Starchild: Volunteering for Ron Paul in Iowa

 
Written for IPR by Starchild at the request of  Jill Pyeatt
 

A couple days after Christmas, I went to Iowa to help Ron Paul’s presidential campaign in the lead-up to the Iowa caucuses. I’d never been there before, and I like traveling, but mainly it was just something I felt like I needed to do; that how well Ron Paul did in that caucus could be a real game changer. And I confess it was a downer that he didn’t take first place, even though he made an excellent showing. But overall it was a positive experience, and I think I did some good. I was surprised however at how disorganized the operation appeared to be, especially given that the media was reporting (as seemed to be true) that Ron Paul had the most extensive ground campaign in the state.

Even before I left, I was trying to find the answers to three important questions — Where should I go in Iowa in order to do the campaign the most good, where should I plan on being on caucus night to speak on behalf of Ron Paul, and where could I sleep during my trip (either at the homes of local supporters, in accommodations obtained by the campaign, etc.) I brought a sleeping bag so that I could crash on the floor of a campaign office or something if needed. I never really was able to get answers to these questions, although I did end up finding free places to stay all but two nights (one of which was sort of my own “fault” as I misread my departure time and missed my return flight out of Chicago, necessitating staying in a motel there an extra night).

I didn’t see a lot of organized precinct-walking. People were doing a lot more phone calling. It was winter in Iowa, after all — though not nearly as cold as I’d been afraid it would be. Some of the activists almost seemed to think I was a little nuts for wanting to spend my time out on the streets putting up fliers and stickers and such. But I’d flown out from California, dammit, and I wasn’t just going to sit in an office making phone calls when I could do that from home! I wanted to go out and be visible and talk to people. Actually I think I spent about as much time driving around as out campaigning on foot, but with my rental car decked out with Ron Paul yard signs in the windows and a “rEVOLution” sticker prominently affixed to the bumper, that didn’t really seem like a waste of time. And it let me see a bit of the state.

I had brought with me some copies of a flier I’d made from the Blue Republicans essay ( Huffington Post ), and was able to make some more copies at the Ron Paul grassroots office in Davenport. This is probably the best written material I’ve seen for convincing people on the left to consider Ron Paul, and my goal was to put it up in liberal-leaning parts of the state. Along with Davi Barker’s “24 Types of Authoritarians” cartoon (see attachment), which wasn’t specifically campaign-related, but is one of my favorite pieces of outreach material and something that everyone should see and grok.

Iowa City, the place I drove to initial my first stay-over in Davenport, turned out to be an excellent area for this mission. It’s a college town with a fairly extensive downtown shopping area, lots of little shops and restaurants, definitely a bit more character and alternative/bohemian flavor than the strip malls and big box stores evident in many parts of Iowa which could be pretty much interchangeable with similar strip malls and big box stores in any other state. To give mainstream corporate conformity its due, the pedestrian-friendly downtown Iowa City scene could have been transplanted from pretty much just about any college town in the country too, but to make a perfectly valid generalization, the long-established haunts of university students are to typical suburban sprawl as a hand-painted coffee mug is to a styrofoam cup, or a delicious creation from Ike’s Sandwich shop down the block from me is to a Big Mac. These truths are no less self-evident than those cited in the Declaration of Independence, and I firmly believe that history will one day shake its head in wonder at the cultural ostriches of our era.

But you are no doubt eager to hear about the actual caucuses, and I digress. The place I ended up caucusing was a little town called Hedrick, in Keokue County. It wasn’t until the day of the caucuses, calling around and trying to find a precinct where they didn’t have someone prepared to speak, that this location was recommended to me. I’d been doing get-out-the-vote stuff in the Fairfield area, a relative libertarian hotbed (Jefferson County, of which Fairfield is the major town, was the only county in Iowa that Ron Paul won in 2008), and they had their precincts pretty well covered. So I drove up to Hedrick, but when I got there it turned out there was a local woman prepared to speak on Dr. Paul’s behalf after all, so I didn’t end up giving a speech for him. It wasn’t a wash however, as I did coax two RP supporters into volunteering as delegates who I think probably would not have done so otherwise.

The caucus process itself, at least where I witnessed it, was a bit disappointing (although even what it was still made me jealous as a Californian where we don’t get to caucus at all). Only three candidates (Paul, Santorum, and Bachmann) had people speaking for them, and as soon as those speeches concluded, the voting began. I’d expected more time for people to discuss the merits of the candidates with each other, but there was very little opportunity for that. Although I understand that the process varies considerably from precinct to precinct, and some people I talked to went to caucuses where people were more engaged. At the Hedrick precinct there were 41 voters, and Santorum ran away with the bulk of their support, garnering 19 votes. Paul and Gingrich were tied for second with 8 votes each; Bachmann got 4, Perry 2, and Romney, interestingly, got none. If only South Carolina voters could be so accommodating!

After the voting, the Hedrick townsfolk chose delegates, and the chair had to practically beg people in order to get enough volunteers to fill out the 8-person delegation they were entitled to submit. That was eventually accomplished, but I think only 2 of 4 alternate slots got filled. Then they took suggestions for changing the Republican Party platform. This process was really disappointing. In the LP, of course, we look at the existing platform and debate and iron out the language of actual plank changes. In Hedrick, there were not copies of the existing platform on hand, and people proposed only broad suggestions, like “Require term limits for Congress”, “End birthright citizenship”, etc. There was no voting; people just called out their ideas, and the two dozen or so suggestions were written down on a list, purportedly to be forwarded along with the delegation, to the state convention.

On the bright side of this procedural informality, no one objected to my contributing three ideas to the list — one was “Equal ballot access rules for all political parties”. 🙂 The other two were to have the platform endorse a couple excellent pieces of legislation listed on the website of the libertarian non-profit Downsize DC the “Read The Bills Act” and the “One Subject At A Time Act”. This was the most specific that any of the platform suggestions got.

Another notable thing about the Iowa effort was that the official Ron Paul campaign only had one office, near Des Moines in the center of the state. I never actually made it to that office, and in fact a person I spoke with there did not seem very interested in wanting people to come help, let alone being able to try to answer any of the questions I had (see above) and suggested I try contacting the grassroots folks instead. Which is probably just as well. Paid campaign staffers who have been given any significant level of responsibility tend, in my experience, to behave like fearful, over-protective mothers and are a drag to work with.

Grassroots supporters, meanwhile, had opened at least four additional offices on their own, and had a generally more welcoming vibe. I spent time at three of those offices, in Fairfield, Davenport, and Iowa City. In Iowa City I ran into Richard Campagna, our 2004 vice-presidential candidate, and in Fairfield I stayed at Roger Leahy’s place. Roger has been a very generous supporter of Dr. Paul, and was no less generous toward me, giving me the run of his charming guesthouse for three nights! I don’t recall physically meeting any other people who were specifically Libertarian that I was aware of, but most of the RP supporters seemed fairly libertarian, from what I could gather. There were several other active Libertarians in Fairfield who I somehow never managed to run into, including Clyde Cleveland who ran for Congress on the LP ticket.

I did have a great conversation at the 2nd Street Coffee House (the place to eat if you’re in Fairfield, imho!) with a couple guys from local radio station KRUU — thoughtful liberals who had some reservations about Ron Paul, but were friendly and invited me to be a radio guest sometime. So gotta follow up with that!

 Starchild is a long-time Libertarian activist from San Francisco.  Ron Paul is currently running  for President as a Republican, but he was the LP’s candidate in 1988.  There continues to be discussion in the media that Dr. Paul might go third party if he doesn’t get the Republican nomination.
 

69 thoughts on “Starchild: Volunteering for Ron Paul in Iowa

  1. Starchild

    In fairness to the Republicans, the Libertarian Party does not generally debate its state platform at the *local* level, so I may have been a bit too hard on the Iowa Republicans for not proposing detailed state platform suggestions at their Hedrick precinct caucus. Hopefully their state delegates would be voting on actual, detailed plank language (not that I’m asserting any great confidence of that fact).

    One positive indicator I forgot to mention was that I saw while in Iowa probably at least a couple dozen Ron Paul signs on people’s yards, by the side of the road and such, but if I recall correctly not a single one for any other candidate with the exception I think of one for Gingrich inside a business.

    After the caucus by the way, I got an email about CNN and Fox exit polls allegedly having reported higher totals for Ron Paul than he ended up receiving in the official tally. Has anyone else heard anything further about this or anything else that might raise suspicions about the count?

    I’m not suggesting that there *was* fraud, or if there was, that there would likely be much that could be done about it now, unless a smoking gun were to emerge. But we definitely need more transparency in the whole voting process, and as long as there’s not transparency, circumstances that don’t quite add up (like exit polls that differ from results) deserve to be looked at.

    Some of us in Iowa were speculating beforehand that polls might be *underestimating* Ron Paul’s support, if they were being taken of “likely GOP caucus goers”, since Paul is more likely than other candidates to attract independents and Democrats who *don’t* normally caucus with the GOP.

    Perhaps this was simply a mistaken guess on our part, just something else to take into consideration. Two polls by the PPP had showed Ron Paul at the end of December having held a steady lead for 10 days — http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/28/iowa-caucus-2012-ron-paul-poll_n_1172411.html — but after that, a Des Moines Register poll reported Romney leading with Santorum rapidly gaining — http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-11/romney-leads-in-iowa-poll-as-santorum-gains-before-state-caucus.html

  2. George Whitfield

    Starchild, you did a great job. Thank you for your effort and your article. Best wishes for a Happy Lunar New Year of the Dragon!

  3. Starchild

    Oh, and thanks, Jake, for your kind words! I forgot to give Jill the “24 Types of Authoritarians” cartoon to include with the piece — here it is (if I do this right):

  4. paulie

    Great job Starchild!

    After the caucus by the way, I got an email about CNN and Fox exit polls allegedly having reported higher totals for Ron Paul than he ended up receiving in the official tally. Has anyone else heard anything further about this or anything else that might raise suspicions about the count?

    I’ve read about allegations of fraud.

    I’m not suggesting that there *was* fraud, or if there was, that there would likely be much that could be done about it now, unless a smoking gun were to emerge. But we definitely need more transparency in the whole voting process, and as long as there’s not transparency, circumstances that don’t quite add up (like exit polls that differ from results) deserve to be looked at.

    Agreed.

  5. paulie

    Perhaps this was simply a mistaken guess on our part, just something else to take into consideration. Two polls by the PPP had showed Ron Paul at the end of December having held a steady lead for 10 days — http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/28/iowa-caucus-2012-ron-paul-poll_n_1172411.html — but after that, a Des Moines Register poll reported Romney leading with Santorum rapidly gaining — http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-11/romney-leads-in-iowa-poll-as-santorum-gains-before-state-caucus.html

    From making calls to Iowa voters, it seemed to me that in the last few days some of the newslettergate muck did sway some softcore supporters away from Paul. Not the hardcore Ron Paul supporters obvihously, but those softcore supporters (plus some possible vote fraud) may have made the difference between first and third.

    Did you get the same impression from talking to Iowans when you were there?

    I also got the sense that the overemphasis on phone calls may have been annoying more people than it was swaying. I had quite a few people complain about being called repeatedly.

    The lack of a door to door effort that you report is a huge blunder by the campaign.

    On the other hand, the Iowa effort this time was orders of magnitude better than last time, when the get out the vote database got sabotaged at the last minute and no backup copies of the database were made (d’oh!)

    As I understand it the good weather worked against Ron Paul’s higher enthusiasm factor.

  6. paulie

    Okay, I forgot how to post images here. Can someone please remind me?

    It seems that someone removed you from the list of IPR writers.

    I don’t know why, and it was not discussed with the group.

    I’d like to add you back, if it’s OK with Trent, but you have to remember not to post your own editorials – just let someone else do it like Jill did this time.

  7. Chuck Moulton

    Paulie wrote (@9):

    I also got the sense that the overemphasis on phone calls may have been annoying more people than it was swaying. I had quite a few people complain about being called repeatedly.

    At the Ron Paul meetups around here a few people went to Iowa and New Hampshire. They detailed problems in both places, but especially New Hampshire.

    Apparently Ron Paul’s get out the vote software had a mechanism to make sure people weren’t called repeatedly, but it was consciously turned off by the coordinators. In New Hampshire they checked the precincts to find out who had not yet voted, matched that with lists of known supporters, and called them reminding them to get to the polls. In other words the people called had already verbally committed to vote for Ron Paul. Unfortunately there many of them were called by over 20 different Ron Paul callers in the space of 3 hours (20 phone calls to 1 person was not an exaggeration… it was the norm) and they were understandably sick of the phone calls. A common reaction was to say they may have been Ron Paul supporters before, but now were so annoyed that they would vote for anyone else.

    Many of the volunteers on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire said they would not be calling for Ron Paul again unless this was fixed in subsequent states.

    Ron Paul has lots of volunteers; however, as long as the operation keeps making stupid amateur mistakes the revolution is throwing away (alienating) potential votes.

  8. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Starchild, send me the link to the cartoon and I’ll add it as an update.

  9. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Starchild, I thought about myself getting on a plane alone, renting a car, and heading out to an unknown state to provide some help. I don’t think I could do it. Congratulations for being the change you’d like to see!

  10. paulie

    Starchild,

    you should be able to post images now

    [img src=”url of image goes here”]

    replace square brackets with angle brackets

  11. D. Lou Shenoll

    The national and local media and even the IA Gov. was unleased on Dr.Paul the final week. Everything and I mean everything was negative. IMO his third was probably the best that could be hoped for with such negative coverage.

    His second in NH should have propelled him into a one on one with Romney (if all was equal, which it isn’t) but the media has reverted to a silent treatment in SC. Check for yourselves. R,G, & S are all covered heavily in these final hours while Dr. Paul receives little if any attention.

    In the larger states it is almost all media driven. Paid Ads can help but the “free” media really matters too (sadly we know Dr.Paul receives little help there). The grassroots will still matter in caucus states. The next is NV. So don’t expect much tomorrow or in FL. Hopefully with strong grassroot support Dr. Paul can get back to the Top in NV !

    Ron Paul Super Brochure Now Mailing To South Carolina! {should be FL and NV also}

    http://www.ronpaulbrochure.com/sc_choose_county.php Only a few thousand so
    far, but I think we can get to the top of the thermometer!

    The Ron Paul Super Brochure is a grassroots project that is spearheaded by CurtSchultz and ronpaulproducts.com as an end run around the Ron Paul MSM media blackout. The plan is to print 10 million brochures to get information about Ron Paul directly into the hands of voters. You can help by ordering brochures to pass out ($70 for 1,000) and/or, go to Ron Paul Products and select from the precinct list where you would like them to be mailed, and it will be done for you!

    Please check out this video for more information, and help spread the word!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Y9O9AinV0&feature=youtu.be

    Get your own supply of Super Brochures at http://www.ronpaulproducts.com/
    (941)962-7660

    To Victory! Ron Paul 2012!

    ***Dr.Paul’s best vote totals in the entire 2008 Primaries were in a FL precinct in which a guy walked the entire precinct knocking on each door handing out Ron Paul Literature and asking the people to vote for Dr. Paul! Walking a precinct is good exercise and it WORKS, females should work in pairs or more. If you don’t have the time to walk a neighborhood the best places to place pamphlets are in waiting rooms (Doctors, Dentist, Hospitals, Auto repair centers, etc., etc.). Just have FUN and know every vote you help get for Dr. Paul is one more step to a BETTER future for ALL !!! Thank you in advance for all you do for RonPaul2012

  12. Starchild

    Thanks, guys! Not time now to respond to everything (am due to be picked up in a couple minutes), but here’s the “24 Types Of Authoritarians” cartoon:

  13. starchild

    Hmm… you know when you’re struggling to make something work, and then suddenly the resistance gives, and it works *too* well? 🙂

  14. starchild

    Hopefully someone can figure out, or tell me how to make the cartoon show up the proper size. [Thanks, Paulie, for getting my IPR contributor status fixed!] Will try to remember the rule about not posting my own stuff.

  15. Starchild

    Yes, thanks again Paulie!

    Jill, feel free to re-add the cartoon in another fashion if you wish — I just thought it would be best to get it posted here sooner rather than later. Oh, and not a huge deal, but “San Francisco” is misspelled in the bio you included at the end of my article; also the slash mark between “third” and “party” looks like it may have been accidental.

    Paulie @9 – I can’t really say that there wasn’t a door-to-door effort by the Ron Paul campaign or grassroots supporters in Iowa, only that I didn’t see much evidence of this being done. Keep in mind I was only there for a week or so right before the caucuses, and only in a few parts of the state, thus getting only a very incomplete snapshot of what was going on.

    I do think there needs to be more attention paid to not having people called multiple times. One Iowan I personally spoke with when making calls before I went to Iowa told me that she’d already been called seven times.

    In general I thought the grassroots calling site http://www.RP2012.org was well set up, but like the official site it could have been improved by adding a blank field in which volunteers could add notes to be read by subsequent callers. This could help reduce the incidence of unwanted calls, people being asked the same questions multiple times, people having their names mispronounced, etc.

    Of course this only works if callers are generally working from the same database or databases are coordinated — something complicated by rules against “coordination” between official campaigns and PACS or other independent groups.

    There are privacy/civil liberties concerns about including too much information in a voter’s file, too, especially if a database were to be retained after the campaign.

    My best guess is that the phone calls helped more than they hurt, but how to best manage such an effort effectively and with proper respect and consideration for people being called, definitely poses something of a dilemma.

    I am certainly against “robocalls” and other forms of impersonal mass contact (mass emails sent from no-reply addresses, etc.). Even auto-dialing is a no-no in my book. When I answer the phone and somebody takes a few moments to come on the line because they’ve been using an auto-dialer, I usually end the call after explaining to them that what an auto-dialer tells me is that the company calling me has made a deliberate decision to save themselves time at the cost of wasting mine. Even if it’s only a second or two, it’s the principle of the thing. Like a tax increase divided among huge numbers of people so that each taxpayer only pays an extra penny or two a year, those seconds add up!

  16. paulie

    I do know that there was some door to door, I know some people that went down to that in Sioux City. But it sounds like there could have bee a lot more.

    I was asking you more about whether you were seeing fallout from newslettergate being dredged up, which I heard on the phone more than any policy objection.

  17. Robert Capozzi

    25 p: I was asking you more about whether you were seeing fallout from newslettergate being dredged up…

    me: It appears that the stonewall has more or less worked. N’Gate 2.0 appeared to blunt RP’s ascent a week or 2 prior to IA, and now he’s once again not a threat, so the story seems dormant. If RP remains in the GOP nom. process, it seems he’ll just kinda glide along, making his points in the debates while MR and NG tussle. As of this morning, it’s looking like TK may be onto something. MR’s looking like he has a glass jaw.

    I really cannot imagine that the GOP leadership can allow NG to be their nominee. NG is WAY too much of a loose cannon, even for them. So, they’ll do all they can to keep things in flux for a brokered convention. This will allow RP to play teacher, which is all he wants, anyway.

    In some ways, I’d LOVE to see them nominate NG. Then the sane monied interests might rally for AE, which could make things VERY interesting indeed.

    Of course, who can central casting call for AE? Bloomberg is the obvious choice. I’d think they’d need someone like Powell, maybe Patreus.

    All quite fascinating, like a good horror film…

  18. Robert Capozzi

    more…

    Mitch Daniels is a name one hears a lot as the Rs brokered convention choice. As Rs go, aside from RP, that would be a root-able outcome.

    Andy, however, might have a brain aneurysm. Daniels got a state-sanctioned marriage to the same woman twice. 😉

  19. Just Wondering

    Starchild,
    As an elected member of Libertarian Party of California Executive Committee, is there a conflict of interest with you working for a candidate that is seeking “The Republican” nomination for President.

    I was just wondering!

    Bylaw 10: Officers

    Section 2
    No state offices shall be combined. No state officer shall:

    B. Use any office in the Party to support a candidate of another political party.

  20. paulie

    JW

    He’s not using his party office to support a candidate. He’s going off as an individual to a different state where he is not an exec comm to do something in which he is not using his LP title to do anything whatsoever.

    RC,

    Thanks for answering but I was interested in what people on the ground observed and whether it jibed with what I was hearing from folks on the phone.

  21. paulie

    MR’s looking like he has a glass jaw.

    I really cannot imagine that the GOP leadership can allow NG to be their nominee. NG is WAY too much of a loose cannon, even for them. So, they’ll do all they can to keep things in flux for a brokered convention.

    Could be the real story behind Americans Elect.

    It may be that Romney’s friends knew he had a tax “issue” and Newt will in fact get the nomination. I don’t think there will be a brokered convention. Romney’s votes go AE.

    That would explain why a Romney crony like Dan Winslow would be involved with AE.

  22. paulie

    BTW, my read is that it was the tax issue that caused Gingrich to win in SC.

    I don’t think the attack on Bain connected with Republicans. Democrats and independents may be a different story.

    Romney blubbered when the tax release question has been raised in successive debates. The excuse that he is waiting until he does this year’s taxes doesn’t fly; it’s blindingly obvious that he could just release past years right now.

    The reply that he doesn’t want to give Obama’s opposition research team a head start doesn’t hold either. It only reinforces the impression that it will be damaging in a general election. And how much time would it take for Obama’s team to develop an attack.

    So long as he does not release his taxes it is the boogeyman in the dark.

    Unless there is something really horendous there, he would be better off releasing them ASAP. The fact
    that he hasn’t makes everyone think there is something really bad that he is hiding, which undercuts his one strength – the perception that he would be more electable than Gingrich or other candidates.

  23. Starchild

    “Just Wondering” @28 – What Paulie said @29 pretty much addresses the bylaws point you raise.

    That issue aside, I think I’ve been very clear that my loyalty is to the libertarian movement and the ideas for which it stands (i.e. the Non-Aggression Principle), and not to any specific institution.

    Right now I see supporting Ron Paul in his efforts to win the GOP nomination as a good way to spread our ideas and advance our movement, so I make no apologies for doing so.

    Paulie @25 – I’ve seen a fair amount about the newsletter issue online — it’s one of the major issues if not the major issue brought up by those on the left who oppose Ron Paul.

    I didn’t really hear about it in Iowa though. Admittedly the number of folks I spoke with was small and quite possibly not representative, but I believe the main objections I heard were related to foreign policy or other permutations on the general theme that Paul is not “conservative” enough.

  24. Starchild

    The main objection I heard from people who seemed to lean to the left was that they simply were not going to vote Republican, period — though few seemed enthused about supporting Obama. Some appeared to dismiss all the GOP candidates as kooks or what-not, without bothering to distinguish among them.

  25. paulie

    As far as the NSGOP race shaping up,

    Good news for Gingrich is bad news for Paul.

    I could see an outside possibility of Rand Paul as VP for Romney. No such opening with Gingrich.

    Also, the SC results mean the race stays competitive longer. That’s bad news for Paul because it means voters for other candidates keep showing up to vote in greater numbers to vote against each other.

    If it had boiled down fairly quickly to Mitt vs Ron as looked likely a week ago (kudos to Knapp for being ahead of the curve), Paul would be picking up more delegates since stopping Paul would just not motivate a lot of lukewarm Romney supporters from getting off the couch to vote.

    As it stands now, not as much.

    It will be a dirty slugfest between Nut and Mutt for a while.

  26. paulie

    Silver lining for Paul is debates go on longer.

    I don’t think Romney would have kept debating Paul one on one.

    Good news for the LP is that this marginally increases the possibility Paul goes LP. I’m still betting against that though.

  27. Just Wondering

    The “Sore Loser Laws” in many states will prevent Ron Paul from running as independent or 3rd Party Candidate. A 3rd party run would also hurt Rand Paul chances of seeking The GOP Nomination in future. Ron Paul WILL NOT seek the Libertarian Party Nomination.

    As South Carolina has illustrated, RP support in closed Republican Primaries is around 12-17%. In states where Democrats and Independents can cross over and vote in GOP primaries his support can rise to 20-25%. But that won’t be enough to win the nomination. But Ron Paul will win enough delegates to be a power broker at The GOP Convention. This will be even more important if no one has won a clear majority of the delegates prior to convention. Don’t be surprised if you see Ron Paul and C4L start floating the idea of Rand Paul for VP.

    Would that be enough to keep The Paulbots voting for The GOP nominee? Gingrich & Rand Paul or Romney and Rand Paul? With The Good Doctor’s endorsement of of course. So, Starchild, would you support The GOP ticket with Rand Paul in the #2 slot over Gary Johnson with The LP Nomination?

    Just Wondering! 😉

  28. paulie

    source site https://nyusternldp.blogs.stern.nyu.edu/how-to-print-an-email-from-iphone-5/ follow 7 page research paper business plan online marketing cialis online bestellen erfahrungen forum cialis sur internet see url http://www.naymz.com/creative-writing-jobs-berlin/ go to link essay on why you choose a college technical writing research papers buy viagra in canada order clomid visa define personal essay ventolin uses https://caberfaepeaks.com/school/homework-help-pens/27/ legitimate essay writing company does over the counter viagra work dissertation writing services usa click https://campcorral.org/help/free-physics-homework-help/12/ phd thesis acknowledgements http://www.chesszone.org/lib/dissertation-embargo-3141.html thesis yoga follow site how to delete email on iphone xr generic viagra buy online persuasive essay example about bullying good objective for resume for banking cialis purchase in uk nolvadex and gyno The “Sore Loser Laws” in many states will prevent Ron Paul from running as independent or 3rd Party Candidate.

    No, not in any state. Sore loser laws do not apply to presidential candidates. That is according to Richard Winger, and he would know.

    A 3rd party run would also hurt Rand Paul chances of seeking The GOP Nomination in future.

    That’s a better argument.

    You are probably correct. But, it’s possible that the Republicans could go the way of the Whigs this year, or that civilization and the pretense of free elections could be gone by 2016, so maybe the Pauls will go all in on that this year.

    Possible, but highly unlikely.

    Don’t be surprised if you see Ron Paul and C4L start floating the idea of Rand Paul for VP.

    I’ve been predicting that one for a while, and I can see Romney possibly taking that deal. Gingrich, not so much.

    I don’t know about Starchild, but I would certainly support Johnson over Romney regardless who Romney’s VP is.

  29. Robert Capozzi

    36 p: Good news for the LP is that this marginally increases the possibility Paul goes LP. I’m still betting against that though.

    me: Why so? I’d think the opposite. That NG and RS remain in the race means it’s still a race, one that RP can stay in and keep putting out his message in the debates. If MR had won and went on to win FL, likely that NG and RS would drop out, leaving RP as a sideshow against MR, the presumed nominee.

    IF the GOP doesn’t select until their convention, then RP has every incentive to stay GOP, where he might even force Rand onto the ticket in exchange for his delegates.

  30. paulie

    When I say Republicans go the way of the Whigs, try this scenario:

    Suppose you are right and Paul is angling for a VP spot for Rand with Romney.

    Now, suppose the fight between Gingrich and Romney gets extremely vicious and protracted. In the past, we have seen the parties put out the flames after such fights – Clinton and Obama, Bush and Reagan.
    It looks like the Republicans will have another such slugfest this year.

    Now, let’s say they fail to reconcile.

    Let’s say Gingrich whips Romney decisively and Paul’s delegates are not enough to get Romney over the top. Now, let’s say Gingrich is a vindictive prick and offers Romney nothing – no VP, no cabinet spot, nothing.

    At this point is a two time back to back loser and probably has no future in the NSGOP.

    But, we know that this year Americans Elect will be on the ballot. Americans Elect board is stacked with Romney cronies and Romney is a gazillionaire. He takes his support to AE and takes their nomination. Basically, he may be too moderate for the NSGOP; he plays a Reagan Republican for them, but not convincingly.

    As AE, Romney flips back to moderate. Now we have a real 3-way race. At this point Paul could plausibly consider the Republicans to be irrevocably split apart and could take his supporters out and make it a real 4-way race (IE one where all four are at 15% or higher).

    Whether Paul does that or not Romney could have a path to victory under that scenario, triangulating between Obama and Gingrich. If it goes to the house, party discipline may not be enough to give it to Gingrich.

    Now, throw Paul into the mix and does he have a path to victory? As things stand probably not, but he builds a new major party in the new 4-party system.

    That creates a new path for Rand in 2016 or 2020.

  31. paulie

    Why so?

    Because Gingrich would not take Rand Paul as VP. Romney might; Gingrich won’t.

    I’d think the opposite. That NG and RS remain in the race means it’s still a race, one that RP can stay in and keep putting out his message in the debates.

    Covered that one @36. As I said it’s a silver lining, but not much of one, because the bigger factor is that
    motivated Gingrich and Romney voters work against Paul’s plans for picking off delegates.

    If MR had won and went on to win FL, likely that NG and RS would drop out, leaving RP as a sideshow against MR, the presumed nominee.

    Correct. But, since Romney’s voters would then have little enthusiasm to actually vote, Paul can pick up delegates more easily in that scenario.

    No, I don’ think Romney would keep debating him at that point.

  32. Starchild

    (Paulie) “I don’t know about Starchild, but I would certainly support Johnson over Romney regardless who Romney’s VP is.”

    Ditto.

  33. Robert Capozzi

    40 p: Americans Elect board is stacked with Romney cronies and Romney is a gazillionaire.

    me: Tantalizing factoid. Care to elaborate?

  34. paulie

    More generally, who would Wall Street types – you know, the folks funding AE – support, Romney or Gingrich?

    I’d say Romney, especially if he stops pretending to be a Reaganite. Being that he is not an actor by training, he’s not as convincing at it as Reagan himself was.

  35. Robert Capozzi

    40 p: Suppose you are right and Paul is angling for a VP spot for Rand with Romney.

    me: Actually, I only threw that out as a remote possibility, to be clear. I definitely cannot read RP’s mind. The last time I (sorta) tried to do so, I was incorrect, as I figgered he’d have a snappy answer for NewsletterGate 2.0, and he didn’t.

    He processes things quite differently than I do, and part of me says he knows what he’s doing and I don’t, since he’s a 12-term congressman and I’m just an obscure commenter on a somewhat obscure website.

    Still, he seems to be playing for maximizing delegates for the GOP, and all indications are he will stay in thru Tampa. If so, it appears that this is his comfort zone…to be the outsider on the inside, putting his message out there until the money runs out. He doesn’t seem to want to rock the boat TOO much, and I have to respect that.

    I happen to think he could facilitate Whiggifying the Rs, and I’d encourage that. It may happen anyway, and I’d LOVE to see that happen, but his role in that may be minor.

  36. paulie

    One more thing.

    To anyone who things a 2 or 3 way split of Republicans locks it down for Obama

    A) It’s more likely to send it to the House, where Republicans have an advantage

    B) Both Romney as AE and Paul as LP take bites out of Obama, too. Paul takes a chunk of the youth/antiwar/anticorporatist/civil liberties vote; Romney takes a chunk of the moderate vote that keeps swinging back between Democrats and Republicans. For that matter Gingrich could go economic populist, as he has already started doing, making a case to the remaining socially conservative Democrats as well as the economic populist Republicans (generally those whose social conservatism trumps their economic populism, many being former Democrats).

  37. paulie

    Well, I proposed the Rand VP scenario first in past threads and by “you’re right” I meant only in the scenario you put forth.

    I also don’t think it’s likely Romney would go for that, only that it’s possible.

  38. Robert Capozzi

    44, 45 p, thanks. OK, one of the board members seems connected to MR.

    But I get the impression you think the politics of Wall Street is monolithic. Yes, MR is “one of them,” but doesn’t mean that Wall St. is a cabal for Romney. Much of Wall St. is D, for ex.

    That said, I suspect the super-rich see that NG is a very dangerous person, possibly clinically insane. Stopping a clinically insane person from getting in the WH seems to be in everyone’s interest.

  39. paulie

    Robert,

    I know Wall Street is not monolithic. I used to deal coke to them, remember? Sometimes they hung out and talked while doing lines or even invited me to their parties.

    I’m using Wall Street as shorthand for those who want to maximize the interests of big business and the military-industrial complex and don’t care for either extreme in the culture wars.

    “That said, I suspect the super-rich see that NG is a very dangerous person, possibly clinically insane. Stopping a clinically insane person from getting in the WH seems to be in everyone’s interest.”

    Exactly.

  40. D. Lou Shenoll

    You guys forget something very important. Gingrich is also one of them or one of their puppets. He is an ultimate insider. Gingrich is not a former, but is a current (card-carrying) member of the Council On Foreign Relations, the Establishment’s “Insider Club” !

    He race baited those hick crackers in SC just like he will in North FL and all across the South, BECA– USE that is the gameplan. Record gun and ammo sales recently shows people are worried, Gingrich will live off that in the south and pockets of the midwest and far west. Romney’s money had me believing he would be the nominee and that should still be true. However who knows now, but the “ones” who buy these people.

    Federal Records Show Romney Campaign Bought And Paid For By Big Banks – http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2011/10/federal-records-show-romney-campaign-bought-and-paid-for-by-big-banks/
    Wall St. is also behind Obama. As they will shortly be behind Gingrich or Santorum whatever needs to be will be !

    Bill Hicks on Politics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXpdJLJqG9U&feature=related

    Under NO circumstance will Rand Paul be named the R VP in 2012. These people don’t want the Pauls and their ideas around, they only want their voters to shut up and get inline behind the R ticket or STAY HOME!

    “Only fools mistake politicians for messiahs.” – Kevin Barrett

    “Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” – Mayer Amschel Rothschild

    “I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, …The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply.” – Nathan Rothschild

    “There is but one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.” – Werner Sombart 1841, French Journalist

    “The Rothschilds have conquered the world more thoroughly, more cunningly, and much more lastingly than all the Caesars before…” – Author Frederic Morton

    “Who controls money controls the world.” – Henry Kissinger

    “Eighty percent of Americans think the country is on the wrong track, and a majority think Obama is doing a bad job. This is scarcely surprising since 30 million Americans are without work or work part-time.” – Alexander Cockburn
    https://www.lp.org/contribute
    carla.howell@lp.org.

  41. George Phillies

    Do I oppose slavery. Yes. Do I oppose the main reason for slavery, namely pedophile rape of 11 year old slave girls? Yes. Do I condemn folks who stand up in front of the holy banner of slaveholders and say nice things about them? Ayup.

    And most southerners did NOT support being kidnapped into the confederate states of America, because they were slaves or women or both, and not asked. Lincoln was stopping kidnapping of African American citizens, whether he had it figured out or not.

  42. just reading

    @48

    Romney might want Rand as VP as assassination insurance. Any murderous cabal unhappy with Romney would likely be even more unhappy with a Pres Paul.

  43. George Phillies

    However, as I watch the ship of state being backed up to ram the iceberg again, will I be surprised if I, like my maternal grandfather, were to see his country voluntarily decomposed into components? Not as much as I would have been 30 or 50 years ago.

  44. Darryl W. Perry

    Do I condemn folks who stand up in front of the holy banner of slaveholders and say nice things about them?
    So, you oppose politicians standing in front of the American flag? After all, NO slaves were brought into the Confederate States,much less on a boat flying the flag of the CSA – slaves WERE brought to the USA on ships flying the American flag.

    Lincoln was stopping kidnapping of African American citizens, whether he had it figured out or not.
    Lincoln supported kidnapping freed slaves and sending them to Africa against their will. Importation of slaves ended well before any State attempted to secede.

    btw, my question was about supporting secession, not supporting whether or not any person could own another person.

  45. paulie

    Why Gingrich would be ill advised to take Paul as a running mate, the man’s own words, as seen on a Conservative web site:

    Gingrich would never take Rand Paul as a running mate. Romney might take Rand, not Ron Paul, as a running mate, though the odds are against it.

  46. paulie

    If this is true it’s Romney or Paul or a very WILD convention.

    Not really. Delegates will be asked by party leadership to vote for the leading contender. All of them who are not Paul delegates will line up to combine against Paul. In no scenario does Paul win a brokered convention.

  47. paulie

    do you believe it was illegitimate/wrong for the 13 colonies to declare independence from the government of George III?

    Actually, I think Dr. Phillies answered your question:

    Do I oppose slavery. Yes.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism#United_Kingdom_and_the_British_Empire

    The last known form of enforced servitude of adults (villeinage) had disappeared in Britain at the beginning of the 17th century. But by the 18th century, traders began to import African and Indian and East Asian slaves to London and Edinburgh to work as personal servants. Men who migrated to the North American colonies often took their East Indian slaves or servants with them, as East Indians were documented in colonial records.[3][4] They were not bought or sold in London, and their legal status was unclear until 1772, when the case of a runaway slave named James Somersett forced a legal decision. The owner, Charles Steuart, had attempted to abduct him and send him to Jamaica to work on the sugar plantations. While in London, Somersett had been baptised and his godparents issued a writ of habeas corpus. As a result Lord Mansfield, Chief Justice of the Court of the King’s Bench, had to judge whether the abduction was legal or not under English Common Law, as there was no legislation that had established slavery in England.

    In his judgment of 22 June 1772 Mansfield declared: “Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from a decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged.”[5] Although the exact legal implications of the judgement are unclear when analysed by lawyers, it was generally taken at the time to have decided that the condition of slavery did not exist under English law in England.[6] While no authority could be applied to slaves entering English soil, the decision did not apply to other British territories.[7] The Somersett’s case became a significant part of the common law of slavery in the English-speaking world, and it helped launch the movement to abolish slavery.[8] After reading about the Somersett’s Case, Joseph Knight, an enslaved African in Scotland, left his master John Wedderburn. A similar case to Steuart’s was brought by Wedderburn in 1776, with the same result: the court ruled that chattel slavery did not exist under the law of Scotland.

    Clearly, the American Revolution was just a slaveholders rebellion, which, unfortunately, the rightful Monarch of the wayward colonies was unable to suppress.

    😛

  48. Steve

    Thanks for coming out to help us Starchild!

    Your assumption about platform debates is correct. Most people who come out on caucus night don’t care enough to get involved in the process. By the time of district and state conventions, there is a lot more discussion. Hopefully some of your planks will make it that far!

  49. Sic Rantorum

    Starchild for President offers a stimulus package that will bring home the troops and get this country moving.

  50. George Phillies

    @58 Baloney. They were several million of them, brought into the Confederacy when the slaveholders stole the land from under their feet and transported it into a new country.

  51. Robert Capozzi

    67 dwp, not speaking for GP, but my take is, first, I don’t believe the American Revolution was a “secession.” Second, it was illegal based on the laws of the time, I suspect. Third, I don’t know what you mean by “illegitimate,” so please define your term. Fourth, in assessing an event in history, the first test for me is: Did it advance liberty, all things considered?

    My answer: American Revolution…yes.

    Confederate Elite Insurrection (Civil War)…no.

    All else equal, replacing a monarchy with a republic advances liberty.

    An insurrection engineered by a few for the express purpose of maintaining slavery, OTOH, did not advance liberty.

  52. Darryl W. Perry

    @RC
    I just now saw your comment.

    Illegitimate:
    2. not legitimate; not sanctioned by law or custom.
    3. unlawful; illegal: an illegitimate action.
    4. irregular; not in good usage.
    5. Logic . not in accordance with the principles of valid inference.

    I used a “/” to replace the word “or” – so definition 3 would be repetitive.
    I could ask the question numerous ways.

    Did the Continental Congress have the legal authority to make such a declaration?
    Was the declaration “legal” under British Law?
    If the Congress had authority AND such act was legal; why are other secessions NOT legal?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *