Rand Paul campaign seeking LP donors, claiming to be endorsed by Libertarian Party

rand paul

The Rand Paul campaign is making a concerted effort to recruit state Libertarian Party officers and members to their campaign, and in some cases to share their mailing list or voter contacts with the Republican Senator’s campaign for President.

George Phillies, Chair of LP-Massachusetts, reports that “Several state chairs have been contacted by Senator Paul supporters asking for the use of our mailing lists. ” in the July 2015 Open Thread. The Paul campaign in Rhode Island attempted to acquire LP-RI’s list of college affiliate members, and in Georgia the immediate Past Chair of LP-GA Doug Craig was targeted for recruitment by somebody identifying themselves as a national deputy campaign manager. Such efforts have been the object of discussion on the LP State Chairs e-mail list, with all those speaking up confirming that they rejected the solicitations.

That Rand Paul would target Libertarian Party members is not necessarily surprising, nor that they’ve been rebuffed. But the Paul campaign is now taking that tactic a step further.

From Joe Enroughty, a Libertarian activist and LPVA 3rd District Vice-Chair in Richmond, VA:

The Rand Paul campaign appears to be so desperate that they have people calling and stating that he has been endorsed by The Libertarian Party. I received a call tonight from a Rand Paul campaign worker named “Cynthia.” I told Cynthia that I was a member of the LP and that I was most likely planning to vote for the LP Presidential Candidate. But at no time was I planning to vote for a Republican, especially one named Rand Paul. She then told me that the LP had issued a statement asking all of its members to vote for Rand in state primaries where they were able to do so. She also told me that the Paul campaign had been given LP donor lists by the LP to use for his campaign. She wanted me to make a donation either over the phone or online at Rand’s web site. 

Another Virginia Libertarian, who requested anonymity due to the nature of his employment, says he received a call from a pro-Rand super PAC Concerned American Voters. The caller claimed that Gary Johnson had endorsed Rand Paul, pointing to an inaccurate headline published by a pro-Rand website. In that interview, Johnson actually stated he plans to vote for the Libertarian nominee and dismissed Rand for “obviously running as a Republican.” The 2012 Libertarian nominee and likely 2016 candidate has been repeatedly critical of what he sees as Rand Paul’s anti-libertarian positions on foreign policy, social issues, and immigration.

C.A.V. also claimed that LNC Chair Nicholas Sarwark had publicly rebuked pro-marriage-equality Libertarians for criticizing Rand, in reference to the events surrounding a controversial Outright Libertarians meme perceived by some as criticizing both Ron Paul and Rand Paul. Sarwark has previously written an open letter condemning Rand Paul for calling for the U.S. to enter the Iraq/Syria civil war, and (in contrast to Sen. Paul) celebrated the Obergefell ruling as vindicating a long-held Libertarian Party position.

Neither the national Libertarian Party nor any state Libertarian Party has endorsed Rand Paul, encouraged Libertarians to vote for or volunteer for Rand Paul, or authorized the Rand Paul campaign to contact LP donors seeking contributions. The Paul campaign and C.A.V. did not respond to requests for comment.

340 thoughts on “Rand Paul campaign seeking LP donors, claiming to be endorsed by Libertarian Party

  1. Trent Hill

    …so the story is that one caller said the LP endorsed Rand and Rand is using their fundraising list? That’s not exactly a real story. If the campaign puts out such a message officially or in any capacity other than one random caller, then it might make a good story. But this is silly?

  2. Richard Winger

    Normally, phone canvassers are just following a script and don’t go too far being creative. So if one does it, it seems likely others also do it.

  3. George Phillies

    Rand Paul has said “Libertarian” is an albatross around his neck, but he is a conservative. Rand Paul is a Republican warmonger who wants more war in Syria, an antiabortionist-daughter-murderer*, a homophobic bigot opponent of gay marriage, et tedious cetera.

    *Tired of having Republican antibortionists call prochoice folks “baby-killers”? Give the conservative Christian Fascists a dose of their own medicine. They’re daughter-murderers, if not their own then someone else’s.

  4. Andy Craig Post author

    @Richard Winger. Exactly right. I can speak to that from some limited personal experience (not in/for the LP).

    @Trent Hill. Two, one with the campaign and one with the PAC. Plus the targeted outreach at state officers and seeking to obtain their lists, which I thought noteworthy on its own. Taken together I thought it interesting. YMMV.

  5. Jill Pyeatt

    Trent, I posted this on FB and several people are already saying they’ve been contacted. I don’t think you should write this off so quickly.

  6. Jim Polichak from Long Island

    Rand Paul is Lebertarianish, at best. In fact, I figure most Libertarians would vote for him if the only choice was him or Clinton. Maybe, if they were required to select one of the Republicans above the others. But he’s no Ron Paul.
    That being said I can’t see any reason why the various state parties shouldn’t think of his money as not being as good as any other candidate or causes money. Why not sell or rent him the mailing lists? The money gained can be used for party building or in our ballot access or retention campaigns.

  7. Sean Scallon

    Our Paul Meet-up group in the Twin Cities did something similar back in 2007. We got a list of all the CP members in Iowa and send them DVDs urging them to support Paul. We handed out Paul campaign material at the CP booth at the Minnesota State Fair. It can be an effective use of non-major party activists. At the very least it gives them something to do during the fall and winter.

  8. Andy Craig Post author

    @ Sean In 2008, the LP actually did express support for Ron though, in addition to him being a past LP nominee and ongoing member of the LP. I believe the CP did, too, and their nominee eventually received his endorsement in the general election. There’s hardly anything misleading going on if it was the CP who decided to let you use their booth for Ron Paul materials (that probably happened at plenty of LP booths too).

    https://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/lp-monday-message-10-ron-paul-questions

    That is all quite different from claiming endorsements and support that haven’t happened, and which have in fact been publicly rejected and denied on both sides.

  9. Sean Scallon

    “That is all quite different from claiming endorsements and support that haven’t happened, and which have in fact been publicly rejected and denied on both sides.”

    Agreed. This could become a problem for Rand, especially if his (ahem!) “opponents” make it light of it or the party does.

  10. Dave

    I doubt his opponents will see the need to attack him over this. He’s not polling very well. Though it would be interesting if this preludes Rand shifting his rhetoric and running as more of a libertarian dove. At this point he has little to lose. And if I remember correctly he’s already given up on 2016 and is planning to run again.

    It’s all very sad, but he has no one to blame but himself. He was polling pretty well and had an active support base until he started trying to sound like all the others running. I saw enthusiasm for him, never as strong as it was for his father, drop off a cliff for him after that. Some of his poll dropping is due to Trump, but a lot of it is due to his desire to appeal to the GOP mainstream while neglecting the very positions that made people find him and his dad appealing in the first place. You’d have never seen Ron Paul applauding a Netanyahu speech, even reluctantly.

    Honestly I’d like to see him try and reinvent himself yet again, but I think he’s burned too many bridges.

  11. Dave

    I do believe ****** that you attract more flies with honey than vinegar. I don’t think anyone will read that message and decide “Hey, ****’s right. Rand Paul’s for me.” Maybe work on your delivery and offer facts instead of insults.

    Editor’s note: above comment refers to a comment by a banned troll who managed to sneak in before he got caught. We would have left the troll’s comment up if we noticed that it had already received a response, but we hadn’t. We ask our readers not to respond to known trolls, so that putting the trolls’ comments in the spam file will not cause the conversation to seem disjointed like this.

  12. Alexander Snitker

    There is no mistaking that Rand Paul is competition to the Libertarian Party. To see that Rand and his campaign are willing to do this only shows that he is in the right party and should stay in the GOP.

    Furthermore, these types of tactics do damage to the movement overall. I do hope that people see this for what it is. A desperate politician who is willing to do anything to damage the Libertarian party in an effort to help the GOP and not to get elected.

    I can’t wait to see Rand endorse Jeb and show all those who think that you can change the GOP that it is a lost cause.

  13. paulie

    Our Paul Meet-up group in the Twin Cities did something similar back in 2007. We got a list of all the CP members in Iowa and send them DVDs urging them to support Paul. We handed out Paul campaign material at the CP booth at the Minnesota State Fair.

    Well at least as far as I know you did not actually make false claims about the CP endorsing Ron (which at least would have made more sense ideologically).

  14. paulie

    And if I remember correctly he’s already given up on 2016 and is planning to run again.

    I’ve seen speculation he might, but nothing saying he has.

  15. paulie

    It’s all very sad, but he has no one to blame but himself. He was polling pretty well and had an active support base until he started trying to sound like all the others running. I saw enthusiasm for him, never as strong as it was for his father, drop off a cliff for him after that. Some of his poll dropping is due to Trump, but a lot of it is due to his desire to appeal to the GOP mainstream while neglecting the very positions that made people find him and his dad appealing in the first place. You’d have never seen Ron Paul applauding a Netanyahu speech, even reluctantly.

    Honestly I’d like to see him try and reinvent himself yet again, but I think he’s burned too many bridges.

    The thing to remember here is that Randal isn’t Ron, and never was.

  16. paulie

    A desperate politician who is willing to do anything to damage the Libertarian party in an effort to help the GOP and not to get elected.

    Bingo!

    I can’t wait to see Rand endorse Jeb and show all those who think that you can change the GOP that it is a lost cause.

    Just like he endorsed Romney last time. What will be different now?

  17. paulie

    https://www.facebook.com/jill.pyeatt/posts/10204843678153571

    Richard Fast Still don’t stand with rand.
    Like · Reply · 3 · 2 hrs

    Jill Catherine I’m quite disturbed by a report this afternoon that his campaign is calling people, saying he’s been endorsed by the Libertarian Party. I hope it’s not true.
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Steve Susman III I doubt it.
    Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    Craig Bowden Actually they have been
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Craig Bowden I know two people who personally received the call and asked me about it
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Richard Fast Yes, someone i know was contacted by someone claiming to be part of his campaign and saying the LP endorsed him. I was furious.
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Craig Bowden They are lying but it is being said

  18. Andy Craig Post author

    In the CSPAN forum tonight he didn’t do bad with his 5 minutes, in particular answering the questions he wanted to be asked instead of the ones he was.

    But one thing that did jump out at me, is in what was obviously supposed to be his civil-libertarian sounding answer about surveillance, he started off by endorsing Ted Cruz’s ridiculous idea of letting the President unilaterally revoke citizenship as punishment. I would say it’s as insanely unconstitutional as passing a bill of attainder, but then passing a bill of attainder is basically why the three stooges were appearing remote from DC.

  19. paulie

    Some media may be interested in this story…Rachel Maddow and Thom Hartmann perhaps? Emailing the show producers could be a good start…

  20. Election Addict

    Malzberg: “Is this somebody you could vote for if push came to shove – if it was Rand Paul against Hillary Clinton who do you vote for? …”
    Gary Johnson: “Well, probably the Libertarian candidate, but if it were Rand – yeah, Rand Paul.”

    It may be reaching to call it an endorsement, but some people consider liking a guy over other candidates an endorsement. They have some point, too – approving of someone over another can be considered endorsing them, if “levels” or degrees were allowed to the term.

    (I have no stake but for a bit of diversion.)

  21. paulie

    EA,

    Johnson was speaking on behalf of himself only, not on behalf of the national LP, and he responded to a hypothetical scenario where Rand Paul is the Republican nominee and the LP or any other choices besides Clinton are not offered. In other words he basically said that Rand Paul is less bad than Hillary Clinton in his own personal opinion as an individual. In other statements, Johnson has pointed out where he thinks Rand Paul falls short,

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/04/gary-johnson-responds-to-rand-paul-announcement-hes-definitely-running-as-a-republican/

    As have others in the LP

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/03/the-daily-beast-why-real-libertarians-hate-rand-paul/ (although hate is probably too strong of a term)

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/02/gary-johnson-rand-pauls-no-libertarian/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/11/nicholas-sarwark-open-letter-to-rand-paul-regarding-war/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/11/mark-wachtler-sen-rand-paul-no-friend-of-the-opposition/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/01/darryl-w-perry-rand-pauls-cognitive-dissonance/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/08/darryl-w-perry-chris-christie-and-rand-paul-are-both-wrong/

    And the Constitution Party activists are on to Rand Paul as well:

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/07/red-phillips-rand-pauls-sell-out-is-absolutely-undeniably-complete/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/06/chuck-baldwin-on-rand-pauls-romney-endorsement-makes-four-endorsements-of-his-own/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/06/rand-pauls-betrayal-a-constitution-party-response/

    Back to the LP:

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/05/lp-attacks-rand-paul-over-latest-stance-on-drug-war/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/04/darryl-w-perry-rand-pauls-orwellian-doublethink/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/03/starchild-answers-constitutionalist-immigrants-letter-to-rand-paul-re-immigration/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/06/libertarian-party-rand-paul-betrays-his-fathers-principles-endorses-mitt-romney/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/06/rand-paul-distances-himself-from-libertarian-party/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/05/libertarian-party-of-kentucky-rand-paul-is-not-a-libertarian-or-a-libertarian/

    I think it’s safe to say we are most definitely not endorsing Rand Paul as a party!

  22. paulie

    What’s more, Rand Paul will without a doub be abusing any lists he got from the LP on behalf of whoever the Republicans nominate (which almost certainly will not be himself) in the general election. Wachtler’s article which I linked above has evidence that he was already doing things along those lines in 2014.

    Perhaps it’s time for another press release and email blast from the national office about these latest tactics from the Rand Paul anti-LP campaign?

  23. George Phillies

    “Malzberg: “Is this somebody you could vote for if push came to shove – if it was Rand Paul against Hillary Clinton who do you vote for? …”
    Gary Johnson: “Well, probably the Libertarian candidate, but if it were Rand – yeah, Rand Paul.””

    Those lines clearly say that there is a Libertarian in the race, too. The matter that Johnson would consider supporting an antiabortionist, anti-gay-marriage, evolution-denying warmonger speaks for itself.

  24. paulie

    Those lines clearly say that there is a Libertarian in the race, too.

    Maltzberg did not offer that option. Maltzberg’s question was

    “Malzberg: “Is this somebody you could vote for if push came to shove – if it was Rand Paul against Hillary Clinton who do you vote for? …”

    Notice no libertarian option. Johnson is the one who brings up the libertarian option in his reply:

    Well, probably the Libertarian candidate

    He should have left it at that, without the probably, but he went on to say

    but if it were Rand – yeah, Rand Paul.

    Slightly rambling, but the best way to read that in context is that if somehow Maltzberg “push to shove” scenario occurred and there was no LP option, he thinks Rand Paul is less bad than Hillary Clinton.

    And now for the context it should be read in, again:

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/02/gary-johnson-rand-pauls-no-libertarian/

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/04/gary-johnson-responds-to-rand-paul-announcement-hes-definitely-running-as-a-republican/

  25. Chuck Moulton

    paulie wrote:

    It appears that some states did give them the list as I suspected.

    WTF! Which states gave Rand Paul their lists?!

    That sounds like grounds for disaffiliation to me.

  26. Losty

    Chuck,
    Please Not Disaffiliation.
    We don’t need ANOTHER Oregon LNC/JC/CON/LNC/JC/CON Carousel

  27. Mark Axinn

    Agreed.

    How about just flogging and shunning? Or maybe writing 1000 times, “I will not help Republicans who seek to claim they are Libertarians.”

    That said, I was interviewed by US News when Senator Paul first announced, and similar to many of us, commended his positions on many issues, particularly NSA and Patriot Act, but also reminded the interviewer that he is a Republican and that we are not so we would be supporting the Libertarian candidate instead of Sen. Paul.

  28. Andy Craig Post author

    I can buy that a lone state chair or officer might have done so without authority or approval, but none of them are speaking up to say they did so far as I know. If any do, I’ll update the post accordingly.

    But if they did so without getting the approval of their state cmte. (which might not have even been able to give consent depending on the state bylaws), or without even getting a written contract, then it just shows why they are targeting individual state officers who either don’t know better or don’t care.

    If I found that our state chair had transferred a party asset to a Republican candidate without authority (which to be clear I have no reason to suspect), forget just vacating the position. I’d refer the matter for criminal prosecution. *Particularly* if he or she took personal payment for it and didn’t intend to tell anyone. At that point you might as well be stealing party funds right out of the treasury.

    But that’s all just speculation, unless paulie has something more he’d like to share.

  29. Chuck Moulton

    Andy Craig wrote:

    If I found that our state chair had transferred a party asset to a Republican candidate without authority (which to be clear I have no reason to suspect), forget just vacating the position. I’d refer the matter for criminal prosecution. *Particularly* if he or she took personal payment for it and didn’t intend to tell anyone. At that point you might as well be stealing party funds right out of the treasury.

    Yes, it is essentially embezzlement — regardless of whether there was a payment.

  30. Andy Craig Post author

    I’ll add, both of these cases are in Virginia from people who wouldn’t be on any other list except national (or LPVA candidates like Sarvis and Loser). I think it’s safe to assume Bill Redpath and Marc Montoni wouldn’t do that, and if any candidate sold their list that would show up in the disclosures (both their own and RP’s). cf. John McCain notoriously putting his list up as loan collateral, legally but in violation of the no-sharing promise they’d made to donors.

    More likely, I think, that they’re just prospecting from the campaign finance disclosures and public lists of state LP officers, along with no doubt Paul the Elder’s lists. The campaign finance disclosures don’t include phone numbers, but it’s an open secret that you can take a name off that list (mailing addresses only) and independently confirm a phone # elsewhere. The fake “trap” entries really only prevent using it for mail, not calls.

  31. Chuck Moulton

    Andy Craig wrote:

    I’ll add, both of these cases are in Virginia from people who wouldn’t be on any other list except national (or LPVA candidates like Sarvis and Loser). I think it’s safe to assume Bill Redpath and Marc Montoni wouldn’t do that

    Yes, neither would. And you can be damn sure the Virginia LP never endorsed Rand Paul.

    I’m a former Virginia state chair and I therefore also have the Virginia list. Like anyone else who got the list, I signed a database use agreement. Breach of that agreement (like sharing the list with Rand Paul) would open the sharer up to litigation.

    Rand did robocalls encouraging people to vote for Cuccinelli against Sarvis, so I highly doubt Sarvis would ever give his campaign list to Rand Paul.

  32. George Phillies

    The statement to my state web site:

    “Rand Paul” Fraud Alert!

    Across the country, Libertarian State Chairs are receiving calls from people claiming to be Rand Paul staffers, asking for their state party membership and mailing lists. To give credit where it is do, long term Rhode Island activist Mike Rollins gave them a flat NO!!! I have not been asked, so I have not had the privilege of telling them where to go or suckering them in for more details.

    Please Share This Post! And read LPMass.org.

    Across the country, Libertarians are receiving phone calls from people claiming to be Rand Paul volunteers, claiming that the LNC has endorsed Rand Paul (flat out lie), has urged Libertarian Party people to vote for Rand Paul (flat out lie), and has urged Libertarians to donate to Rand Paul (flat out lie). Then they ask for money.

    Please Share This Post! And read LPMass.org.

    Be a real libertarian! Support your Real Libertarian State (LPMass.org) and National (LP.ORG) parties.

  33. paulie

    WTF! Which states gave Rand Paul their lists?!

    From the comments on Jill’s page, possibly Louisiana and Utah. Maybe some others?

  34. paulie

    But that’s all just speculation, unless paulie has something more he’d like to share.

    Already did. Scroll up for the comments from Jill’s facebook post.

  35. paulie

    More likely, I think, that they’re just prospecting from the campaign finance disclosures and public lists of state LP officers, along with no doubt Paul the Elder’s lists.

    That may be it.

    If we get a blast from national asking for people to report if they got these calls maybe a pattern can be established?

  36. Andy Craig Post author

    “Already did. Scroll up for the comments from Jill’s facebook post.”

    I saw that, and see it as confirmation that the calls are being made. Unless I’m missing something that doesn’t say anything about how RP got their contact info, though, much less that it was from a state LP.

    The problem isn’t calling Libertarians, there’s nothing necessarily wrong about that. The problem is calling Libertarians and lying about doing so with LP approval and endorsement, for the purpose of getting a contribution under false pretenses.

    “If we get a blast from national asking for people to report if they got these calls maybe a pattern can be established?”

    Above my pay grade, but I don’t see national going for that.

  37. paulie

    I’d be for getting all the mileage out of it we can. You’re right about the source of lists though, it wasn’t necessarily the state parties. I’d be interested to know if any of them fell for it. I still wouldn’t be surprised if some did, but I don’t have proof, at least yet.

  38. NewFederalist

    Let’s see… Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush vs. Donald Trump vs. Gary “Fair Tax” Johnson vs. Jill Stein et al… I guess I could write in Jim Hedges since he has no chance either! I think we’re screwed!

  39. paulie

    I’d say Johnson would be the obvious choice if those are the options, even though in some ways he is not ideal. And, for the bazillionth time, he does not necessarily support the “prebate” welfare scheme, the “revenue neutral tax rate” or various other aspects of the so-called “fair” tax, although he erroneously says that it would be a “good starting point” for a conversation on how to reform the byzantine tax code. We may or may not be screwed, but if I was writing someone in it sure wouldn’t be a prohibitionist.

  40. zach

    Well the establishment wins again thanks to divide and conquer. Hope you guys are ready for Bush or Clinton 🙂

  41. paulie

    You mean the establishment is using establishment tool Rand Paul to divide and conquer libertarians and try to convince them that there’s a meaningful difference between Bush and Clinton? If so, I agree.

  42. Matt Cholko

    LP members getting calls from RPs campaign does not indicate that they have LP lists. There are several companies that do a pretty good job of compiling voter data, who then rent that data to any campaign that wants it. There are old LP candidates (Bob Barr, for example) that could sell their lists. There is the Ron Paul campaign, to which a large number of LP members donated (myself included, in 2007-2008). There is the public records/phone number mining possibility. And, I’m sure there are other ways that I’m not thinking of.

    Anyway, I’m with Paulie, and others, in that I think we should make whatever news out of this we can. Its a good opportunity to point out that the LP is actually libertarian, and Rand Paul is not. Its also a good opportunity just to get the LP name in the media, maybe get an appearance for Sarwark or Howell on some radio or TV shows, and other stuff like that.

  43. paulie

    If anyone wants to help us contact media outlets who may be interested in the story or suggestions based on experience about best ways to get their attention please let me know.

  44. Andy Craig Post author

    Some of the Randroids are now claiming it must have been a false flag call from another candidate’s operation trying to scare Republicans away from Rand by saying he’s LP-endorsed.

    I’ll grant them points for creativity on that theory, even if it makes no sense for callers who are asking for contributions direct to the RP campaign.

  45. paulie

    If that had been the purpose they would have been calling Republican voters, not LP supporters, and they certainly would not have asked for donations. Randbots are too funny.

  46. Robert Capozzi

    ac: Some of the Randroids…

    me: Back in the day, a “Randroid” was an Objectivist, an Ayn enthusiast. Do you mean them, or supporters of Rand Paul?

  47. Andy Craig Post author

    I think the context alone was obvious enough. Besides, how many hardcore Peikoff-following Objectivists are even still around? It’s been a while since I’ve heard much from them in an active political context. I think ARI’s main thing these days is just getting copies of Anthem, Fountainhead, and AS into high school English curriculum, which they have been spectacularly successful at.

  48. Jim Fulner

    I think the much more likely scenario is the caller in question gets paid based on a portion of the donations she collects, and will say antyhgin she thinks may help her get something from the caller in question and when hearing a lost sale to “Well I’m going to support the Libertarian…” “Oh, didn’t you hear, the Libertarians said support Rand..”

  49. Sean Scallon

    “What’s more, Rand Paul will without a doubt be abusing any lists he got from the LP on behalf of whoever the Republicans nominate (which almost certainly will not be himself) in the general election. Wachtler’s article which I linked above has evidence that he was already doing things along those lines in 2014.”

    That’s very good point and something to remember when you get your first Jeb Bush email blast next fall.

    Any LP state party turning over its list willingly by themselves and not under false pretenses or done so by one person in violation of party protocol is an internal state party matter and should be left to them to deal out discipline. Disaffiliation from the national exec. is bad move

  50. Mark Axinn

    How ’bout tar and feathers?

    Or make them listen to tapes of Murray Rothbard lectures?

  51. Robert Capozzi

    ac: I think the context alone was obvious enough.

    me: Not 100%, but now I get you meant Rand Paul supporters. I try to not get too enmeshed in the choice between Willowbrook and St. Elizabeth’s! 😉

  52. paulie

    Joshua Katz on LNC list http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2015/003371.html

    I’ve been noticing a lot of state chairs reporting calls from Rand Paul
    volunteers claiming that the LNC has endorsed Rand and asking for
    membership lists. Do we know anything about this, and if these are actual
    campaign workers, do we have any recourse? At the least, maybe we should
    send out some communication to our members preemptively.

    Joshua A. Katz
    Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

  53. Andy

    My guess here would be that a few Rand Paul fundraisers are looking for other sources of donations and that Rand had nothing to do with this.

  54. Andy Craig Post author

    @Andy Perhaps, but I don’t think that absolves the campaign of responsibility. We have a word for taking people’s money under false pretenses: fraud. If I went around calling people claiming to be endorsed by Rand Paul (therefore give me money), I imagine it wouldn’t take too long for the Rand camp to object. Most likely in the form of a cease and desist letter and threats of legal action, not a blog post.

  55. George Phillies

    When it is happening in several states, using the same line, there would appear to be a script. Scripts do not write themselves.

    I am however seeing in several places the ‘a few Rand Paul fundraisers’ line, from people who were Paul supporters or the like, and might wonder if there is another script.

  56. Andy


    Andy Craig Post author

    August 5, 2015 at 9:59 am

    @Andy Perhaps, but I don’t think that absolves the campaign of responsibility. We have a word for taking people’s money under false pretenses: fraud.”

    I seriously doubt that Rand Paul knows about it, and I would not be surprised if the higher ups on Rand’s campaign staff knows about it. It could very well just be a few fundraisers who are using a questionable tactic to boost their fundraising commissions.

    This is no different than the times that the Libertarian Party has hired mercenary petitioners who have used questionable tactics to get people to sign LP ballot access petitions, by telling people that the petition is to “Increase the minimum wage.” or to “Keep jobs in America.” or to “Lower their utility bill.” or some other line of bullshit.

  57. Andy

    “George Phillies

    August 5, 2015 at 10:47 am

    When it is happening in several states, using the same line, there would appear to be a script. Scripts do not write themselves.”

    There are mercenary petitioners who use the same bullshit line in multiple states, regardless of what the petition is, such as, “Sign here for lower gas prices.” or, “Sign here to keep jobs in America.” or, “Sign here to increase the minimum wage.” or, “Sign here to lower your utility bill.” or some other line of BS.

    A few commission fundraisers using a deceptive pitch and making calls to people in several states is no different than what some mercenary petitioners do, and this does not mean that Rand Paul had anything to do with it, anymore than any petition proponent has something to do with it when a petitioner that was hired, who may not have even been hired directly by the campaign, as they could have subcontracted with somebody who was contracted by the campaign, or they could have even subcontracted with somebody who subcontracted with somebody subcontracted with a campaign contractor, and who used some kind of bullshit pitch.

    I would not be surprised if Rand Paul does not even know who these people are or what pitch they are using.

    I doubt that Gary Johnson knows who any of the petition circulators are who got him on the ballot, outside of Paul, and that’s only because Paul pops up at a lot of LP meetings and has personally met and hung out with Gary Johnson.

    Should Gary Johnson (or any other candidate or campaign) be held personally responsible if some petition contractor or subcontractor used a deceptive pitch to get people to sign? Most petition proponents do not even know who most of the petition circulators are, and some don’t even know who any of them are.

    I do not agree with anyone using deceptive pitches for fundraising or petition signature gathering, but it is hard to control what every fundraiser or petition circulator says or does, particularly when dealing with unphilosophical mercenaries and large campaigns.

  58. Andy

    “George Phillies

    August 5, 2015 at 11:01 am

    It’s always good to have closet Republicans show their true colors by coming to the defense of Republican warmongers like Paul.”

    If you are talking about me, this is a ridiculous statement, because I am far from being a Republican or a warmonger and anyone who knows me can back this up, and I’d make the same points whether the campaign in question was Rand Paul or Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein or Gary Johnson or whoever.

  59. Andy

    Is it possible that Rand Paul himself had something to do with this? Sure, it is possible, but not likely in my opinion (based on many years of involvement with politics and working on campaigns).

  60. Andy Craig

    I never said that Rand Paul himself personally approved. Who knows, and who cares? He’s responsible for the people working in his employ and on his behalf. “It’s not Dr. Paul himself, it’s just the people he hired to work for him and use his name!” sounds like a familiar and unconvincing excuse. If somebody is taking credit card numbers on RP’s behalf, I doubt the people donating would like to hear that the RP campaign has no control over that person and their behavior.

    Regarding your analogy to petitions: you’re right that happens. You’re also right that it’s wrong, and I’ll add illegal. Here in Wisconsin, Paul Ryan’s primary opponent was almost kicked off the ballot for it. They narrowly ruled in his favor because he claimed the pro-legalization sign he had was just to draw attention to his position on that topic, and that he was honest with people about what they were signing (his nomination petitions). As I’m sure I don’t have to tell you, people have both threatened with and actually received prison sentences for petition fraud, plus often having their petitions invalidated. How often does it still happen? I’ll defer to the professional petitioners. But if we had reports of Libertarians being asked to sign Rand Paul ballot access petitions on the claim that he’s LP-endorsed, I’d see that as a problem too.

    The internal management of the Rand Paul campaign will no doubt remain opaque. I’m not going to go all Watergate on them and break into RPHQ looking for incriminating documents, if that’s the standard of proof you want. What we know, is that Libertarians are speaking up saying they’ve been contacted by people asking for donations for Rand Paul saying he’s LP-endorsed. What you make of that information is up to you.

  61. Andy

    “Andy Craig

    August 5, 2015 at 11:49 am

    I never said that Rand Paul himself personally approved. Who knows, and who cares? He’s responsible for the people working in his employ and on his behalf.”

    Then to be fair, you should also hold the Libertarian National Committee, State and County Libertarian Party affiliates, and Libertarian Party candidates responsible when mercenary petitioners whom they contract with do the same thing.

  62. Andy

    “Andy Craig

    August 5, 2015 at 11:49 am Regarding your analogy to petitions: you’re right that happens. You’re also right that it’s wrong, and I’ll add illegal.”

    Yeah, it is wrong and illegal, but guess what, the people who do it rarely get caught, and even when caught they rarely get prosecuted, and it is even rare for them to be terminated by the campaign, and yes, this includes the LP along with every other group that does petition drives in this country. I know of cases where petitioners have been caught lying to the public, and nothing happened to them, and yeah, I can even cite examples where officials within the LP were aware of this and did nothing, and where they even hired the offenders back.

    I am not saying that every petitioner does this every time. Some petitioners never engage in tactics like this, but there are some that do, but even out of the ones who do, they do not do it all of the time, but of course, some do it more than others.

  63. Andy

    Andy Craig said: “They narrowly ruled in his favor because he claimed the pro-legalization sign he had was just to draw attention to his position on that topic, and that he was honest with people about what they were signing (his nomination petitions).”

    Years ago, a fellow Libertarian petitioner (the other Libertarian petitioner was not Paul in case anyone is wondering) and I were petitioning for a Libertarian candidate at a gun show, and a mercenary petitioner popped up at the same show. This event was held at a state fairgrounds, and we had to stand in the parking lot outside the gate where people walked into where the gun show was. Myself and the other Libertarian petitioner said things like, “Sign here to get a pro-gun rights candidate on the ballot,” and we also really pushed the candidate (it was Harry Browne) and the party as we had lots of Harry Browne and general Libertarian Party outreach material that we handed out. We made no secret of the fact that the petition was for a candidate, or who the candidate was, or which party’s nomination that he had.

    While we were at this event, some mercenary petitioner popped up (it was a women, but I am not sure who she was), and the pitches she was using were along the lines of, “Sign the petition to protect gun rights.” or, “Sign here to stop gun regulations in America.” and stuff like that. She never mentioned that it was for a candidate or who the candidate was or what the party was, unless somebody actually read the petition or asked (which most people did not).

    The issue that this female mercenary petitioner used was in line with the platform of the candidate and the party of the candidate, but the fellow Libertarian petitioner and I both thought that this pitch was deceptive because the women did not mention that it was for a candidate who advocated this issue (unless somebody asked, which most people did not), as she pitched the petition as if it were a ballot initiative in favor of gun rights.

    The fellow Libertarian petitioner and I were contracting with the Libertarian National Committee, which is who paid for this petition drive. There were a few other petitioners there who were contracted by the LNC (out of this small group, a few were Libertarians, but at least two or three that I am aware of were mercenaries), but the LNC had also hired a mercenary petition contractor who had hired a bunch of mercenary contractors under them, one of who was this women whom we had encountered at this gun show.

    I guarantee you that Harry Browne, nor any of his campaign staff, nor anyone on the LNC, had any idea who this women using the deceptive pitch at the gun show was.

    Now I would argue that this was the result of the LNC hiring mercenaries instead of Libertarians (although there were at least 4 Libertarians who worked on this petition drive), but even so, it is not like the LNC instructed this woman or anyone else to use a deceptive pitch, and given that this women was hired by a mercenary petition contractor whom the LNC hired, I’d be willing to bet that nobody on the LNC even knew who this woman was, as the only thing that they would have known is that they sent a check to some mercenary petition coordinator.

    Here is something that is really disturbing that I recently got confirmation of from a former LNC member, and that is that outside of one or two people, nobody else on the LNC even knows where the ballot access money goes after they vote to allocate it (the same thing goes with some of the other expenditures in which they vote in favor).

    Regular readers here probably saw my comments from some other threads where I brought to light the fact that in 2012, the LNC paid one mercenary petition contractor over $140,000, which was like 40% of the LNC’s ballot access budget, and roughly 14% of the total budget for the LNC, and was far more than the amounts of money paid to anyone else for ballot access, and when I brought this up to somebody who was on the LNC during this time period, they admitted that they did not even know who the person was who received this money, or even that one person had received it, and they said that neither did most of the rest of the LNC.

    No wonder this party is in such poor shape.

  64. Dave

    In fairness, I believe RP’s the only candidate who has refused to share his data with the RNC (This article says others, mostly minor candidates, have not, but its a bit old.)

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-07-24/why-isn-t-rand-paul-making-a-data-deal-with-the-gop-

    Now this does not mean he won’t eventually. Indeed if he wants to run later on I imagine he’d have to or it would be used against him. I did find that interesting though.

    In truth, I really want to like Rand. He occasionally comes up with things that are really great, and I think misguided hawkish rhetoric aside he’d be the Republican least likely to start another war. But it seems like its often two steps back, one step forward with him. My advice to him( because honestly, he could use even my untrained opinion at this point) is to start running a campaign differing from his rivals, rather than trying to one up them and prove he’s more “electable” than his father. Hell, even if he only won back his dad’s supporters, in a field this splintered that would be enough.

  65. Dave

    Anyway, he should probably just drop out now with Benton being indicted. Spare yourself the embarrassment Rand. Maybe you can try again in four years and learn from your mistakes this time.There’s a reason half the threads on RP forums about you are negative or lukewarm.

  66. Chuck Moulton

    I don’t understand why Andy keeps turning every thread into a gripe about “mercenary petitioners”.

    As for the actual subject of this thread, did anyone note the phone number of the caller? Did any of them try calling it back?

  67. paulie

    My guess here would be that a few Rand Paul fundraisers are looking for other sources of donations and that Rand had nothing to do with this.

    I think it comes directly on orders from Rand Paul himself and his closest handlers, albeit with plausible deniability. It fits into a pattern of using him directly to target LP supporters and identified likely LP voters to urge them to vote for Republicans in state races where there were LP candidates also running in 2014. It’s pretty obvious that he is being used by the Republican establishment to destroy or maximally damage the LP and any other independent opposition to the maximum of his ability. They, and he, are counting on the LP being retiscent to stand up and fight back. See the Wachtler article I linked earlier in the thread. See who his campaign manager did and what lengths he went to to keep the LP off the ballot for his last client (Rauner in Illinois). It all fits a pattern, and this is another part of this pattern.

  68. paulie

    When it is happening in several states, using the same line, there would appear to be a script. Scripts do not write themselves.

    Exactly!

    We have a word for taking people’s money under false pretenses: fraud. If I went around calling people claiming to be endorsed by Rand Paul (therefore give me money), I imagine it wouldn’t take too long for the Rand camp to object. Most likely in the form of a cease and desist letter and threats of legal action, not a blog post.

    Right again!

  69. paulie

    A few commission fundraisers using a deceptive pitch and making calls to people in several states is no different than what some mercenary petitioners do, and this does not mean that Rand Paul had anything to do with it,

    By itself, maybe not. But consider this:

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/11/mark-wachtler-sen-rand-paul-no-friend-of-the-opposition/

    Kentucky US Senator Rand Paul is currently waging a one-man war against independents and opposition candidates across the country. He’s coordinating with the elites of Washington and Wall Street and going after independent media outlets. You may have even seen one of his campaign commercials in your state telling you not to vote independent.

    And

    GOP Party bosses used him in campaign commercials this election asking independent and opposition voters not to vote for the independent or opposition candidates on their ballot because it would cause Republicans to lose their respective races to Democrats.

    And

    Rand Paul even campaigned for the Republican Senate Minority Leader and gave him the Paul family campaign manager – Jesse Benton.

    Benton is a key figure with his own alleged criminal controversies. He’s been accused of stealing the millions-strong membership list from the Pauls’ Campaign For Liberty and giving it to Senator McConnell and the RNC. Assumedly, for that act of loyalty, Jesse Benton was hired as McConnell’s campaign manager for the 2014 election. Soon thereafter, Benton was forced to resign after criminal investigations were launched over his alleged bribery of Republican Party delegates to the GOP’s 2012 Presidential nominating convention.

    And

    Senator Rand Paul’s transition to the dark side appeared complete in the run-up to this month’s Election. That’s when he was enlisted by the Republican leadership to travel the country with the specific purpose of reaching out to his former independent and libertarian friends. In races where Libertarians, Constitution Party candidates or independents threatened to take votes away from a GOP candidate, Senator Paul campaigned for the Republican nominees.

    Various 2014 Election races saw a GOP candidate threatened with defeat due to the candidacy of an independent or opposition Party candidate. One of those was the race for Alaska’s US Senate seat. Our friends on the left might call this the real triumvirate of evil – the Republican Party, the US Chamber of Commerce, and Senator Rand Paul. That was the team that joined together to record and air over one million dollars in TV commercials in Alaska featuring Republican Senator Rand Paul campaigning for his fellow Republican over independent and Libertarian challengers.

    A Chamber of Commerce spokesperson summed up the three-way partnership’s strategy. “In states like Alaska, the Chamber is focused on the independent swing vote, and we think Senator Paul is well positioned to deliver a message that appeals to them,” explained Blair Latoff Holmes from the US Chamber of Commerce, “This fits into our theme this year of using credible messengers in target races.”

    And:

    So, did the Republican Party strategy of using Rand Paul to lure independent and opposition voters away from their own candidates and into the GOP camp work? Unfortunately, it appears it did. In all but one of the known targeted races, the independent and opposition candidates received only 2 or 3 percent while the Republican candidate won by just as slim of a margin. There was one exception however.

    In the race for Alaska Governor, the independent won with 48.1% of the vote over the Republican’s 45.9%. Votes for the Libertarian and Constitution Party candidates in the race totaled only 5.7%. But that was more than double the margin of victory. In the state’s US Senate race, the Republican won by 2%. The combined vote totals of the Libertarian and independent candidates was just 5.7%. If they would have gotten 1% more each, the Democrat would have won.

    Another targeted race was in the state of Georgia. In the US Senate race there, the strategy again proved effective. In a three-way race, the Libertarian candidate was limited to a dismal 1.9%, giving the Republican candidate the win. In another targeted race in North Carolina, the Libertarian candidate for US Senate was limited to just 3.7%. The Republican nominee won by only 1.5%.

    And in Kentucky, home of both Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, the strategy was most effective. In McConnell’s surprisingly easy victory, the Libertarian candidate was held to just 3.1% in a three-way race. With independents, Libertarians and Tea Partiers firmly in the Republican Party’s camp, the second most despised person in the US Senate won easily by 15.5%. And possibly more than anyone else, the American people may have Rand Paul to thank.

    Consider also:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/rand-paul-chip-englander-2016-elections-114245.html

    https://twitter.com/chipenglander “Campaign Manager @RandPaul for President. Previously Campaign Manager @BruceRauner for #ILGOV.”

    I’m sure I don’t need to refresh Andy J’s memory, but in case anyone else forgot or did not know:

    http://www.illinoisherald.com/articles/2014/q4/bruce-rauner-well-hurt-you-and-your-family/

    http://www.illinoisherald.com/articles/2014/q3/il-gop-armed-terror-campaign-linked-bruce-rauner/

    http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/08/illinois-attorney-generals-office-will-investigate-intimidation-of-libertarian-petitioners-and-petition-signers/

    http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/pistol-packing-petition-challenger-prompts-review-ag/fri-08292014-121pm

    http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/under-gun-petition-challenges/wed-08202014-801pm

    http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/rauner-firing-blanks-flap-over-hired-gun-ballot-challenge/tue-08262014-837pm

    http://politics.suntimes.com/article/springfield/rauner-appalled-outraged-gun-bearing-petition-challenger/thu-08282014-827pm

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-ibendahl/illinois-libertarians-lod_b_5737462.html?utm_hp_ref=chicago&ir=Chicago

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-ibendahl/rauner-camp-brings-a-gun-_b_5709799.html

    https://www.quinnforillinois.com/quinn-illinois-statement-regarding-rauner-voter-intimidation-guns

    Anyone want to bet that whatever LP lists Rand Paul gets his hand on will be used to contact LP supporters and tell them “it’s just too important to stop Hillary Clinton” to vote Libertarian next fall?

  70. paulie

    As for the actual subject of this thread, did anyone note the phone number of the caller? Did any of them try calling it back?

    I don’t know. Someone may want to ask the people who reported being called if they are in touch with them, for example on the thread on Jill’s FB page linked above, or anyone else who is in touch with anyone who was called.

  71. paulie

    He’s responsible for the people working in his employ and on his behalf. “It’s not Dr. Paul himself, it’s just the people he hired to work for him and use his name!” sounds like a familiar and unconvincing excuse. If somebody is taking credit card numbers on RP’s behalf, I doubt the people donating would like to hear that the RP campaign has no control over that person and their behavior.

    True.

  72. paulie

    Dave’s comment that Jesse had been indicted is news to me. Apparently it IS new news:

    The indictmet itself may be, but the allegations that led to it sure aren’t.

  73. paulie

    From the politico story linked above:

    The super PAC Benton runs, America’s Liberty PAC, is one of three pro-Rand Paul presidential super PACs. The other two are Concerned American Voters, run by Jeff Frazee and Matt Kibbe, and Purple PAC, run by Ed Crane. America’s Liberty PAC, however, is the one super PAC that’s been sanctioned by the Paul campaign, and on its website it describes itself as the “only Super PAC endorsed by Senator Paul.”

    No evidence, just a hunch, but Benton’s group is the most likely suspect in this case as well.

  74. paulie

    Also from the same Politico article:

    The fresh headlines of the scandal, which came one day before the first Republican debate, could impact not only Paul’s presidential ambitions, but also his reelection bid for his Senate seat. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee on Wednesday blasted out a story on the indictment with the subject line “Hey Rand, We’ll See You When You Drop Out Of The Presidential Race!”

  75. Andy

    Well gee Chuck, maybe because it is a big problem in the party and because nobody is doing anything to fix it. Did you consider that this might be the reason why I brought it up here?

    The topic also relates to the topic of this thread, just in case you did not notice.

  76. Chuck Moulton

    Andy wrote:

    The topic also relates to the topic of this thread, just in case you did not notice.

    It has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic of this thread, just like it has nothing whatsoever to do with the topics of most threads in which you discuss “mercenary petitioners” ad nauseam.

    Andy wrote:

    Well gee Chuck, maybe because it is a big problem in the party and because nobody is doing anything to fix it. Did you consider that this might be the reason why I brought it up here?

    Nor are “mercenary petitioners” a big problem for the LP. Your primary beef with “mercenary petitioners” as articulated repeatedly is that they don’t do outreach for the LP. Petitioners are paid to get our candidates (or state/county parties) on the ballot, not to do outreach. It would be nice to have petitioners who also do outreach, but if that’s going to cost more money than just getting on the ballot, frankly that extra money doesn’t currently exist. All you do is rant and rage to an audience that has nothing to do with what petitioners are hired (90% of the time, Bill Redpath makes those decisions) advocating for a solution that is impossible with our current finances.

    Redpath over the years has looked for petitioners who are reliable, cheap, and drama free — so that he can be sure candidates will make the ballot well before the deadline, can have as much money as possible left for other ballot drives, and doesn’t have to spend 5 hours a day on the phone talking people off the ledge or coordinating emergencies. The “mercenary petitioners” who you loathe are reliable, cheap, and drama free.

  77. George Phillies

    Also, as a former and probably future candidate, I want petitioners who will shut up, get my signatures with good quality,m and let my campaign send my message.

  78. George Phillies

    The most notable feature of this issue is that the LNC seems to be sitting there rather than condemning the activity. They are in difficult financial straits, and 128K$ more or less in the hole relative to their 2015 budget. One might think they would worry more about protecting their potential donor lists form being raided.

  79. Mark Axinn

    Andy,

    I too think it’s time for you to give it a rest.

    I have worked closely with one of your claimed mercenaries for five years now. I consider him a friend. He got the job done, more than once. He also did outreach like “Help stop Stop and Frisk” and “Help get pro-legalization candidates on the ballot”.

    Sounds like truth in advertising to me.

  80. Andy

    Chuck Moulton said: “Nor are “mercenary petitioners” a big problem for the LP.”

    Mercenary petitioners are a very big problem in the Libertarian Party. The fact that you would say otherwise tells me that you are out of touch. The party has hired people who have gone out and LIED to the public about what the petitions are for and/or what the Libertarian Party is. Every time there has been a big problem with validity, mercenary petitioners have been the source of the problem.

    Look at the big fiasco in Pennsylvania in 2012. This was caused by mercenary petitioners (who in addition to getting bad validity were also too lazy to work outside of Philadelphia, so they got little to no signatures to qualify the LP candidates for district offices outside of the Philadelphia area). Oh, and the story that they validity was bad because they worked in Philadelphia is complete bullshit. Philadelphia actually has a pretty good rate of registered voters, as does the surrounding metropolitan area.

    Look at the failure in Oklahoma in 2012. It was in large part because of mercenary petitioners. There was only one Libertarian petitioner that worked there (it was Roger), and he was only there towards the end of that petition drive. The rest of the paid petitioners who worked in Oklahoma on that drive were mercenaries who did not give a rat’s behind if the LP made the ballot or not.

    Look at Illinois in 2012 when a mercenary brought in some mercenaries from California (so they could pocket an override off of them), and these California mercenaries intentionally padded their numbers by “working the petition like a plebiscite,” that is just having anyone sign without screening to see if they were legally qualified to sign, so they could bilk the party for more money. Fortunately, they got caught before it got too out of hand.

    Look at Illinois in 2014 when a mercenary had all of their signatures thrown out because they committed a legal violation. This means that the more than 4,000 signatures they collected were thrown out, which means that the over $10,000 that the party paid this person for these signatures was for NOTHING. That’s right, OVER $10,000 of LP donor money FLUSHED DOWN THE TOILET because of this mercenary.

    Also, why reward non-libertarians who are just as happy to work as blockers for Joe Arpaio in Arizona, or work on petitions to start a state income tax in Washington, or to pass a new gun control law in Washington and Nevada, or institute a Top Two Primary in Oregon or Arizona or Washington or Florida?

    If you think that it is just peachy keen to hire people of this ilk, then why not just hire communists or Nazis? Why bother having Libertarians work at the national office? Just send Wes Benedict and Carla Howell and the rest of the crew packing, and replace them with non-libertarian mercenary scum. Just put any Democrat or Republican or apolitical mercenary in the national office.

    Hey, and while we are at it, why not put non-libertarian mercenaries on the LNC, and on state LP committees too, since ideology does not matter?

    You have expressed problems with the Gary Johnson campaign staff. I’d be willing to bet that a lot of this is because his campaign staff is composed of mercenaries, like that Gary Johnson campaign staffer who kept a Mitt Romney for President bumper sticker on his car during the duration of the campaign.

    If it does not matter who the LP sends to talk to the public, then why even bother having Libertarians as candidates? Just replace Libertarian Party candidates with mercenaries as well. The party basically already tried this in 2008 with the Barr / Root ticket. Having two Republican mercenaries posing as Libertarian candidates certainly did wonders for the party.

    If I ever get in a position to do something about it, the role of mercenary petitioners in LP ballot access will be greatly reduced.

  81. Andy

    “Mark Axinn

    August 5, 2015 at 9:05 pm

    Andy,

    I too think it’s time for you to give it a rest.”

    I will not give it a rest until this mercenary train is derailed and most LP ballot access is being done by actual Libertarians. If say 70-80% of LP ballot access were done by actual Libertarians, you probably would not hear me complaining.

    It is funny, but the people who really know what is going on with ballot access all agree with me, and I am not just talking about other Libertarian petitioners. I am talking to some people who have been state chairs and on former LNC members who are aware of a lot of the bullshit that has gone down and they all know that I am right.

    Here is an open challenge to anyone reading this. I am so confident in my position, that I will debate anyone in person on this and have the debate put on video and posted to YouTube, and it can be made into an article here, and it can also be forwarded to every LP donor.

    I say we should let the donors know how their money is being spent. Let’s see what they think of mercs who go out misrepresent LP petitions to the public, get low validity, work on scumbag anti-liberty causes, etc….

    I know when I was at the LP of PA convention in 2012, one LP donor in particular was very angry when I informed him of the fact that Eric Dondero had been hired on multiple occasions to petition for the LP. This person said that they did not even want to donate to the LNC if they knew that some of their donation money was going to end up in Dondero’s pocket.

  82. Andy

    “I know when I was at the LP of PA convention in 2012,”

    This was actually in 2013. During the same convention every LP of PA member who I talked too about this was angry at the merc crew who screwed up in Philly the previous year.

  83. Andy

    “George Phillies

    August 5, 2015 at 7:05 pm

    Also, as a former and probably future candidate, I want petitioners who will shut up, get my signatures with good quality,m and let my campaign send my message.”

    If it had not been for Jake Witmer, Paul, and myself (THREE actual Libertarian petitioners played a vital role in this), Libertarian Joe Kennedy would not have made the ballot in Massachusetts for that special election in early 2010.

    If the mercenaries who were in Massachusetts at that time had been the sole people relied on to get that job finished (this petition drive took place in the fall of 2009), Joe Kennedy would not have made the ballot.

    Paul was there, and as I said above, he played a vital role in the success of that petition drive, and he knows that I am right.

    Hey, if George ever runs for office again, maybe he should hire Eric Dondero to collect signatures for him. This would be funny.

  84. George Phillies

    Actually I agree with you that I do not want petitioners who misrepresent my position or generate low validity rates. Some of the rake-off percentages that I have been quoted by other state chairs, for fundraising associated with ballot access, are also in my opinion remarkable.

    Actually, I have met Eric Dondero. He was petitioning for Bob Barr in New Hampshire in 2008. He appeared to be doing a good job. However, he is not a Libertarian.

  85. paulie

    The most notable feature of this issue is that the LNC seems to be sitting there rather than condemning the activity. They are in difficult financial straits, and 128K$ more or less in the hole relative to their 2015 budget. One might think they would worry more about protecting their potential donor lists form being raided.

    Agreed. A couple of LNC members have discussed this, but I was hoping for more by this point. I bet we would have made some of the media stories about the Rand Paul campaign’s tailspin if LPHQ had at least done a press release about this by now.

  86. paulie

    I’ll leave the original comment author out, since I guess he doesn’t want to be associated with the comment, but I thought the comment itself is worth saving as a contribution to this thread:

    So Jesse Benton will leave national politics the way he came in: harming, embarrassing, and undermining a Paul for President campaign.

  87. Nicholas Sarwark

    The most notable feature of this issue is that the LNC seems to be sitting there rather than condemning the activity. They are in difficult financial straits, and 128K$ more or less in the hole relative to their 2015 budget. One might think they would worry more about protecting their potential donor lists form being raided.

    Please don’t misinterpret my inaction as ignorance as opposed to a calculated decision that action at this time is ill-advised.

    I endeavor only to swing when I’m sure I’m going to connect squarely. I’m not sure on this one, with what evidence I have at present.

    If the situation changes, the response will likely change.

  88. Nicholas Sarwark

    If you would like to observe how it goes if one goes public against the alleged behavior of the Paul campaign, read the comments on this post.

    You’ll note that the accusation is easily deflected as being without solid evidence that the act occurred or that the act was directed by or approved by the campaign.

    Discretion is sometimes the better part of valor.

  89. Andy

    “George Phillies

    August 5, 2015 at 10:16 pm

    Actually I agree with you that I do not want petitioners who misrepresent my position or generate low validity rates. Some of the rake-off percentages that I have been quoted by other state chairs, for fundraising associated with ballot access, are also in my opinion remarkable.

    Actually, I have met Eric Dondero. He was petitioning for Bob Barr in New Hampshire in 2008. He appeared to be doing a good job. However, he is not a Libertarian.”

    Dondero appeared to be doing a good job when you saw him, but I’ve had reports of him from multiple sources lying to people to get them to sign petitions (and even later bragging about it), and getting low validity (like on the LP drives in Arkansas in 2011 and in Maryland in December of 2010).

    Also, note that the candidate you saw him collecting signatures for was Bob Barr. Barr was close to the “Dondero wing” of what it means to be a libertarian, which is to say not very libertarian, if libertarian at all.

    Now I am not saying that Dondero can’t collect signatures, or that he always does a bad job (even though he has on at least some occasions), but outside of whatever merits or demerits there are of Dondero the petition circulator, the fact remains that the guy grossly misrepresents what it means to be a libertarian, and he has gone on record saying that he wants to destroy the Libertarian Party, and he has actively attacked multiple Libertarian Party candidates and Libertarian Party activists, and he has also attacked multiple small “l” libertarians who are respected by many people in the Libertarian Party, and for this reason alone, I would never hire him to gather petition signatures or do anything else for the Libertarian Party. I would not even hire him to sweep the floor at the Libertarian Party national office.

  90. paulie

    If you would like to observe how it goes if one goes public against the alleged behavior of the Paul campaign, read the comments on this post.

    You’ll note that the accusation is easily deflected as being without solid evidence that the act occurred or that the act was directed by or approved by the campaign.

    Discretion is sometimes the better part of valor.

    I think you are worried about the wrong thing to worry about here. See my comments above and follow the links; if we don’t go after them it doesn’t mean they won’t go after us. At what point do we fight back?

  91. paulie

    You’ll note that the accusation is easily deflected as being without solid evidence that the act occurred or that the act was directed by or approved by the campaign.

    As to the first point, we have direct personal testimony from several individuals that they got these calls (see above) as well as testimony from several state LP chairs that they got calls asking for the list.

    As to the second, see context I provided above.

  92. paulie

    Short version: Rand Paul has a history of specifically targetting LP and independent campaigns for defeat, calling their supporters and likely supporters and cutting ads aimed at them specifically asking them to vote for Republicans in those races. He is tied in with sleazy political operatives who have a history of engaging in sleazebally tactics and some of whom have now been indicted. And his campaign manager’s last gig was running a gubernatorial campaign that took sleazy and extreme tactics for keeping the LP off the ballot to new depths, up to and including terrorist intimidation tactics intended to suborn perjury, and would have probably faced state indictment for it if they hadn’t in fact won the governor’s race, which they did.

  93. Jill Pyeatt

    We’ve made the issue public, and pointed out that the LP doesn’t take kindly to being misrepresented. Even if Rand knew about this, perhaps he’ll see it as the fraud it is and back off. Frankly, I think it’s very likely Rand’s campaign will not recover form the Benton fallout. Since Benton is a family member, I would consider the whole Paul family to go into crisis mode for a while.

  94. paulie

    BTW I just read the thread on Wyllie’s wall that Nick linked. And there were quite a few people in that thread agreeing with our side. I think the few Rand Paul trolls and dupes in there have Nick way too gunshy on this one.

  95. paulie

    As for the proof they are asking for it is in this very comment thread. We are not just making empty accusations. I also have a copy of the comment thread from the state chairs list with multiple reports from LP state chairs of being contacted for their list by Rand Paul campaigners. I forwarded that thread to Andy Craig; I would have to scroll up to see how much of it he used in the article.

  96. paulie

    We’ve made the issue public, and pointed out that the LP doesn’t take kindly to being misrepresented. Even if Rand knew about this, perhaps he’ll see it as the fraud it is and back off. Frankly, I think it’s very likely Rand’s campaign will not recover form the Benton fallout. Since Benton is a family member, I would consider the whole Paul family to go into crisis mode for a while.

    Which makes it the best time to pile on with the rest of the sharks while there’s blood in the water. That’s how the political game is played and we already know that they not only would but already have done it to us and will do it again. Strike while the opportunity presents itself!

  97. Andy

    Paul said: “And his campaign manager’s last gig was running a gubernatorial campaign that took sleazy and extreme tactics for keeping the LP off the ballot to new depths, up to and including terrorist intimidation tactics intended to suborn perjury, and would have probably faced state indictment for it if they hadn’t in fact won the governor’s race, which they did.”

    Given the mentality of some of the people in the LP, including some on this thread, that Republican campaign manager who is currently working for Rand Paul and who worked as the campaign manager for Bruce Rauner for Governor of Illinois, and who was likely involved with the attempt to keep the Libertarian Party off of the ballot in Illinois in 2014, could end up being hired to run ballot access for the Libertarian Party in 2016, or perhaps could end up as the next Executive Director for the LNC.

  98. paulie

    From statechairs:

    I just had a phone call from a University of Rhode Island student. He was asking me to help the Rand Paul campaign, by providing contact information for Libertarian Party of Rhode Island members who are college students. My reply, which I believe was polite enough, was to tell him to get back to me after Senator Rand Paul has officially switched parties. It appears that the Rand Paul campaign is eager to subvert the Libertarian Party for the Republican cause.

    Mike Rollins,

    Libertarian Party of Rhode Island

    I have also got a call from their deputy campaign manager about helping with Georgia…I told him I would pass…but they are going after us
    Doug Craig

    That’s at least two state chairs. Additionally we have Joe Enroughty from the article we are commenting on (I just re-read it and recommend others do also).

    And from Jill’s page:


    Craig Bowden I know two people who personally received the call and asked me about it
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Richard Fast Yes, someone i know was contacted by someone claiming to be part of his campaign and saying the LP endorsed him. I was furious.
    Like · 2 · 2 hrs
    Craig Bowden They are lying but it is being said

    I’ve seen multiple reports like this scattered around various different places. It’s happening, and the proof does exist. We can’t prove the campaign sanctioned it, but there’s a lot of circumstantial evidence that ties it in with their known patterns of behavior, going all the way to the top, and they are responsible for the actions of their hired representatives either way.

  99. Andy Craig Post author

    “””I’ll leave the original comment author out, since I guess he doesn’t want to be associated with the comment, but I thought the comment itself is worth saving as a contribution to this thread:

    So Jesse Benton will leave national politics the way he came in: harming, embarrassing, and undermining a Paul for President campaign.”””

    I stand behind the sentiment, I just realized that Benton did have a career in national GOP politics before Ron ’08 so the joke didn’t really fit. 😉

  100. Andy

    Andy Craig said: “I stand behind the sentiment, I just realized that Benton did have a career in national GOP politics before Ron ’08 so the joke didn’t really fit. ?”

    I just did a little reading up on Jesse Benton, and it is sounding to me like he came into Ron Paul 2008 as a mercenary for hire. Well surprise, surprise.

    If I ever run for office, I will only hire bona fide libertarians as campaign staffers.

  101. Andy

    Apparently, Jesse Benton started out working for the Republican National Committee back in 2000 as a mainstream Republican, but he did claim to have moved in a libertarian direction by the time he started out with the Ron Paul 2008 campaign. Benton did start out as a volunteer with Ron Paul 2008, but he ended up in a paid position.

    I don’t know how legitimate Benton’s conversion to libertarian ideas was, but he was criticized by some hardcore libertarians in Ron Paul’s circle, like Tom Woods.

    This is from Wikipedia:

    “Benton has been criticized by many Ron Paul supporters who see Benton as being overly concerned with his own career, incompetent, and not truly a ‘hardcore Paulite.’ Thomas Woods, an historian, political analyst, and former Ron Paul adviser, criticized Benton for what he saw as downplaying Ron Paul’s libertarian ideals in order to earn ‘GOP respectability,’ a notion echoed by other Paul supporters.”

  102. Andy Craig Post author

    As for if the LNC should do something about this: I’m inclined to agree with Nick, actually.

    I’m absolutely convinced this is happening, that it’s an organized effort, and that the LP is one of their main targets, and that it’s good for Libertarians to be calling it out on their own as they see fit. That’s more what I had in mind, not LNC making some sort of official protest over it.

    However, I’ll admit I didn’t get what I really wanted before I posted this story: something on-tape or a document like a script. I feel like I had enough to go with (and paulie does a good job laying out the broader circumstantial evidence), I absolutely trust the accounts given by the sources, and I strongly suspected (as indeed happened) that it being posted here at IPR would cause others to come forward and say they’ve had similar calls. Articles run in “respectable” mainstream publications on far shakier sourcing all the time, just go read any Politico expose-style gossip report. And like paulie, I’ve seen others claim the same thing elsewhere beyond just the two calls I cited in the post. Those were just the two who *approached me* about it, asking if I’d look into it and write-up what I found. So I took a bit of initiative, talked to them and the state chairs, and this is what came of it.

    At paul’s suggestion, I also sent it out to some larger media outlets. We’ll see if any of them bite and do some of their own investigation. Would they if LNC jumped on it? Probably, at least some. Others sending them a suggestion to look into it would help with that, also. But I understand Nick’s hesitation, and it isn’t just about not alienating the ever-shrinking pool of future former Rand supporters. It’s that if/when the LNC is going to call out Rand, better to do so on substantive political issues, than crying foul over ethics and tactics that won’t even really register or interest most voters and non-Libertarians. cf. Nick’s open letter to Rand about the Iraq/Syria war, or calling out Trump on eminent domain. For another thing, the Rand campaign is already in the gutter anyway and much less of a threat than once it was. From 1st place with 17%+ to 8th place with less than 5%, he’s done more damage to himself than the LP could ever inflict even if that was our purpose (and it isn’t.)

    And I also agree with Nick, that if there was to be something more, there would need to be follow-up with more individuals willing to state on-the-record that they were called and that an LP endorsement was claimed, beyond just Joe and anonymous (who, just for the record, has a perfectly legitimate and totally unrelated reason for not wanting his name attached to politics). I think that could be done, but we’d need to follow up with e.g. the people who posted on Jill’s FB and elsewhere. Some of them might not want to be made the object of a media story, or have other hesitations. I wouldn’t want to drag anybody into that sort of thing. That’s why I haven’t added the FB comments from Jill’s page as an update to the original post. I invited them to comment here about it, and neither apparently want to, which is fair enough. And beyond that, I would encourage people receiving such calls to contact the LNC and their state LP themselves to report it, and commenting here.

    That’s a bit long-winded, but just my personal take on the direction the conversation has gone. Like I said above, what the LNC does or does not do is not up to me and I’m perfectly OK with that.

    tl;dr version: In true Libertarian fashion, I’m profoundly ambivalent about what others choose to do about this.

  103. Douglas Durham of AIM

    The LP is comprised of abject idiots who are incapable of assessing strategy as a variable independent of (though related to) philosophy. The reasons for this don’t matter much, it is true, and the comments here reflect that. No doubt there are well-intentioned libertarians, but not well intentioned enough to learn how to create a movement and win elections. Talk with enough of them and you’ll realize: that’s not even their goal.

    There are many psychological reasons for declaring oneself a Libertarian, but make no mistake: if you start to edge the LP closer to success you will be drummed out of the LP very quickly. Some suspect, because this is true, that the LP is infiltrated by purposeful destroyers. While it’s certainly possible, I fear the problem is more mundane and less exciting: the government schools that have made it impossible to raise an independent jury have created several well-to-do ex-Republicans who think that political law is top-down, executive, command-and-control.

    It is not, and anyone who thinks it is, will experience nothing but failure in the field of politics. The LP, as a whole, doesn’t want to win. Individuals within the LP want to win (in their own personal lives) even at the expense of the LP. They want prestige without battlefield victory. They despise people like Andy Jacobs, Paul Frankel, Eric Dondero, Jake Witmer, Milton Lukins, and Bob Lynch: They despise political workers who map libertarian ideas onto the cruder minds of non-libertarians. They despise political imperfection that comes with the expansion of the network.

    They feel superior because they consider themselves “anarchists”(a smaller subset of libertarians that doesn’t form political networks) or “objectivists”(another small subset of libertarians that ALSO doesn’t play well with others). Feeling superior is what this game is all about.

    It’s not about individual freedom. If it was, people would take it more seriously. They would weed out the persistent causes of failure in the LP, and force it to function properly.

    I don’t have the money it takes to do this. I can’t afford to fly to every LNC meeting(a good reason to hold them on skype, and allow public comments, and even public votes on LP strategic policy!).

    Some say this opens us up to infiltration. This is laughable! The LP couldn’t be less effective if it ok it’s orders directly from the FBI or CIA (which it very well may).

    The LP needs to be “open-sourced.” NOTE: Although I included Eric Dondero as someone capable of working for the LP, he is an admitted militarist who, since Badnarik’s victory in 2004, admittedly regularly misrepresents the LP. This should make him unhirable by any LP branch, national or affiliate.

  104. Douglas(s) Durham of AIM

    The reason my prior post is on this thread is because the LP has never learned the elemental, fundamental basics of political engagement. As such, Rand Paul has likely noticed there is a large demographic that “isn’t being used.” Finders keepers! He’s more than welcome to pick up the shiny coin and put it to use! The alternative is to let it sink to the ocean floor, swift falling from the hands of people for whom “political strategy” and “political philosophy” are completely unconnected items.

  105. Robert Capozzi

    RP2 seems to follow in his Dad’s footsteps in one unfortunate regard: A great propensity to attract sleazy advisers and camp followers. Not all of them, of course. Since at least the Hayes embezzlement scandal of 1988, there have been a series of dubious characters around both Pauls.

  106. NewFederalist

    Wow! For once I agree with Robert Capozzi. The nepotism and outrageous salaries were a big turn off in the 2012 Ron Paul campaign as well. To paraphrase: “Never have so many paid so much for so little.”

  107. Robert Capozzi

    NF, it seems you agree with me perhaps 2x a year! 😉

    RP1 has been running TV and web ads a LOT of late promoting a gloom-and-doom scenario, sponsored by Stansberry Associates. For more on them, start here:

    http://reviewopedia.com/workathome/stansberryresearch-com-reviews-legit-or-scam/

    I find this stuff alarmist and odd, especially at a time when RP2 is running for prez. It reminds folks about the kook factor surrounding the Pauls. Is Dad purposely sabotaging his son’s chances? Does he think this sort of thing HELPS?

    Oy vey!

  108. NewFederalist

    “NF, it seems you agree with me perhaps 2x a year! ?”

    That could be an exaggeration.

  109. paulie

    and paulie does a good job laying out the broader circumstantial evidence

    I’m trying to unlazy myself up enough to make it an actual post. We’ll see.

    Others sending them a suggestion to look into it would help with that, also.

    Post a list of who you contacted so far and maybe me and a few other people can brainstorm up a few other potential places to send it to.

    But I understand Nick’s hesitation

    Don’t get me wrong, I understand it also. I just happen to conclude that on balance we’re better off going after them, although admittedly it will be painful, I think it will hurt us more in the long run if we just surrender and let them keep pummeling us with no response.

    alienating the ever-shrinking pool of future former Rand supporters.

    To the extent that any of them still follow his lead a year from now, he’ll be using every last ounce of juice he has to persuade them, and persuade them to persuade others, that it’s just too important to stop Hillary to vote Libertarian this time, blah blah blah. Therefore, it’s in our best interest to shrink his political capital as much as we can between now and then. If we can help persuade him to retire from politics completely and go back to practicing medicine that would be ideal. Otherwise he will keep doing what Wachtler documented he did in 2014, but bigger, harder and nastier.

    crying foul over ethics and tactics that won’t even really register or interest most voters and non-Libertarians.

    In the context of the Benton et al indictments it will help demonstrate a pattern of behavior that may be of interest to a larger audience. And some people may be asking anyway whether he’s really a libertarian or a conserative at heart, or just an opportunist who will say whatever he thinks the audience he is talking to wants to hear and condone any underhanded tactic in the service of his ambition.

    For another thing, the Rand campaign is already in the gutter anyway and much less of a threat than once it was. From 1st place with 17%+ to 8th place with less than 5%, he’s done more damage to himself than the LP could ever inflict even if that was our purpose (and it isn’t.)

    Well, it’s true that at the moment he seems unlikely to be on the balllot next year, except in Kentucky, and even that’s not certain. But on the other, political fortunes come and go; McCain seemed finished with staffers quitting etc. and came back to get the nomination, albeit not the presidency; in 2012, a parade of candidates took their 15 minute turns on the top of the Reublican nomination field before sinking back down. It’s not inconceivable that Rand Paul could have another wind and even at some point become a short term front runner for the nomination in the months ahead, although he probably won’t. But even if he literally drops out of the race this months, which I don’t think will happen but conceivably could, he’ll still retain some brand name capital among libertarian-leaners…and he’ll be using it to do everything he can to get them to be afraid, be very afraid of Democrats and vote Republican next year and in future years. It would be in our interest to reduce his political capital now while there is an opportunity.

    And I also agree with Nick, that if there was to be something more, there would need to be follow-up with more individuals willing to state on-the-record that they were called and that an LP endorsement was claimed,

    We had more people on Jill’s FB thread and others that I did not bother to note where exactly (d’oh!). We have two state chairs on the record that they were called and asked for lists. An email blast from national should get us more than enough first hand accounts in response.

    I think that could be done, but we’d need to follow up with e.g. the people who posted on Jill’s FB and elsewhere. Some of them might not want to be made the object of a media story, or have other hesitations. I wouldn’t want to drag anybody into that sort of thing. That’s why I haven’t added the FB comments from Jill’s page as an update to the original post. I invited them to comment here about it, and neither apparently want to, which is fair enough.

    OK, you have a point there. We shouldn’t drag people into what could potentially become a media story.

    And beyond that, I would encourage people receiving such calls to contact the LNC and their state LP themselves to report it, and commenting here.

    So would I. I wish we had some help with that, but c’est la vie.

  110. paulie

    Douglas Durham,

    They despise people like Andy Jacobs, Paul Frankel, Eric Dondero, Jake Witmer, Milton Lukins, and Bob Lynch:

    One of these is not like the others.. one of these is not the same… how did ED’s name sneak into the group above?

    NOTE: Although I included Eric Dondero as someone capable of working for the LP, he is an admitted militarist who, since Badnarik’s victory in 2004, admittedly regularly misrepresents the LP.

    It goes back way further than that. For example this …gem… is from 2001:

    From: Eric Dondero, INTERNET:ericdondero@yahoo.com
    To: Steve Dasbach, SteveDasbach
    Date: 4/30/01 5:04 PM
    RE: Re: [RLC-National] The LP in Crisis … again, ho hum.

    “We could deal them a fatal blow.” … Michael, Michael, Michael??? … “Could.” That is the subjunctive form of the verb “can.” … Why would you use “could.” … Please reform your comments. The proper verbage which should be utilized in this instance is “must,” as in “we must deal the Libertarian Party a fatal blow.” … We are now in a state of all-out war with the LP. Though it could be argued that we, Chuck, a couple others and I, might have provoked them. They have declared war on the Republican Party with this latest salvo. … It’s time for the weak of heart amongst us, (don’t read these following names – Phil Blumel, Paul Jacob, that guy in New Jersey who is always talking about “cooperating with LPers”), to step aside. … The bombastic corps will now lead. We need to fatally strike the LP where it hurts. They are the enemy. Much more so than the Democrats or Moderate Republicans. … Let’s kick their asses, Braveheart style!

    And it by no means started then.

  111. paulie

    Finders keepers! He’s more than welcome to pick up the shiny coin and put it to use!

    “Put it to use” on behalf of Bush-Walker or Bush-Martinez and the RNC… woo hoo!

  112. George Phillies

    I shall politely welcome Douglas Durham from AIMLESS to IPR. We haven’t had something that …interesting… (alternative words come to mind) since that other character proposed that the LP should advance by merging with the Green Party, the Constitution Party, and the American Nazi Party. Remember, as a point to get straight, our plank is that hallucinogens should be *legal*, not that you should try all of them *at the same time*.

    In my opinion, the P**l campaign has given us a chance to whack cross-sides the head with a Vermont and Northern railroad tie the entire Republican antiabortion fascists, and we should be taking vigorous advantage of it. And if corrections need be made, that’s the target’s problem not ours.

  113. Andy

    “paulie

    August 6, 2015 at 10:11 am

    Douglas Durham,

    ‘They despise people like Andy Jacobs, Paul Frankel, Eric Dondero, Jake Witmer, Milton Lukins, and Bob Lynch:’

    One of these is not like the others.. one of these is not the same… how did ED’s name sneak into the group above?”

    LOL! I was thinking the same thing. There are good reasons for Libertarians to despise Eric Dondero.

    Paul, Jake, Milton, Bob, and myself are all Libertarians who have lots of experience in ballot access work. Dondero has a lot of experience in ballot access work as well, but he is not a Libertarian, he’s a Republican imperialist.

    When it comes to doing ballot access work for the Libertarian Party, there are lots of run-of-the-mill mercenary petition circulators that I’d hire before I’d hire Eric Dondero (who I would not hire for LP work at all).

    “From: Eric Dondero, INTERNET:ericdondero@yahoo.com
    To: Steve Dasbach, SteveDasbach
    Date: 4/30/01 5:04 PM
    RE: Re: [RLC-National] The LP in Crisis … again, ho hum.

    ‘We could deal them a fatal blow.’ … Michael, Michael, Michael??? … ‘Could.’ That is the subjunctive form of the verb ‘can.’ … Why would you use ‘could.’ … Please reform your comments. The proper verbage which should be utilized in this instance is ‘must,’ as in ‘we must deal the Libertarian Party a fatal blow.’ … We are now in a state of all-out war with the LP. Though it could be argued that we, Chuck, a couple others and I, might have provoked them. They have declared war on the Republican Party with this latest salvo. … It’s time for the weak of heart amongst us, (don’t read these following names – Phil Blumel, Paul Jacob, that guy in New Jersey who is always talking about ‘cooperating with LPers’), to step aside. … The bombastic corps will now lead. We need to fatally strike the LP where it hurts. They are the enemy. Much more so than the Democrats or Moderate Republicans. … Let’s kick their asses, Braveheart style!”

    I WANT EVERYONE HERE TO READ THE ABOVE EMAIL FROM ERIC DONDERO.

    Now, after reading this email, ask yourself why a certain LNC member, who had full knowledge of the above email, as well as a bunch of similar statements from Dondero, would hire Eric Dondero on multiple occasions to work as a petition circulator for the LNC, between 2004 and 2012 (the only reason Dondero has not worked on any LP drives since 2012, is because he supposedly found some other line of work in 2013, after working on some non-LP campaigns in Arizona in the early half of 2013).

    Now one may say, “Well maybe the LP really needed Dondero to petition, and the party would have failed to make the ballot otherwise.”

    My response to this is bullcrap. Some of the petition drives he worked on had plenty of time before the deadline, and some other petitioner could have easily taken his place, and in some of these cases, the drives would have still been finished well before the deadline if he had not been there, and even for the ones that were done last minute, there are other petitioners out there who could have come in so it is not like he was the only one that could have been found in a last minute crisis (which the party would not even have if things were run properly from the beginning, but this is another issue).

    Somebody may say, “Well Eric Dondero is a really good petition circulator, so the LP needed to hire him.”

    My response to this is that while he may be good on some occasions, I have received numerous reports of him misrepresenting petitions to the public (and even bragging about it), and I know he’s gotten low validity on at least some occasions. Now to be fair, there are probably some instances where he has done well, but the bottom line is that it is not like he’s the only petition circulators out there, some of whom have never even petitioned or the Libertarian Party. Since I have worked on a lot of ballot initiatives in a lot of places, I am very familiar with the mercenary petitioning circuit, and I can think of several experienced mercenaries that could have been called in Dondero’s place. These people may not be Libertarians, but neither is Dondero (even with the libertarian views he claims, he always sells out to the Republican establishment), but at least they don’t say they want to destroy the Libertarian Party, and they don’t frequently misrepresent what it means to be a libertarian, and they do not frequently attack Libertarian Party members and movement libertarians.

    Another thing to consider here is that new petitioning talent can be recruited out of the existing Libertarian Party base, as well as out of the greater libertarian movement. I have seen little to no effort in the last 15 years to recruit and train actual Libertarians to work as petition circulators. This is something that should change.

    So given these facts, and given the content of the email above from Dondero, why would anyone on the LNC see to it that Eric Dondero got placed on Libertarian Party ballot access drives all over this country between 2004-2012?

    I know of three occasions where Dondero was pushed into a Libertarian Party petition drive over the objections of the State Chairman, as in the State Chairs did not want him there, but a certain LNC member forced Dondero on them.

    Is this a guy that you want to see out representing the Libertarian Party to the public? Do you like the idea of your donor money having gone into the pocket of this guy?

    Remember, Dondero is not just some run-of-the-mill mercenary petitioner, he’s a guy who has gone on record as saying that he wants to destroy the Libertarian Party, yet an LNC member who knew that he said this repeatedly hired him to petition for the LP, even though he was not really needed as a petitioner.

  114. Andy

    “but the bottom line is that it is not like he’s the only petition circulators out there, some of whom have never even petitioned or the Libertarian Party.”

    Should read, “but the bottom line is that it is not like he’s the only petition circulator our there, there are some experienced mercenary petitioners out there who have never even petitioned for the Libertarian Party that could have easily replaced Dondero.”

  115. Andy

    “George Phillies

    August 6, 2015 at 11:17 am

    ‘a certain LNC member forced Dondero on them. ‘

    Who?”

    Redpath.

  116. Andy

    I was on two of the LP ballot access drives in question of which I am referring to above where Dondero was forced in over the objection of the State Chairs, even though he was not needed, and all his presence on these drives accomplished was lowering the validity rate (since I was told by the State Chairs in both of these instances that Dondero had the lowest validity rate of anyone who worked on these drives), and also putting the real Libertarians who were working on these petition drives, which were Paul, Bob, and myself, out of work prematurely. There were still several weeks left before the deadline, so instead of Paul, Bob, and myself being the ones who collected those signatures, Dondero got them, so Dondero got the money that was allocated for those signatures, and Paul, Bob, and I got put out of work early. These petition drives were at no risk of failing, so there was no reason for Dondero to have been brought in or to have brought in anyone else for that matter.

    There was also the LP drive in Kentucky in 2012 where the State Chair told Dondero both on the phone and in an email to print the petitions on 8.5″ by 14″ paper, but Dondero printed them on 8.5″ by 11″ paper, which meant that the boxes were smaller, which resulted in a lot of the signers not filling in all of the information, as lots of the signatures that he collected lacked dates and/or cities and/or zip codes (and he was obviously not vigilant enough to make sure all of the signers filled in this information in addition to the boxes being smaller than necessary), which could have resulted in lots of his signatures being disqualified by the election officials in that state. Dondero ended up being paid by the LNC on all of these signatures anyway, and then he left the state before the drive was over, and given that the State Chair was not comfortable with Dondero’s validity, they had to end up paying other petitioners to collect the same number of signatures that Dondero collected to make up for his low validity.

    Oh, and a couple of years later Dondero went on a message board and made up some nasty lies about this State Chair (who apparently never had a nasty conversation with Dondero when he was there, even after he turned in low validity signatures on the wrong size paper), falsely accusing him of taking money from Democrats so an LP candidate for US Senate could siphon votes away from Republicans, and of being an unemployed goofball who can’t hold a steady job and who was in a dysfunctional marriage (all of these statements from Dondero were fabricated).

  117. Mark Axinn

    Andy re: mercenary petitioners:

    Conspicuously absent from your list of fuck-ups was New York. Perhaps that’s because we had someone minding the store and controlling petitioning, including literally dozens of paid and volunteer petitioners. Not one penny of LP or LPNY money was spent on petitioning in the last five years that I did not approve. The buck stops at the top of the pyramid, not down on the streets.

    Pennsylvania in particular had real problems with no one at the helm in 2012.

  118. Mark Axinn

    Regarding Benton, who appears to be a sleaze and possibly a criminal.

    I don’t think he snuck in the back door in the Ron and Rand Paul campaigns. He’s married to Ron’s granddaughter (Rand’s niece).

  119. paulie

    Regarding Benton, who appears to be a sleaze and possibly a criminal.

    I don’t think he snuck in the back door in the Ron and Rand Paul campaigns. He’s married to Ron’s granddaughter (Rand’s niece).

    Valid point.

  120. Mark Axinn

    And, now a defense of Rand and Benton:

    Given that Rand Paul is the only US Senator who has stood firmly against the NSA snooping, and given that he has not toted the Party line on many other matters as well (that party being the Neo-Con Statist Party in control of all three branches of government), and given that the NSA can pretty much take anyone down whenever it wants to do so, and given the timing of the indictment, is it possible, ummmmmm likely, that the powers that be are using this to end the RP2 campaign before it goes any further?

  121. paulie

    Wouldn’t count him out just yet. Latest from the chatter networks is that he is possibly planning to be the one to take on Trump tonight. We’ll see how that works out if he does it. I guess at #8 there’s not much to lose by giving it a go.

  122. paulie

    As for Rand Paul challenging the NSA, he has a somewhat mixed record on that as well… for example, his recent support for additional screening for Muslim-Americans.

  123. Mark Axinn

    Okay so you guys don’t support the idea of the govt. powers that be (Mitch McConnell makes a phone call or whatever) trying to take down an upstart.

    Yeah, I guess that would never, ever happen here.

  124. George Phillies

    Now the interesting question: Will one of the indicted be invited to turn states’ evidence and cop a plea, in exchange for handing over the evidence that this was all the candidate’s plan.

  125. Andy Craig Post author

    Mitch McConnell has even endorsed Rand for President.

    “Join me, and together with the Senate Majority Leader we’ll Defeat The Washington Machine!”

    But as for the idea that PTB won’t let Rand get the nomination and will toss up stuff like the timing of the Benton indictment: duh. Of course they are. That’s part of why “work within the GOP!” is such an exercise in futility.

    “As for Rand Paul challenging the NSA, he has a somewhat mixed record on that as well… for example, his recent support for additional screening for Muslim-Americans.”

    Endorsing Ted Cruz’s crazy citizenship-revocation idea, too.

  126. Jill Pyeatt

    This may have been on ongoing investigation, but the fact that the indictments came out the day before the first debates certainly seems deliberate to me. As far as this being the candidate’s idea–I would be surprised if that were the case. At that time, Ron’s campaign was very active and involved many people. I can’t say that about Rand’s campaign at this time, but I suppose it’s possible he didn’t know about the misrepresentation. We’ll see if he puts an end to it.

  127. Andy Craig Post author

    “Post a list of who you contacted so far and maybe me and a few other people can brainstorm up a few other potential places to send it to.”

    Maddow, Young Turks, RedState, LGF, Reason, American Conservative, and a handful of WI outlets I have contacts at.

  128. paulie

    Additional ideas:

    Daily Beast, Daily Kos, The Hill, Politico, fivethirtyeight, Think Progress, Thom Hartmann, Jose Diaz-Balart, Tamron Hall, Andrea Mitchell, Thomas Roberts, Ed Schultz, Al Sharpton, Chris Matthews, Lawrence O’Donnell, Chris Hayes, Alex Witt, Steve Kornacki, Melissa Harris-Perry,

    http://newslink.org/ Lists of contacts for newspapers, TV and radio news departments

  129. Robert Capozzi

    What is LGF?

    It’s the ticker symbol for Lion’s Gate Entertainment, but I’m thinking it’s not that.

  130. NewFederalist

    “What is LGF?” – Robert Capozzi

    Loud Gross Flatulence! I happens a lot with age.

  131. Gene Berkman

    GP asks “Will one of the indicted be invited to turn states’ evidence…?”

    The state senator who received the bribe has already turned state’s evidence, in answer to your question.

  132. Andy

    Benton hooked up with one of Ron Paul’s granddaughters during the 2008 campaign, and he married her sometime after that.

  133. Robert Capozzi

    Jill, any relation to Valori Pyeatt, Jesse Benton’s wife and RP1’s g-daughter?

  134. George Phillies

    No, Gene, the question is whether or not the indicted three — Jesse Benton, John Tate, or Dimitrios Kesari — will decide to turn states’ witness and cop a plea by supplying evidence against the actual candidate. Benton may be family at the moment, but the other two are not. The size of the expenditures is sufficiently large and the nature of the pay-off is sufficiently sensitive that I find it hard though not impossible to believe that the candidate did not know, especially when it is someone very senior in the campaign doing this. It’s much like Watergate. Benton may bite his tongue, it being family, but other people may not, especially when the prospect of extended prison sentences is waved. Also, the campaign Treasurer may yet need to answer a few questions.

  135. Jill Pyeatt

    RC said: “Jill, any relation to Valori Pyeatt, Jesse Benton’s wife and RP1’s g-daughter?”

    As a matter of fact, Valori’s dad Tom is my husband Alan’s cousin. They all grew up in the same community and went to the same high school. I married into the family 6 years ago, and one day I got an IM from Lori Pyeatt politely and nicely asking who I was. Apparently she and her mom Carol noticed a new Pyeatt on FB who seemed to have some strong opinions. I have since met Lori and Tom and their wonderful son Mark (Valori’s brother), and was delighted to have Carol Paul walk clear across the room at the Mises event last November in Costa Mesa to welcome me to the family.

    Tom (who is Rand’s brother in law and Jesse’s father-in-law) knows we’re Libertarians and we have some conversations on FB sometimes. We disagree sometimes. I like them all very much, and I do try to watch what I say on FB out of respect to them. I do call out Rand sometimes, though, when he deserves it. I haven’t met Rand.

    Valori is a FB friend, although I haven’t met her. Her husband’s indictment will undoubtedly impact their life immediately. I can’t help but think the timing was meant to send a strong message about Rand’s campaign.

  136. Douglas(s) Durham of the American Indian Movement (FBI branch)

    In my opinion, the P**l campaign has given us a chance to whack cross-sides the head with a Vermont and Northern railroad tie the entire Republican antiabortion fascists, and we should be taking vigorous advantage of it. And if corrections need be made, that’s the target’s problem not ours.

    Gosh! Those are tough words from George Phillies! I’m sure the GOP is concerned. BTW: I’m obviously not Douglas(s) Durham, the FBI’s informant in AIM. I’m just hoping less-well-educated people will google the name and realize that the LP is controlled opposition. It’s controlled without most of its “key players” even realizing it’s controlled. (Ie: If the key players weren’t blithering idiot political neophytes, they could simply vote to do things the right way. There are however, people who occupy “leadership” positions in the LP who cause the LP to be misrepresented “on the ground.”)

    Although they advocate a political-technology-illiterate viewpoint on this board, I don’t think that Chuck Moulton and Mark Axinn are FBI informants. I think they’re just people who know NOTHING about political organization. They don’t understand why loyalty is important, they don’t understand “political identity,” they don’t understand that the “representatives on the street” change individual voters’ viewpoints (by overcoming “objections” at the level of the objection itself), whereas our weak outreach material generally does not.

    The reason I included Eric Dondero on the list of petitioners is to indicate that he’s actually aware of how political organization is done. At one point he was a domestic-policy libertarianish, foreign-policy pro-war, big-L libertarian. Now he’s a domestic-policy libertarianish, foreign-policy pro-war, big-R Republican. He has no principles, he’s loyal to whoever pays him, which overwhelmingly, has been the military. So, he’s a loyal state collectivist and militarist. This makes him anti-libertarian. So, those who object to his ever being hired by the LP (were the LP to be a serious organization) are right.

    However, the LP will hire Dondero in the future. They lack the capacity to not hire him.

    I simply included Dondero in the list because

    1) Had the LP ever pursued an intelligent strategy in the past 40 years, they could have had a worker who, though unprincipled due to his internal sociopathic condition, would have behaved as a libertarian petitioner should: by portraying the LP correctly to the general public. (It’s true that he would have tended to only change right-wingers into Libertarians, because those are people susceptible to the set of arguments he understands.)

    2) The fact that Dondero can speak like a Libertarian sets him apart from other mercenaries, like Daryl Bonner, who lack that skill, and completely don’t care what the outcome of any election is. (Dondero prefers that the dominant party that “claims to be capitalist” wins, whatever that party is. Again: The party need not be capitalist, just claim it. He feels that this labeling will push the general public away from the communism Russia saw in the 1950s. Of course, this is a weak allegiance, because he really just wants to be “on the winning team,” whatever it is.) If and when purely mercenary petitioners are hired (which should be very rarely, and optimally, never) those who can be required to represent the LP properly should be hired over those who lack the capacity to do so. Dondero has the capacity to represent the LP properly, but not the willingness to do so. Bonner would need “training within narrow parameters” to even represent the LP accurately, nevermind the precision that comes with a detailed understanding. (In short, when questioned, Bonner would have to “wing it” or direct people to the website.)

    3) Dondero also shouldn’t be hired because he’s a racist, and has stated publicly that blacks are less intelligent than whites. (The fact that Mark Dean and Neil de Grasse-Tyson tower over both Dondero and his idol, Charles Murray, doesn’t give him any pause in pursuing these arguments.) The future of libertarianism, if there is to be one, isn’t racist. Nor is it likely to be managed by rich, white, ex-Republicans. (Such people tend not to be similar to Spooner and Thoreau, and have no place for a Frederick Douglass among their midst. This is likely because they are pro-social sociopaths.)

    I understand that Scott Kohlhaas has awarded a no-bid contract to Stavros Mendros in Maine to do LP registrations at $3/registration (far less than the $4 and $5/registration that was paid in 2003 and 2005, in more difficult areas of the country). Since this is piggy-backed with a marijuana legalization petition, if people sign the petition and register, they can make around what an actual libertarian would have made in the past, to bring in “hard registrations.” This will result in a temporary bump in libertarian activity, but it will not result in the groundswell that it could, were it to be taken seriously.

    The people registering as Libertarians in Maine will be people who want to legalize pot, and that will be their only reason for so-registering. As such, they will rapidly “fall off the books.”

    If the LP hadn’t gotten on its knees and sucked off the unprincipled mercenaries, while refusing to hire its dedicated activists, it would be in a position to bring in an army of dedicated new libertarians in Maine. But the LP has zero loyalty. (In fact, the reason so many of its former employees think it’s infiltrated, is that it actually appears to have “anti-loyalty.” The dedicated party-member activists get far, far, far worse deals than the mercenaries do, if and when they’re allowed to work at all. You can imagine what this does to outreach efforts: “Join this wonderful new political party, that’s currently trying to make me homeless and destitute, in spite of the fact that I’ve given them my all!”)

    All the evidence points to the LP being what is known as “controlled opposition.” Most LP petitioners get to a point where they see a better way to build the LP than what the LP employs. But the “employer” (Redpath, Kohlhaas, the Redpath-Kohlhaas-directed-State-Chairs) behaves in an irrational manner. The State Chairs are largely political dillettantes; they don’t care to find the best way to do things. This means that those making the decisions need only encourage existing stupidity: they don’t need to formulate it themselves, nor do they need to insist on it (which would make their malevolence obvious). So, the guy who’s intent on “getting ballot access out of the way as cheaply as possible” and then making a newsletter is encouraged (whereas the guy who wants to hire libertarians to register voters as Libertarians, long past the number required for state ballot access is discouraged -since that might actually build a burgeoning movement that couldn’t be stopped).

    This then causes the ballot access workers to leave the LP in disgust at having wasted so much of their lives working for people who were determined to waste their efforts.

    That’s certainly where I’m coming from. In that regard, I’m a more intelligent Eric Dondero (I’m capable of seeing how domestic “libertarianish paternalism”+unregulated support of the military industrial complex isn’t really capitalist, and ultimately produces a destructive outcome for humanity). …Unless you gauge intelligence by outcome. In that regard, Dondero makes more money than most of the rejected LP petitioners. He also regularly gets hired by Redpath and Kohlhaas, no matter how anti-liberty his online (and meatspace) rantings become. He seems to get some sort of welfare payment from the military, and may also get a payment of some kind for his role as a GOP-friendly “anti-Libertarian” agent provocateur.

    Much the way the real Douglas(s) Durham, after infiltrating the American Indian Movement, claimed to be an agent provocateur and confidential informant who specializes in “infiltrating Native American organizations.” (He since has infiltrated Native American Casinos, in attempts to screw them over.)

    Problems can’t be solved at the level they were created at. As Einstein said: “A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels.”

    With that in mind, we need to stop putting a lot of faith in party leadership. If what you’re doing in a party is good in the short term, and can be measured as such, then it should be fought for. But don’t fight for long-term plans that cannot be incrementally-measured, because that allows politicians to hijack your efforts, and waste them. That is the current model of the LP, and will be, until it gets serious about thinking about politics. I have linked to the Real Nature of Politics here, as have many others in the past. That the link appears at Red State should not be misconstrued as endorsing anything else at “Red State.” I am a true libertarian, and don’t sympathize with the sociopathic goals of the totalitarian Ds and Rs.

    That said, they are masters of the domain of strategy. If we wish to mix principle with strategy, we must operate at a higher hierarchical level than they do. One way to go about this is to act as a deontologist, but BE a consequentialist. The two are related/compatible in this way only. Acting as a deontologist is simply a lower level of the same hierarchy that, at the top, contains consequentialist understanding. In this understanding, libertarians should always be uniting “anarchists” and “libertarian-leaning religious theocrats.” Ron Paul understood this, for example, and shifted many philosophically-inconsistent theocrat votes to himself.

    We must always ask ourselves “How could we lose?” and “What actions does our enemy hope we take?” The current chairman of the LP is not mentally equipped to ask these questions. He thinks the minor step of catering to “liberals”(socialists), as a counter-step to having mistakenly catered to “conservatives” for so long, is wise. It is slightly smart, but alone, it’s not nearly enough to make any perceptible difference in any outcome (“consequence”). Right now, we are losing, and we are doing everything exactly as our political enemies wish us to do.

    This is how we know our enemies have inserted themselves into our decision-making process.

    I’ll close with a good heuristic, again from Einstein, “Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.”

    As quoted by Virgil Henshaw in Albert Einstein : Philosopher Scientist (1949) edited by Paul A. Schilpp

  137. Douglas(s) Durham of the American Indian Movement (FBI branch)

    Conspicuously absent from your list of fuck-ups was New York. Perhaps that’s because we had someone minding the store and controlling petitioning, including literally dozens of paid and volunteer petitioners. Not one penny of LP or LPNY money was spent on petitioning in the last five years that I did not approve. The buck stops at the top of the pyramid, not down on the streets.

    Pennsylvania in particular had real problems with no one at the helm in 2012.

    “The buck” meaning what? Responsibility for who is hired? Sure. In that, you have failed to be a leader. If by “the buck” you mean “results of the outcome of talking with your activists,” there’s also a shared responsibility there: you have to accept the leads gathered by your activists, and let them know they won’t wind up in the circular file. (Without even knowing whether you’ve done this, I predict you have not. I predict you have been an abject failure in this regard, and that your dumbest ideas have been encouraged by Redpath and many others.) If by “the buck” you mean “the results of hiring competent libertarian petitioners” over uncaring mercenaries, then sure, that’s also an outcome of hiring. However, if by “the buck” meaning that the leadership should not care about the results of face-to-face interaction, nor should the petitioner, nor should the petitioner view high-level interactions as part of his job, then you’re an idiot. From your seeming lack of caring about the subject, I think you are an idiot. I think you’re a top-down simpleton who has oversimplified politics to result in 35 years of failure, yet still sees no reason to change.

    You’re wrong in many ways, but I’ll let Andy correct you on the details. PA’s John Carr caught the invalid signatures from the Bonner crew early on. National forced PA to keep him on board, as a monopoly contractor, despite his dissemination on the streets of a message so inconsistently libertarian that it, in effect, acts as an anti-libertarian message. If you claim that the PA LP shouldn’t be held to account for its complete lack of institutional memory, then think about it: Doesn’t National have institutional memory? ABSOLUTELY, THEY DO. Why wasn’t the outcome better, then? Because they’re not fighting on the same team.

    The average voter isn’t strategically stupid: they use strategic heuristics to determine if the LP are daydreamers. They ask questions like “What’s the highest office the LP has elected anyone to?” They do this because they’re lawyers, poli-sci majors, and other people who have been involved with the Ds and Rs, and many of them have some knowledge of how politicians are actually elected. ..They have the exact inverse of the focus of the LP: limited strategic awareness, non-existent philosophical awareness. The LP has limited philosophical awareness, with non-existent strategic awareness.

    Put yourself in that category, Axinn. You don’t seem to understand that your hierarchy is populated from the bottom-up, and if it’s not, …it doesn’t exist. This is why a viable political hierarchy counts its street-level workers as “the middle of the pyramidal hierarchy,” not the bottom (although they reach to the bottom, when they organize the grassroots).

    By pooh-poohing the notion that “petitioners are just hired help” and thinking it doesn’t matter who you hire as long as they gather enough signatures to make the ballot, you fail political science 101. You fail to realize how to utilize scarce resources. Sure, you know how the incumbent powers now rest on their laurels with top-down campaigns.

    THEY’VE TAKEN POWER ALREADY. THE MAN ON THE STREET ALREADY EXPECTS A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN TO WIN. THE Ds AND Rs DON’T NEED TO ALLOCATE SCARCE RESOURCES TO “DOWN ON THE STREET” INTERACTIONS, IN ORDER TO BUILD UP A COMPETITOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT. THEY CAN TAKE EXISTING SUPPORT LEVELS AND PORTRAY THE LIBERTARIAN ALTERNATIVE AS DISORGANIZED WITH ZERO CHANCE OF ELECTION, WHICH MATTERS TO PRAGMATIST VOTERS. THE Ds AND Rs DON’T NEED THEIR CANDIDATES TO UNDERSTAND CAMPAIGNS: THEY HAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO HIRE EXPERT CAMPAIGN MANAGERS, AND MOBILIZE THEIR EXISTING POWER STRUCTURE WITH ROBO-CALLS.

    You’re (theoretically) trying to take power from the establishment. You can’t do that by pretending you’re on equal footing with the establishment, and that the LP is “just another political party, the same as the Ds and Rs.”

  138. Douglas(s) Durham of the American Indian Movement (FBI branch)

    The “mercenary petitioners” who you loathe are reliable, cheap, and drama free.

    Yeah, Chuck. They’ve also built a Libertarian Party that hasn’t elected anyone to meaningful state legislature in over 35 years. (I count the 4/40 in Alaska as progress toward State Nullification. I don’t count the 4/400 in NH as similar progress, because it is vastly less likely, and the system can stop it long before it happens. Is there a viable path to Libertarian Party success that doesn’t proceed up to, and through, State Nullification? I don’t think so!)

    I guess that also makes them “constructive results free.”

    Moulton’s comments are so philosophically wrong they should be followed with
    “…The Aristocrats!” Ironically, he’s a trust-fund baby, a member of the aristocracy, and that’s exactly what he’s defending: top-down command-and-control hierarchy. (As opposed to bottom-up self-populating designed hierarchy. The latter can be designed by the former, but the leadership of the LP has proven that the task is beyond their comprehension.) Moulton is defending a past, present, and future of failure for the LP. He’s doing this because he doesn’t understand basic politics.

    Basic “politics” (both political engagement, and the science that defines it) is network building. People don’t vote for you, don’t join you, and don’t help you if they don’t want to be anything like you, or you make it clear to them that they’re not. Looking down your nose at anyone who dares be “part of a movement” is a guarantee you won’t have any “movement” to speak of.

    This kind of thinking from rich, white, ex-Republican jerks who can’t talk to the man on the street is one big reason the LP and electoral success are water and oil. Ironically, Aristocrats like Moulton don’t even want to hire someone to do the dirty work.

    The “mercenary petitioners” whom I loathe are UNreliable, seemingly cheap to superficial idiots (unless you factor in the cost of their not bringing anyone into the party, not making any connections, regularly fucking up validity, regularly fucking up court appearances due to their lack of caring about the outcome), and drama free (if you want “political success without drama” you want what never was and never can be –you see, my boy, politics determines how force is going to be used against individual members of society).

    The “drama” you detest so much is linked to political success, Chuck. You don’t just get to sit back, send out mailers, and have everyone vote libertarian, leaving control in the hands of the oh-so-wise Libertarian elders (who have failed to elect anyone to significant office for 35 years). It doesn’t work that way. (Andy actually cares about the results the LP achieves. Do you think your non-libertarian mercenaries do?)

    For 15 years I’ve seen the LP do everything they could to prevent success. They’ve continuously violated all of Blackwell’s laws in their planning and execution. They continuously fail to even establish benchmarks for success in any of their plans, and they continuously fail to plan for success of any kind. (Meaning: the end-goal of their plans is not a single elected libertarian, without “unmeasurable magic” existing as an intermediary step.)

    It’s my hope that small-L libertarians reading this will view Moulton’s comments as political cyanide, because that’s exactly what they are. Big-L libertarians are big-L libertarians precisely because they have self-selected for not giving a rat’s ass about doing anything that could possibly lead to a Libertarian being elected to any office that voters believe is significant, so my hopes for them are already dust.

    So, on second thought, you’re right, Chuck. Send Daryl Bonner out to tell people in ND that voters think Edward Snowden is a traitor who should be executed; give him a monopoly contract and pay him $275,000 while actual libertarians struggle to make $15,000 in a whole year (not due to lack of work ethic, but because disloyal jerks like you refused to hire them). I’m sure that will lead to political success. Following exactly that paradigm has worked out so well for the 35 years since the LP last elected anyone! Keep up the good work! When Bonner works the LP petition in NY like a plebicite not checking whether voters are registered or not, he should be given even more work! Smart thinking! That’ll be sure to result in “reliable” signatures!

    The LP presidential candidate is certain to win the presidency without having a single person elected to significant office anywhere in the USA! Why, the LP is such as success that there are State legislators who have considered switching to the LP, but don’t, simply because the LP offers not just a deficit of support to candidates, but a measurable loss of rank-in-file voters. The name acts as an immense hindrance, not a benefit!

    You, Axinn, and Redpath know best! Keep blazing that trail of success! How dare Rand Paul try to take your list of people who will contribute to Libertarian failure, and get them to contribute to libertarian success?!

  139. George Phillies

    Ah, Randal Paul!. A warmonger who tried to sabotage negotiations with Iran, a global warming denier, a homophobic opponent of marriage equality, an antiabortionist daughter murderer (like baby killer, but feeding the Christian fascists their own medicine) who thinks that “Libertarian” would have been an albatross around his neck. However, all those are words of praise, directed in the direction of a man with Randal Paul’s stands.

    And Douglas Durham, world’s leading expert on tact and humility. Behaves like (whether he is or not) the archetypical noob who appears, insults everyone for not following his brilliant plans, and vanishes without a trace.

  140. Andy

    I have not read the entire thread, but whoever made the comment about the mercenary petitioners in question being cheap, effective, and drama free does not know what in the hell they are talking about and has obviously not spent any time on the road with them.

  141. Chuck Moulton

    What a complete load of crap!

    Earth to anonymous fuckhead: you don’t know a goddamn thing about me.

    First, I am on the ground manning booths at fairs (like the Arlington County Fair I am manning tomorrow, Saturday, and Sunday; Celebrate Fairfax back in June, etc.), volunteer petitioning where I talk to voters about Libertarian positions, and talking to ordinary people about libertarianism that I run into every day online and in person.

    Second, I’m from Pennsylvania (I was state chair) and I know well everyone involved in Pennsylvania. I warned Redpath it was the wrong approach before Pennsylvania and I have repeatedly suggested a better approach afterward to anyone who will listen to me. I worked countless hours in Pennsylvania successfully defending the petition signatures.

    Third, I work my ass off in Virginia (former state chair there too) stuffing mailings, improving the database, organizing meetups and Facebook pages, and generally doing what I can to improve the LPVA.

    Fourth, I have been a tireless advocate for organizing from the ground up, using technology more effectively for micro-targetting, and taking advantage of our huge army of volunteers. The idea that I am somehow backward and not technologically or politically savvy is ridiculous. Few people know half of the things I’ve done behind the scenes to improve the LP.

    Fifth, I’ve never been a Republican. My initial party registration was Libertarian in Pennsylvania and I vote for the Libertarian Party candidates every election. The only time I voted in a Republican primary was in Virginia (which does not have registration by party, so I did not have to give up a LP registration to do so) for Ron Paul in 2012.

    Sixth, I’m hardly rich. I’m not poor, but any family money I am lucky enough to get goes to me because my parents worked hard and lived frugally their whole life. My parents were both college professors. My dad was raised as a subsistence farmer who could only afford college due to the GI Bill after enlisting in WWII and serving 2 tours of duty. Before getting a college position, my mom taught in an inner city high school. She left her Ph.D. program because her adviser was a sexist pig. My mom cut coupons for all our food and my dad went to garage sales for most of our furniture and many of our toys. We never traveled outside the country (until I was well past college). Apart from visiting my grandmom in Florida (we flew), all family trips were road trips with cheap motels. My parents are well off because they lived well below their means and invested in the stock market. Nowadays practically no one does that… whenever anyone gets a raise they buy fancier things or a bigger house or a nicer car. You call me a “trust fund baby” like that’s an insult, but I’m proud that my parents were able to build the American dream from very modest beginnings through hard work and good budgeting.

    Seventh, I can’t help it if you completely missed the point of my earlier comment. Outreach and getting someone on the ballot are 2 different things. They can be tied together, but that costs money. Economics is the allocation of scarce means that have alternative ends — that’s exactly what the LP has to do every day: decide how to allocate its scarce resources. That’s the adult thing to do. We don’t have money that rains from the sky. The decision makers have decided to allocate that money to getting on the ballot rather than outreach. I don’t always agree with their decisions, but I recognize that those decisions are reasonable and not some grand conspiracy to defraud donors or hurt the LP.

    I recognize that a lot of libertarians also happen to be social outcasts with terrible social skills — myself included. Here’s a newsflash: when someone is an asshole or is incredibly annoying, people tend to cease conversation, stop paying attention, work with others, etc. That’s exactly what Andy is doing. He pollutes threads that have nothing whatsoever to do with petitioning with petitioning gripes that we’ve all heard a million times. Every time I meet him in person, he rambles on at length about petitioning gripes. I’ve talked to countless state chairs who have had to deal with constant complaining about petitioning gripes. It’s incredibly annoying. When I read IPR I don’t like wasting hours every year wading through Andy’s word salad to get to the comments that are actually relevant to the discussion. I read them all because occasionally he says something important. I know Bill Redpath doesn’t like fielding long phone calls about various gripes. Bill Redpath doesn’t like fighting petitioners all the time about social security numbers on required government forms. He would rather be watching a baseball game.

    If the choice were between a petitioner who is reliable, cheap, drama free, and also Libertarian on the one hand and a petitioner who is reliable, cheap, drama free, and not a libertarian on the other hand, the choice would be a slam dunk. That’s not the choice we are presented with.

    Do mercenaries sometimes have bad validity rates, lie to signers, etc.? Yes. That’s why it is important to have a clear contract, do validity checking, and withhold payment or future contracts from bad apples. If I have an employee who is a true believer, that takes less oversight than an employee who is just there to cash a paycheck. Yet somehow most offices are filled with people who are not related by family to the employer, are not constantly gushing about how much they love their jobs, and would steal money or other things if they could be guaranteed no one would ever catch them. Oversight is enough to keep people from shirking from work or taking advantage of their employers.

    The choice is between on the one hand petitioners who sometimes hold their petitions hostage (throw them away, threaten to burn them, etc.), can’t petition many places due to lack of a car, etc. (i.e., are not reliable); demand more per signature than “mercenaries” (i.e., are not cheap); are eating up everyone’s time with complaints via phone or in person, get thrown in jail regularly and refuse to take personal responsibility for escalating the situation with the police or campus security, refuse to provide social security numbers, etc. (i.e., are not drama free); and are Libertarian and on the other hand “mercenary petitioners” who are reliable, cheap, and drama free, yet are not actual Libertarians.

    I’ve worked with “mercenary petitioners”. For example, Darryl Bonner collected signatures for my congressional campaign in 2004 stacked on the Badnarik petitions. This is how the “mercenary petitioners” work: I tell them how many signatures I need, I tell them how much I will pay per signature, then they meet once a week (or some other period) to exchange completed, notarized petitions for dollars. It was wonderful! There are no phone calls wasting my time complaining about all sorts of things. I don’t need to bail them out of jail. I don’t need to argue with them for a half hour about whether the government should be allowed to ask for a social security number.

    When Bonner handed me the first set of petitions in 2004, he said I was shortchanging him on money. I pointed out we don’t pay for signatures that are not completely filled out with dates. Every other pickup all of the signatures were completely filled out with dates because he knew he wouldn’t get paid without making sure the signer filled everything out. That’s basic oversight.

    I find it unbelievable that Andy is oblivious to the fact that when you are incredibly annoying, that is going to affect the work you can get and whether people listen to you.

    Don’t get me wrong: I enjoy talking to Andy, I enjoy talking to Paulie, I enjoy talking to Jake Witmer — heck, I enjoy talking to Eric Dondero — but it makes perfect sense to me that a state chair or Bill Redpath are going to hire petitioners who are reliable, cheap, and drama free — which in many cases are “mercenary petitioners” — so the petition coordinators (who absolutely should be exercising oversight) don’t have to be dragged away from their families or jobs or baseball games as much.

    Anyone who wants to argue for hiring actual Libertarians for LP petitioning or argue for more outreach during LP petitioning needs to stop demagoguing the issue acting like the Libertarian petitioners are angels and everyone who disagrees with them must be crazy. You need a real apples to apples comparison: the budget for petitioning with Libertarians vs. the budget for the petitioning with mercenaries, the time commitment for dealing with Libertarians vs. the time commitment for dealing with mercenaries, the benefit in terms of new activists, members, and loyal voters with Libertarians vs. mercenaries, etc. And if anyone actually does that cost/benefit analysis (it sure as heck hasn’t been done yet), I’d suggest presenting it to the people who actually make the decisions rather than spamming it here in a lot of unrelated threads.

  142. Andy

    How much time has Chuck spent traveling around the country working on ballot access drives, and how much has he really interacted with any of these people? Very little.

  143. Andy

    Ask anyone who has ever worked with me, and I am extremely reliable and do not cost any more than the mercs who you seem to think are wonderful, less if anything since I have zero fuck ups on my record like they do (Pennsylvania 2012 for one example).

    Also, as for “drama,” you have zero clue what you are talking about here as well. I know exactly who you are referring to, and they are total drama queens. You have no clue about which you are speaking, no freaking clue at all.

  144. paulie

    Any chance we can take the petitioning discussion to open thread? I’ll be happy to discuss it there. I was hoping we could actually accomplish something with this particular thread. How about getting back to discussing strategies for getting more media coverage for this story, for example?

  145. Andy

    They relate to the topic as the deceptive pitch the Rand fundraisers were using are like the deceptive petition pitches the mercenaries whom the LP has hired whom Chuck has apparently been duped into believing are wonderful.

  146. paulie

    Regardless of whether they related in the beginning or not I am asking that you move it to the open thread now so we can try to actually accomplish something with this thread.

  147. Andy

    So that really saved the LP lots of money when every signature a merc collected in Illinois was thrown out. His validity in Illinois in 2014 was ZERO percent! Over $10,000 flushed down the toilet.

    My validity in Illinois was 83%, and if I had not been there, the drive would have failed.

    Let’s do some math. 83% is 83 points higher than ZERO% .

    But Chuck thinks this guy is saving the party money.

    LOL!

  148. Andy

    Take my sigs out of the equation in Illinois, and your Philly merc would have cost the party over $100,000, because Illinois would have failed.

    ZERO% validity. Yeah, that is reliable and cheap.

  149. paulie

    OK I guess asking nicely didn’t work. Do I need to start deleting comments? I’ll try to ask nicely one more time, please take that to the open thread.

  150. Marc Montoni

    Chuck Moulton is one of my libertarian heroes, and I would vouch for him anytime.

    To my knowledge, no one in the Virginia LP has given any list to the Paul campaign. I see several possibilities as to how the Paul campaign might have gotten access to LPer’s contact information:

    1) Public searches. Joe Enroughty, who received one of the calls as in the OP, has his name, phone, and address/email contact information associated with the LP in various places all over the Internets. Perhaps the Paul campaign has bought a harvested list of LP contacts.

    2) Other than the LP: The calls were not generated via an LP, but rather a candidate, list that was legitimately (or illegitimately) sold/rented to the Paul campaign. The LP has no ownership rights over the lists generated by its candidates (although I think there should be a contractual agreement between the LP and any candidate who gets access, that their list will be shared fully with the LP).

    The Johnson campaign has its own list, and so far as I know it has not been shared with the LP.

    In addition, the Sarvis campaign(s) also had its own lists, but neither the 2013 or 2014 campaign databases were shared with the LP.

    Since the LP is privy to neither list, this is a guess, but Enroughty might be on one or more of those lists also — and if any of those campaigns have done list trades with the Paul campaign, it would make sense there would be some overlap between even lists like these which have been kept segregated from the LP list.

    3) Mailhouse leak: It is entirely possible that one of the mailhouses either state or national LP’s use for mailings re-rented the list to the Paul campaign. Virginia and national (and I presume all other state parties) both use non-disclosure agreements with our mailhouses, so if this happened it is a clear breach of contract. The LP has pursued such a breach in the past.

    4) Internal LP Leak: It is entirely possible that someone who has access to the LP database at a state, regional or local level has provided their portion of the LP database to the Paul campaign. Many years ago one of our local affiliates provided the LP data it was given to both a Republican candidate as well as a local taxpayers group. I didn’t press the issue because I knew the state committee wouldn’t actually do anything to sanction that behavior. It is much harder to hold regional or local officers accountable for list breaches. We’ve had this problem in the past and unfortunately we will again. We can’t stop LINO’s from squirming into positions with access to the LP database. That’s the responsibility of the regional and local members who elect them to those positions.

    I’m not opposed to list trades — the LP used to do it all the time with Reason, NOMOS Magazine, and dozens of others. Overall, it’s a great way to find new people who might be interested in the LP.

    But they need to be legit.

  151. paulie

    The Johnson campaign has its own list, and so far as I know it has not been shared with the LP.

    It was, although it took longer than it should have.

  152. paulie

    I don’t know for a fact but I have a hard time believing Ron Nielson would have shared lists with Rand Paul. That would seem very counterintuitive to say the least. I think we can safely rule that out.

  153. Andy

    Chuck may be good on some things, but he has no idea what he is talking about in regard to ballot access.

    I look forward to his response to my posts about Illinois 2014.

  154. Mark Axinn

    >Although they advocate a political-technology-illiterate viewpoint on this board, I don’t think that Chuck Moulton and Mark Axinn are FBI informants.

    Phew. I was really, really worried there for a moment that someone other than anonymous Durham thought that was my true agenda.

    Chuck, it must be such a relief to you too.

  155. Marc Montoni

    Chuck Moulton, Mark Axinn are both right now standing in the paycheck queue at FBI HQ. I know because I’m a half-dozen places in line ahead of them, and I can hear them laughing at how they’ve got the movement hoodwinked.

  156. Mark Axinn

    Durham–

    I don’t have the time nor the inclination to respond to your myriad insults.

    Sorry, as I know you just want to demonstrate what an asshole you are, but we already have enough evidence of that.

    Paulie, Jill, Jed–Do we know who this particular troll is?

  157. paulie

    I know who it is but I think we should honor people’s desire to be anonymous here, although I’m surprised people don’t recognize the writing style and talking points.

    Besides, I’d rather talk about ideas about getting this story into larger media outlets. Anyone else have thoughts or suggestions on that or willingness to help?

  158. paulie

    I deleted a comment by the nazi troll as well as a response to it from Andy, and moved Andy’s latest response about petition issues to the open thread. I asked nicely twice, so I won’t be nice about it anymore. Take the petitioning tangent to the open thread. That goes for everyone.

  159. Andy

    The petition topic relates directly to this thread, because the thread is about deceptive pitches. Unethical mercenary petitioners use deceptive pitches, as do unethical mercenary fundraisers.

    I don’t think that Rand is a bad guy, but his campaign is disappointing compared to the campaigns of his father in 2008 and 2012.

    I find it funny how some people on this thread who are critical of the Rand Paul campaign for having fundraisers who use deceptive pitches defend the use of the LP hiring mercenary petitioners who do the same thing.

    Paul (as in our Paul here at IPR) knows that I am right about this because he has caught some of the mercs in question doing it.

    I do not respect people who lie to get people to sign petitions, or to donate to a campaign.

    I do not respect people who use dirty tactics to keep candidates or issues off the ballot, be it the petition challenge from the Republicans in Illinois, to petition blockers like the one the Arpaio Recall petition drive had to deal with in Arizona.

    I bet that Mark Axinn and Chuck Moulton would be singing a different tune if they had to collect petition signatures to get themselves on the ballot and some asshole opposition to their campaign hired mercenaries to work as petition blockers (which are people who jump in front of signature gatherers and scream and yell to get people to not sign their petitions)., and these mercenary blockers went out and blocked them while they were trying to gather signatures.

    Some of the beloved mercs who you two think are so wonderful have gotten paid to do this.

    Let’s say that you personally knew that a mercenary worked on a blocking campaign against a pro-liberty petition. Would you then hire this person to petition for the Libertarian Party?

    Would you hire the people who worked to block Carla Howell’s initiative petition to reduce the sales tax in Massachusetts to petition for the LP?

    How about the people who blocked Paul Jacob’s petitions to put spending limits on state government? Do you think that the LP should hire these people?

    How about the people who have tried to knock the LP off the ballot in various states? Would you hire them to petition for the LP?

    I fail to see how it is a radical idea to suggest that Libertarian campaigns should hire actual Libertarians, be they campaign management staff or petition circulators or whatever.

    Heck, I am only suggesting that 70%-80% of LP ballot access work be done by actual Libertarians. Is this too radical a thing to suggest?

  160. William Saturn

    I’m not seeing a good reason to use resources to attack Rand Paul. He’s not the one growing government in this country. He’s standing against its growth. The Democrats and establishment Republicans are those growing government. Those should be the people the LP attacks. Rather, some people on this site talk about Paul as if he is the enemy of freedom, when he was actually the only candidate on tonight’s debate stage that said anything remotely libertarian. How do you think possible libertarians supporting Paul will feel when they see this animus towards Paul? What message is sent when the LNC chair writes a “Letter to the Editor” that a major newspaper publishes that praises the massive government growers Obama and Hillary?

    Mr. Phillies,

    You’ve made some very incendiary remarks about Rand Paul on here. Just above you called him:

    A warmonger who tried to sabotage negotiations with Iran, a global warming denier, a homophobic opponent of marriage equality, an antiabortionist daughter murderer (like baby killer, but feeding the Christian fascists their own medicine)

    Let me ask you a few questions based on this statement:

    1. Should libertarians support giving billions of dollars to Iran?
    2. Should libertarians support growing government to “combat” global warming?
    3. Is it completely impossible for a libertarian to believe that a fetus is a human being and that killing it should not be allowed?

    I am very interested to read your responses to these questions.

  161. paulie

    The petition topic relates directly to this thread, because the thread is about deceptive pitches. Unethical mercenary petitioners use deceptive pitches, as do unethical mercenary fundraisers.

    Addressed this above at 9:28 pm. Take it to the open thread. I already moved a couple of your comments about petitioning there. Will continue with that.

  162. paulie

    I’m not seeing a good reason to use resources to attack Rand Paul.

    Self-defense. Read my comments earlier in the thread and follow the links.

  163. paulie

    He’s not the one growing government in this country. He’s standing against its growth.

    Untrue on many issues. To take just one example, he’s for making the military even more expensive, when the US already spends more than the rest of the world put together on the military and is deeply and increasingly in debt. And that’s just one of many examples.

  164. paulie

    some people on this site talk about Paul as if he is the enemy of freedom, when he was actually the only candidate on tonight’s debate stage that said anything remotely libertarian

    Jeb Bush is probably less terrible on (im)migration. But more to the point he’s the only one directly working to siphon Libertarian support into the duopoly, in ways including those documented in the original post as well as in Wachtler’s article linked above etc.

  165. paulie

    How do you think possible libertarians supporting Paul will feel when they see this animus towards Paul?

    How do you think actual Libertarians supporting the LP feel when we see his attacks on our party and candidates and his lies about having our support?

  166. paulie

    What message is sent when the LNC chair writes a “Letter to the Editor” that a major newspaper publishes that praises the massive government growers Obama and Hillary?

    That we are not just wackos who always oppose anything any other party does, and that we are willing to give credit when and where it is due.

  167. paulie

    1. Should libertarians support giving billions of dollars to Iran?

    What, of their own money? Or are you calling permitting voluntary trade to take place “giving money to” Iran? What billions of dollars?

  168. paulie

    Should libertarians support growing government to “combat” global warming?

    If you don’t support a big government solution to a problem you have to deny that the problem een exists at all?

  169. Andy Craig Post author

    “1. Should libertarians support giving billions of dollars to Iran?”

    Should libertarians support “giving” things stolen by the U.S. government back to their owners? And allowing people to voluntarily trade with each other? I would say yes.

    “I’m not seeing a good reason to use resources to attack Rand Paul. ”

    Who’s using any “resources”?

    “What message is sent when the LNC chair writes a “Letter to the Editor” that a major newspaper publishes that praises the massive government growers Obama and Hillary?”

    ….for lifting the embargo on Cuba, something Libertarians and libertarians alike have advocated since forever? I think it says that we’re not idiotic Republicans who will jump to oppose a policy *just because* the Democrats finally agree with it.

  170. William Saturn

    “he’s the only one directly working to siphon Libertarian support into the duopoly”

    The LP does a good enough job on its own to run people away who aren’t “pure” enough. It would probably be wiser for libertarians to put resources toward supporting Rand Paul, giving the libertarian icon Ron Paul more influence on the White House than he ever could have otherwise, than to support Gary Johnson who will be nothing more than a fourth party afterthought.

  171. paulie

    The LP does a good enough job on its own to run people away who aren’t “pure” enough.

    Au contraire. Rand Paul’s attacks on the LP are not based on purity but on party, but you want us to just take it and not apply the same standard to him?

  172. paulie

    It would probably be wiser for libertarians to put resources toward supporting Rand Paul,

    So he can use them to attack us. Yeah, that would make sense.

    giving the libertarian icon Ron Paul more influence on the White House

    Getting Jeb Bush elected will not give Ron Paul any influence on the white house. That is just silly.

    than to support Gary Johnson

    Gary Johnson, or whoever the LP nominates, will be on the ballot in (hopefully) 50+ states next fall (or close to it). Rand Paul will not be on the ballot in any state, except maybe for Senate in KY, and will be running around trying to minimize LP votes and maximize NSGOP votes.

    nothing more than a fourth party afterthought.

    My own assessment of what the LP has done in 43 years is a lot more generous than that. Much, quite likely most, of the growth of the larger libertarian movement in the past four decades plus has been due to the LP. Many people who did not stay with the LP started on their libertarian journey with the LP. We’ve influenced many people, including even those who ran against us.

    And as far as any alt party that wasn’t a short lived cult of personality in US politics, the LP has had more sustained success than any other party in almost a century. We’re not that far away from getting to the level those parties back then achieved, and that was enough to get the establishment parties to enact their major proposals into law.

    Rand Paul’s main function is to do everything he can to keep the LP from getting to that level. He is a tool of the establishment who spouts just enough “libertarianish” rhetoric to make him an effective tool for this task.

  173. paulie

    Should libertarians support “giving” things stolen by the U.S. government back to their owners? And allowing people to voluntarily trade with each other? I would say yes.

    I guess it should not be surprising that someone who supports Rand Paul would not understand something that basic.

  174. paulie

    ….for lifting the embargo on Cuba, something Libertarians and libertarians alike have advocated since forever? I think it says that we’re not idiotic Republicans who will jump to oppose a policy *just because* the Democrats finally agree with it.

    I guess someone who doesn’t understand that allowing people to voluntarily trade with each other isn’t “giving” money to a regime that claims the country they live in as its turf, and that the LP should defend itself when directly attacked, maybe wouldn’t understand that the Cuba embargo is ridiculous, either.

  175. Andy

    “William Saturn

    August 7, 2015 at 1:05 am

    ‘he’s the only one directly working to siphon Libertarian support into the duopoly’

    The LP does a good enough job on its own to run people away who aren’t ‘pure’ enough.”

    There are people in the LP who do plenty to drive away people who are “pure” enough as well.

    The LP has become good at driving most Libertarians away, which is why party membership is currently the smallest it has been since 1994 or 1995, and is currently about 1/3 of what it was 15 years ago.

  176. paulie

    There are people in the LP who do plenty to drive away people who are “pure” enough as well.

    That’s closer to the truth than what William Saturn said. Not that either is all that relevant to Rand Paul’s completely partisan attacks against the LP and the LP’s lack of partisan self-defense.

  177. Andy

    Paul said: “My own assessment of what the LP has done in 43 years is a lot more generous than that. Much, quite likely most, of the growth of the larger libertarian movement in the past four decades plus has been due to the LP.”

    Much of the growth of the libertarian movement since 2007 has been due to Ron Paul’s campaigns for the Republican nomination for President.

    I think that the Libertarian Party is important, and that it has the potential to be far more effective than it ever has been, and I also think that Rand Paul’s campaign has been a bit of a disappointment, but let’s not kid ourselves here, Ron Paul 2008 and Ron Paul 2012 brought more people to the cause of liberty than the Libertarian Party has during the same time period, and I would even go so far as to say that Ron Paul 2008 and 2012 were the biggest mass awakenings for the greater libertarian movement that this country has ever seen.

  178. William Saturn

    I had the understanding that money being paid to Iran included both frozen assets and extra monies that did not originally belong to Iran. If I am wrong, I apologize for my error.

    I see no basis for this charge that Rand Paul is “attacking” the LP. It seems he is using its lists to build his support base. The caller this article attacks probably had no clue about the actual Libertarian Party and its organization. I doubt there was any concerted effort. Rand Paul has no reason to attack such an inconsequential entity as the Libertarian Party.

    There is still an outside shot that Rand Paul rises in the polls and wins the nomination. This is a far more likely scenario than Gary Johnson doing anything consequential in the general election. However, you cannot compare the two. Gary Johnson and the Libertarians are not running against Rand Paul right now and vice versa. If Rand Paul does not win the nomination and supports Bush or whoever wins the Republican nomination, then it would not be in libertarian’s best interest to support the Republican. However, that is not what the Paul campaign is about right now. It is about winning the nomination, which would be in a libertarian’s best interest.

  179. Andy

    “paulie

    August 7, 2015 at 1:31 am

    ‘There are people in the LP who do plenty to drive away people who are ‘pure’ enough as well.’

    That’s closer to the truth than what William Saturn said. Not that either is all that relevant to Rand Paul’s completely partisan attacks against the LP and the LP’s lack of partisan self-defense.”

    I’ve got to wonder if any of Rand Paul’s actions are because he has been threatened. Maybe since getting elected to the US Senate he’s been visited by men in black suits who’ve told him that he’s got to say or do certain things or he or members of his family (like his wife or kids or etc…) might have an unfortunate accident.

    I am not saying that this has happened, so this is speculation, but one has got to wonder, and it would not surprise me if something like this has happened.

  180. paulie

    The LP still does a lot more in a sustained way. We run hundreds of candidates every time and have over a hundred in office. We are building an organization, not just a personality cult. And even Ron Paul built a chunk of his national following that formed the bedrock of his later presidential campaigns thanks to his LP run. Rand Paul, on the other hand, has been more than a bit of a disppointment and really is not building any kind of liberty movement, but he sure is attacking the LP a lot.

  181. paulie

    I’ve got to wonder if any of Rand Paul’s actions are because he has been threatened.

    I think it is because he is not really principled to begin with, and to whatever extent he is, it’s outweighed by ambition.

  182. paulie

    I had the understanding that money being paid to Iran included both frozen assets and extra monies that did not originally belong to Iran. If I am wrong, I apologize for my error

    If you are not wrong that’s the first I have heard of it.

    I see no basis for this charge that Rand Paul is “attacking” the LP.

    Scroll up and read, and follow the links. I laid it out in quite a bit of detail above.

    It seems he is using its lists to build support.

    By lying, but that’s just one of many ways he is attacking the LP. Seriously, scroll up and read rather than just opining.

    The caller this article attacks probably had no clue about the actual Libertarian Party and its organization.

    But sure felt entitled to make false claims. And why do you think it was just one caller?

    I doubt there was any concerted effort.

    I don’t. Scroll up and find out why.

    Rand Paul has no reason to attack such an inconsequential entity as the Libertarian Party.

    And yet he’s been doing it (really…scroll up and read the thread…or just my comments in the thread from the start). So we aren’t so inconsequential as you think.

    His campaign manager didn’t think so on his last gig either. Or how about the half-million Kasich spent to keep us off the ballot in Ohio? Among many other examples, even though polls consistently show that if we weren’t on the ballot just as many of our voters would vote for the Democrats as for the Republicans.

  183. William Saturn

    There was no need for the “Letter to the Editor” about the Cuba embargo to even mention Hillary Clinton. The fact that it did and that it praised her (calling her brave) without qualifying that praise was strange.

  184. paulie

    There is still an outside shot that Rand Paul rises in the polls and wins the nomination

    Way, way, way outside. I’d say non-existent for any practical purposes. And even if he did, he’d lose to the Democrats. And even if he got elected – which, let’s face it, won’t happen – it would only be because he sold out every last bit of anything good he still tepidly pays dishonest lip service to.

    This is a far more likely scenario than Gary Johnson doing anything consequential in the general election.

    We have a ripple effect that is far larger than our vote totals indicate, regardless whether Johnson or someone else will be the LP nominee. And at least we’ll be on the ballot in the general election, unlike Rand Paul, who will be working against us and on behalf of Republicans.

  185. paulie

    If Rand Paul does not win the nomination and supports Bush or whoever wins the Republican nomination

    When, not if.

  186. paulie

    then it would not be in libertarian’s best interest to support the Republican.

    It’s in our best interest now to stand up against the establishment tool that is using our lists to build himself up so he can attack us with more strength next year, up and down the ballot, just like he did last year and the year before that. What is so hard to understand?

    However, that is not what the Paul campaign is about right now. It is about winning the nomination, which would be in a libertarian’s best interest.

    The extremely remote chance that he would win their nomination, much less the presidency, is in no way worth the absolute certainty that he will continue to directly atack us just as he has already been doing and just as his campaign manager was doing in his prior employment.

  187. Andy

    William Saturn said: “However, that is not what the Paul campaign is about right now. It is about winning the nomination, which would be in a libertarian’s best interest.”

    The chances of this happening are between extremely remote and zero.

    Here’s what I wish Rand would do: Run a more balls out pro-liberty campaign like his father did, but take it even further by pushing jury nullification as a major issue. His father made the Federal Reserve a major issue, and that was great, and he did talk about jury nullification a few times, but he did not make jury nullification into a major issue. Rand should. Rand should also recruit a back up candidate to run for the Libertarian Party nomination after he gets eliminated from the Republican primary, which Rand should be realistic enough to realize will happen, and this will be clearly apparent after Super Tuesday, even if he is not being realistic. I’d like to see him pick Andrew Napolitano to run for the LP nomination, and Napolitano should run a shadow campaign to Rand Paul’s campaign. After Rand is out, all of the resources go to Napolitano. Rand shows up at the LP convention and gives a nomination speech for Andrew Napolitano for the LP Presidential nomination. Napolitano wins it in a landslide on the first ballot. A wealthy Vice Presidential nominee emerges who is also a hardcore libertarian prior to the convention, like say Doug Casey or Chris Rufer, and they easily win the LP’s VP nomination, and then the VP nominee drops a big donation to the campaign ($10’s of millions of dollars). Rand Paul says he can’t support Jeb Bush or whoever the Republican ticket for President is so he officially endorses the LP ticket of Andrew Napolitano / Doug Casey or Chris Rufer (or some other wealthy hardcore libertarian). A big money bomb is organized for the Fourth of July for the LP ticket of Napolitano / Casey or Rufer (or insert wealthy hardcore libertarian) and it is heavily promoted by Rand and Ron Paul, Alex Jones, etc… The money bomb breaks all records and brings in say $15 million in one day. A Libertarian Super PAC is formed which raises another $15 million. The biggest pro-liberty awakening in the history of this country takes place. The establishment D’s and R’s get scared so they start pulling out the dirty tricks and running attack ads. Napolitano tries to get in the debate with Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, but he is denied access, so he makes a YouTube video where he tears them apart. The video gets millions of hits on YouTube. Election day comes and the Napolitano / Casey or Rufer (or insert name of wealthy hardcore libertarian) ticket gets the biggest vote total for a minor party or independent candidate since Ross Perot in 1992. The Libertarian Party wins major party status in several states, plus the Libertarian Party manages to get record vote totals for a bunch of other offices, and the party actually elects several people to seats in state legislatures, and even elects its first candidate to the US House of Representatives. Jury nullification and state nullification are big campaign themes for the Napolitano / Casey or Rufer (or insert name of wealthy hardcore libertarian), so the government has a more difficult time prosecuting people for victimless crimes than they did before this campaign, and some states are seriously putting forth proposals to nullify unconstitutional federal mandates. The revolution has begun.

    Yeah, I know it is a nice fantasy.

  188. Andy

    “They feel superior because they consider themselves ‘anarchists’ (a smaller subset of libertarians that doesn’t form political networks) ”

    I think that most of the people in the LP who could be considered “puppet masters” are self described minarchists, not anarchists, but minarachy vs. anarchy has little to do with my points here.

    I am interested in people who want to get the party and movement ahead vs. the people who are in the way of getting the party and movement ahead.

    Those who think that it is OK or even preferable to have most LP ballot access work done by non-libertarian mercenaries are most definitely in the category of people who are preventing the Libertarian Party and movement from getting ahead.

    Those who want to continue the “business as usual” which has led to the party being in dismal shape right now in terms of current membership and funding, are a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

  189. Douglas(s) Durham of the American Indian Movement (FBI branch)

    …BTW, Chuck, I’m sure those libertarian activists you heap scorn upon would be a whole lot more “reliable” if they got the same no-bid monopoly contracts Bonner gets, by virtue of his not being a libertarian, and not caring about the results of his work. You see, when you give someone $175,000 even when they royally screw everything up, you can probably still get some kind of “reliable” response from them in the future. The latest mailer the LP sent me didn’t have my correct phone number on it, but then, I haven’t been given $175,000 from the LP’s precious donor base, nor does Redpath have me on speed dial.

    Send me that $175,000. I promise I’ll be more reliable. LOL!!! (Actually, you can’t send me the $175,000, since I’ve left the LP in disgust at your infantile management of what was initially misrepresented to me as a viable option for individual freedom.)

    The LP donor base has been paying Bonner, “the man who can’t be fired” to disseminate anti-liberty messages to the public. Whereas, I have been paying out of pocket to disseminate pro-liberty “jury nullification” messages to the public. I wonder which person the LP donors would rather be paying? (They’ve been paying Bonner. Now, if history is a predictor, they’ll fail to realize this user-name is a sick joke, and they’ll demand to bring FBI informant Douglas(s) Durham out of retirement as an LP petitioner! Hey, he’s already torpedoed one “anti-government organization!”)

    So, if it comes down to paying Redpath to give Bonner yet more money, I wonder whether the LP donors should pay him, or give the money to an office-winning small-L libertarian like Rand Paul? Again: Rand’s minions should gain access to the list and then move to China until the statute of limitations is over. The LP is too dumb to notice its capital fleeing, and too dumb to use that capital for good itself. The LP has been entrusted with your freedom and mine, and it’s a front operation; it’s “controlled opposition,” it’s an expensive joke on the membership.

    I guarantee that when a l/Libertarian donor pays Rand Paul, the dollar will go far, far, far further in his “top-down, command-and-control” campaign than it would if it was sent to one that you, Redpath, or Axinn designed. So yes, maybe there is a place for the command-and-control, top-down organization you desire. It just has no place for YOU in it. You dare to say that Andy is overly dramatic, trust fund baby? He has to work for a living, unlike you, you pretentious assclown! You dare call him unreliable? How reliable have you and Axinn been in your leadership positions? How many State legislators have you elected? Oh, NONE?! Wait, that can’t be right!

    Maybe the buck$ should stop with the “top of the hierarchy,” …just not one you(Chuck Moulton) have anything to do with.

    If I’m not mistaken, you’ve been in school over 10 years, right? It’s too bad you didn’t learn anything about real-world politics while you were there. (Why be involved in politics if you know nothing about it? Why be a laggard in your area of non-expertise? Why not put to use what you learned in school?)

    …Unless you’re actually an FBI or CIA plant. Then, I guess you really have learned something, and that thing you learned is keeping the LP from being a threat to the central bank / drug war parties.

    …Either way, you’re an obstacle to the LP ever electing anyone, or ever shaping public debate to result in freedom. If there was any justice or intelligence in the LP noone would ever take you seriously again. As it is, “team freedom” is really “team stroke my ego for being privileged, and I’ll stroke yours.” We’re all oh-so-cool because we have the right philosophy, and can fly around the country pretending to be part of a political party that cares enough to elect people and make a difference. Such a motley crew does not make up a force for liberty, it makes up a group of annoying people, obsessed with their own importance.

    But you’ve won. You, the do-nothings who control the LP’s money, are viewed as “more important” than the “low-level” (in the sense of “unimportant” and in the sense of “street-level”) workers who could breathe life into your party. The Democrats didn’t choose this strategic path, and they control the nation. The Republicans didn’t choose this path, and with the Democrats, they control the nation, two faces of one central bank, warmonger, prohibitionist party.

    The Christopher Langans, Peter Thiels, Peter Vosses, Elon Musks, Kim Dotcoms, John McAfees, Eliezer Yudkowskys, and other intellectuals have remained uninvolved in the “animating contest of freedom,” probably because they recognize that incumbent power always escalates to violence, and they don’t have much capacity for violence. (Of course there are many reasons for remaining uninvolved, many of which afflict most libertarians: they don’t know how to get involved in an economical way, they don’t know how to sort out who is friend and who is foe, they are comfortable-carrot and risk averse-stick, they believe the LP is now being professionally managed)…

    Ideally, they will still be here to pick up the pieces of this tyranny, when it finally collapses of its own weight. Don’t expect results from the current LP. Not the way it’s managed now. Too bad not even Kim Dotcom wishes to lift a finger to set things right in the US, because libertarian ideas could be ascendant, instead of an inept unscientific backwater.

    Have a nice day.

  190. George Phillies

    Referring to Paul winning the nomination, Saturn writes ” which would be in a libertarian’s best interest.”

    It would totally not be in the interest of the Libertarian political movement for people to think that a homophobic bigot and antiabortionist daughter-murderer — because that’s what antiabortionists are, daughter-murderers — not to mention warmonger , is in any sense a Libertarian.

  191. paulie

    , or give the money to an office-winning small-L libertarian like Rand Paul?

    Assumes facts not in evidence. Once again:

    I don’t operate on the presumption that Rand Paul is a secret libertarian. I think it’s just as, or more, likely that he’s a secret statist who only sometimes pretends to be “libertarianish” strictly in order to get libertarian lists, votes, donations and confidence and channel them towards the establishment. But even in the unlikely event that he is actually a secret libertarian, it won’t matter, because if and when he actually gets to the iron throne of power that he has been so desparately pursuing at all costs, he will be far too beholden to far too many statist interests, surrounded by too many statist advisers and financiers, beholden by too many promises on and off the record and, probably, blackmail – to ever govern that way. Forget threats of assassination, threats of removal from power will be enough to someone so craven and so dedicated for so long to chasing power at any and all cost. And it’s fairly likely someone has or will have pictures of Randal doing naughty things involving sex and drugs that could destroy his highly hypothetical presidency, his marriage and family, and his reputation. And if somehow all else fails, yeah, presidents have been known to not survive a full term in office; with all the money and power on the line, do you think this would present a practical, much less ethical, problem to the kinds of forces we are talking about?

    I guarantee that when a l/Libertarian donor pays Rand Paul, the dollar will go far, far, far further

    In an anti-liberty direction.

  192. William Saturn

    ” because that’s what antiabortionists are, daughter-murderers ”

    Actually, abortionists are the daughter murderers because half of their kills are female fetuses. To call those opposing the killings of human fetuses “daughter-murderers” is ridiculous. Many, if not most pro-lifers believe in an exception when the mother’s life is threatened.

    Phillies’ statement is the kind of hyperbole that runs people away from the party.

  193. Jill Pyeatt

    “Many, if not most pro-lifers believe in an exception when the mother’s life is threatened.”

    Speaking of hyperbole, calling someone “pro-life” isn’t accurate unless the individual also condemns wars and assorted other methods of killing.

  194. William Saturn

    “Speaking of hyperbole, calling someone “pro-life” isn’t accurate ”

    Based on the context, everyone should know exactly what I am talking about.

  195. paulie

    Hmmm… well, if the thread is going to die anyway I’ll open it up to petition gripes again. Anyone object at this point?

  196. Andy Craig Post author

    Could bump it back up to the front page, but otherwise yes the discussion seems to have petered out.

  197. paulie

    OK then…hearing no objection, I’ll restore Andy J’s comments that were moved to the open thread.

    #1:

    I do not respect people who work as petition blockers, like blocking that Arpaio Recall in Arizona.

    I do not respect people who lie to the public to get people to sign petitions.

    I do not respect people who run off to work on every anti-liberty cause that will pay them on a routine basis.

    I do not respect people who bring in low validity rates on petitions on numerous occasions.

    This is why I have a lower opinion of non-libertarian mercenary petitioners, and the same principle applies to others in politics, and life in general for that matter.

    Now there are obviously different degrees, and some non-libertarian mercs are better than others, and there could be other aspects about them I do respect, but the above categories are not among them, to the degree that they do them.

    I do not see why some people act like it is so “radical” to suggest that the majority of LP ballot access work (say 70%-80%) ought to be done by actual Libertarians.

  198. paulie

    #2:

    The petition stuff relates directly to this because of the correlation between deceptive fundraiser pitches and deceptive petition pitches.

  199. paulie

    #3:

    Just for the record, many people in the world of petitioning know that. I am very reliable, and several people have even referred to me as the best and most reliable petitioner in the LP.

    Also, I bring little to no “drama” to the table. The times you’ve read or heard me complaining have mostly been due to long delays in getting paid (which were never agreed upon), or getting stiffed on pay, and even then, it is not like I have taken all of these incidents to a public forum.

  200. paulie

    Other than that the only comments I deleted were some comments by the nazi troll expressing agreements with Chuck Moulton’s comments about libertarian petitioners and with William Saturn’s defense of Rand Paul, and Andy J speculating that Chuck Moulton is possibly the nazi troll.

  201. Andy Craig Post author

    Just to clarify: the comments weren’t deleted on *my* objection. 😉 Though I don’t disagree with your reasons.

  202. paulie

    Has anyone tried?

    After the 17-candidate debate of America’s newest emerging third party, Paul’s campaign may be facing.

    ?

  203. Andy

    It really seems like Chuck was regurgitating talking points that somebody else gave him above. A guy with little experience in ballot access, and who I have never even worked with on any ballot access drive, is not really qualified to make such comments.

    It is also funny, because I saw Chuck at an LP meeting a while ago and he said that he went to where the challenge was being done in Pennsylvania in 2012 and he said that he personally verified that the validity from the crew of mercenaries that worked in Philadelphia was not good.

    Now he’s on here acting like hiring these mercs is some kind of wonderful thing.

    It seems to me that a long, drawn out challenge where the party just barely made the ballot, due to the fact that the party turned in more than double the required number of signatures, is the kind of drama that the party would want to avoid in the future.

    Also, Richard and John from the LP of Philly said that the merc crew was a pain in the ass with which to deal.

    They sure did not save the party any money either.

  204. paulie

    Has anyone tried?

    After the 17-candidate debate of America’s newest emerging third party, Paul’s campaign may be facing.

    ?

    Was there a typo or a part of the message missing in the original comment?

  205. Chuck Moulton

    Andy wrote:

    It is also funny, because I saw Chuck at an LP meeting a while ago and he said that he went to where the challenge was being done in Pennsylvania in 2012 and he said that he personally verified that the validity from the crew of mercenaries that worked in Philadelphia was not good.

    Now he’s on here acting like hiring these mercs is some kind of wonderful thing.

    Here is a simplification of what Andy keeps writing:
    A “mercenary petitioner” did a bad job in a particular state in a particular year. Therefore, all “mercenary petitioners” do a bad job in all states in all years.

    I’m sure most readers here can catch the basic logical fallacy, but here is a link for anyone who hasn’t yet had their morning coffee:
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Overgeneralization

    At no point have I ever suggested that all “mercenary petitioners” always do a good job or always do a better job than Libertarians who are petitioners. In fact, over the years I have criticized particular circumstances in which “mercenary petitioners” did a bad job, including Pennsylvania in 2012.

    Here is another simplification of what Andy keeps writing, highlighting a different issue:
    A petitioner did a bad job and he was a “mercenary petitioner”. Therefore, he did a bad job because he is a “mercenary petitioner”, not a Libertarian petitioner.

    Logical fallacy:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionable_cause
    http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/awb_nav.pl?s=wpd&c=dsp&k=fallacy+of+false+cause

    The problem in Pennsylvania was:
    1) a particular petitioner was given a monopoly contract,
    2) that petitioner was permitted to subcontract to other petitioners who were far less experienced and far less reliable,
    3) that petition contract was not given adequate oversight (paying out even for obviously bad signatures, allowing bad practices to continue even when discovered, and not checking validity until it was too late),
    4) those petitioners were permitted to focus most of their efforts in Philadelphia rather than helping downticket candidates elsewhere in the state,
    5) the volunteer effort was minimal when instead there ought to have been a focus on primary day (if as much volunteer time was put into primary day petitioning as defending the petition, that would have been a much better use of resources), and
    6) there was insufficient recruiting of downticket candidates (stacking in Pennsylvania leads to a dramatic increase in volunteer signatures with downticket candidates).

    That the petitioners in Pennsylvania were “mercenary petitioners” rather than Libertarians had very little to do with the problem. In particular, many of the subcontractors did a terrible job and should never be re-hired, but the main contractor Darryl Bonner has done a good job petitioning himself (as the petitioner, not as contractor overseeing subcontractors) in many other states and many other years.

    As mentioned repeatedly, Bill Redpath and state chairs will hire petitioners who are reliable, cheap, and drama free — I know this because I have had many long discussions over the years with the people who make hiring decisions. Some “mercenary petitioners” in some circumstances are reliable, cheap, and drama free, so they will be hired. Some Libertarian petitioners in some circumstances are reliable, cheap, and drama free, so they will be hired. Some petitioners (whether “mercenary petitioners” or Libertarian petitioners) are hired, then turn out to not be reliable, cheap and drama free, so hopefully they are not re-hired in the future (and this is often the case).

    Andy wants a different criteria than reliable, cheap, and drama free to be used to determine who is hired, because often that leads to “mercenary petitioners” being hired instead of Andy (and other Libertarian petitioners). Andy continues to demonstrate that he is a drama queen by spamming petition gripes in completely unrelated threads that are not actually read by people making most of the hiring decisions, using obvious logical fallacies to smear his competition.

  206. George Phillies

    I have been distributing to Libertarian Facebook groups the message:

    Republican Fraud Alert! (and please share this message)

    But first, be a real libertarian! Support your Real Libertarian County, State, and National parties.

    Across the country, Libertarian State Chairs are receiving calls from people claiming to be Rand Paul staffers, asking for their state party membership and mailing lists. To give credit where it is due, their requests were denied.

    Across the country, Libertarians say they are receiving phone calls from people claiming to be Rand Paul volunteers, claiming that the LNC has endorsed Rand Paul (flat out lie), that it has urged Libertarian Party people to vote for Rand Paul (flat out lie), and that it has urged Libertarians to donate to Rand Paul (flat out lie). The donation addresses I am advised appear to be legitimate.

    Please share this message.

    Quoting IndependentPoliticalReport.com:

    From Joe Enroughty, a Libertarian activist and LPVA 3rd District Vice-Chair in Richmond, VA:

    The Rand Paul campaign appears to be so desperate that they have people calling and stating that he has been endorsed by The Libertarian Party. I received a call tonight from a Rand Paul campaign worker named “Cynthia.” I told Cynthia that I was a member of the LP and that I was most likely planning to vote for the LP Presidential Candidate. But at no time was I planning to vote for a Republican, especially one named Rand Paul. She then told me that the LP had issued a statement asking all of its members to vote for Rand in state primaries where they were able to do so. She also told me that the Paul campaign had been given LP donor lists by the LP to use for his campaign. She wanted me to make a donation either over the phone or online at Rand’s web site.

    For more Libertarian news, subscribe to Liberty For America magazine. It’s FREE.

    http://libertyforamerica.com/liberty-for-america-magazine/

    There have a large number of positive responses and a few complainers, at least one of whom is a known Republican.

  207. paulie

    Thanks for spreading that around. Might make it easier for people to find the additional discussion if you link the specific post as well especially since it is not on the front page any longer.

  208. Steve Scheetz

    So, we have a gentleman suggesting that we need to change our values in order to win an election, and to do otherwise is to drive away people in droves.

    I have some news. The LP has changed its values in order to win an election, and that caused its own base to go away in “droves.”

    Frankly, what the LP needs to be doing is to differentiate the party from the two major parties. ONLY by doing this will we demonstrate the differences between those walking the talk and those posing to gain the Liberty votes.

    Rand Paul, for all his rhetoric, and all of his actions, (believe me, I understand that some of his actions were absolutely awesome) remains, a republican. sure, he has some libertarian rhetoric, but at the end of the day he is absolutely, to the core, republican.

    To those of you who support Rand Paul, I am thrilled to say that you are supporting Rand Paul! The Republican candidates who have declared, so far, are wanting! YET, to the Libertarians out there, at some point, the party will state, clearly, “THIS MAN/WOMAN is our candidate, and we will ALL wish to support him/her, because he/she will represent OUR values, not some watered down version of what passes for values that we are expected to sacrifice who we are in order to support…

    F%$# THAT! I would rather fail 99% of all elections for the possibility that 1% of candidates who have that special mantra “ALL shall live their lives their way provided they do not interfere with anyone living his/her life his/her way” If that is too radical, then I am proud to call myself too radical!! BTW, to those who believe I should temper my mantra in order to become elected, F%$^ YOU!

    Sincerely,

    Steve Scheetz

    Immediate Past Chair, LPPA

    P.S. It is nice to not be the voice of the party and retain the ability to speak my own thoughts!

  209. paulie

    So, we have a gentleman suggesting that we need to change our values in order to win an election, and to do otherwise is to drive away people in droves.

    Which comment(s) are you referring to? It’s a long thread so a point of reerence would be good.

    I have some news. The LP has changed its values in order to win an election, and that caused its own base to go away in “droves.”

    Frankly, what the LP needs to be doing is to differentiate the party from the two major parties. ONLY by doing this will we demonstrate the differences between those walking the talk and those posing to gain the Liberty votes.

    Yep!

    Rand Paul, for all his rhetoric, and all of his actions, (believe me, I understand that some of his actions were absolutely awesome) remains, a republican. sure, he has some libertarian rhetoric, but at the end of the day he is absolutely, to the core, republican.

    Right again.

  210. paulie

    Apparently (I didn’t see them, was only told about it) someone has been deleting links to http://amthirdpartyreport.com/2015/08/09/lnc-chair-sarwark-praises-hillary-clinton-in-letter-to-editor/ from this thread. Although I expressed my disagreements with William Saturn on the editorial views first expressed in that column – I think it was in this thread but I’d have to check – there is no reason he should not be allowed to express his view on this here or to link back to A3PR.

  211. paulie

    For that discussion scroll up to

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/08/rand-paul-campaign-seeking-lp-donors-claiming-to-be-endorsed-by-libertarian-party/#comment-1214304

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/08/rand-paul-campaign-seeking-lp-donors-claiming-to-be-endorsed-by-libertarian-party/#comment-1214307

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/08/rand-paul-campaign-seeking-lp-donors-claiming-to-be-endorsed-by-libertarian-party/#comment-1214309

    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/08/rand-paul-campaign-seeking-lp-donors-claiming-to-be-endorsed-by-libertarian-party/#comment-1214313

    For more context, scroll up to Saturn, August 7, 2015 at 12:47 am and read the following hour or so’s comments from all sides.

  212. Pingback: Rand Paul campaign seeking LP donors, lying about being endorsed by Libertarian Party | American Third Party Report

  213. Circular Firing Squad

    Moulton wrote,

    Andy wants a different criteria than reliable, cheap, and drama free to be used to determine who is hired, because often that leads to “mercenary petitioners” being hired instead of Andy (and other Libertarian petitioners). Andy continues to demonstrate that he is a drama queen by spamming petition gripes in completely unrelated threads that are not actually read by people making most of the hiring decisions, using obvious logical fallacies to smear his competition.

    Gosh, Andy must be a bad guy! It couldn’t be that he (and many others) have seen, first-hand, patterns you’re completely unaware of, right? Let’s analyze your claims:

    1) A great many petitioners know that Andy is was the most reliable, cheap, and drama free petitioner in the history of the LP, until Kohlhaas tried to rip him off in 2006. Ultimately, the people who ripped him off, (by paying him 6 months late, forcing him to incur late fees, etc), ponied up to pay his debts. The long string of “get lost kid” signaling would come later, in 2008 – present.

    2) Let’s take you at your asinine claim, and say Andy’s “dramatic.” (Because he once didn’t want to fill out a tax form, and then showed the LP that IRS rules didn’t require it. Sure, Bill Redpath had the right to not hire him, but seeing as how all the way up to and through that time, Andy was one of the most reliable and drama-free petitioners the LP had, that seems a bit harsh, irrational, and well, just plain mean. …Especially because, THEORETICALLY, we’re trying to also have petitioners do extra work to recruit the public to our cause, something Bill Redpath, and people like yourself, have basically driven out of the petitioning efforts.) Does Andy follow his paymasters around, or call them every 10 minutes? No. He accepts the paper, gets the signatures, and then hands them in. If he notices blatant self-destructive practices in the LP, and then comments on them as a member, as an activist, and as an employee, you, Chuck Moulton, should THANK HIM FOR THE RELIABLE INFORMATION.

    3) You use of the term mercenary petitioners should really read strictly mercenary petitioners. A petitioner who would happily circulate a petition to execute Edward Snowden, or to increase pay for government schoolteachers, who simultaneously is circulating for the LP is a “strictly mercenary” or “unprincipled mercenary” petitioner. By default, this describes 99% of the existing petitioners, due to their having become familiarized with frequent petitions (often to increase state power) in California. If you see no problem with the LP being represented by such people, then it’s a simple fact that you don’t know the first thing about how to win in politics. Since it’s clear that this is the case, here are two essays that will introduce you to the important basic elements of political strategy and political reality:
    The Real Nature of Politics(pdf)
    The Laws Of The Public Policy Process(html)

    It’s a simple fact that the way the LP currently conducts its operations violates most of the prior “laws.” These laws are more “guidelines” whereby people interested in politics can get a sense of what it entails. They are laws that almost 100% of the LP are unfamiliar with. Hence, their complete inability to even vaguely threaten the incumbent elected and unelected power structure.

    4) Your complaint: Andy continues to demonstrate that he is a drama queen by spamming petition gripes in completely unrelated threads, really strikes a nerve with me. The nerve of that bastard Andy who has put your Party on the ballot in over 20 States! Making you scroll past his comments when you’re just trying to make sure the LP is still wasting donor money so you can report to your bosses at the FBI! Oh shit, I just thought of something, if you’re forced to consistently serve the mission of interfering with the LP’s viability, then you actually have to read Andy’s comments and maybe even reply to them! You poor bastard, now I really do feel sorry for you! That’s worse than being transferred to Alaska, the typical Hollywood threat for under-performing federal agents. …Or you could just realize that you’re wrong on this subject, scroll past his comments, and keep your insipid support for inept LP status quo to yourself.

    My comment was almost as long as Andy’s and I didn’t even get to the fallacies in your 3rd and 4th sentences. I barely scratched the surface of the fallacies in one single paragraph! Which reminds me of a quote from programmer Alberto Brandolini, “The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”

    The prior quote is added to, here, in this portion of a video interview of Sam Harris.

    Do I really think Chuck Moulton is a government goon? Not really. I just think he’s an aloof asshole for whom the result of individual freedom is less important than hobnobbing with wealthy LP “leaders”(who have driven away the membership, failed to grow the LP, and resulted in over 15 years of electoral failure, with zero bench-marked, rational, incrementally-measurable plans).

    Shitting on a min-wage(now) employee who does your dirty work, replacing him with an inept moron who screws up that dirty work, and then pondering the LP’s failure and ineptitude is the mark of a “useful idiot,” at best. Now I know why Ayn Rand so scorned “college boys” in “Atlas Shrugged,” …they’re all “pull,” zero “real world experience.”

    Of course, this doesn’t stop the NSA and other gov goons from monitoring all of our phones and using our private information to coerce us into political dead-ends (as Snowden’s WIRED Magazine interview noted that they have at very least proposed). Filling taxpayer-effort-funded beds and directing unlimited amounts of freshly-printed dollars to them is a racket that pays really well, given the 2.3 million people incarcerated in the American Police State. Now that Cato reports the Fed really does care about where those dollars go, maybe we’ll see people more serious than Chuck Moulton get involved in electoral politics.

    Then again, maybe not.

    This is from the WIRED Interview. …But Andy’s “paranoid” or “a drama queen.” Sure. Read on, you comfortable aloof doofuses who have run the LP into the ground:

    Another troubling discovery was a document from NSA director Keith Alexander that showed the NSA was spying on the pornography-viewing habits of political radicals. The memo suggested that the agency could use these “personal vulnerabilities” to destroy the reputations of government critics who were not in fact accused of plotting terrorism. The document then went on to list six people as future potential targets. (Greenwald published a redacted version of the document last year on the Huffington Post.)

    Snowden was astonished by the memo. “It’s much like how the FBI tried to use Martin Luther King’s infidelity to talk him into killing himself,” he says. “We said those kinds of things were inappropriate back in the ’60s. Why are we doing that now? Why are we getting involved in this again?”

    At least Rand Paul claims to oppose this. At least he’s seriously standing up to the USA becoming a Stalinist state that disappears or ruins “radicals.”

    So long as views like Moulton’s and Redpath’s are “running the show” the LP is 100% harmless to tyranny. It is disloyal to, and does not defend, its own. The entire LNC is highly suspect, if not for outright collaboration with the enemy, for their coerced acquiescence.

    A person with between $10,000 and $40,000 can get elected to any State legislature in the Nation. If the “leadership” in your State doesn’t know how to do this, they’re not “leadership,” they’re controlled opposition. If a candidate can’t tell you how many votes the incumbent won with, and won by, he’s not a serious candidate. If he or she can’t tell you how they intend to win that many votes by direct personal connection (by phone conversation or face-to-face), they’re not a serious candidate. If they don’t know they need to know the prior things, they’re not a serious candidate.

    When we have mercenaries who can’t defend the libertarian positions on people’s personal hot button issues, we’re asking them to join a team that’s currently a losing team, and giving them ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR DOING SO. Why should they join us? …So they can be targeted by incumbent goons for straying off the plantation? So city inspectors can be sent to their businesses and homes? “No thanks!”

    When Andy (or any other talented libertarian activist) talks to someone, they’re attracting that person to the LP. When some mercenary scumbag talks to someone, (especially when that person knows more about libertarianism than the person they see as “representing” the LP) they’re driving support away from the LP.

    I believe, from his writings here, that Andy thinks that every last shred of effort should be used to turn the LP into a serious political organization. (Which it currently is not, and cannot be, given its governance.) I can’t say the same about you, Chuck. It seems to me that you can’t tell the difference between “drama” and “survival.” (Or you’re a goon. That’s also plausible with very few steps down any reasonable chain of logic. After all, there’s no law in the USA, and all of our communications are an open book to the NSA. They even send information to local p?o?l?i?c?e? standing army departments on a regular basis. So, how do we not have the same thing as the NKVD and KGB under Yezhov and Stalin? Well, they haven’t started mass executions yet, even though their fake laws piled on top of the Bill of Rights enable them to do so as long as they pronounce their victims “terrorists.” So, it’s not mass murder yet …just mass imprisonment.)

    Probably the best reason to think the LP isn’t infiltrated is that the people running it are so incompetent that it would be like sandblasting a soup cracker.

    Those who encourage the pathetic disloyalty and disorganization are the worst problem the LP faces. Without their influence, it’s conceivable we might once again elect 1/10 of a State legislature (something the LP currently has absolutely no desire or capacity to do). Andy’s “petition gripes” are “gripes” with the way that most of the money is spent on what could be (BUT IS NOT) highly effective grassroots organization.

    I’d continue this diatribe against libertarian political incompetence, but the crickets are pretty loud, and I don’t want to burden radical trailblazers like Chuck with their scroll bars any more than I already have.

  214. Chuck Moulton

    As usual lots of ad hominem attacks and little substance.

    This whole conversation feels like trying to explain to a progressive that businesses are trying to maximize profits while the progressives keep whining that the business should maximize solar power or wages or free stuff for the homeless. The petitioners think petition drives should maximize outreach, while everyone who employs them have completely different standards (i.e., valid petition signatures). Until you talk the language of your employers (budgets, cost/benefit analysis) and actually address your employers, you’ll get nowhere. But feel free to keep wasting your time being drama queens… I’ll just stop reading the word salad.

  215. Andy

    Chuck does not know what the fuck he is talking as about with the merc petitioners. The mercs are not cheaper, they are just as expensive, if not more expensive, plus they are less reliable and they create more drama.

    I’d like to see the mercs held accountable for their low validity, misrepresenting the LP petitions to the public (as in lying to get people to sign), and causing LP candidates to fail to make the ballot. I’d also like to see them held accountable for working every anti-liberty cause which offers them money.

  216. Chuck Moulton

    Andy wrote:

    Chuck does not know what the fuck he is talking as about with the merc petitioners. The mercs are not cheaper, they are just as expensive, if not more expensive, plus they are less reliable and they create more drama.

    If that were the case, you wouldn’t have to talk about changing hiring standards because under current hiring standards they wouldn’t be hired. But it’s not true, which is readily apparent from who is hired.

  217. trying again

    @paulie August4 —

    Actually, Rand Paul has refused to share his mailing lists with the RNC. He is the only candidate to do so. Google ” Why Isn’t Rand Paul Making a Data Deal With the GOP? ” and you will find that your assumption is incorrect.

  218. trying again

    @paulie — Where are you get this idea that Rand Paul supports “additional screening for Muslim-Americans.”

    Are you sure you’re not thinking of his recent comments saying the State Dept (not the NSA, nota bene) needs to do more screening of Muslim foreigners applying for US visas?

    Ron Paul supported that same commonsense position, BTW.

  219. trying again

    @paulie — The Wachtler (who?) blog accuses Jesse Benton of “stealing” the Campaign For Liberty mailing list for the RNC, but gives no source at all for this allegation.

    On the other hand, several legitmate news outlets ran properly-sourced stories in July about the Rand2016 campaign refusing to share data with RNC.

  220. paulie

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/17/exclusive-rand-paul-on-tennessee-terror-restrict-immigration-from-muslim-nations/

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/07/18/paul-muslim-immigration/30342457/

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/07/18/rand-paul-restrict-muslim-immigration.html

    During an interview with Breitbart News, Paul said, “I’m very concerned about immigration to this country from countries that have hotbeds of jihadism and hotbeds of this Islamism. There was a program in place that Bush had put in place—it stood for entry-exit program from about 25 different countries with a lot of Islamic radicals, frankly. I think there does need to be heightened security. Nobody has a right to come to America, so this isn’t something that we can say ‘oh their rights are being violated.’”

    http://reason.com/archives/2015/08/04/rand-pauls-massive-immigration-contradic

    In the wake of the Chattanooga shooting by a Muslim immigrant, the presidential candidate dusted off a plan he had floated after the Boston bombing to cut back student visas to Muslim countries. (Never mind that, barring one 9/11 hijacker, none of the Muslim terrorists in any attack actually came on such a visa.) Worse, he recommended heightened “scrutiny” for Muslim immigrants by reviving some particularly noxious aspects of the post-9/11 program called the National Security Entry Exit Registration System (NSEERS) that Congress killed a few years ago. It required the implementation of a biometric exit and entry system to track the cross-border movements of every man, woman, and child in America—citizen and non-citizen alike—something that’s just a little shy of a National ID card that Paul opposes. Even more chillingly, it mandated Muslim boys and men to personally appear before Uncle Sam’s immigration functionaries and get fingerprinted and IDed. Such surveillance on steroids—which ruined the lives of many innocent Muslims through false detentions while leading to not a single terrorism-related arrest—is a slap in the face of Paul’s own crusade against government surveillance.

    If Ron Paul supported this fascist horseshit too, shame on him. But Ron Paul is retired from electoral politics, so let’s focus on the present and future here.

  221. paulie

    the Wachtler (who?) blog accuses Jesse Benton of “stealing” the Campaign For Liberty mailing list for the RNC, but gives no source at all for this allegation.

    Ask Wachtler then. Follow the link and contact him if it’s important to you.

  222. trying again

    I see you’ve linked four articles about foreign Muslims who wish to immigrate.

    Your false comment upthread was about “Muslim Americans.”

    Do you understand what the word “American” means?

  223. paulie

    Immigrants who live in the US are Americans. I did not say citizens.

    Visitors should not be tracked like cattle either, much less immigrants, just based on nation of origin.

  224. trying again

    “Ask Wachtler then. Follow the link and contact him if it’s important to you.”

    Gossip and horseshit is not important to me. Is the truth ever important to you? Or are you just happy to regurgitate bullshit as long as it feeds into your vendettas?

  225. trying again

    “Americans. I did not say citizens.”

    Hahaha. How disingenuous can you get? Deceptive, dishonest language to forward an agenda. You obviously don’t give a damn about America.

  226. paulie

    horseshit is not important to me.

    Then stop spreading it.

    Is the truth ever important to you?

    Yep.

    Or are you just happy to regurgitate bullshit

    If you want to prove it’s bullshit then start by asking Wachtler where he got the information. Until then we have only your word and you are not exactly a reliable source. Just because Randal is not sharing some data now does not mean he has not shared any in the past.

  227. paulie

    Hahaha. How disingenuous can you get? Deceptive, dishonest language to forward an agenda. You obviously don’t give a damn about America.

    Talking to yourself again, I see.

  228. Jill Pyeatt

    So, trying again, what is this “agenda” of Paulie’s? Not furthering hatemongering, maybe? I do it as much, or more, than he does.

    Much of the Islamaphobia crap is caused by propaganda. We’ve had millions of Muslims living in this country for years without problems.

  229. paulie

    trying (my patience) again’s agenda is trolling. Plain and simple.

    what is this “agenda” of Paulie’s? Not furthering hatemongering, maybe?

    Yep

    Much of the Islamaphobia crap is caused by propaganda.

    Right again!

  230. Jill Pyeatt

    Paulie said: “trying (my patience) again’s agenda is trolling. Plain and simple”

    Indeed. He’s not particularly clever about it.

  231. Jill Pyeatt

    My personal troll has shown up again on FB after a couple months’ break. I do wonder if it’s the same guy.

  232. paulie

    It’s not. I actually accidentally learned who trying again is, and it’s not anything like what you may guess. The real person is nothing like the troll. I guess it’s just a way to blow off steam for this person…classic trolling.

  233. Pingback: Liberty for America August 2015 | Independent Political Report

  234. paulie

    Latest polls have Randal down to 3% and 11th place. “Playing the game” doesn’t seem to be working too well for him, if that’s what he is doing.

  235. Andy

    “paulie

    August 11, 2015 at 10:41 am

    Latest polls have Randal down to 3% and 11th place. ‘Playing the game’ doesn’t seem to be working too well for him, if that’s what he is doing.”

    I predicted that this may happen. Rand should follow in the footsteps of his father more closely. Ron Paul for President in 2008 and 2012 got big because Ron Paul inspired a lot of people to get active by putting out a more radical libertarian message, and the majority of these people did not come from traditional Republican ranks. There are already lots of candidates for the Republican rank and file to chose from, so Rand would be better off reaching out to the same groups that his father did.

  236. paulie

    Yep. Same thing happens to LP when we water down our message.

    Of course the above assumes that he’s just playing a game and that his views are secretly a lot more like his father’s, and I don’t know if I buy that at all. If anything he may be more like the stereotypical preacher’s son who is a really bad kid but knows very well how to put on a show of piety when he needs to.

  237. Andy

    “2) Let’s take you at your asinine claim, and say Andy’s ‘dramatic.'”

    Here is the truth of the matter: Chuck Moulton and most everyone else in the Libertarian Party do not know that many petition circulators, in fact, a lot of people in the LP do not know any petition circulators.

    A lot of these people would not even know me if not for the fact that I have attended LP meetings on and off for many years, and if not for the fact that I post on some message forums that are frequented by Libertarians.

    Why do I attend Libertarian Party meetings and why do I post on message forums like this one? Because I actually care about liberty, and I want the Libertarian Party and movement to be successful.

    Given that most Libertarian Party members have little to no interaction with any petition circulators, they are not going to hear or read their “gripes” or anything else, because they do not “run” in the same circles.

    The reason that you generally do not see any mercenary petitioners popping up at LP meetings (except on very rare occasions, like going there to turn in signatures), or posting on message boards that are frequented by LP members is because the mercenary petitioner does not really give a damn about the LP beyond getting paid. It is just another petition to “sling” for money to them, and it could just as easily be for any other cause, just so long as they are getting paid.

    The fact that mercenary petitioners almost never show up at LP meetings or post on message boards does not mean that they are easy to work with, or that they are “drama free,” or that they never complain, or that they are reliable, or that they do a good job, it just means that most LP members will never hear from them – or even know who most of them are – because these people do not care enough about the LP to be involved with it.

    Go spend some time in mercenary petitioning circles and you will hear plenty of griping and whining and other drama.

    I did NOT START OUT in any of this stuff as a petition circulator, or as a person who ever intended to make money off of politics.

    I started out as a regular Libertarian Party member back in 1996. I joined after I saw Harry Browne speak at the LP National Convention that year on C-SPAN during the 4th of July weekend.

    I was a member of the party for 4 years before I ever gathered any petition signatures, or even knew that petition circulators could get paid. Heck, at the time I did not even know that it was necessary to gather petition signatures to get candidates on the ballot.

    After I found out I could make money gathering petition signatures, I saw it as a way to get paid for something that I was ALREADY DOING anyway, and that was trying to persuade as many people as possible to move the country in a libertarian direction.

    All of the people I worked with on my first couple of petition drives (Pennsylvania and Maryland) were all Libertarians. My third petition drive was in Arizona, and although I worked with several Libertarians there, this was the first place that I encountered any mercenary petitioners (I think it was in this thread that I mentioned my encounter with a mercenary petitioner at a gun show in Arizona who jumped in front of Libertarian petitioner Bob and myself and was using a disingenuous pitch).

    I did not encounter lots of mercenary petitioners until I worked on my first ballot initiative drive in California in 2001, but it did not last very long because the drive got shut down because the initiative proponent ran out of money (I worked on it for around a week or two).

    I went to Massachusetts in the fall of 2001 to petition for Carla Howell’s first attempt at eliminating the Massachusetts State Income Tax. Carla and her campaign staff were all Libertarians, and Carla did in fact hire several Libertarian petitioners, however, due to the size of the petition drive (initiatives typically require a lot more signatures than a candidate or party petition), Carla had several mercenaries working on the drive as well. So I ran into more mercenaries in Massachusetts. A mercenary coordinator that Carla had contracted with who was the same mercenary coordinator that the LNC had hired for that Harry Browne petition drive in Arizona in 2000 which I worked, got low validity on Carla’s initiative for several turn ins (this crew was at like 40% or something like that), so Carla ended up getting rid of them. This same crew ended up picking up a couple of other initiatives in Massachusetts, one was to ban the sale of horsemeat, and the other was to ban gay marriage (or at least to prohibit gays from having state recognized marriages). There was a scandal involving some of these mercenary petitioners tricking people into signing the anti-gay marriage petition, by doing a bait and switch, whereas they stopped people with the horsemeat petition, and then they flipped the page and got people to sign the anti-gay marriage petition without telling them what it was (they told people that they had to sign twice for the horsemeat petition), and they had the legal language of the anti-gay marriage petition covered up so people could not read it. A similar scandal happened with an anti-gay marriage petition in Massachusetts in 2005, but I was not there that time.

    The antics of some of the mercenary petitioners in Massachusetts in 2001 left a bad taste in my mouth.

  238. Andy

    My next encounter with mercenary petitioners was in January of 2002, which was when I worked on petitions in California for the second occasion, and this was my first long stint working with mercenary petitioners and coordinators. There were a total of six initiatives that circulated during this time period, five state wide petitions and one county petition. Two of these petitions were blatantly anti-liberty, so I refused to work on them. I was the only one in this petition office who refused to work on these anti-liberty petitions. Others thought that it was weird. I remember one of the petition coordinators that ran this office said, “Uh oh, it looks like we’ve got an activist on our hands!” as if being an activist, or having any principles was a bad thing.

    I have since gone on to work on petition drives in 33 states, and if you count each stint that I’ve worked, it comes out to 107 times. I’ve lost count of the number of petitions that I’ve worked on over the years. I actually do remember them all, but it would take a while to sit down and total them all up.

    I have worked with lots of people all over this country. Now when I say worked with people, some of these people are just people who were working on the same thing that I was working, and I encountered them at a petition office or a public venue gathering signatures. I’ve worked by myself a lot, but I’ve also teamed up with a lot of people. I’ve also worked with numerous petition coordinators and proponents over the years. I’ve also been a petition coordinator myself on some occasions.

    15 years is a long time, and 33 states is a lot of places. So I think that I can speak with some authority here.

    There are very few Libertarians in the petition business. Most of the people are what I describe as apolitical mercenaries, as in they are people with no real political convictions and they will work on anything for money. There are also of course a few people in the petition business who do have real political convictions, but most of these people are not libertarians either.

    The majority of people who post here have absolutely no idea who any petition circulators are besides myself and Paul (and a few other Libertarian petitioners who have posted here on occasion over they years), and the majority of people here know little or nothing about the petition business.

    If you think that LP ballot access, or ballot access for any minor party (outside of maybe Americans Elect), is a big deal, then you know little or nothing about ballot access. Getting minor parties like the Libertarian Party or the Green Party or the Constitution Party on the ballot is small potatoes in the world of ballot access.

    The big money is in qualifying initiatives and referendums for the ballot.

    Now I do like to make money, but making money is not my sole concern, and if it was, I’d have a lot more of it right now. When I work on Libertarian Party ballot access, I am not just doing it for the money, and I am certainly not doing it because working Libertarian Party ballot access is the best way to make money in the world of petitioning, because it is not.

    I do it because I want the Libertarian Party and cause to be successful. I want to do whatever I can to make the Libertarian Party and cause more successful.

    Most petitioners and petition coordinators view all petitions, whether it is for the Libertarian Party, or for anything else, as just a way to make money. Their biggest concern is getting paid, and they are just as happy to work on an anti-liberty cause as they are to work on a pro-liberty cause, just as long as they are getting paid. Some of these people even go so far as to use less than ethical tactics when they work on petition drives on a regular basis.

    I’ve worked with lots of mercenary petitioners and mercenary petition coordinators. Do I hate all of these people? No. Sure, I dislike some of the, but there are a few of them that I actually count as friends, and/or friendly acquaintances.

    There are different levels of liking or not liking or respecting or not respecting a person. I think that the libertarian philosophy is the correct philosophy, so generally speaking, the further a person is from holding this ideology, the less respect that I have of their ideology, but life is funny in that sometimes people can hold what I’d call the wrong ideology, but you may get along with them for other reasons, or in spite of this.

    So there are mercenaries whom I get along with and who even do a good job, in that as far as I know, they do not misrepresent petitions, they generally bring in a good validity rate, and they do not rip people off.

    However, even if they do not misrepresent petitions, and even if they generally bring in a good validity rate, and even if they do not rip people off, they are still lacking from what I’d call the ideal since they are not really doing anything to bring the country towards more individual freedom. Yes, they may work on some pro-freedom causes, but this is nullified by them also working on anti-freedom causes, plus, they do not do anything extra beyond gathering signatures, like you don’t see them handing out pro-freedom information (like Fully Informed Juries, etc…), or doing anything to network people in with pro-freedom organizations.

    There are some “good” mercenaries out there, but even with the “good” ones, they are still not the ideal, because the Libertarian Party and movement has a great need for people to act as field representatives, not just signature gatherers.

    Really, if this stuff was only about signature gathering, I’d have quit a long time ago. Getting signatures on petitions is only a part of the game. My other goal when I am out there (most of the time/the exception would be the rare occasions when I am just working on something that is liberty neutral, as in something that would not really bring us more freedom, but is also something that would not really result in less freedom than we have now) interacting with the public is to persuade people to move in the direction of more freedom, and to identify the people who are already pro-freedom, or who lean pro-freedom, and to try to plug them into the pro-freedom network, if they are not already a part of the pro-freedom network. I especially try to plug people into the Libertarian Party.

    I prefer to work with fellow freedom fighters, not people who are just out to make money. Once again, I like to make money, but if making money were my only goal, I’d be a pure mercenary in the petition business, and I’d had have a lot more money right now, or maybe I’d be doing something else entirely all together right now. A big part of the reason why I do this is so that I can take part in the “animating contest for liberty,” to borrow a phrase from Samuel Adams. If I was not able to make money off of politics, then I would have to have another job or business, which would mean that I’d have less time to take part in politics.

    If it were not for myself, Paul, Bob, Jake, and a small handful of others (who only do this stuff once In a while), the Libertarian Party would basically have no field outreach team, and there would be little to no field outreach that took place during any petition drive.

    I would like to see more actual Libertarian activist working on Libertarian Party ballot access drives, and also more pro-liberty petition drives in general. Why?

    1) Because actual Libertarians generally average higher validity rates than non-libertarian mercenaries.

    and,

    2) Because actual Libertarians do a better job of disseminating a Libertarian message to the public, which is something that a lot of the public needs to hear.

    Anyone who thinks that non-libertarian mercenaries are wonderful to work with ought to go spend some time with them. Every time there has been a big problem with validity, or cases of people misrepresenting petitions to the public, non-libertarian mercenaries have been the culprits, and non-libertarian mercenaries bring plenty of drama to the table, including some of the ones who’ve done a lot of work for the LP (ones that even Chuck may know who they are), who some in the LP have labeled as being “pains in the ass,” or as “drama queens” or as “big cry babies.”

  239. Robert Capozzi

    a: Rand should follow in the footsteps of his father more closely. Ron Paul for President in 2008 and 2012 got big because Ron Paul inspired a lot of people to get active by putting out a more radical libertarian message, and the majority of these people did not come from traditional Republican ranks.

    me: Is it possible that RP2 simply doesn’t buy his Dad’s approach? If he doesn’t, then it would be inauthentic of him to mimic his Dad.

    He might, for ex, not buy his RP1’s Civil War revisionist view that he unfortunately shared with the nation on Meet the Press.

    RP1 didn’t have quite the competition that RP2 has, so that he’s slipping in the polls does NOT prove that RP1’s message has more resonance than RP2’s. And there was no Trump factor, either, in 08 or ’12.

    I’d note, too, that RP2 has committed some pretty big gaffes in some TV interviews over the past 6 months or so. Understandable, since he’s still pretty much a rookie. It’s kind of a shame, because he’s generally FAR more articulate than his RP1, in my view.

  240. Andy

    Robert Cappozi said: “me: Is it possible that RP2 simply doesn’t buy his Dad’s approach? If he doesn’t, then it would be inauthentic of him to mimic his Dad.”

    Nobody knows what Rand Paul is really thinking. My guess is that he thought that appealing more to mainstream Republicans would be a more successful route to go than what his father did, but who knows.

    “He might, for ex, not buy his RP1’s Civil War revisionist view that he unfortunately shared with the nation on Meet the Press.”

    So you are still pushing the myth that some comments Ron Paul made about the Civil War somehow cost him lots of votes from people who’d have voted for him otherwise. I have already debunked this on past threads here (including where I showed that there were some black people who agreed with him).

    You are the only person whom I am aware of who thinks that Ron Paul’s comments about the Civil War cost him votes.

    “RP1 didn’t have quite the competition that RP2 has, so that he’s slipping in the polls does NOT prove that RP1’s message has more resonance than RP2’s. And there was no Trump factor, either, in 08 or ’12.”

    It is true that Rand is running in a more crowded field, however, if he took a more radically libertarian approach like his father did, Rand would stand out more from the crowd and he’d bring in more supporters who are not a part of the regular Republican rank-and-file, which described most of the supporters of his father had when he ran for the Republican Presidential nomination.

  241. Robert Capozzi

    a: You are the only person whom I am aware of who thinks that Ron Paul’s comments about the Civil War cost him votes.

    me: It’s hard to say. His statements on the Civil War and the revelations about the hate in his newsletters may have gotten him some net votes in the primaries, for all I know. He may well have attracted more haters to vote IN THE PRIMARIES, which are generally quite low turn-out affairs. He may have attracted other non-haters who are simply angry and disaffected. And he surely got some of the 1% L voters to vote in the R primaries, too.

    What he never did was come close to getting the nomination. His candidacy was more of a soapbox than a serious campaign, IMO.

    a: It is true that Rand is running in a more crowded field, however, if he took a more radically libertarian approach like his father did, Rand would stand out more from the crowd and he’d bring in more supporters who are not a part of the regular Republican rank-and-file, which described most of the supporters of his father had when he ran for the Republican Presidential nomination.

    me: I don’t disagree. RP1-ism, though, stood no chance of getting the nomination, nor would it in this cycle. I agree that I’d like to see RP2 running a different sort of campaign, both to win the nomination and to more properly align with what I think he really believes, which is RP1-ism significantly tweaked away from the extremism and hard-right haterism that RP1 either embraced or tacitly played footsie with.

  242. paulie

    The newsletters definitely hurt the momentum, regardless of how valid you think the criticism was. But because Ron was perceived as genuinely different and authentic he did get a lot of enthusiasm that Randal simply doesn’t get, and won’t if he keeps trying implausibly to appeal to the muddled middle, along with all the other Republican bit players trying to do the same thing. The people that do support him cite him being “libertarian” as their top reason for doing so. But he’s not libertarian enough to really inspire them like his dad did, so he’s sinking.

    Neither one of them can win the nomination, despite what some people keep thinking and saying. But Ron made a much bigger splash and made more of a difference to a lot more people in ways that did not involve actually getting the nomination just by running than Randal is on a trajectory to even come close to.

  243. Robert Capozzi

    pf: But Ron made a much bigger splash and made more of a difference to a lot more people in ways that did not involve actually getting the nomination just by running than Randal is on a trajectory to even come close to.

    me: The question in my mind was his splash bigger because of RP1’s ideological purity or was it more because he was more outrageous and quirky?

    I think of RP1 as more of a Thomas Paine figure, lighting brushfires but without the bandwidth to marshall that into something larger. For that, we needed someone more like Thomas Jefferson. Whether RP2 is like TJ or, perhaps, Benedict Arnold…time will tell.

    My lean is neither is neither, as I find orthodox L-ism half-baked though well intentioned.

    I hope I’m wrong.

    I wish GJ could be a TJ, but I’m not seeing it at the moment.

  244. paulie

    The question in my mind was his splash bigger because of RP1’s ideological purity or was it more because he was more outrageous and quirky?

    Some of both.

    I think of RP1 as more of a Thomas Paine figure, lighting brushfires but without the bandwidth to marshall that into something larger.

    That’s about right.

    For that, we needed someone more like Thomas Jefferson. Whether RP2 is like TJ or, perhaps, Benedict Arnold…time will tell.

    I’m inclined to conclude the latter.

  245. Andy Craig Post author

    I actually don’t have a problem with, and agree, that Rand would have been well-advised to be a little more moderate, a little more pragmatic, and a lot less paleo- than Ron was. That’s all well and good. The problem is that isn’t what he’s done, even though it’s the theory his defenders continue to cite. He hasn’t traded out Ron’s less-workable or less-viable policy positions and political strategies for something with broader appeal, instead he’s been busy “distancing” himself from the positions that were the core of Ron’s campaigns, and traded them for policy positions and political strategies that are both less effective and less popular.

  246. Robert Capozzi

    ac, yes, exactly.

    Let’s keep in mind: RP2 is a rookie. He’s been making rookie mistakes in judgment and positioning. He tends to whine when on national TV interviews.

  247. Robert Capozzi

    pf: I’m inclined to conclude the latter. (that RP2 is more of a Benedict Arnold.)

    me: You’ve been citing some dirty tricks he plays against the LP. If true, that seems way uncool to me, despite the fact that I believe the LP and its challenge to the non-existent cult of the omnipotent state is foundationally flawed.

    Be cool is the first rule.

  248. paulie

    But it’s not just the LP.

    Again see Wachtler, excerpted from http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/11/mark-wachtler-sen-rand-paul-no-friend-of-the-opposition/

    Rand Paul attacks independent journalists

    Immediately after Sen Paul’s endorsement of Mitt Romney over his father Ron Paul, two independent journalists asked the Senator the question no establishment news outlet dared to ask – how could you endorse Mitt Romney over your own father? For the crime of not following the Capitol Hill propaganda protocol, those two journalists were accused by Rand Paul of criminally harassing him, leading to interrogations by everyone from the Capitol Hill Police to the FBI to a collection of Washington DC media bureau chiefs.

    Those two journalists – Abby Martin of RT News and Media Roots, and Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change – were the two unfortunate reporters who dared to ask that question and were now suffering the wrath of Rand Paul and the GOP establishment. They are legitimate reporters, they had proper credentials and press passes, and they had every right to be at the Capitol and ask that question. But none of it mattered. Read the 2012 report from our sister publication Whiteout Press for further details, ‘Rand Paul uses new Friends to terrorize Indy Media’.

    To take just one example.

  249. Andy Craig Post author

    It’s also worth keeping in mind: even if Rand holds even with Ron’s 2012 performance (and that’s looking increasingly unlikely)- then that would mean getting 10% of the total primary popular vote, coming overall in 4th place, and not winning a single state (delegate selection shenanigans aside). And a lot of that he only got by being the last not-Romney still in the race when the later primaries rolled around.

    Could Ron have won Iowa if he’d done a little better? Maybe. It was a pretty close 3rd and he had been in the lead going into the final stretch. And if he had, it wouldn’t have gotten him any closer to being the nominee than it did Huckabee or Santorum. He still would have lost NH, and been clobbered after that.

    To get anywhere close to winning the nomination, Rand wouldn’t just have to improve on Ron’s performance, he’d have to quadruple it or better. That was never in the cards, no matter what strategy he pursued.

  250. Robert Capozzi

    My guess is that RP2 is running NOT for 2016, but for 2020 or 2024. He’s establishing his brand, and frankly as a rookie his national profile has grown quite quickly, compared with other pols. He’s not a backbencher like RP1 was for decades. He’s a player. Part of what he’s doing, I suspect, in this cycle is to distance himself from his Dad’s extremism and fringiness.

    He’s accomplished that. I think he could have done a BETTER job, though. And some of the sleazy things he’s done remind me of the worst of the RP legacy.

  251. Robert Capozzi

    ac: That was never in the cards, no matter what strategy he pursued.

    me: I dunno. A really, really skilled communicator might be able to make the dove case, which I find compelling, given the failures of Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, RP2 has been afraid to go there.

    And it was a great set-up, especially with Graham being such a weak personality. Graham as hit man is pretty laughable, if you step back and look at who he is and what he represents. Talk about a chickenhawk! A “veteran” who pushed legal pencils!

    RP2 could have doubled down on the peace angle, which is the practical position. Instead he’s attempting to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

  252. Andy

    The biggest accomplishment of Ron Paul 2008 and 2012 was not in vote totals or delegate counts, it was the large number of people that Ron Paul inspired to get involved in the liberty movement.

  253. robert capozzi

    How many? To what consequence? And to what extent do they not carry RP’s baggage?

  254. Andy

    Robert Cappozi’s questions in the post right above this illustrate how out of touch Cappozi is. If you came out from behind your computer screen more often and ventured out into the world, and you actually talked to people, you would not need to ask such questions.

  255. Jill Pyeatt

    I agree, Andy. Talking about Ron Paul and using the words “extremism” and “fringiness” pretty much tell his story.

  256. Andy

    Rand Paul was not afraid of independent media at all until after he was elected to the US Senate. This adds fuel to my speculation that he may have been threatened.

  257. Andy Craig Post author

    Do you really have to resort to blackmail and threats to explain why a Senator would be more hostile, controlling, and inaccessible to the media than a non-Senator?

    Like pf says, a lot of people just assume that Rand must really hold secret libertarian opinions, or at least those of his father, and so any deviation from that has to be “explained” by either political expediency or, if you’re of a more conspiratorial mindset, threats and blackmail, etc.. I think it’s true that on some issues Rand’s personal opinion is more libertarian than he admits, but not nearly so much as those who judge his every statement against “the plumb-line” and assume the latter must be his “real” opinion. In this regard I actually give him a lot more credit for honesty than most of his supposed defenders do. When he says he wants to build more Tomahawks or maintain Iran sanctions or not close Gitmo or maintain bans on SSM or force cities to help deport more Mexicans, I think he more-or-less does believe the rationalizations he gives for those positions.

  258. Andy

    It could be for a variety of reasons. That is why I said I was speculating. Also, my speculation was that he may have been threatened, which is not necessarily the same as being blackmailed.

  259. Pingback: When Unlimited Ambition Meets Endless Gall… | freewillobjector

  260. Mark Axinn

    >We’ve had millions of Muslims living in this country for years without problems.

    Jill, I had a problem with a Muslim gentleman just tonight. My favorite fruit stand guy, Abdul, did not have onions and we really wanted to buy some.

    You know, the guy works 12 hours a day outdoors, you think he could have the onions I want. Maybe he should be deported.

    Paulie–I guess I should move that last comment to one of the Trump threads, right?

  261. Robert Capozzi

    a: Robert Cappozi’s questions in the post right above this illustrate how out of touch Cappozi is. If you came out from behind your computer screen more often and ventured out into the world, and you actually talked to people, you would not need to ask such questions.

    jp: I agree, Andy. Talking about Ron Paul and using the words “extremism” and “fringiness” pretty much tell his story.

    me: In my experience speaking with people, I find most don’t find RP1’s views to be widely held. You two may find otherwise.

    Given that our country is generally not Paulian politically, I’d say the preponderance of the evidence is on my side.

  262. Andy

    Robert Capozzi said: “me: In my experience speaking with people, I find most don’t find RP1’s views to be widely held. You two may find otherwise.”

    Neither are most of anyone’s views who is not a mainstream Democrat or mainstream Republican widely held.

    Having said this, Ron Paul built a pretty large following, and this following came from a lot of different backgrounds.

    I say this as a person who has spoken to thousands of people all over the country, and as somebody who attended numerous Ron Paul meet ups, Campaign for Liberty meetings, Young Americans for Liberty meetings, and Ron Paul speeches.

  263. Andy

    Andrew Napolitano says that Rand Paul is a hardcore libertarian. I’m not saying that he is right, wrong, or somewhere in the middle on this, I am just posting this for the purpose of adding to the discussion.

    Anarchast Ep. 207 Judge Napolitano: A Rothbardian Anarchist on Rand Paul and The Future of America!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPir7zNmclM

  264. Robert Capozzi

    A: I say this as a person who has spoken to thousands of people all over the country, and as somebody who attended numerous Ron Paul meet ups, Campaign for Liberty meetings, Young Americans for Liberty meetings, and Ron Paul speeches.

    ME: Yes, RP1 had somewhat of a cult following. Like the LP itself, it has some basic flaws at the root that I suspect it will fizzle, and probably is already receding.

    a: Andrew Napolitano says that Rand Paul is a hardcore libertarian. I’m not saying that he is right, wrong, or somewhere in the middle on this, I am just posting this for the purpose of adding to the discussion.

    me: And yet there are so many things about this that don’t work. AN is not really an “anarchist,” though he plays footsie with them. RP2 not only says he’s not L, he’s certainly not hardcore L. Unless, of course, he is SECRETLY L and is playing the Trojan Horse. And since when should we defer our opinion’s to authority figures?

  265. Andy

    Chuck Moulton said: “Here is another simplification of what Andy keeps writing, highlighting a different issue:
    A petitioner did a bad job and he was a “mercenary petitioner”. Therefore, he did a bad job because he is a “mercenary petitioner”, not a Libertarian petitioner.”

    This is not a logical fallacy, it is a pattern. I have been following LP ballot access very closely for the last 15 years, and EVERY time that there has been a big problem with validity, mercenary petitioners have been the source of the problem. Mercenary petitioners have also been the ones who have gone out and misrepresented the LP to the public as well, and this is in many ways just as destructive as getting low validity.

    Does this mean that mercenary petitioners always do a bad job? No. There are some mercenaries who pitch the petitions properly, and who bring in decent rates of validity, but even in these cases I still favor actual Libertarians over mercenaries because even the best mercenary is not going to do much, if anything at all, to build the party beyond just gathering signatures.

    If ballot access drives were just about gathering signatures, I’d have quit doing it years ago. Libertarians are not just out there to gather signatures, we are out there to help build the party and the movement.

    There is also the point that hiring mercenaries rewards people who are unprincipled and are just as happy to work on anti-freedom causes as they are to work on pro-freedom causes, just so long as they are getting paid. Rewarding people like this with Libertarian work, which means donor money gets allocated to people who’d be just as happy to work against the Libertarian Party as they are to work for the Libertarian cause, fosters a perverse set of incentives, and it says that there are no consequences for actions.

    I am really astounded that there are people in the Libertarian Party who think that having non-libertarian mercenaries out on the street talking to the public is the best way to do ballot access, when all of the facts show otherwise.

  266. Andy

    Let’s say Chuck runs for office as an LP candidate, and somebody who does not want him on the ballot hires a crew of mercenaries to act as petition blockers, that is that they get paid to harass Chuck while he, or anyone else that is on his team, are out trying to gather petition signatures so Chuck can be on the ballot. If the merc crew sees Chuck or one of his petitioners in the field, they jump in front of him and shout, to scare away potential signers, and they hand out flyers urging people to not sign, and the flyers contain exaggerations, and out right lies about Chuck. The mercs also call in false complaints to venue managers and the police about Chuck and his petitioners, with the intent of getting them kicked out of locations so they can’t get their petition to get Chuck on the ballot signed.

    Should the Libertarian Party hire the mercs who worked as blockers against Chuck Moulton in the future, or should there be no consequences for actions?

    Should the mercs who blocked Chuck Moulton at the very least have their names put at the bottom of the “to hire” list, as in the LP should only call them if it is an emergency and the party could not find anyone else last minute, or should the mercs who blocked Chuck Moulton be placed on top of the Libertarian Party’s “to hire” list?

  267. Andy

    Last phrase in 2nd paragraph of above post should read, “should there be consequences for actions?”

  268. Jill Pyeatt

    I’ve been asked who someone can report to at the LP, who has been on the receiving side of one of these calls?

  269. Andy

    Somebody should record phone call from a Rand Paul fundraiser who claims that the LP has endorsed Rand, and post the recording online.

  270. paulie

    I’ve been asked who someone can report to at the LP, who has been on the receiving side of one of these calls?

    Please have them report to us too. I’d like more testimony from those willing to go on the record.

    Somebody should record phone call from a Rand Paul fundraiser who claims that the LP has endorsed Rand, and post the recording online.

    Yes, but the chances of that happening are much lower than of getting more people come forward and testify to it.

  271. Thane Eichenauer

    An unfortunate end note to the Rand Paul for President 2016 campaign.

    “Anti-debt crusader Rand Paul has more than $300G in unpaid bills”
    Read more by searching the New York Daily News or any fine search engine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *