matt0611
Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 3,749
You're going to be waiting for a long time. The two party system is not going away any time soon.
Last edited:
This Battle isn't over
- Thread starter Teamronin
- Start date
You're going to be waiting for a long time. The two party system is not going away any time soon.
specsaregood
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2007
- Messages
- 39,143
./
Last edited:
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Oh, come on. Ron is a huge part of WHY that was so, and Ron was polling first for Senate in TX before he said he didn't want the seat.
BamaFanNKy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,924
I love out of state people who think Ron helps people win races in Kentucky.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Ron hasn't given up for OUR sake, so we can fight for his nomination. That is important to many here.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
I know his money did. Speaking as someone who personally donated thousands, and got others to donate.
cheapseats
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 7,502
Oh, a third-party run IS happening. Ron Paul "just" isn't the standard bearer.
Gary Johnson doesn't have a prayer...his in-trade numbers are worse than Ron Paul's...you know the drill.
B-b-but . . . "a lot can happen in three months." "Anything can happen."
ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN was the name of a HALLMARK CHANNEL movie I saw over the holidays. Implausibly serendipitous...happy endings all around. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN is the secret sauce of Wishful Thinking, into which I do not buy (tho I enjoy happy endings as much as the next Spectator).
NOT anything can happen, unless MIRACLES serve as factors in equations.
But more can and will happen between now and November than can or will happen between now and August.
It is a very SLIM possibility, but it is NOT impossible that a critical mass of Americans can be "inspired" to send a resounding FUCK YOU to both parties. After all, MORE THAN 40% of Americans claim to be Independent. They surely don't ACT like it, but here's HOPING.
Last edited:
BamaFanNKy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,924
So, you donated to Rand because of an endorsement not a message. good to know.
LibertyEagle
Paleoconservative
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 52,730
Not true. I am a traditional conservative and I have supported Ron Paul since he first ran for Congress.
Count me among those who never felt that the GOP was a good fit for Ron Paul and/or his supporters. The values and principles we have never were the principles of the GOP in spite of Dr. Paul's talk of wanting to "return the GOP to its roots."
You're looking at this wrong. Political parties are just tools to get elected. Who gives a crap about any of them? We don't elect political parties; we elect individuals. While I am a registered Republican, so that I can vote in the primary, I have never voted for someone just because they were a Republican. I vote for the best person, or try to, regardless of party.
Ron Paul decided that the Republican Party was the best tool to use and he has encouraged us to BECOME that party. If we are successful at that, and we have kicked some royal ass in the last 4 years, we will BE that party. It's not time to disengage. We must not give up ground; we have to keep executing our strategy.
This is not about Ron. If we want to ever have a chance at getting more liberty candidates elected, then we simply must take a stand with one of the major political parties. We are so close. Don't give up. Please.
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
This isn't Johnson's forum. People who like him will vote for him. Rand or no Rand, Johnson simply does nothing for most of us, because we want consistent working from principle and he doesn't do that. A cost benefit process can 'excuse' too much. Stop shilling for him in Ron's campaign forum. And yeah, the campaign is still on, and it is on because we demand it because of those who want to pursue every last scrap of a chance Ron could win, including the chance that Romney simply falls hard in some fashion between now and convention. It doesn't matter if it is likely to those who think any chance Ron could win is better than a certainty someone else could win, because at this moment in time, Ron Paul's record in the face of unpopularity of his positions simply makes him irreplaceable. When he retires we will have to deal with it, and perhaps grow our own. But right now, we have someone with a historically exceptional record to campaign for and it is very rewarding.
Ron Paul truly speaks for us. And we are truly looking forward to having him speak for us, once he is nominated into contention at RNC on his own delegate strength, not a deal, at the convention.
Last edited:
LibertyEagle
Paleoconservative
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 52,730
I agree with sailingaway on this. Speaking as someone who donated to Rand and also called many, many Kentuckians for Rand. You've got to know that a lot of out-of-staters were calling and donating.
So, Ron Paul did help him. Quite a lot, I would say. But, I didn't do it, because of Ron. I did it for liberty.
BamaFanNKy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,924
That's my point. You don't support because of Ron. Ron is insignificant in the grand scheme of things. He didn't create the idea of liberty.
How would Ron running 3rd party undo any of our progress? If you've taken over the party what difference does it make?
That's exactly how I see it. We also need to remove the Rand Paul section from this site. He doesn't belong here and anyone that thinks he does is kidding themselves. He's despicable. With a father like his he should have learned better but all he cares about is kissing up to the party establishment.
Joey Fuller
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2009
- Messages
- 759
I will not support Rand Paul PERIOD. I am either writing in Ron Paul or voting for Gary Johnson. I don't care if they offer a VP spot for Rand or if he runs in 2016.
Joey Fuller
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2009
- Messages
- 759
EXACTLY
braane
Member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2011
- Messages
- 1,198
^^
I think the people who wouldn't vote for Rand aren't thinking clearly, and by 2016 I am sure they will have changed their minds. The Rand sentiment here has never been quite what Ron gets, and I get that, but he is still 100% better than anyone else who will be running in 2016 (who has a legitimate shot). It isn't settling, either, the guy votes in line with Ron on a lot of things and holds a lot of our ideas. We aren't going to take 1 giant leap towards our ideas in the oval office overnight anyways. We will have to do this 1 step at a time, this election makes that as evident as ever.
Rand would be a great president. He wouldn't be Ron Paul, but he would probably be a Reagan type (which would be good for our country).
Last edited:
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,007
Anybody who thinks Ron didn't secretly ask Rand to do this is kidding himself.
Notice the words on the first few frames? REALITY ZONE? Here's the deal. The G. Edward Griffin strategy announced back in 2008 is the "Liberty candidates must say whatever the hell they have to say to get into power, then change things." Are there risks to that strategy? YES! Do I like that strategy? NO! Do I trust that strategy? I'm not sure! It's hard to say who's being fooled, the neocon voters who vote for "stealth liberty" candidates, or the liberty voters who think they are really voting for "stealth liberty candidates" but are actually being double crossed. But I'm not naive enough to believe that Ron Paul isn't in on whatever is happening. He is. Either we trust Ron and Rand or we don't trust either of them. It's that simple. And Peter Theil and Bilderberg doesn't give me the warm fuzzies.
Beyond that, we've (well, let me change that to I) have to got to stop looking for some presidential candidate to save me. We have to save ourselves on the local level. We have to support local candidates that we know we can trust even if that means running for office ourselves. Yeah I'll support the best liberty candidate around in 2016, even if that's Rand and even if Rand has endorsed Romney. But that's no longer going to be my focus. For every dollar I donate to the next "national" liberty candidate I will donate 1 dollar to a local race where I know the person. I don't even know if I'll donate to national races in the future.
Notice the words on the first few frames? REALITY ZONE? Here's the deal. The G. Edward Griffin strategy announced back in 2008 is the "Liberty candidates must say whatever the hell they have to say to get into power, then change things." Are there risks to that strategy? YES! Do I like that strategy? NO! Do I trust that strategy? I'm not sure! It's hard to say who's being fooled, the neocon voters who vote for "stealth liberty" candidates, or the liberty voters who think they are really voting for "stealth liberty candidates" but are actually being double crossed. But I'm not naive enough to believe that Ron Paul isn't in on whatever is happening. He is. Either we trust Ron and Rand or we don't trust either of them. It's that simple. And Peter Theil and Bilderberg doesn't give me the warm fuzzies.
Beyond that, we've (well, let me change that to I) have to got to stop looking for some presidential candidate to save me. We have to save ourselves on the local level. We have to support local candidates that we know we can trust even if that means running for office ourselves. Yeah I'll support the best liberty candidate around in 2016, even if that's Rand and even if Rand has endorsed Romney. But that's no longer going to be my focus. For every dollar I donate to the next "national" liberty candidate I will donate 1 dollar to a local race where I know the person. I don't even know if I'll donate to national races in the future.
rope walking is hard.
