Wednesday, June 13, 2012

To write in, or not to write in

Liberty Movement

Without question the first and best option is Ron Paul winning the Republican Nomination. That is, has and should be our number one priority.

If for whatever reason that does not happen we can; endorse Romney, vote for Gary Johnson, sit out the election or WRITE IN RON PAUL. As a contingency I choose option four, and I'd like to make the case for everyone to do the same.

Some of the reasons we're told we should not do this include;

It will just hand the election to Obama... ummm, well not if we win! Besides, we all know Ron attracts plenty of left leaning folks too.

It will hinder the liberty movement's ability to get entrenched in the Republican Party. Clearly Ron Paul  himself can not announce as an independent or actively support a write in candidacy, as that would hurt the liberty movement within the GOP.

The grass roots is another story. We can continue to fill positions in the Republican Party with a genuine interest in transforming the party into what it claims to be, namely, small government, low taxes, low regulations and protection of personal freedoms.

It's impossible to win a write in campaign. Rare? yes. Long odds? Absolutely. Impossible? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

As far as I can tell there are only eight states (48 electoral votes) that do not allow write in voting. The other 490 electoral votes (91%) are up for grabs and CAN BE HAD.

I will outline the "how" in the next post.

Sunday, May 20, 2012


In chess you are supposed to “see the whole board” and to play the game several moves out. 

When the Paul campaign announced that they were no longer going to be investing time or money into as of yet uncontested primaries, the media interpreted it as “Ron Paul is dropping out”. Our side went on the defensive and started railing against this strongly... but deep down there was / is a lot doubt. What is the campaign REALLY up to? Why this message? Why now?

Because… they see the whole board. 

From the very beginning Ron Paul has told anyone who would listen that this contest was about the delegates and nobody got it. The reporting was always “x” state holds primary, Ron Paul still winless. Marginalizing our campaign was working IN OUR FAVOR… doubly so as long Santorum and Gingrich stuck around. They could pick up just enough perceived delegates to keep Romney from getting to 1144 perceived delegates. 

Once they dropped out, Romney was pre-maturely anointed, but there was one small problem. As state conventions began to convene the eyes of the media FINALLY started to open… Ron’s delegate strategy was actually working; Maine, Massachusetts, Alaska, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Louisiana, Nevada and Washington State for starters. He really was racking up delegates at the district, county and state levels. What did this mean? Could he throw a wrench in Romney’s party plans? Of course he could and people finally started noticing. The RNC and the Romney camp were so spooked that they had to ratchet up the cheating efforts, Arizona and Oklahoma are good examples. 

But Dr. Paul... sees the whole board. 

The threat had to be diminished, so they told they world that active campaigning was over, but if they really wanted out, if it was really over, he would have stepped aside. They told the Ron Paul supporters to “behave” in Tampa, they are able to take the high ground... knowing full well we aren’t going to “just go along” at the convention. This coup is going to happen and when it does Dr. Paul will be able to shrug his shoulders, give one of those “awe shucks” smiles and know on the inside, that this is exactly how they drew it up on the chalk board. 

Well played sir, checkmate is coming soon.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Ron Paul Case Files #1

I've seen so many well intentioned, passionate supporters of Ron Paul completely botch it up when calling talk radio, posting on news articles and posting on opposing facebook pages.

We can not play into the stereotype of; Paulbot or Paultard or any other derogatory idea of who we are.

Our mission is singular, attract a new supporter from anywhere. I'm putting together a series of tips called "Case Files". This is the first one...

Case File #1 -

Use one of these scripts when calling; Rush, Levine, Hannity, Savage, Berry or any other conservative radio talk show.

Greet the host and as soon as they give you the green light say...
“people are rightly concerned about our National Security and many fear that a Ron Paul Presidency would put our country in serious danger. I worry about our safety too and though I can’t predict the future I can say that Ron Paul has received far more donations from our military personnel than all other Republican candidates combined. Endorsements from these heroes is more than good enough for me, but you should decide for yourself, please Google Ron Paul”
If the host hasn’t cut you off or disconnected you at this point say…

“thank you for your time, I'll take your comments off the air"

You want to be friendly and even tempered. It is extremely important not to get into an argument with the host; not because you are wrong or you can't hold your own, but because they control the microphone. They will take any chance to paint you as; kooky, crazy, or insincere. Don't give them that chance.

Another tact;

"people are rightly concerned about our National Security and many fear that a Ron Paul Presidency would put our country in serious danger. I worry about our safety too and though I can’t predict the future I can say that Ron Paul has received an endorsment from the former head of the CIA unit responsible for tracking Osama Bin Laden. His real world experience and expertise is enough for me, but you should decide for yourself, Google Ron Paul"

You don't have to (and probably shouldn't) use these verbatim, but they are a good starting point.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012


I thought I noticed something odd, but dismissed it as quickly as it came into my head. Then I saw someone else mention it, and thought, huh, weird.

Given how nasty the campaign has been getting, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney seem overly and possibly overtly cordial. What gives?

Perhaps they've found a deep respect for one another... uh no.

Maybe Paul is gunning for VP or some other high ranking position in a Romney administration... yeah 'cause that is just the kind of thing Ron Paul would do.

Maybe Romney is courting the Paul voter who he KNOWS he will need come general election time... me thinks we're getting closer.

Maybe both candidates think they are better off once everyone else is out of the race... Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner.

Ron Paul's campaign has made many mentions of how only he and Romney can run a national campaign. Romney's camp has acknowledged they wouldn't mind facing off with Paul. So... who's right?

Well, that kinda depends. Conventional wisdom indicates that would favor Romney, and I admit I've long felt that Ron Paul was better off if the field was fractured. That said there are two factors that will play a role, but how big?

February, the month is chalk full of caucus states and Paul has banked on his organization and grass roots support in these states. Nevada, Minnesota, Maine & Washington (March 3rd, but before super tuesday) will be critical to give people a real view of the "not-Romney" alternative.

Proportional delegates, until April 1st most of the contests will divide up delegates proportionally, which means in a two person race the delegates could be quite even. If Ron Paul can hang in well enough to stave off the inevitability factor he has two big aces up his sleeve, Texas and California.

If Romney sweeps South Carolina and Florida we are going to see how this chess match plays out sooner rather than later.

Ron Paul has already changed America

One of the slights against Ron Paul is that he has rarely gotten any legislation through congress. While this is certainly true and may speak to the power of persuasion he has over his peers, I frankly think it speaks more to the power of persuasion that lobbyists have over his peers. (but hey, that's a whole different story)

Undeterred, Dr. Paul has been a consistent voice of dissent in congress, proudly earning the label "Dr. No". More importantly he has completely changed the political discourse in this country and it will have reverberating effects for years to come.

What are some of the things that Paul has changed?

Moneybomb - A term now regularly used to describe political fund raising events, but it was Paul's supporters who lay claim to the original Moneybomb back in '07. Nobody else comes close to his success with these types of fund raising efforts either. While most candidates struggle to reach a few hundred thousand dollars, Ron Paul regularly hits several million in donations.

End the Fed - yes it's a book, but more it's an idea. Paul questions the need for a central bank and then really questions what the central bank has been doing. His efforts to audit the Fed came to fruition (at least in part) and the results were staggering. Over 16 trillion in buddy loans from money that was created out of thin air. The ability for one organization to wield so much power over the global economy is terrifying and Ron Paul brought it to light.

Sound Money - we may be a long way from returning to the gold standard, but because of voices like Dr. Paul's we are closer to things like a balanced budget amendment.

Congressional authorization for war - Presidents Republican and Democrat alike have denigrated the War Powers Act and have been left unchecked by weak congresses. Ron Paul takes them to task on the issue.

Liberty - His belief that government's nearly sole repsonsibilty is in the protection of our liberty. Once considered a fringe movement, the idea of real freedom is (as Dr. Paul likes to say) becoming popular, don't you know!

Regardless of elections won or lost, legislation passed or not, there are few people in the history of our country who have had or will have a greater impact than Ron Paul.

All bets are off!

While New Hampshire and Iowa have very different demographics there are a couple of items from exit polling that really caught my eye.

In both states 46% of repsondants indicated that they had made up their mind in the last few days. While unfathomable to me, I expect that to continue in SC and Florida as long as the field stays somewhat intact. In Iowa this greatly helped Santorum and in New Hampshire it was a boon to Romney and to a lesser degree Huntsman.

While that 46% of the field is difficult to predict (really, really difficult), let's look at the 54% of the electorate who were more sure of their vote. In both contests so far Ron Paul has had 12% of the population locked up at least a month in advance.  To me this represents his floor, I do not believe in any contest from now until June that he will do worse than that. Outside of Romney no other candidate has a floor greater than 4%.

As the race eventually becomes Romney vs Paul (question is when, not if), the establishment will try to portray it as; the "presumptive nominee" vs "the cranky old guy who won't go away". Before that happens, Ron Paul has got to show that he can get some of these "last minute" voters. South Carolina is the perfect spot to do this.

The field is still fractured enough that a win here is not impossible, but more importantly, if he can jump up to the 20% support level in a southern state then I think he shows serious muscle.

Even with no delegates in South Carolina or Florida, Ron Paul could enter Super Tuesday in virtual delagate tie with Romney. If that is the case, all bets are off!

Sunday, January 8, 2012


Claims of "unelectable" are always made with arrogance, ignorance or malice.

In the spirit of full disclosure I am a Ron Paul supporter, but I could be speaking for thousands of candidates in hundreds of races in our recent history.

Look no further than Newt Gingrinch who just nine months ago, his campaign in disarray was left for dead. Smelling salt technology has obviously come a long way. Then there is Rick Santorum, never really alive in this race, (polling at sub 5% for MONTHS) comes out of nowhere and pulls off a tie (delegates) in Iowa.

Why should you listen to a pundit, the media or anyone else with regard to electability? At best they are usually wrong and at worst they are intentionally trying to lead you in a certain direction. Listen to the candidates, scrutinize their records (for yourself) and choose the one who most closely aligns to your way of thinking.

Electability is determined on election day and not before. What makes an individual electable or not is in each of our hands, one by one our votes are counted and count they do. We should replace our own judgement with someone else's... never.