Will a Jeff Flake Victory help the Liberty Movement?

[sailingaway]

I say libertarian-conservatives often to distinguish from the "capital L" Libertarians. That is actually pretty much where Rand is more so than a guy like Johnson or whoever else they ran on the LP ticket in the past.

you include a lot of people I don't like.

I am noting that the thrust of this entire thread is people not having the same definitions. I will work like crazy for people who satisfy my own.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Nothing ever changes because YOU don't change it. Why would a liberty candidate, or one who is close, run for office in your area? You won't support them, so it would be a waste of time.

We get the candidates we deserve.

Where and when did I say I "won't support" a liberty candidate?

You're taking my words out of context.

I said I won't support someone I don't know who claims to be a liberty candidate. If all I know about them is that they take the liberty label, that's not enough. And it's especially not enough when I learn they've supported the main bills that have destroyed our civil liberties! That gets them a big fat NO from me.

 

[gerryb]

Exercise some "eternal vigilance" by not labeling people who voted NDAA and the Patriot Act as Liberty Candidates!!

As has been stated no less than half a dozen times, who is labeling them as "Liberty" candidates? What makes that mark?

If we held out for what I consider a liberty candidate -- Ron Paul's public policy does not even qualify. His personal thoughts probably do. We would get nowhere.

 

[tbone717]

you include a lot of people I don't like.

I am noting that the thrust of this entire thread is people not having the same definitions. I will work like crazy for people who satisfy my own.

And you write off people I think will be very helpful. Nonetheless, I believe we share the same ultimate goals.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Well, then unfortunately you're going to be losing elections for the rest of your life.

It's amazing that you've been here since 2007 and still have ZERO idea how politics works. Are you telling me you have NEVER noticed the types of people who generally run for certain offices?

Who typically runs for US Senate? US Representatives.
Who typically runs for US Representative? State Representatives.
Who typically runs for State Representative? LOCAL office holders such as "school board, tax collector, township manager or sheriff"
Who typically runs for LOCAL offices? People like YOU who want to make a difference and change policy but who don't want to sit on their ass waiting for someone else to do it.

For reasons I'm not going to go into here (because they're none of anyone's business) I'm not running for office, and I have no intention of doing so.

But thank you for assuming the only option for me is to "sit on (my) ass"

 

[sailingaway]

The problem is this is incredibly narrow minded for the site to do because now all of the sudden we're holding people to a forum standard... yes a forum with 40,229 people (perhaps not all of them even American citizens) now decides what the proper "standard" is for particular candidate.

Jeff Flake was 1st on the Congressional Liberty Index in 2010:
http://www.rlc.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/LI2009.pdf

He beat out Ron Paul who was in fact #2.

Say what you will about the rankings themselves what is clear is he's in the top tier of liberty republicans and to try dismiss him because you don't like one or two of his issues is exactly the kind of absurd "standard" that will cause this movement to go NOWHERE.

The type of standard you're placing should be held against people when we actually hold the party and aren't still a tireless minority. The time to hold people to that is when we have 300 Jeff Flakes and not 10.

Is he perfect? No, no one is, even the people you think are perfect now, when elected, will do 1-2 things you don't like- then what? We destroy them to and change their thread titles and self-destruct all on our own?

Do you not see where such a ridicoulous standard will get you? We need to grow and in order to do that we have to vote in the most like-minded liberty people we can and sort out the best and the worst later. We won't even get to that point if we hold everyone to such a standard now.


And, on top of all of that, there's 42,000 members but how many are active really? 1-2 thousand?

So now we're holding the entire liberty movement to a standard that 1 to 2 thousand people on a forum decide?

This is total insanity.

A Jeff Flake Victory WILL help the Liberty Movement even if he's not a carbon copy of Ron Paul.

1-2 thousand people spreading the idea his victory WONT help the Liberty Movement will only suppress his own support and cause the opposition, who is clearly inferior, to win.

You are saying Ron Paul Forum's internet clout should advertise that Flake is a liberty candidate which is what the title said before it was modified, essentially, even though there is absolutely NOT a consensus on that. AS I said, I didn't change the title, but that would have been equally wrong and would have come up in a google article search as a RON PAUL FORUMS thread.

If the OP wants to pm a mod with a different title that does assume one way or the other (Flake is better than his opponent, for example) I'm sure any mod would be happy to change it.

I don't think anyone wants to advertise AGAINST Flake in his race, but nor do many of us want him to appear to be one of our own.

 

[sailingaway]

And you write off people I think will be very helpful. Nonetheless, I believe we share the same ultimate goals.

I'm not sure we do. At least I think issues I think are absolute baseline you think are in the 'wouldn't it be pleasant if we got that' category. That could definitely lead us to pushing different candidates in a specific race.

 

[gerryb]

You are saying Ron Paul Forum's internet clout should advertise that Flake is a liberty candidate which is what the title said before it was modified, essentially, even though there is absolutely NOT a consensus on that..

I don't know what it was before, I am assuming the [NOT] was inserted. IF that's the only change.. Then who is calling him a liberty candidate in the thread title? It says help the Liberty Movement. IF the person will vote 1 time more for liberty issues than the opponent, it is helpful to the liberty movement...

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Is there anybody on the forum that actually believes Flake won't be helpful to the liberty movement?

Whether he is a liberty candidate is debatable.

The title should be changed back. Anyone who believes he will not help(hurt) the liberty movement is delusional.

 

[cajuncocoa]

As has been stated no less than half a dozen times, who is labeling them as "Liberty" candidates? What makes that mark?

If we held out for what I consider a liberty candidate -- Ron Paul's public policy does not even qualify. His personal thoughts probably do. We would get nowhere.

Yes, we all have our own ideas of what makes someone a liberty candidate. On that point, we agree.

However, I would have never guessed (although lately I probably should have known) that I would find a thread here that was originally titled " A Jeff Flake Victory will help the Liberty Movement", and after reading a few posts, I learn this Jeff Flake has voted for not only the PATRIOT Act, not only the Iraq War, not only NDAA, not only to create the TSA, but all 4 of those things!! How can someone like that "HELP" the liberty movement?? Is that so hard to understand??

 

[sailingaway]

I don't know what it was before, I am assuming the [NOT] was inserted. IF that's the only change.. Then who is calling him a liberty candidate in the thread title? It says help the Liberty Movement. IF the person will vote 1 time more for liberty issues than the opponent, it is helpful to the liberty movement...

and if he would vote once against liberty, as in against the Smith Amash amendment to remove indefinite detention of American citizens without trial from NDAA, he would be unhelpful to the liberty movement....

I would have likely put something like 'Disputed' in there if I had done it. Again, the OP can suggest different titles.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Is there anybody on the forum that actually believes Flake won't be helpful to the liberty movement?

Yes, that would be me.

For reasons stated in my last post prior to this one.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Yes, that would be me.

For reasons stated in my last post prior to this one.

So did Jon Kyle, and Flake is a vast improvement in posts I have outlined earlier. PLus, even where Flake screwed up in those votes, such as the Patriot Act he did add some good amendments to it, and later was against Iraq.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

You are saying Ron Paul Forum's internet clout should advertise that Flake is a liberty candidate which is what the title said before it was modified, essentially, even though there is absolutely NOT a consensus on that.

Not a consensus here, between 1-2 thousand keyboard warriors. But he was #1 on the Liberty Index, you gotta hold someone to a ridiculous standard to say he's isn't a liberty candidate.

AS I said, I didn't change the title, but that would have been equally wrong and would have come up in a google article search as a RON PAUL FORUMS thread.

So now it's better we have a negative title so anyone interested will see in Google he's NOT a friend of Liberty, even though there's no consensus on that either.

If the OP wants to pm a mod with a different title that does assume one way or the other (Flake is better than his opponent, for example) I'm sure any mod would be happy to change it.

The point is he should be able to make the thread title anything he wants because it shouldn't even be a question if Jeff Flake isn't an allying CONSIDERING our present position politically and within the GOP AND the SAMPLE SIZE OF THE SO CALLED "CONSENSUS". We are still totally nothing, you realize that right? We don't even have 20 Jeff Flakes.

I don't think anyone wants to advertise AGAINST Flake in his race, but nor do many of us want him to appear to be one of our own.

Well, that's exactly what the new title does, and holding people to such an insane standard is... well... insane and if Flake loses to someone we CLEARLY don't like it will be because he didn't fit our "standard" whatever the hell that even is.

 

[sailingaway]

So did Jon Kyle, and Flake is a vast improvement in posts I have outlined earlier. PLus, even where Flake screwed up in those votes, such as the Patriot Act he did add some good amendments to it, and later was against Iraq.

I don't think anyone is arguing Kyl is better. I think we pretty much all think Flake at least has SOME good points so is better than Kyl.

 

[sailingaway]

Not a consensus here, between 1-2 thousand keyboard warriors. But he was #1 on the Liberty Index, you gotta hold someone to a ridiculous standard to say he's isn't a liberty candidate.


So now it's better we have a negative title so anyone interested will see in Google he's NOT a friend of Liberty, even though there's no consensus on that either.



The point is he should be able to make the thread title anything he wants because it shouldn't even be a question if Jeff Flake isn't an allying CONSIDERING our present position politically and within the GOP AND the SAMPLE SIZE OF THE SO CALLED "CONSENSUS". We are still totally nothing, you realize that right? We don't even have 20 Jeff Flakes.


Well, that's exactly what the new title does, and holding people to such an insane standard is... well... insane and if Flake loses to someone we CLEARLY don't like it will be because he didn't fit our "standard" whatever the hell that even is.

You can hold people to whatever standard you want. I didn't change the title and if the OP has a title that will avoid that controversy I am sure any mod would be happy to change it to that.

As to the liberty index, I never bought into that it completely ignores things like civil liberties, and most of the amendments in the Bill of Rights. Very convenient in trying to brand run of the mill politicians as some sort of liberty warriors but not very useful to me.

 

[tbone717]

I'm not sure we do. At least I think issues I think are absolute baseline you think are in the 'wouldn't it be pleasant if we got that' category. That could definitely lead us to pushing different candidates in a specific race.

Well it is primarily because I believe that it will take a long time to undo this 100 year monstrosity that we have before us. So, since we are still in the minority, I believe we build coalitions with those who agree with us on 90% and go from there. Maybe some day when we have 435 like minded folks in Congress we can raise the bar to 95%, but for now I am all for taking steps in the right direction when we can.

But I don't think that will lead to pushing different candidates in the same race. We usually do not have the luxury of two folks to choose from.

 

[cajuncocoa]

So did Jon Kyle, and Flake is a vast improvement in posts I have outlined earlier. PLus, even where Flake screwed up in those votes, such as the Patriot Act he did add some good amendments to it, and later was against Iraq.

Good to know about Jon Kyl. I'll make sure to add him to my naughty list.

 

[sailingaway]

I don't at all mind coalitions. But we can do that without blurring which part of that coalition WE are and what WE stand for.

 

[sailingaway]

But I don't think that will lead to pushing different candidates in the same race. We usually do not have the luxury of two folks to choose from.

there were a couple of congressional district races in CA (not mine) where Ron Paul folks didn't like the RLC candidate as much as another. I would have looked into them more had I lived in those districts, but I don't.