Runoff election for a free state - round 2

[GunnyFreedom]

The legislature in these states is not accessible either due to the size of the state itself or the number of times it meets.

NH's legislature is accessible. All the activists know each other because we are a small state and a very prosperous one being near the coast and all the high tech industries.

These three states above are find if you want to hole up in the mountains somewhere.

The degree to which we transform the local politic, wherever we go, is directly related to how much of our own interest we give it. If we are committed to changing the local parties and local elections, we will do so either in NH or in WY. We will do it wherever we are. Being located in New Hampshire, is not a prerequisite for transforming the state politic.

If citizens en-masse begin attending precinct meetings, and county conventions, we will transform the local politic wherever we happen to be.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Go to New Hampshire. The Free State Project is a well-organized group. There are already organizations ranging from the NH Free activist crowd to the NHLA political crowd. Each county is also well-organized, with frequent meetings and candidacies. The FSP already has a few members serving as state representatives, and many more at the local level.

Don't reinvent the wheel. I was with the FSP when they went through the process of choosing a state and it was horrible. The issue was really divisive and it's not worth repeating. A lot of research went in to their choosing NH as the free state, and their analysis of the state stands. It's still one of the best states in the nation, and there is already a huge liberty movement within its borders.

I know there's a lot of sentiment in favor of several states being chosen, but even a "Ron Paul FSP" wouldn't attract so many people as to allow for multiple states. I don't think this effort will be bigger than the FSP, and the FSP had 5,000 members at the time they chose their state. They judged that they would need 20,000 in order to have a big effect in a state with a population of under 1.5 million. My liberal estimate is that you could match the FSP's numbers, in which case you'd need to limit yourself to one state in order to stand a chance of succeeding. Just go to New Hampshire and join the movement already in progress!

 

[pinkmandy]

The degree to which we transform the local politic, wherever we go, is directly related to how much of our own interest we give it. If we are committed to changing the local parties and local elections, we will do so either in NH or in WY. We will do it wherever we are. Being located in New Hampshire, is not a prerequisite for transforming the state politic.

If citizens en-masse begin attending precinct meetings, and county conventions, we will transform the local politic wherever we happen to be.

In NH every 200 or so people are represented in their state house by a delegate. That's unmatched anywhere in the world for representation. Those seats are important, the delegates make the decisions for the state. Like no REAL ID (go NH!). And most of those delegates run UNOPPOSED. The pay is only $100/yr so money is not a motivator. It's a major reason NH was chosen- because it's the easiest state for us to legally govern. That's what we need, to GOVERN a state. We can reject federal funding, reject federal laws, reassert state rights in many areas...there is so much we can do if we all just GO.

I'm heading up for a visit on the 28th. We plan to move within months.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

In NH every 200 or so people are represented in their state house by a delegate. That's unmatched anywhere in the world for representation. Those seats are important, the delegates make the decisions for the state. Like no REAL ID (go NH!). And most of those delegates run UNOPPOSED. The pay is only $100/yr so money is not a motivator. It's a major reason NH was chosen- because it's the easiest state for us to legally govern. That's what we need, to GOVERN a state. We can reject federal funding, reject federal laws, reassert state rights in many areas...there is so much we can do if we all just GO.

I'm heading up for a visit on the 28th. We plan to move within months.

Meh. You can go fight against the Boston infection. I can't tolerate it myself. If I moved to NH, I'd wind up on death row one day. WY threatened to arrest and jail federal agents citing that the Patriot Act was unconstitutional. That rates respect. I'm doubly set against the FSNH because they like to pretend that Wyoming doesn't exist. That very kind of tactic we saw used against Ron Paul, putting everyone but him in the 'voters guides.' If the FSNH'ers I had encountered were more balanced and less biased, I'd probably be more enthusiastic about their movement. Mention every state but Wyoming, and maybe people will forget about it...

A state that jails FBI agents who try to use the Patriot Act in their territory.
And they are that painful to acknowledge as a viable stronghold of freedom?

I don't like the tactic, so FSNH leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. quite frankly. I want to like them, but I can't. Not to mention the Ron Paul Primary performance when it was pivotal.

I got nothin agin' ye, but convincing me to choose NH now would be akin to the mountain becoming a plain before Zerubbabel. If you don't have a genuine miracle of God up your sleeve, then NH is probably staying last on my list for the time being. FauxNews tactics belong to things that are Faux. That's just my read on things.

 

[porcupine]

Meh. You can go fight against the Boston infection. I can't tolerate it myself. If I moved to NH, I'd wind up on death row one day. WY threatened to arrest and jail federal agents citing that the Patriot Act was unconstitutional. That rates respect.

That's nice bluster. How many FBI agents have they jailed?

And what have they done to reject the national ID card in Wyoming? Nothing? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

[truelies]

THERE IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THIS IDEA-Even if a narrow pro-liberty majority were to be created in a single State, the feds would use the complaint of even a single individual that his/her 'god given nanny state rights to a free lunch' were being infringed to shut the whole project down and force a return to bidness as usual.

 

[porcupine]

THERE IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THIS IDEA-Even if a narrow pro-liberty majority were to be created in a single State, the feds would use the complaint of even a single individual that his/her 'god given nanny state rights to a free lunch' were being infringed to shut the whole project down and force a return to bidness as usual.

This is one of the most annoying things about some of you on this board: the paranoia and the way you are frozen by fear (or maybe you're not really afraid, but use it as a crutch to not act). So what do you propose doing instead, truelies? How would the feds just "shut it down?"

Either give some constructive ideas or shut the hell up.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.

 

[truelies]

...........................Either give some constructive ideas or shut the hell up.

Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.

with all due respect- BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS, your precious 'free state' idea has 0.00000% chance of bearing fruit. Get over it and realise that freedom is going to have to be lived mostly in the middle of a herd of freedom fearing sheeple. just a a forinstance the fellow with the libertarian gated community concept is on a far better path than the 'free state' folks.

 

[OferNave]

Go to New Hampshire. The Free State Project is a well-organized group. There are already organizations ranging from the NH Free activist crowd to the NHLA political crowd. Each county is also well-organized, with frequent meetings and candidacies. The FSP already has a few members serving as state representatives, and many more at the local level.

Don't reinvent the wheel. I was with the FSP when they went through the process of choosing a state and it was horrible. The issue was really divisive and it's not worth repeating. A lot of research went in to their choosing NH as the free state, and their analysis of the state stands. It's still one of the best states in the nation, and there is already a huge liberty movement within its borders.

I know there's a lot of sentiment in favor of several states being chosen, but even a "Ron Paul FSP" wouldn't attract so many people as to allow for multiple states. I don't think this effort will be bigger than the FSP, and the FSP had 5,000 members at the time they chose their state. They judged that they would need 20,000 in order to have a big effect in a state with a population of under 1.5 million. My liberal estimate is that you could match the FSP's numbers, in which case you'd need to limit yourself to one state in order to stand a chance of succeeding. Just go to New Hampshire and join the movement already in progress!

What he said. And when you get here, join this: http://nhliberty.org/

 

[Nathan Hale]

with all due respect- BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS, your precious 'free state' idea has 0.00000% chance of bearing fruit. Get over it and realise that freedom is going to have to be lived mostly in the middle of a herd of freedom fearing sheeple. just a a forinstance the fellow with the libertarian gated community concept is on a far better path than the 'free state' folks.

This isn't true. If the Ron Paul revolution moved to NH you would absolutely see a libertarian state in less than a decade. Go to the FSP's site and read through the archives. This stuff was debated for a long time before the members considered it viable.

 

[brianewart]

People, in order for a FSP type thing to work you have to pick a small populated state. So, AK, NH, and MT are the only logical choices.

Wyoming?

 

[Tomba88]

New Hampshire. Hundreds of "Free Staters" have already moved here. NH is a small in terms of both size and population. Why not team up with other freedom minded people in a small state where we can make the biggest impact.