong with helping them out?

 

[Kludge]

People forget most Incumbents get their money from companies; isnt the purpose of elected representatives to represent the PEOPLE......not special interest companies? If their purpose is to represent the people....and the constitition doesnt say they represent solely their districts; whats wrong with helping them out?

Again, they are representing their DISTRICT, that's how the Republic was set up to be.

Is it in line with our principles to consciously attempt to side-step the intent of our framers, stooping to the levels of those we oppose and promoting Democracy?

 

[Agent Chameleon]

Gah! I was almost convinced to donate to outside campaigns, but Kludge's words also ring true to me.

Stupid Kludge! >_<



But I think I'll check out the walkforfreedom and other nation-wide efforts.

Thanks everyone.

 

[Mini-Me]

Again, they are representing their DISTRICT, that's how the Republic was set up to be.

Is it in line with our principles to consciously attempt to side-step the intent of our framers, stooping to the levels of those we oppose and promoting Democracy?

Donating to the underdog candidate of another district's race is not side-stepping the intent of the Framers. Either way, the voters living in that district will ultimately decide their representative. Donating money to the underdog is just a way to help voters hear candidates who they otherwise would not...candidates who will do the right thing for both them and the entire country. The decisions their representatives make affect all of us, so there's no reason we can't try to persuade voters in other districts to vote for principled candidates (by helping those candidates get a voice).

Besides, so many special interests give overwhelming monetary support to candidates who do not have their district's or their country's best interests at heart. When we try to counterbalance that, we're not doing anything wrong...it kind of reminds me when my roommate a few years ago used to watch a lot of Stargate SG-1. The Ancients were basically godlike beings, but they had a sort of "prime directive" not to interfere in the lives of regular mortals. The Ori were also godlike beings, but they were evil. Although they did not interfere for the cause of good, the Ancients would prevent the Ori from interfering directly. (Of course, they allowed them to interfere indirectly, which led to a huge problem, in that the Ori planned on using their indirect influence, which the Ancients would allow, to kill off the Ancients - after which time they could interfere however they like ) Obviously, we're not godlike beings, but we are indeed semi-outsiders...and when special interests interfere (as always), since we cannot prevent them from doing so, we can at least do our best to re-level the playing field. Besides, as I mentioned, the outcome of other elections does in fact directly affect all of us.

 

[RP4EVER]

Kludge: So the way they(Congressmen) vote only affects their district?

Heres my stance......all Federal Laws affect us.....no matter who does and does not vote for them; the more Liberty Lovers elected the more Liberty and Freedom we keep. If you arent comfortable donating to outside races; find a local one to support.

 

[Kludge]

It's a slow day... Anyone care to refute me? I ended up donating ~$160 total to BJ (some through the Liberty Straw Poll), which was more than I had at the time, but I'm still shaky about the ethics of it.

 

[evilfunnystuff]

imo there is nothing wrong with donating money to a respectable person in order for them to be able to be heard

imo you wouldnt be influencing the election

if it helped, the cadidate from their district would be the one influencing it

you would be helping them afford to have a voice

if the voters dont like that voice, they wont vote for them