Paul supporters, what are you going to do....

[geauxtohell]

That's a great video thanks for posting it.

Actually, upon re-watching it; it was all the news outlets. Fox, CNN, CBS, MSNBC. I guess I focused more on Fox due to their coverage of the the Ames debate and the opening bit. But clearly, all of the media outlets are not taking Paul seriously.

the only time the media pays attention to paul is when they can use him as a hammer to hammer the other side, other than that, they could care less.

In fairness (and I'll now concede that the media ignores Paul), I think different outlet's ignore him for different reasons.

I think the more liberal ones ignore him because they think he has no chance and it's the "same old song and dance".

I think Fox ignores him because they are afraid he might actually get somewhere.

I hate the habit of "name dropping", but never forget that Roger Ailes runs Fox.

 

[Douger]

RP may, or may not, be the only hope you have, He'll probably get killed by the assholes who own you.

 

[geauxtohell]

RP may, or may not, be the only hope you have, He'll probably get killed by the assholes who own you.

Damn you are lame. Could you go and shit all over another post?

 

[Trajan]

Actually, upon re-watching it; it was all the news outlets. Fox, CNN, CBS, MSNBC. I guess I focused more on Fox due to their coverage of the the Ames debate and the opening bit. But clearly, all of the media outlets are not taking Paul seriously.

the only time the media pays attention to paul is when they can use him as a hammer to hammer the other side, other than that, they could care less.

In fairness (and I'll now concede that the media ignores Paul), I think different outlet's ignore him for different reasons.

I think the more liberal ones ignore him because they think he has no chance and it's the "same old song and dance".

I think Fox ignores him because they are afraid he might actually get somewhere.

I hate the habit of "name dropping", but never forget that Roger Ailes runs Fox.

what is the special relationship ( or non relationship) between paul and ailes?

 

[geauxtohell]

the only time the media pays attention to paul is when they can use him as a hammer to hammer the other side, other than that, they could care less.

In fairness (and I'll now concede that the media ignores Paul), I think different outlet's ignore him for different reasons.

I think the more liberal ones ignore him because they think he has no chance and it's the "same old song and dance".

I think Fox ignores him because they are afraid he might actually get somewhere.

I hate the habit of "name dropping", but never forget that Roger Ailes runs Fox.

what is the special relationship ( or non relationship) between paul and ailes?

Ailes is an establishment GOP guy. I would venture to guess (and that is all it is) that he's not anymore thrilled about Paul getting the nomination then Boehner is.

 

[geauxtohell]

I think Paul might gank a VP slot out of this. However, I think even that is a long shot.

I think that's even less likely.

I think Paul could possibly win the NH primary. I think even with that, he won't have enough momentum to win the primary. I don't think he'll win any Southern State. He definitely won't win Texas now.

Looks like I was wrong..... Romney won solidly in NH.

Primary bump............

 

[Trajan]

In fairness (and I'll now concede that the media ignores Paul), I think different outlet's ignore him for different reasons.

I think the more liberal ones ignore him because they think he has no chance and it's the "same old song and dance".

I think Fox ignores him because they are afraid he might actually get somewhere.

I hate the habit of "name dropping", but never forget that Roger Ailes runs Fox.

what is the special relationship ( or non relationship) between paul and ailes?

Ailes is an establishment GOP guy. I would venture to guess (and that is all it is) that he's not anymore thrilled about Paul getting the nomination then Boehner is.

hummm, then; I would hazard a guess that cbs abc nbc et al are not thrilled with any gop candidate and will give them short shrift.

 

[Oddball]

when the GOP tosses your boy under the bus again? Because you, me, and everybody else knows it's going to happen. There is simply no way in hell that an isolationist who wants to dismantle the FED is ever going to be given the keys to the GOP kingdom. We all know it.

Vote Libertarian again...Like you couldn't have guessed.

My question is, as this is Paul's last hurrah, why do you guys even try to find a home in the GOP? Why not just run as a Libertarian. In this election cycle, that might actually work, as people are pissed at both parties. Even if not the case, why keep doing the same thing and expecting different results? From what I can tell of the Paul supporters, they aren't exactly in the bag for the GOP machine either. I mean, they stole your Tea Party idea. No you would think that Michelle Bachman came up with the idea.

Frankly, I just don't get it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Congrats on the second place finish behind Bachmann in Iowa. I do respect the groundswell that Paul carries with him.

However, we all know where this is heading.

I'll tell you why: The current ballot clusterfuck in Virginia.

Four of the GOP candidates got caught up in odious ballot petition restrictions meant to keep any and all comers who aren't part of the demopublicratican machine from even being seen as a choice on ballots....Every year many of the various state Libertarian Party (the only real 3rd party in the nation) organizations shoot a good share of their campaign war chest just getting on the ballot.

In a lot of states you can keep your place on the ballot if you keep running a candidate every year...The end result of that practice is that the LP ends up running some of their nuts just to maintain their ballot status.

 

[KSoze]

He ran as Republican so he could be in the debates, for the coverage of his message. If he ran as just a Libertarian he wouldn't be as popular as he is now.

 

[geauxtohell]

Vote Libertarian again...Like you couldn't have guessed.

Except Paul isn't running as a libertarian. What is the point of having a separate party if you have to switch over to one of the odious two parties to win the White House?

I'll tell you why: The current ballot clusterfuck in Virginia.

Four of the GOP candidates got caught up in odious ballot petition restrictions meant to keep any and all comers who aren't part of the demopublicratican machine from even being seen as a choice on ballots....Every year many of the various state Libertarian Party (the only real 3rd party in the nation) organizations shoot a good share of their campaign war chest just getting on the ballot.

In a lot of states you can keep your place on the ballot if you keep running a candidate every year...The end result of that practice is that the LP ends up running some of their nuts just to maintain their ballot status.

Do you mean to tell me that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Perry aren't GOP enough while Paul is?

Furthermore, in the whole libertarian party, they can't recruit some non-nuts to run and keep their ballot status?

Your logic makes no sense.

As it stands, we all know where this is heading with Paul. The GOP will never hand him the keys to the kingdom.

Now, if he loses the primary, he's basically done without getting a chance to win over some of the moderate votes that he stands a good chance to win in the general.

I don't see the point.

 

[Oddball]

Vote Libertarian again...Like you couldn't have guessed.

Except Paul isn't running as a libertarian. What is the point of having a separate party if you have to switch over to one of the odious two parties to win the White House?

You get your message out running as a major party candidate.

I'll tell you why: The current ballot clusterfuck in Virginia.

Four of the GOP candidates got caught up in odious ballot petition restrictions meant to keep any and all comers who aren't part of the demopublicratican machine from even being seen as a choice on ballots....Every year many of the various state Libertarian Party (the only real 3rd party in the nation) organizations shoot a good share of their campaign war chest just getting on the ballot.

In a lot of states you can keep your place on the ballot if you keep running a candidate every year...The end result of that practice is that the LP ends up running some of their nuts just to maintain their ballot status.

Do you mean to tell me that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Perry aren't GOP enough while Paul is?

Furthermore, in the whole libertarian party, they can't recruit some non-nuts to run and keep their ballot status?

Your logic makes no sense.

As it stands, we all know where this is heading with Paul. The GOP will never hand him the keys to the kingdom.

Now, if he loses the primary, he's basically done without getting a chance to win over some of the moderate votes that he stands a good chance to win in the general.

I don't see the point.

No...The Gingrich, Santorum, Perry and Huntsman campaigns got caught in the ballot access trap that the D&R insider duopoly set to keep out all other potential opponents....They failed to meet the criteria for "viability", as defined by their own party man hack machines.

Ironic, ain't it?

 

[dblack]

Vote Libertarian again...Like you couldn't have guessed.

Except Paul isn't running as a libertarian. What is the point of having a separate party if you have to switch over to one of the odious two parties to win the White House?

The point is to make the case for change. The point is to build enough momentum that we can win congressional seats at both the state and federal level and promote liberty at all levels. The race for the presidency is an important part of the overall campaign, but it will probably be the last thing we actually win.

Do you mean to tell me that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Perry aren't GOP enough while Paul is?

Furthermore, in the whole libertarian party, they can't recruit some non-nuts to run and keep their ballot status?

Your logic makes no sense.

As it stands, we all know where this is heading with Paul. The GOP will never hand him the keys to the kingdom.

Now, if he loses the primary, he's basically done without getting a chance to win over some of the moderate votes that he stands a good chance to win in the general.

I don't see the point.

Not sure what you're getting at, but I think you missed Oddball's point. You asked why libertarians bother with the GOP. The reason is that the cards are heavily stacked against third parties ever making any progress. This keeps us out of the running directly, by limited ballot access, keeping us out of debates, etc... but it also limits us indirectly by discouraging anyone with serious political ambitions from pursuing third party candidacies.

You asked why libertarians can't find 'non-nut' candidates. Well, it's because most everyone realizes the game is rigged against anyone who isn't a Democrat or Republican. This is why we've been working through the Republicans. Personally, I think we should be making similar effort to infiltrate the Democrats, but those efforts have failed to gain much traction to date.

 

[geauxtohell]

Vote Libertarian again...Like you couldn't have guessed.

Except Paul isn't running as a libertarian. What is the point of having a separate party if you have to switch over to one of the odious two parties to win the White House?

The point is to make the case for change. The point is to build enough momentum that we can win congressional seats at both the state and federal level and promote liberty at all levels. The race for the presidency is an important part of the overall campaign, but it will probably be the last thing we actually win.

Do you mean to tell me that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Perry aren't GOP enough while Paul is?

Furthermore, in the whole libertarian party, they can't recruit some non-nuts to run and keep their ballot status?

Your logic makes no sense.

As it stands, we all know where this is heading with Paul. The GOP will never hand him the keys to the kingdom.

Now, if he loses the primary, he's basically done without getting a chance to win over some of the moderate votes that he stands a good chance to win in the general.

I don't see the point.

Not sure what you're getting at, but I think you missed Oddball's point. You asked why libertarians bother with the GOP. The reason is that the cards are heavily stacked against third parties ever making any progress. This keeps us out of the running directly, by limited ballot access, keeping us out of debates, etc... but it also limits us indirectly by discouraging anyone with serious political ambitions from pursuing third party candidacies.

You asked why libertarians can't find 'non-nut' candidates. Well, it's because most everyone realizes the game is rigged against anyone who isn't a Democrat or Republican. This is why we've been working through the Republicans. Personally, I think we should be making similar effort to infiltrate the Democrats, but those efforts have failed to gain much traction to date.

But what is the point? Now Gingrich is surging in Carolina, because Romney is fading. I mean, this is kind of painful. At this point, no one can claim the GOP doesn't know about Paul. He's just not getting anymore than about 25 percent traction.

It would seem to me that he would have a better chance of winning the presidency if he just jumped into the general and let moderates and independents vote for him.

 

[dblack]

But what is the point? Now Gingrich is surging in Carolina, because Romney is fading. I mean, this is kind of painful. At this point, no one can claim the GOP doesn't know about Paul. He's just not getting anymore than about 25 percent traction.

It would seem to me that he would have a better chance of winning the presidency if he just jumped into the general and let moderates and independents vote for him.

The point is to change the direction of the country. That's always been the goal. I think he knows he's not going to win the presidency but wants to leverage the support he does have to give libertarians a real voice in the Republican platform. If he can't get any traction in that effort, he might throw his support to a third party - probably the Libertarian Party. In any case, he has to keep that option alive to keep the Republicans from taking his voters for granted.

 

[Oddball]

But what is the point? Now Gingrich is surging in Carolina, because Romney is fading. I mean, this is kind of painful. At this point, no one can claim the GOP doesn't know about Paul. He's just not getting anymore than about 25 percent traction.

It would seem to me that he would have a better chance of winning the presidency if he just jumped into the general and let moderates and independents vote for him.

The point is to change the direction of the country. That's always been the goal. I think he knows he's not going to win the presidency but wants to leverage the support he does have to give libertarians a real voice in the Republican platform. If he can't get any traction in that effort, he might throw his support to a third party - probably the Libertarian Party. In any case, he has to keep that option alive to keep the Republicans from taking his voters for granted.

He might even leverage his delegates to get Rand in the VP slot.

 

[Contumacious]

Now, if he loses the primary, he's basically done without getting a chance to win over some of the moderate votes that he stands a good chance to win in the general. .

Realistically, there is no chance that he will prevail because:

Every politically controlled educational system will inculcate the doctrine of state supremacy sooner or later. . . . Once that doctrine has been accepted, it becomes an almost superhuman task to break the stranglehold of the political power over the life of the citizen. It has had his body, property and mind in its clutches from infancy. An octopus would sooner release its prey. A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state.

–Isabel Paterson, The God of the Machine (1943)

.

 

[Katzndogz]

Paul has run for president as a libertarian several times. He does the same as he does as a republican, not well.

I can't say that Paul is a Constitutionalist because he mangles the Constitution more often than not. He does, however, play one on television. Ron Paul is the same kind of Constitutionalist as Fred Thompson was a brilliant no-nonsense District Attorney.

What Ron Paul does have is a core constituency who believes that if he is elected president he will legalize drugs. They are one issue voters and that never works.

 

[dblack]

Paul has run for president as a libertarian several times. He does the same as he does as a republican, not well.

I can't say that Paul is a Constitutionalist because he mangles the Constitution more often than not. He does, however, play one on television. Ron Paul is the same kind of Constitutionalist as Fred Thompson was a brilliant no-nonsense District Attorney.

What Ron Paul does have is a core constituency who believes that if he is elected president he will legalize drugs. They are one issue voters and that never works.

Wow. At least you're consistent. Every single thing you say here is wrong.

 

[geauxtohell]

Bump for the kinda-sorta end of the Paul campaign

 

[PredFan]

when the GOP tosses your boy under the bus again? Because you, me, and everybody else knows it's going to happen. There is simply no way in hell that an isolationist who wants to dismantle the FED is ever going to be given the keys to the GOP kingdom. We all know it.

I'll continue as always, supporting LP candidates and voting the most conservative in the general.

My question is, as this is Paul's last hurrah, why do you guys even try to find a home in the GOP? Why not just run as a Libertarian.

Because the media ignores Libertarians. They aren't given air time and they aren't allowed to participate in debates.

Even if not the case, why keep doing the same thing and expecting different results? From what I can tell of the Paul supporters, they aren't exactly in the bag for the GOP machine either. I mean, they stole your Tea Party idea. No you would think that Michelle Bachman came up with the idea.

Where do we go? The Democrats?

Frankly, I just don't get it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Congrats on the second place finish behind Bachmann in Iowa. I do respect the groundswell that Paul carries with him.

However, we all know where this is heading.

It won't matter after this, Obama will win re-election and there won't be a country to save after that.