Should We Also Take Over the Democrats?

[sailingaway]

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.

which means it is a good ORGANIZATIONAL YEAR at the Dem party, to get in place, for any who may want to do that.

 

[nasaal]

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

Part of my point exactly. We talk all the time about using the system to beat it. Well we can't do that using only half the system.

 

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

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.

Yep. We can shine a light on the Dems' hypocrisy, just as we've done to Republicans.

 

[parocks]

Some people, some Ron Paul supporters, just have a real hard time with the Republican Party for some reason. There are others who are in the Libertarian Party. For those who just can't hang with the Republicans, Ron Paulizing the D's is an option. Go in there, push the antiwar legalize it hard.

 

[sailingaway]

Some people, some Ron Paul supporters, just have a real hard time with the Republican Party for some reason. There are others who are in the Libertarian Party. For those who just can't hang with the Republicans, Ron Paulizing the D's is an option. Go in there, push the antiwar legalize it hard.

I'd say push the constitution. Yes anti war but I think there is a huge following for getting rid of NDAA and the police state.

 

[RonPaulMall]

We work on the Republican side because Republicans pay lip service to limited government even though they support big government in practice. So there is at least that theoretical opening. Democrats preach and believe in big government. There is literally no in for us in the Democratic Party. The second we start talking about limited government they will tune us out. Jeffersonian Democrats? This isn't the 18th Century anymore. The last good Democrats were the Bourbon Democrats. And they haven't existed in over a hundred years. I would love to infiltrate the Democratic Party too, but there just isn't any way of doing it. It is a dead end. Only chance you'd ever have of success is to pull a Mark Clayton/Flat Top Bob move and pick a Democratic Primary that nobody pays attention to and nobody knows the candidates and win the nomination on pure chance.

 

[supermario21]

No no no no no. Time is right to take over the Republican Party. While the establishment squabbles for the next 2 years we should be focused on organizing.

 

[sailingaway]

There are a LOT of democrats who actually believe in civil liberties and are antiwar and they have as much natural overlap with us, if those are truly their hot button issues, as the general fiscally conservative Republican. I'm in California. I'm telling you the kids at UCLA would not be thinking of being Republican except for Ron.

 

[nasaal]

No no no no no. Time is right to take over the Republican Party. While the establishment squabbles for the next 2 years we should be focused on organizing.

That assumes that the power structure is a single party. The power structure is both parties. The republican party stagnated a lot during the time of W Bush. The Democratic party is going to do the same in the next 2-4 years. You use those opportunities to push certain agendas on both sides. You will not pass these things with just 1 party.

 

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Some people, some Ron Paul supporters, just have a real hard time with the Republican Party for some reason. There are others who are in the Libertarian Party. For those who just can't hang with the Republicans, Ron Paulizing the D's is an option. Go in there, push the antiwar legalize it hard.

That was me in the late 90s. I got sick of the Democrats and found the Libertarian Party. There's no way I would've registered Republican back then.

 

[parocks]

I am really surprised to see color coded thinking here.

I'm not opposed to one, but I wouldn't racially select one, either.

Blacks are 12.4% of the population
Black Women were 8% of the vote on Tuesday, and they voted for Obama 96/3.

White Women voted for Romney 56/42. Turnout was huge for black women, and low everywhere else. Romney got fewer votes than McCain or Kerry in 04. Obama, too, got fewer votes than he got in 08 or Bush in 04.

It's not unreasonable to think that good looking latino Ron Paul would close the wide latino gender gap - Latino women went to Obama with 73%.

I don't think that's the way to go, but it makes sense if you're looking at exit polls.

 

[sailingaway]

It makes sense if you think people think that way but people who think like we do don't.

I really dont like picking candidates for collectivist reasons is all

odds are, since we reflect society so will our candidates

 

[BSU kid]

As pointed out, it geographically makes sense to run Democratic candidates in some areas, slabbing an R after any candidates name is essentially political suicide in certain regions of the U.S. such as Vermont, New York, Rhode Island etc etc. At least running someone in the primaries locally gives us a chance, while we continue working on the GOP.

And I disagree with the notion that all Democrats want big government, there is a large chunk of them who want less government...the anarchist anti-establishment type. They channel there anger against corporations, when government and bad fiscal policy is to blame. I would imagine that at least some of these could be converted, especially once they find out that the FED is way more evil then Wall Street.

 

[parocks]

I mentioned a few weeks ago my idea about getting rock stars to run for office. Make it a thing. If you believe in Ron Paul's message entirely, run as a republican, if you are 100% uncompromising on antiwar, and aren't sure about other Ron Paul ideas, run as a democrat.

 

[Victor Grey]

The opportunities available for a viable run would be much more rare to run on the democrat ticket.

If they presented themselves, I wouldn't be against it.

 

[parocks]

As pointed out, it geographically makes sense to run Democratic candidates in some areas, slabbing an R after any candidates name is essentially political suicide in certain regions of the U.S. such as Vermont, New York, Rhode Island etc etc. At least running someone in the primaries locally gives us a chance, while we continue working on the GOP.

And I disagree with the notion that all Democrats want big government, there is a large chunk of them who want less government...the anarchist anti-establishment type. They channel there anger against corporations, when government and bad fiscal policy is to blame. I would imagine that at least some of these could be converted, especially once they find out that the FED is way more evil then Wall Street.

If you think we could get a win, give them all their issues, but insist on Antiwar and the rest of our issues that Democrats do like. If there's a Liberty person who wants to run for office in a place (usually a city) that only elects Democrats, it might be a good idea to run as Democrat.

 

[sailingaway]

The opportunities available for a viable run would be much more rare to run on the democrat ticket.

If they presented themselves, I wouldn't be against it.

House and Senate in some states are usually Dem. For some people, those positions might fit better.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

No Ron Paul supporter has won a major election as a democrat. Stick with what has gotten us results instead of doing anything too fanciful.

 

[parocks]

The opportunities available for a viable run would be much more rare to run on the democrat ticket.

If they presented themselves, I wouldn't be against it.

In Maine, the new US Senator is an Independent. He was the Governor as an Independent. The Democrat got 13.15%

 

[sailingaway]

No Ron Paul supporter has won a major election as a democrat. Stick with what has gotten us results instead of doing anything too fanciful.

that's only because Ron has been in the GOP and they joined for him. We have some people who don't feel they fit there, and if they aren't going to be GOP no matter what, it seems to me trying these other avenues is a good thing to look into. I think GOP will get most gains but there are dems also who like Ron, and there may be opportunities. I wouldn't be against people who constitutionally have a problem working in the GOP looking into it.

And Ron specifically said we need these ideas in ALL parties, multiple times.