Should We Also Take Over the Democrats?

BSU kid

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
1,135
If the GOP is a dying party, like the pundits want us to believe...should we not also infiltrate Democratic ranks? After all, Dr. Paul himself said they are essentially the same party. By putting some of our members in their ranks it would allow a safety net should the GOP collapse or no longer becomes viable at a national level.

Essentially I advocate we run Liberty Candidates in both, and it is really not that bizarre of an idea. The YAL already encourages members to join either-or at the college level and take them over.
 
If the GOP is dying, it only helps us. The Democratic Party has nothing in common with us. A few of them were antiwar when Bush was the president.
 
Yes. Mark Clayton won the dem nomination for the U.S. senate in TN much to the chagrin of the state party. They tried to get him thrown off the ballot and failed. Sure he got beat pretty significantly in the general (though he came as close as the last dem to run despite having the party bosses against him) but he got national recognition (and ridiculous attacks) regardless.
 
If the GOP is dying, it only helps us. The Democratic Party has nothing in common with us. A few of them were antiwar when Bush was the president.

Maybe not the party as a whole, but there are democrats who share Ron Paul values on a lot of issues. (Mark Clayton for example).
 
No. Maybe 25 years ago but they are too wrapped up with big labor, and progressive causes associated with the welfare state. Court them on civil liberties only.
 
We have Dems who support Ron and won't become GOP for anyone else. I definitely would like them to. There are Jeffersonian Democrats, they tell me.
 
The Democrats are going further and further left. Plus, while we have a sizable and respectable force, that would be spreading our resources too thin. Our ultimate goal really needs to be establishing a viable and competitive third party, and we need to go through one or both of the parties to set that stage up.

People have heard me say many a time, I've had far more success, personally, with neocons and die hard R's than I have progressive liberals and die hard D's. The progressive/liberal Democrats want communism in this country and they are succeeding in their goal.

But, it depends where we are. Some Democrats may be more apt to influence from us, than others, but, I'm not sure. Does anyone know if blue dog Dems are dying out, or growing?
 
Last edited:
Yes. Mark Clayton won the dem nomination for the U.S. senate in TN much to the chagrin of the state party. They tried to get him thrown off the ballot and failed. Sure he got beat pretty significantly in the general (though he came as close as the last dem to run despite having the party bosses against him) but he got national recognition (and ridiculous attacks) regardless.

Anyone in TN with a D by their name will lose badly, unless it is for sometihng in Nashville, or possibly Memphis.

LOL just looked at the Senate results for 2012:

j9o3M.png
 
Last edited:
Democracy is so devoted to central planning it would be ridiculous. But they can push certain liberty platforms. Foreign policy, Drug war, patriot act, NDAA, audit the Fed. All of these can be pushed through the Democratic party. You won't get Austrian economics, but you can get lower spending and taxes to a degree. You can at least get a somewhat balanced budget. It'd be easier to deal with in congress when we're just fighting over true economic issues, than trying to fight an entire culture of social planning.
 
Democracy is so devoted to central planning it would be ridiculous. But they can push certain liberty platforms. Foreign policy, Drug war, patriot act, NDAA, audit the Fed. All of these can be pushed through the Democratic party. You won't get Austrian economics, but you can get lower spending and taxes to a degree. You can at least get a somewhat balanced budget. It'd be easier to deal with in congress when we're just fighting over true economic issues, than trying to fight an entire culture of social planning.

You can get Jeffersonian constitutionalism -- as THEY see it. And it isn't far from us. At least it would be really easy to form coalitions with them on most things once in office.
 
I am really surprised to see color coded thinking here.

I'm not opposed to one, but I wouldn't racially select one, either.
I am not being racially motivated. I am being realistic.
Saling Away my dad was spanish and Indian so I can say it. Heh
 
If the GOP is a dying party, like the pundits want us to believe...should we not also infiltrate Democratic ranks? After all, Dr. Paul himself said they are essentially the same party. By putting some of our members in their ranks it would allow a safety net should the GOP collapse or no longer becomes viable at a national level.

Essentially I advocate we run Liberty Candidates in both, and it is really not that bizarre of an idea. The YAL already encourages members to join either-or at the college level and take them over.

Yes.

Understanding the proper role of government is not party specific.
 
I am not being racially motivated. I am being realistic.
Saling Away my dad was spanish and Indian so I can say it. Heh

Yeah, but I'd be the one to vote for him because he was your dad, not because he was spanish and Indian.
 
You can get Jeffersonian constitutionalism -- as THEY see it. And it isn't far from us. At least it would be really easy to form coalitions with them on most things once in office.

I agree. People want purity, and so do I. But I really only worry about purity when it comes to presidential candidates that have a serious chance of winning, like Ron Paul. But if there is a D candidate in a place that they could actually win that is more or less a Jeffersonian Democrat then what is the problem? Beats sanctions in Iran and increased military spending. Also, it would completely skew the caucusing that is done in congress and throw the whole system into whack a bit. I like the idea of the Liberty community being bigger than red or blue team politics. If we can get enough into office, we can truly break away as our own political group and perhaps even party. I'd rather see Kucinich and Paul debate in primaries and Rick Perry and Santorum.
 
Yes but. Don't bother with 2014. History tells us that 2014 will be an insanely strong GOP year.

And then when we do, we need to focus on particular areas where there are high concentrations of the exceeding rare "conservadems." Like here in NE North Carolina. A Ron Paul Democrat could run away with an election in North East NC, BUT not in 2014. 2014 will be a very, very GOP year.
 
I agree. People want purity, and so do I. But I really only worry about purity when it comes to presidential candidates that have a serious chance of winning, like Ron Paul. But if there is a D candidate in a place that they could actually win that is more or less a Jeffersonian Democrat then what is the problem? Beats sanctions in Iran and increased military spending. Also, it would completely skew the caucusing that is done in congress and throw the whole system into whack a bit. I like the idea of the Liberty community being bigger than red or blue team politics. If we can get enough into office, we can truly break away as our own political group and perhaps even party. I'd rather see Kucinich and Paul debate in primaries and Rick Perry and Santorum.

there are also states where it is easier to run as a Dem.
 
Back
Top