Should we not run a presidential candidate in 2016?

[LibertyEagle]

Which lists would belong to RON and no one else, except with his express permission.

Yes and that is how it is now.

 

[DylanWaco]

Hey guys, for those of you who want to keep dragging Ron's campaign through the mud, what do you think of Romney's campaign? How do you think they are doing? You know Romney is paying them top dollar and he has millions and millions of money to work with. Do you think they are better?

I don't. They have let Obama completely define their candidate and his positions.

Romney's campaign has been terrible, but to be fair they have a totally unappealing candidate, who the vast majority of the parties base viscerally loathes and who has no real connection to alternative voters outside the existing system. I'm not sure you CAN run a good campaign with a candidate like that.

 

[AuH20]

Rand is on second base, in scoring position essentially and we have critics telling us we need to abandon him and go back to square one. Does that make any sort of sense?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Romney's campaign has been terrible, but to be fair they have a totally unappealing candidate, who the vast majority of the parties base viscerally loathes and who has no real connection to alternative voters outside the existing system. I'm not sure you CAN run a good campaign with a candidate like that.

They have money to run ads to define Romney the way they think he should be defined. They don't do it. They have let Obama paint him. That is inexcusable.

 

[DylanWaco]

They are fighting against an MSM that has (amazingly) rightfully portrayed Romney as a serial lying fraud. The ads have helped him. Without the money he wouldn't have gotten out of the primaries.

 

[matt0611]

Run Rand Paul for President in 2016. Obviously.

There's no other good option.

And no, don't say Jesse Ventura or some other BS, try to stay in the real world here.

 

[LibertyEagle]

that sounds like a 'Rand Paul movement' not a liberty movement, particularly when phrased in such a 'him or nothing' manner. And the back up plan of Ron's campaign was to build RON'S influence in his congressional retirement, to those who supported RON.

Rand is our best bet at the presidential level. That seems clear to me. That doesn't mean there aren't others at all levels.

I hope we get good people running for everything and its dog.

 

[sailingaway]

You are entitled to your opinion. Others who may previously have held that opinion now are open to others coming into view in the intervening time. It doesn't make them, or even those who subscribe to principles most of us share but for whatever reason may not, at least at this time, subscribe to Rand, 'outside the liberty movement' as Collins declares them to be. It is that presumption of defining for all the 'liberty movement' and who 'its' candidate will be that I was objecting to, not the choice of specific people to support Rand.

And his statements together also suggest that it was/would have been acceptable to run Ron's campaign for Rand not Ron, which I disagree with. Again that doesn't go to anyone in particular's choice for presidential candidate, just my response to Collins's pronouncements.

 

[LibertyEagle]

You are entitled to your opinion. Others who may previously have held that opinion now are open to others coming into view in the intervening time. It doesn't make them, or even those who subscribe to principles most of us share but for whatever reason may not, at least at this time, subscribe to Rand, 'outside the liberty movement' as Collins declares them to be. It is that presumption of defining for all the 'liberty movement' and who 'its' candidate will be that I was objecting to, not the choice of specific people to support Rand.

And his statements together also suggest that it was/would have been acceptable to run Ron's campaign for Rand not Ron, which I disagree with. Again that doesn't go to anyone in particular's choice for presidential candidate, just my response to Collins's pronouncements.

That's fair. As long as you don't misuse your position as a Moderator to undermine Rand.

 

[sailingaway]

That's fair. As long as you don't misuse your position as a Moderator to undermine Rand.

I will state my positions, and I try to be as honest as I can be and challenge my own assumptions, and I always try to be fair by my own lights. Anyone here who follows what I say as the be all and end all 'right' idea without examination should rethink that position. I reject the notion that stating my honest opinions in a discussion of opinions is 'misusing' my position as a moderator, whatever the result is. From the way you put that, it sounds like my opinions are fine if they agree with a result you like, but not if they don't.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Chances are pretty good, Rand Paul will be running for President in 2016.

Rand will have the tentative backing of Teocons and and even some Huckabee/Santorum type conservatives out of the gate. I really, really like Rand's chances in 2016, he's played the game and played it well, Those of us who listen to his speeches and watch his votes rather than follow his "endorsements" will know where his loyalty truly lies. He's his father's son, and a statesmen that plays the game where Ron would refuse to tread.

My point is this...We may get the presidential candidate we want--with the help of the enemy and with the party structure we've layed in Ron's wake.

Its happening. Don't give up.

He's the liberty movement's Bill Clinton in how advanced he is at playing the game of politics.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Good luck with the Rand Paul ticket, I guarantee you the establishment has already picked their 2016 candidate after Mitten Sach's loses to Barry in November, Marco Rubio.

Jeb Bush will crush him in Florida.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I will state my positions, and I try to be as honest as I can be and challenge my own assumptions, and I always try to be fair by my own lights. Anyone here who follows what I say as the be all and end all 'right' idea without examination should rethink that position. I reject the notion that stating my honest opinions in a discussion of opinions is 'misusing' my position as a moderator, whatever the result is. From the way you put that, it sounds like my opinions are fine if they agree with a result you like, but not if they don't.

Nope and I think you know exactly what I mean. That is all I am saying about it here.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

If Romney loses I could see Rand running in 2016. It would be a good idea to get as many liberty-supporters in local government positions & the State party in order to minimize the chances of getting screwed over in caucuses by those nimrods that flagrantly violated Robert's Rules of Order.

Start planning ahead accordingly.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

To have a chance at the presidency we need someone that will inspire people like Ron did. Or have a big name such as Rand Paul run. Anything less then these two options won't cut it. Ideally we would have a candidate with huge name recognition and the ability to inspire people like Ron did. With that said we should totally run a presidential candidate and where possible attempt to get constitutional liberty candidates elected to the House & Senate.

All out!

I think Rand has the energy and drive to run for President and bring other liberty candidates along for the ride. Rand will have huge coattails in 2016. The direct opposite of what Romney has now dragging fellow republicans down with him. The contrast between the two will be dramatic.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

I have been screaming since 2007 that the state level races (and particularly the state legislatures) are several orders of magnitude more important than any Federal races whatsoever. I find the entire debate in this thread unbearably depressing.

I agree with you on their importance, but how many thousands or tens of thousands state-level positions are there? It's hard for the average Paul supporter to keep track of them all and see the value in supporting someone in a far off state. Look at the difficulty Chris Hightower had raising only 10k in funds and he's a well-known, respected liberty candidate. It's very difficult getting people to take notice and give donations to candidates that really won't bare fruit on the national scene for several years in the future or at all.

Then you have the task of singling out which state to make our move, or do we just support everyone willy-nilly style throughout the country? Should we focus on one state like NH and bankroll their state level candidates and try to effect change in one state first? I'm with you on the importance of having a strong minor league, but what strategy do we opt for?

 

[cajuncocoa]

That's fair. As long as you don't misuse your position as a Moderator to undermine Rand.

Good grief, LE...I don't think Sailing is doing that at all. Some of you are so invested in Rand that you can't even take a difference of opinion about him.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

We shouldn't even be asking this question, Rand Paul IS running.

We won't be able to raise nearly enough money for Rand as we did for Ron (although Rand does have an audience outside of the remnant).

Other than that we can't raise shit for liberty candidates, people won't put their money up. The only reason we did it for Ron was because so many people believed in him and there was a time urgency given the state of this nation and his age.

I think Rand has a higher ceiling for fund raising actually. He casts a much wider net.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

If Ron hadn't talked like RON during Ron's race, RAND would have lost.

Ron was a catalyst; Rand is a refinement.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Why do we need to package or market anything? Ron Paul gathered us all here because he didn't package and market his message to anyone. He told the truth. The blunt truth. I sure as hell wouldn't have joined his campaign had he had different rhetoric. We don't need someone to tell the Republicans what they want to hear. We need someone to tell them what they NEED to hear.

Because words matter. Presentation matters. Perception is 9/10th of reality to people.