You don't win by quitting... (Ron is still a Republican)

[Matt Collins]

I'm not willing to be a delegate for the GOP but I'll vote if they give me good candidates. I'd prefer to spend time/money on promoting libertarian candidates and the GOP doesn't have very many.

You can change that. Recruit a good liberty candidate to run for state or local office as a Republican. You will change the local GOP's behavior if you do that.

 

[acptulsa]

Of course, but you explain this yourself in post #43 of this thread.

The left/right paradigm we all know is a joke, but very few others do. Unfortunately perception is reality and even if we know it's a charade, others dont, they take it as reality, so therefore it does exist. We have to go and reach people at their level which means playing along with their nonsense even if it is irrational.

I disagree. We don't have to play along with the irrational nonsense. We can, eventually, strip them of these silly notions. It obviously isn't easy, or we'd have done it by now. But we've stripped many, many people of these silly notions already. And I don't think we're through yet.

That's not to say we don't have to play along with this nonsense, at least to the degree Rand Paul does, to get elected right now. But that's not what you said.

 

[Matt Collins]

Get involved in the local GOP, take it over - precinct by precinct, state by state.
its a long process, it took a while for the wrong policies to become mainstream and it will take a long time to correct that.
certainly more than 1 or 2 election cycles, maybe more than one decade.
this is a long term process, dont give up.
keep pushing.

 

[Matt Collins]

Nor do you "win" by continuing to beat your head against the same brick wall over and over again. You just wind up with brain damage.

Also, it's NOT "quitting" to recognize the fact that the actions you are currently taking are not substantively advancing your cause and thus resolving to change your approach in order to achieve greater success.

Electoral politics does not produce any substantive, positive results. The last 236+ years of US history, and especially the last half-century or so of the modern "liberty Movement" engaging in them, prove this rather conclusively. It doesn't take a genius to recognize that something needs to be done differently if the goal is to reached.

The liberty movement is moving forward and gaining a bigger foothold. We are not having the same results as always - we have made HUGE achievements. Look at the Iowa, Maine, AZ, Minnesota, Georgia, NH, MO, CO and other local Republican Parties to see the progress we've made. Quitting now would be foolish.

 

[twomp]

Your defeatism is not welcome here.

Who are you to decide what or who is welcome here? What if I told you your RNC shilling isn't welcome here? Weren't you the one that had an "epiphany" that Rand voted for the Iran sanctions because it would stop the Fed from loaning out money to Iran. Even though there was NO language in the bill that said anything of that nature? Or that the audit of the Fed in 2010 said nothing about the Fed loaning money to Iran?

Weren't you the one who said that Romney might make an ok president because Rand would keep him in line with the "threat" that Rand my primary him in 2016? I'm sorry to inform you of this but the GOP doesn't have the copy right on liberty and if some of us feel like helping a 3rd party is better use of our time rather than working with corrupt people that you love so much, we can do so freely without you telling us we aren't welcome.

 

[Matt Collins]

What if I told you your RNC shilling isn't welcome here?

I agree, that RNC shilling isn't welcome here either.

Weren't you the one that had an "epiphany" that Rand voted for the Iran sanctions because it would stop the Fed from loaning out money to Iran. Even though there was NO language in the bill that said anything of that nature? Or that the audit of the Fed in 2010 said nothing about the Fed loaning money to Iran?

Did you even read the bill? Because it prevent American entities from doing business with the Iranian central bank. Remember the Fed loaned a ton of money to Libya before our government started bombing that. Why do you think that is?

My guess is that Rand was trying to make it illegal for the Fed to interact with the Iranian central bank, and if we ever do get an audit, we could very possibly find out that they had, making them de facto outside of the bounds of the law.

Weren't you the one who said that Romney might make an ok president because Rand would keep him in line with the "threat" that Rand my primary him in 2016?

I never said Romney would make an ok Prez, just the opposite. But a primary threat from Rand in 2016 is a very real possibility.

 

[erowe1]

Who are you to decide what or who is welcome here?

The only person who can decide who's welcome here is SA. And there's really no telling what she thinks about that on any given day. Just try to say whatever you think she wants to hear, whether you really believe it or not, and hope she doesn't interpret it as sarcastic. And don't assume that it's safe to agree with Ron Paul about something.

 

[twomp]

Did you even read the bill? Because it prevent American entities from doing business with the Iranian central bank. Remember the Fed loaned a ton of money to Libya before our government started bombing that. Why do you think that is?

Oh so Libya is Iran now? And here I thought that was 2 different countries.

 

[Matt Collins]

Oh so Libya is Iran now? And here I thought that was 2 different countries.

It just goes to show that Libya was being funded by the Fed. Could the Fed also be funding Iran too? That wouldn't make a lot of people happy if they found that out.

 

[Miguel]

"We will become the tent"

 

[twomp]

It just goes to show that Libya was being funded by the Fed. Could the Fed also be funding Iran too? That wouldn't make a lot of people happy if they found that out.

You might be right or you might not. You have no proof either way. I believe Libya was getting promises from the US government in exchange for Gadafi agreeing not to develop weapons so that may be where that money is coming from. I don't see the same thing happening in Iran as they are refusing to stop developing nuclear technology.

In any case, that didn't work out too well for Libya now did it?

I was referencing your insistence that Rand Paul was not doing anything wrong by voting for the sanctions. Many people were upset with him for doing that (I personally didn't really care) and you felt the need to "quell" it with your "epiphany" with no facts to back that up. To me, that made you seem like just someone shilling for their boss.

 

[Smitty]

You people who are fixated on political parties are getting in the way of the liberty movement.

The GOP has adopted rules which makes the success of any type of grass roots activism within their party impossible.

The Republican party is not available for the liberty movement,...and in fact, it never was.

The events surrounding this cycle's primary and convention have proven that.

 

[Matt Collins]

To me, that made you seem like just someone shilling for their boss.

I am not employed by Rand currently. And sometimes you have to read between the lines on what is going on and what gets said. It's not always possible to come out and state your full intentions. Just sayin'

 

[Matt Collins]

You people who are fixated on political parties are getting in the way of the liberty movement.

The GOP has adopted rules which makes the success of any type of grass roots activism within their party impossible.

The Republican party is not available for the liberty movement,...and in fact, it never was.

The events surrounding this cycle's primary and convention have proven that.

Rules can be changed. And there are several state Republican parties that are not controlled by Ron Paul supporters which prove differently. We are trending upward, don't be a defeatist.

 

[acptulsa]

Rules can be changed.

I'm impressed. I didn't know you were capable of understatement. This, however, is some serious understatement.

 

[Smitty]

Rules can be changed. And there are several state Republican parties that are not controlled by Ron Paul supporters which prove differently. We are trending upward, don't be a defeatist.

There nothing defeatist about what I said.

The GOP isn't a good fit for the liberty movement. It has 150 years of negative baggage which has to be atoned for before it can even *begin* to represent anything associated with liberty.

It's time to face reality.

Close to half of the country will *never* vote for anyone associated with the Republican party regardless of who they are or what they stand for. It's a damaged brand to those people,....and *now*, because of its antics in the primary and at the convention, it's a damaged brand to a huge chunk of the liberty movement.

Trying to steer people into the GOP at this point is to start from an enormous deficit.

It's time for the liberty movement to rise up out of that Republican cesspool.

 

[pcosmar]

Your defeatism is not welcome here.

It is not defeatism. It is realism.
Continuing to pretend it is any different is simply delusional.

Unless you are looking for a full time paid position of Blowing smoke up folks asses.
I'm not.

 

[Liberty74]

Oh stop with the NONSENSE!!!

I am sick and tired of people claiming those who want to take a different direction is "quitting." Frankly, you don't have a freaking clue.

Ron Paul is a person who just happens to be registered as a Republican. His ideas are very libertarian. The Republican party does not agree with him on practically anything - that is coming from Ron Paul himself. So in essence, if you stay with the Republican party at the national level, you are wasting valuable time, energy and money. The Republican party rejected our ideas of cutting, stopping the wars, sound money, etc. Ron Paul got slaughtered in almost every closed primary. He kicked ass with - wait for it - Independents. If anyone wants to "take over" a party, you take that party over and make it the Liberty party. They have no real establishment to fight with yet have about 40% of the voters. There is no chance in hell we will take over the Republican party that is a dying party demographically anyway. The GOP hacks well make sure of that. If anyone doubts me, just look at what has happened since Iowa through the convention. And don't give this BS "we took over the party in several states." We did not such think. Those positions won (which is awesome morally) hold no power to make laws or change laws.

Smell the coffee people. I am beginning to wonder how many GOP operatives there are in RPF to herd us.

 

[Matt Collins]

The GOP isn't a good fit for the liberty movement.

It's a better fit than the Democrat party which is the only other viable vehicle available presently.

Close to half of the country will *never* vote for anyone associated with the Republican party regardless of who they are or what they stand for. It's a damaged brand to those people,....and *now*, because of its antics in the primary and at the convention, it's a damaged brand to a huge chunk of the liberty movement.

We don't need half of the people to vote for anyone. We need a minority who knows how to use pressure points to their advantage. Come to LPAC and get trained and you too will understand what I am referring to and how to be an effective political activist.

It's time for the liberty movement to rise up out of that Republican cesspool.

If there was a way to do that I'd be all for it, but there is no viable alternative before us; Ron understands this.

 

[Matt Collins]

if you stay with the Republican party at the national level, you are wasting valuable time, energy and money.

With rare exception I don't disagree with that (Ron, Rand, Amash, Lee, Massie, etc).

The state governments are where we need to focus.

The Republican party rejected our ideas of cutting, stopping the wars, sound money, etc. Ron Paul got slaughtered in almost every closed primary. He kicked ass with - wait for it - Independents. If anyone wants to "take over" a party, you take that party over and make it the Liberty party. They have no real establishment to fight with yet have about 40% of the voters. There is no chance in hell we will take over the Republican party that is a dying party demographically anyway. The GOP hacks well make sure of that. If anyone doubts me, just look at what has happened since Iowa through the convention.

We simply didn't have the numbers. In the states where we did have the numbers we did VERY well, such as in Minnesota, Iowa, etc. Senator Kyl even recently remarked that Ron Paul has taken over the AZ GOP.

We are trending upwards and we are changing the Party and will ultimately change policy. Quitting now after we have gained so much ground would be foolish and irresponsible.

Smell the coffee people. I am beginning to wonder how many GOP operatives there are in RPF to herd us.

That's laughable. No one is trying to "herd" anyone in, I am however trying to get you to do the most effective thing for liberty which is become involved in your local Republican Party, and bring every other Ron Paul supporter in your town with you.