The spin machine who attempted to Present George W. Bush as a conservative
Yes, the eeeeeevil spin machine run by the...hmmm...NAU?
Mwahahahahahahahaha.
Posted on 03/12/2007 6:35:53 AM PDT by sdnet
Political maverick and Texas House member Ron Paul formally announced his candidacy for the president of the United States this morning during the “Washington Journal” call-in program on C-SPAN.
Paul stands as one of the last remaining believers in strict enforcement of the Constitution and a limited federal government in Washington D.C. Paul ran unsuccessfully for the White House in 1988 under the Libertarian ticket, but now caucuses with the Republican Party. His political platform includes low taxes, individual liberties and a principled belief in the right to life.
His presidential exploratory committee formed earlier this year stirred up his enormous grassroots support from heartland voters, small government believers and fed-up Republicans who believe current GOP candidates offer no real solutions to an expanding federal government and refuse to tackle America's important issues, such as illegal immigration and an erosion of American's civil liberties.
(Excerpt) Read more at smallgovtimes.com ...
Well, what I am suggesting is that in washington it is very difficult to behave as a conservative, all of the pressures are to be a liberal. Millions of us worked hard to put the GOP in charge, and when the GOP got in charge, it gave up and became worse spenders than the dems. Now, we didn't know that in advance, but that is what happened. So for me, at least, I am extra careful about making sure the people that I vote for are willing to battle the establishment.
That's nonsense. Anyone can run, and the GOP isn't funding anyone in the primaries.
But that's what we are doing, and the GOP establishment is calling us all sorts of names for not supporting big government GOP types. That tells me that the GOP as a whole isn't interested in small govenrment any more.
You might say that means that the voters aren't, but I am not so sure that is true. The shareholders of companies don't like getting ripped off by management, but it often happens. The tool that the GOP uses to keep ripping off the voters is the "if you don't vote for our guy, Hillary will win card".
That's nonsense. Anyone can run, and the GOP isn't funding anyone in the primaries.
That was once true. It is not any more. See Specter, Chaffee.
Ron Paul is a punk who invites "smear tactics." And he doesn't have a chance.
Meanwhile back in the real world today the headline reads: U.S. raids targeting foreign Al Qaida hideouts in Iraq
I was speaking of presidential candidates. The Senate has its own campaign warchest to spend on whatever RINOs it chooses. And it certainly has done so.
Don't be caught up in the belief that the GOP is some monolithic body. It isn't.
It's a party that has many factions and many sources of funds as well as largesse. It fights within itself at least as much as it fights Democrats.
My philosophy is to support the heck out of a candidate I support, then to give to the GOP for the general elections, knowing that whomever prevailed in the primaries is going to be superior to the Rat candidate.
...and Money.
Paul will likely leave the GOP a la Buchanan and Keyes, within a few years. Hopefully taking Tancredo with him. I doubt Paul has a better shot winning the presidency as a 3rd party candidate, rather than a Republican...but, I would agree he has a 100% chance of losing under both scenarios.
Well said!
Ah, so you are saying that you don't want the ideology that you support to gain office. You have a double-secret alternate strategy that will do...something. I guess I'll wait for it to make sense.
In the interim, the Republican Party learns not to p!$$ off it's conservative base. Painful lesson? Certainly. Often a needed one though.
Ah, the paranoic smoke-filled room theory of politics. There are evil overlords running the party and they have the effrontery not to seek your input. And I can't imagine why not, with such a head for strategic genius you have.
What i've never really understood is the inconsistency in the Republican Party.
The Grand Old Party is not a top-down organization. There is no Nashian party boss in a top hat, with a bloated belly and an ever-present cigar. The smaller parties work that way, but not the big ones. Even the Dems, who are much more top-down, can't keep their coalition together. There is no secret cabal of Illuminati trying to keep you down.
People just don't like you.
as if we Libertarians owed any damned thing to the Republicans...especially our vote...We don't need you and the lying, sociopathic bastards that are foisted upon the American Electorate every four years.
Who's foisting? Ron Paul is running. And he will lose. Badly. He will not place 3rd or better in any primary before the winner gets the required number of delegates. (It is possible he will be one of only two losers straggling at the end of it all.)
You sound like an impotent old man, angry at the rest of the world for his own inability to make a difference and so he loudly and forcefully tells anyone who will listen that he will go off and engage in an Onanistic act.
Like voting for Ron Paul.
What legislation is this guy responsible for after all his years in Congress?
Yeah. Those Democratick administrations wern't so bad
...and the payoff...
In the interim, the Republican Party learns not to p!$$ off it's conservative base.
We are already the minority party. Your's is a recipe for disaster and you offer no proof that an ideologically pure GOP would ever return to power to impliment change.
You, (by the pronoun, i mean the Republicans, let's not make this personal) YOU.NEED.US. Without the independent voter, you have exactly zero chance of getting your candidates elected. 49.999% of the vote in a two man race is still a loss to the party that has 50.001% of that vote.
The GOP need only move to the left to grab moderate voters to suplant you. If you once were a Republican voter and you leave the party, we lose one vote. But if we convert a rat voter to the GOP we gain 1 vote and the rats lose 1 vote, for a net gain of 2 votes. Your strategy of of denial of support only push the party to the left.
Well said. I always like it when you can use the math.
I have seen no such invitation.
It certainly was not by running for President. If I recall, he often rejected requests to run for President, choosing to focus on his service as a representative instead.
On most issues he would be my guy, but I do believe we need to prosecute the so-called war on terror in a big way.
The current administration's strategery is to keep it in the middle east, and until somebody comes up with a better idea (and in my view we haven't seen one) I think we should stay on the track we're on.
So there is my disagreement with Ron Paul. I completely understand where he's coming from, viewing the war as one against a people who did not declare war against us. I believe various tyrants over there have done everything short of sending us an engraved invitation to occupy the region and take whatever action is necessary to defend our country.
Rep. Paul seems to believe we need more justification than we have in order to prosecute this war. An honest disagreement with the current administration (and the vast majority of the Congress and Senate of four years ago, most of whom are still in office). It is only one issue, but it is a huge one.
Keep up with the insults, that'll win them back, right. </sarcasm>
Obviously your mileage varies, but there is absolutely no reason why anyone should capitulate to your threats and demands.
Ok, so enjoy loosing elections.
If your candidate can't make the case and win on the merits, that should tell you something. Your threatened temper tantrum helps who, exactly? Conservatives? You?
Apparently, it is the Republican candidates who can't win, so it is in the best interest of the party not to alienate it's conservative base.
Or maybe you really wanted Hillary elected all along.
Were that the case, i wouldn't be supporting Ron Paul, as they are polar opposites.
Nope. Rep Paul has been there, done that, and got the tee shirt. FYI, he was the Libertarian Party Presidential nominee in 88. He's always served in Congress as a Republican.
i notice that after Buchanan was used to destroy the Reformed Party in the 2k elections, (good job that), he went right home to the Republican fold.
MSNBC is Republican?
No. i said:
The Country survived LBJ's Great Society. The country survived the Carter Administration. The country survived the Clinton Administration. Hell, the country survived four terms of FDR. It will survive President Hitlery.
...which was a reply to the following comment of yours in post 78 of this thread.
What I really don't understand is that you think that you benefit somehow from this strategy. Follow me on this: You stay home. By staying home, you ensure that your political polar opposite takes office. This somehow pleases you. Then, when the next election comes 'round, you threaten again to withhold support because of the insufficient purity of your allies' views or performance in office.
Incidentally, i never conceded the "staying home" comment. Turnout figures for the 2k6 election indicate otherwise. That actually makes matters worse for the Republicans. The Voters tossed them out with their votes, and not their apathy.
Ah, the paranoic smoke-filled room theory of politics. There are evil overlords running the party and they have the effrontery not to seek your input. And I can't imagine why not, with such a head for strategic genius you have.
Once again, thank you Dr. Phil for attempting to reword what was never said to begin with. Not going to fly here:
Who made the choice is not relevant. That the electorate rejected those choices, and what they stood for is relevant. As i recall, and as Dog Gone has pointed out on this thread, Lots of Conservative Republicans lost elections too. i doubt that they lost because they didn't appeal to the Libertarians alone. More likely they lost because they were identified with a Party drifting so far left that it is virtually indistinguishable with the opposition...so why not vote for the real thing rather than the cheap copy?
As i said before, the Independent, and Third Party Conservatives, as well as the Conservative Libertarian Republicans don't need the Republican Party, and spending at levels that would have made LBJ's Great Society planners blush ~tell me, is "the chimp" ever going to find out where he put his veto pen?...maybe he wants to borrow one from Ron Paul~ They and the country will survive the alternative, but The Republican Party needs them.
The Grand Old Party is not a top-down organization. There is no Nashian party boss in a top hat, with a bloated belly and an ever-present cigar. The smaller parties work that way, but not the big ones. Even the Dems, who are much more top-down, can't keep their coalition together. There is no secret cabal of Illuminati trying to keep you down.
At least you're consistent. If you can't win on the merits of the position, misrepresent the position, and rebut your own misrepresentations. Not bad, most people wouldn't have spotted that technique.
People just don't like you.
First, who cares? i don't recall that too many people "Liked" Bill Clinton, or for that matter Hilary Clinton. Second, if the opinion polls are anything near accurate (i have my doubts), they like George W. Bush, the de facto leader of the Republican Party, a hell of a lot less. Third: Like us or hate us, we don't care, but you're not going to win without us. So it behooves the Republican Party to keep it's presently neglected conservative voter base happy.
Who's foisting? Ron Paul is running. And he will lose. Badly. He will not place 3rd or better in any primary before the winner gets the required number of delegates. (It is possible he will be one of only two losers straggling at the end of it all.)
The spin machine who attempted to Present George W. Bush as a conservative. The same spin machine that is presently attempting to do the same with Rudy McRomney. Probably won't work as well. Real simple equation here: Run candidates that the conservative base will accept, or enjoy your minority party status, and more Ruth Bader Ginsburg nominees on the USSC. As for the final end of Ron Paul...stay tuned.
You sound like an impotent old man, angry at the rest of the world for his own inability to make a difference and so he loudly and forcefully tells anyone who will listen that he will go off and engage in an Onanistic act.
Like voting for Ron Paul.
i really hope that you're not a Psychologist or Psychiatrist or some other type of mental health professional, because you're really not very good at that sort of thing.
Or are you just cruising for a date?
The spin machine who attempted to Present George W. Bush as a conservative
Yes, the eeeeeevil spin machine run by the...hmmm...NAU?
Mwahahahahahahahaha.
Really don't mean to piss in your Corn Flakes, but nobody is ideologically pure. Not even the most Fanatical Libertarian. Second, Pursuing present course when it has resulted in demonstrable loss is foolish. The Republican Party doesn't have the resources to fight a war of attrition. It certainly can't win a war of attrition.
Third, and most important, the Conservative base, independent voters, and Libertarian minded can easily see that an Administration and Party who
The GOP need only move to the left to grab moderate voters to suplant you. If you once were a Republican voter and you leave the party, we lose one vote. But if we convert a rat voter to the GOP we gain 1 vote and the rats lose 1 vote, for a net gain of 2 votes. Your strategy of of denial of support only push the party to the left.
Sure, piss off more and more of the Conservative Base. Every incremental move left results in more of the Right leaving. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.