Ron Paul Wins in Nevada, So Romney and the RNC Buy a New Party

[Carlybee]

I think that is old news, based on the primary last week I dont' think the spots were obtained. in any event, and the campaign had sent out an email disaproving of at least how it was being spun, maybe not the reality of what they actually aimed at.

I added some more stuff from there. I do get the feeling they are pretty clueless though.

 

[The Free Hornet]

I've never liked the takeover strategy. In fact, even people willing to call it that are hurting their goals. Where I live, the liberty folks haven't tried to take over the party. However, the party has welcomed us with open arms. It recruits us to run, trains us, volunteers for us and raises money for us. It has been a great relationship so far. If this take over stuff continues to backfire in various states, maybe people will try to emulate what we are doing in NH.

Perhaps your party has already been taken over...? But what do you think it means to "take over" other than to be the people who "recruits us to run, trains us, volunteers for us and raises money for us"? Where "us = liberty lovers" and not "us = neocons". Or maybe you are OK with both being supported?

If your local party is hostile to liberty, what do you do?

a) flee to a party with no power
b) accept it
c) fight to take over

I like the idea of going to another party except the current party structure is such that there is little-to-no power outside the two major parties. It would be like excluding yourself from politics in a sense.

 

[georgiaboy]

This is very important because it is a shot across our bows. They are warning other states this could happen if we take over. A political blogger /party guy was saying this might happen in IOWA. It is very important that we be able to bring funding into the party where we take over management in a state. We need to focus on this, after the moneybomb.

Can the superpacs help with this?

From a different angle, is yesterday's funding model what is really needed for the renewed GOP? I think about all the folks who are concerned with the inordinate influence money brings to politics.

Maybe this is the time for the new leadership to take a fresh approach to how the state party is funded. Bring attention to any attachment of money to 'special interests' and their political expectations. Give the membership a renewed transparency into the budgetary needs of the organization and the accountability it promises to the dues paying members, etc.

 

[Keith and stuff]

If your local party is hostile to liberty, what do you do?

a) flee to a party with no power
b) accept it
c) fight to take over

You need to figure out why your part is hostile to liberty first. My party isn't hostile. We have clearly defined rules and the party doesn't have much power, anyway.

Fighting to take over sounds horrible. If makes you seem like a terrible person that is trying to steal from others. I recommend having pleasant conversations with the folks. Perhaps you agree on the majority of issues? Push those issues. If you feel your party isn't doing a certain thing to your likely, increase your involved with the party. Try to persuade people. Volunteer to run a sub-committee. Volunteer to serve on an executive board. Volunteer to help plan an event or fundraiser. Help someone in a special election campaign. Build friendship and mutual respect.

If none of that works, maybe it doesn't make sense to be involved with the party where you live. Maybe your activism could be better used elsewhere.

 

[sailingaway]

Can the superpacs help with this?

From a different angle, is yesterday's funding model what is really needed for the renewed GOP? I think about all the folks who are concerned with the inordinate influence money brings to politics.

Maybe this is the time for the new leadership to take a fresh approach to how the state party is funded. Bring attention to any attachment of money to 'special interests' and their political expectations. Give the membership a renewed transparency into the budgetary needs of the organization and the accountability it promises to the dues paying members, etc.

they would be bypassed for actual power by those handing out money, though, imho. I did not say it SHOULD be thus, only that here it is.

 

[sailingaway]

look at this: http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/politics/...problems_says_he_has_plan_to_win.html?ref=335

Note that the resolution was passed Tuesday and the RNC opened the 'work around' funding on Monday, so it wasn't a response to the resolution.

 

[nobody's_hero]

This is what Paul was worried about when he sent out those emails...
.

Ron should have known they would do this regardless. This whole idea that the GOP was just going to play nice once we were a serious threat to the establishment, was a bit of fanciful-thinking.

 

[sailingaway]

Ron should have known they would do this regardless. This whole idea that the GOP was just going to play nice once we were a serious threat to the establishment, was a bit of fanciful-thinking.

they opened the first one on MOnday per one of the articles I read on this. The resolution was on Tuesday. But a blogger in Iowa was implying the RNC might do it THERE a couple of weeks ago.

 

[francisco]

Why does Romney feel the need to do this if he has an insurmountable delegate lead? The best place to hide a lie is in between two truths.

It will be monumentally stupid for his own interest if Romney does not reach out to the RP contingent. There are many areas of agreement, and other areas where he could move toward us without turning off the neocons. For example: who could rationally oppose auditing the fed, or making SOUND MONEY a key precept?

If Romney ignores the balance of power that our movement represents, that could easily make the difference between winning and losing in the general election, it will show an unwillingness to face facts to the extent that it disqualifies him from the presidency.

 

[sailingaway]

It will be monumentally stupid for his own interest if Romney does not reach out to the RP contingent. There are many areas of agreement, and other areas where he could move toward us without turning off the neocons. For example: who could rationally oppose auditing the fed, or making SOUND MONEY a key precept?

If Romney ignores the balance of power that our movement represents, that could easily make the difference between winning and losing in the general election, it will show an unwillingness to face facts to the extent that it disqualifies him from the presidency.

Uh, he's the banker candidate, remember?

 

[francisco]

Uh, he's the banker candidate, remember?

Point taken. But importantly, for the average voter, Sound Money should be an intuitively desireable goal. So we need to openly challenge Romney on this issue. In fact, I believe it is the single most important issue, because with Sound money principles in place, it would be economically infeasible to continue our current disastrous foreign policy, and in turn the rationale for the current moves against civil liberties goes away too.

As I said elsewhere, the ball is in Romney's court pertaining to any cooperation from RP supporters, and what enforceable positions he takes on the issue of Sound Money would largely tell the tale.

 

[damiengwa]

As predicted, by me here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...egates-in-MA&p=4399902&viewfull=1#post4399902

I'll give you the answer, the convention was run by the establishment of the party for the sake of presenting a sanitized show. A show intended to give the appearence of some democratic, open convention of ideas and speakers. But in reality it was a scripted show. Like a Cardacian trial where the outcome is always arranged in advance.

I hope a lot of ron paul supporters end up in fact going to the convention. But i hope they go there with a plan to not participate and play ball. But instead to disrupt and discredit the whole process. Instead, i think they will dellusionally read rules and proceedures and try some technocratic way to steal the nomination, and they will fail. And the media will ignore whatever "unfair" method used to thrawrt them, and/or demonize the paul agitators.

Any way you slice it, they will change, modify or ignore any rules or proceedures that lead to anything other than the desired outcome. EG RON PAUL CAN"T WIN THE NOMINATION. Focus your energies on things that have a real shot at forwarding the liberty movement. And stop acting so surprised by the gambling going on in casablanca!

 

[hkbrandt]

This email just came in..




From: [email protected]
Subject: Press Release: Congratulations to Congressman Paul on Efforts to Unify Republican Party to Defeat Obama


For Immediate Release: Contact: Clark County Republican Party
May 17, 2012 702.258.9184


Congratulations to Congressman Paul on His Efforts
to Unify Republican Party to Defeat Obama

Las Vegas, Nevada - CCRP Chairman David Gibbs congratulates Congressman Ron Paul on his efforts to unify the Republican Party to defeat President Obama this fall. In a recent statement from the Congressman's campaign, he approved of the RNC focusing its efforts toward Governor Romney's election and endorsed the leadership of Chairman Reince Priebus.

We in the CCRP look forward to working with all Republicans to elect Governor Romney as the next President and to electing conservative Republicans to the Senate, House and offices all across Nevada. "We need to change the make up of Nevada's Legislature so that we can put people back to work and get our government under control," Gibbs says. "We cannot continue spending at the rate we currently are and must focus our state government on improving the economic climate for all Nevadans."


Below please find comments from National Ron Paul Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton:

Ron Paul Campaign Statement Concerning RNC Rule 11

“Chairman Priebus has always treated Dr. Paul and our team with respect, and we appreciate his leadership.” – Jesse Benton

LAKE JACKSON, Texas – Responding to complaints that the Republican National Committee has violated Rule 11 by setting up RNC Victory Operations while Dr. Paul still seeks the nomination, the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential campaign issued the following statement.

“In April, the RNC asked our campaign for our blessing to begin assembling the Victory organization Republicans will require to guarantee a win in the fall. Building such an operation is no small undertaking, and our Party needed to build in a few months what the incumbent president has been building for four years.

“The RNC offered to set up a joint fundraising committee with the Paul campaign and were very clear that if Dr. Paul became the nominee, the Victory Operation would be behind him 100 percent. They also were clear that they would hold off if our campaign objected. I gave my full consent for the RNC to move forward.

“Chairman Priebus has always treated Dr. Paul and our team with respect, and we appreciate his leadership. He has been an outstanding chairman and has our full confidence.”
###

Together to Victory in 2012
Paid for by the Clark County Republican Party
Clark County Republican Party
702-258-9184
www.clarkgop.org

 

[Revolution9]

and we should rename it 'the Republic Party'.

The Grandstand Ole Old Party..or GOOP fer short.

Rev9

 

[PC_for_Paul]

This is getting totally ridiculous.....moneymoney, moneymoney, moneymoney, money.......

I know freedom isn't free but I didn't know payments in dollars only? Well that and Visa cards I guess...

Wow I could have had a 3rd party...

 

[alucard13mmfmj]

seems delegats are unbound.. otherwise the romney camp wouldnt have to worry about it, since after all =P.. he is the presumptive nominee.

 

[MozoVote]

In some ways, 'evolution' is better than 'revolution'. Donors in Nevada, Alaska, Maine and Iowa are alarmed at the term "takeover" and what that implies. People are inherently nervous about change. In states where Liberty activists just continue to accrete into the party structure, the transition will be less traumatic.

One thing I had thought about on my own recently - the party does have many people in it that do BORING gruntwork. Monitoring polls, calling thousands of voters to remind them to show up... the party has groomed people to do those jobs for free, who fit into the existing mindset of the party. Do we really have the manpower to fill all those spots right off the bat? Not too likely. If the socialcon/neocon volunteers quit en masse, it will make the leadership in a "takeover" state look ineffective, and set up for failure.

You can be sure, the party heads pushed out of power in these states are plotting a comeback. Politics is a continuing cycle of king-of-the-hill.

 

[lib3rtarian]

In some ways, 'evolution' is better than 'revolution'. Donors in Nevada, Alaska, Maine and Iowa are alarmed at the term "takeover" and what that implies. People are inherently nervous about change. In states where Liberty activists just continue to accrete into the party structure, the transition will be less traumatic.

One thing I had thought about on my own recently - the party does have many people in it that do BORING gruntwork. Monitoring polls, calling thousands of voters to remind them to show up... the party has groomed people to do those jobs for free, who fit into the existing mindset of the party. Do we really have the manpower to fill all those spots right off the bat? Not too likely. If the socialcon/neocon volunteers quit en masse, it will make the leadership in a "takeover" state look ineffective, and set up for failure.

You can be sure, the party heads pushed out of power in these states are plotting a comeback. Politics is a continuing cycle of king-of-the-hill.

You just highlighted my two biggest fears about our "take over" strategy with this post.

1) As much we call them neocons, sheeple etc, those people do indeed do a lot of grunt work, and needs to be admired for that. I know the lady who is my district chair works her ass off (the kind of hours I can never afford to put in), and all she cares about is abortion, gay marriage and a "Christian Nation". When we "take over", these people will leave, probably due to disgust. I seriously doubt we have the manpower to fill these spots. All said and done, there's more of them than us.

2) We cannot rest on our laurels in the states we "took over". If we do, then we run the same risk of them organizing and ousting us at a moment when we least expect it.

For example, if 'Team Nevada' managed to do a better job of outreach and GOTV in NV, then it's a huge shame for our movement as a whole.

With great power comes great responsibility. We better be prepared to chew what we bite off.

 

[cajuncocoa]

You just highlighted my two biggest fears about our "take over" strategy with this post.

1) As much we call them neocons, sheeple etc, those people do indeed do a lot of grunt work, and needs to be admired for that. I know the lady who is my district chair works her ass off (the kind of hours I can never afford to put in), and all she cares about is abortion, gay marriage and a "Christian Nation". When we "take over", these people will leave, probably due to disgust. I seriously doubt we have the manpower to fill these spots. All said and done, there's more of them than us.

2) We cannot rest on our laurels in the states we "took over". If we do, then we run the same risk of them organizing and ousting us at a moment when we least expect it.

For example, if 'Team Nevada' managed to do a better job of outreach and GOTV in NV, then it's a huge shame for our movement as a whole.

With great power comes great responsibility. We better be prepared to chew what we bite off.

Your post illustrates why it doesn't make sense to "take over" as planned.

People need to be educated to the benefits of freedom and liberty; if they won't come willingly, then we haven't really changed a thing.

If they just leave the GOP when our liberty-minded people fill seats once occupied by neocons, what will we have gained?

 

[Keith and stuff]

In some ways, 'evolution' is better than 'revolution'. Donors in Nevada, Alaska, Maine and Iowa are alarmed at the term "takeover" and what that implies. People are inherently nervous about change. In states where Liberty activists just continue to accrete into the party structure, the transition will be less traumatic.

One thing I had thought about on my own recently - the party does have many people in it that do BORING gruntwork. Monitoring polls, calling thousands of voters to remind them to show up... the party has groomed people to do those jobs for free, who fit into the existing mindset of the party. Do we really have the manpower to fill all those spots right off the bat? Not too likely. If the socialcon/neocon volunteers quit en masse, it will make the leadership in a "takeover" state look ineffective, and set up for failure.

So much truth in this!