See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: No Paul = No Vote in November
Source:
The Daily Bell
URL Source: http://www.thedailybell.com/3693/Ro ... nd-No-Paul-No-Vote-in-November
Published: Mar 10, 2012
Author: Ron Holland
Post Date: 2012-03-10 15:09:12 by Flintlock
Keywords: None
Views: 1470
Comments: 104
"I would also say of Ron Paul – he doesn't need to win. In his view he is winning already. This is an ideological point he is making. But here's why it's electorally significant – a lot of people, I mean 41 percent in Virginia, only two people on the ballot, still a lot of people voted for Ron Paul. A lot of those voters are portable. They're not Republican – they're not dedicated Republican voters." – Tucker Carlson, Editor, The Daily Caller It is time for a groundswell of Ron Paul supporters to quietly, respectfully but firmly make their position clear to the mainstream media and the GOP establishment. Simply put, "No Paul on the ticket means no vote for the GOP in November." The Ron Paul Campaign has the GOP establishment stuck between a rock and a hard place even though they have not won a single state in the primaries to date. Every Paul supporter knows the underhanded tactics used by the Republican leadership at the state and national level as well as the organized smear and news blackout campaign carried out by the mainstream media. Making Nice For the November Election As we move into the last months of the GOP presidential nomination campaign, most of the establishment media are now "making nice" with Ron Paul and his supporters. He actually gets questions during the debates, some press coverage and the other candidates seem friendly. The reason is simple. The Republican Party desperately needs the votes of Ron Paul supporters in order to win in November against Obama. Obviously, Virginia Heffernan didn't get the memo in her typical anti-Paul elitist drivel titled Ron Paul's Pointless Internet Presidency posted on Yahoo earlier in the week but now this is the exception rather than standard procedure for the press. The word has gone out to be nice and respectful to Ron Paul so they can get our votes in November. Too Little Too Late The Republican establishment has obviously done its homework with focus groups, polling, etc. and here is their situation. Although they have successfully held back the Ron Paul campaign to date from threatening to win the GOP presidential nomination, in the dirty tricks process they have ostracized the substantial Paul voting constituency even more from the GOP than before. Paul supporters are far more than portable as suggested by Tucker Carlson; rather they are toxic toward the GOP elites and very few will now support any of the establishment candidates after the abusive treatment given to Ron Paul as well as the crude attacks against Paul supporters. I well understand these feelings of resentment, as I am a Ron Paul supporter. There is no way I will vote for either Romney, Santorum or Gingrich, although I certainly prefer their fake rhetoric to the Obama propaganda. If Ron Paul isn't the Republican nominee for president, then the establishment nominee desperately needs the votes of his supporters in order to beat Obama in the fall general election. The establishment knows the Gingrich and Santorum voters in the GOP Presidential primary will eventually vote for Mitt Romney in November if he wins the Republican presidential nomination at the GOP convention beginning on August 27th, 2012. They also know and fear that most Ron Paul supporters will not vote for the nominee and will likely stay away from the polls in droves thus hurting the other Republican candidates for the House and Senate as well for state and local elections. Basically, 15% of the GOP primary voters will sit out the 2012 November election and this almost guarantees the re-election of Barack Obama. Why Don't I Really Care If the Democrats or Republicans Win in November? My answer is regardless of whether Romney or Obama wins the general election despite all the anti-Obama rhetoric by the Republican establishment, little will change on major issues. Romney's campaign promises are identical to all other presidential campaign promises, much to do about nothing. Neither Bush nor Obama kept their campaign promises and neither will Romney. Course of Action First, we redouble our efforts in voting and funding the Ron Paul Campaign up through the final primary and caucus. Second, in editorials, articles or discussions with the press or GOP leadership always emphasize your plans to stay at home on election day if a Ron or Rand Paul is not on the ticket. Third, at the Republican National Convention when the presidential nomination is handed to Romney, assuming he wins, we continue to stress "NO PAUL = NO VOTE IN NOVEMBER." Finally, we then wait at the convention for the personal phone call from Mitt Romney following private preliminary discussions where Rand Paul is asked to be the Vice Presidential candidate on a Romney/Paul ticket after assurances Ron Paul will be nominated for an appropriate cabinet level appointment such as Secretary of the Treasury or Defense. Ron Paul deserves some family time off following the years of campaigning and educating the American people about liberty. He has done more to advance the cause of limited government, peace, liberty and free markets than any American since the time of the American Revolution. Mitt Romney has spent the last seven years running for President of the United States so obviously he really wants to win. Romney and his advisors must know that without the 15% plus of GOP voters supporting Ron Paul who, unlike Gingrich and Santorum supporters, will sit the election out, he cannot defeat Barack Obama without our support. His only option is to put a "Paul" on the ticket. Although a Vice President Rand Paul is a great tactical victory, this is only a battle in a long war for the restoration of liberty and legitimate constitutional government to the United States. When I was a young man in the military during the 1970s, I well remember the antiwar crowds shouting "Hell, no, we won't go!" in opposition to the Vietnam War. Today, 40-plus years later, I'm a grandfather and maybe older and wiser but still willing to a little more respectfully tell the same power elites running this country and both political parties, "Hell, no, I won't go." But this time it is to the polls in November unless there is a Paul on the ticket. Will you join me?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-27) not displayed.
.
.
.
#28. To: Cynicom (#24)
After what the GOP has done to Paul, it also is a slap to the face of all freedom loving Americans and I hope it is the end of the GOP period.
You are absolutely correct.
Sometimes I suspect you have a periscope into my inner sanctum??????? Odds are Paul will not DEMAND anything immediate. My theory, shared by no one else, is that Paul is running this time for...RAND PAUL in 2016. Santorum is the Bush family in disguise. Newtie is a POS.
& sleep in a hollow log.
Would you be too surprised if I told you that I did? My mother says that I've inherited her mother's ESP. There's nothing all that magical about it, though. It's a simple matter of paying attention and honestly evaluating other people's motives, and next thing you know, you're predicting the future. If you want to predict Amerikka's future, you need to understand that there are only two absolute rules Amerikka operates under and everything that happens falls under one or both of those rules: That's the honest evaluation part, now just stand back and pay attention, then the future becomes quite clear. See? Easy-peasy. Anything else is Pollyannaish. Highly probable that Ron is laying the groundwork. It would certainly explain Rand's refusal to stand opposed to the jews/Israel. I suppose you (not you personally) can show that those votes cast over the past 100 years have improved things ! Really ? "You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul." Mahatma Gandhi
Agreed. People should be paying attention NOW to what Rand Paul has to say, not four years from now. Rand has been too quick out of the gate with many of his pronouncements if indeed he is going to run in four years. My turnoff was when in the Senate he baldly said that doctors .....have the RIGHT to make a comfortable living.
Newtie is a POS. It isn't hard to keep from voting when the Dems have a Communist running who has already torn up the Constitution, and the GOP shows they do not respect honesty and consistency. You are wrong about Santorum. He shares the title of POS with Newt. I would love to see Paul stand up and demand a pound of flesh, but your speculation is most likely correct, i.e., that he is running for Rand in '16. At the end of the day the Americans will again be proved to have been duped into thinking they chose the winner. The evildoers will not lose ... whoever is POTUS is there because that is who they wanted.
I often wonder why Ron Paul, in the name of education, does not explain the one easy and bloodless method of removing this government. Paul should hammer into the voters heads, that eight months from now they CAN AND SHOULD REMOVE THE ENTIRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Explain it to the people, the power is in their hands and they have never used it. The criteria???? No incumbent gets an American vote, party be damned. Be done with that long list of losers, Peeloosely, Boner etc etc. Clean house. People here say Paul is educating, well, if so, let him explain how easy it is to rid ourselves of this corrupt government. The founding Fathers, planned it, we are too damned stupid to use it.
If the voters this year vote for ANY incumbent, then they deserve what they get.
Well, if you're too stoopid to see the big picture, I suggest you drink a gallon of bleach. Bottoms up! Ron Paul and his legions of spam monkeys ain’t gonna win shinola. - Jim Robinson - (comment #1) You reek. You never miss an opportunity to bash Ron Paul do you. YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A PAID GOVERNMENT PLANT/DISINFO AGENT. Go fuck yourself , you rat, now crawl back in your hole. Ron Paul and his legions of spam monkeys ain’t gonna win shinola. - Jim Robinson - (comment #1) If Paul stands up and demands a pound of flesh and a quart of blood in exchange for support, we will have a new ballgame. Will he????? He never wanted to be President. He just wanted to remind us we can be free if we work at it. His message has already won the hearts and minds of sufficient numbers to do just that but... not today. ~~~~~~~~ The days of peaceful change from within, passed us by long ago. Future change will be by a more restrictive government, by the gun and chains if necessary. Americans are just along for the ride. It is not often mentioned, but recall Ron Paul first was elected on a term limits platform, and has been reelected eleven times since then.
Congress hasn't demonstrated any power for quite awhile. Executive Orders issue constantly and Congress doesn't even read the bills before voting on them. I think you're right that a complete toss of all incumbents would send the proper signal ... but so would a nuke ! "You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul." Mahatma Gandhi
If enough Republicans/Conservatives refuse to vote in November, they might as well be strewing rose petals in the path of Obama. On the other hand, if Ron Paul repeats his follow of 2008, and jumps to a Third Party ticket, he will cause the same effect by splitting the vote that would go to a Republican candidate. Ron Paul's best move - best for the Republicans, not necessarily best for Paul - is to convincing and persuasively support the Republican nominee and urge all his supporters to do likewise.
Eff the Republicrat Party. Voting a party line or for a "Party" rather than voting based on reason and principle is for schmucks. Voting for a Republican I despise is no different than voting for Oh'bummer. Voting for the lesser of two Weevils, after the number of times the R establishment has gang raped the base is something only a hard core SUCKER would do. Polar opposites that still believe there are two distinct parties, reinforces the notion that the brain dead do indeed walk among us. (and they vote?)
Unfortunately, Ron is the carrot you get to look at right before you get swatted with the stick.
"You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul." Mahatma Gandhi
Voting for a Republican I despise is no different than voting for Oh'bummer. Voting for the lesser of two Weevils, after the number of times the R establishment has gang raped the base is something only a hard core SUCKER would do. Voting in any Federal election after 150 years of the lesser of two evils gang bang is something only a hard core sucker would do .... And, like P.T. Barnum said "there's a sucker born every minute." "You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul." Mahatma Gandhi
The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011' -- the Anti-First Amendment and Peaceful Assembly Bill -- passed unanimously in the Senate. That means Rand Paul voted for it. Rand Paul is Ron Paul's son but dynastic representation isn't the objective -- Constitutionalism is.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I'm just stoopid enough to have caucused and gone to the convention for Ron Paul. I will caucus for him again come primary time and with any luck will go to the convention again. I just haven't mad up my mind about the options for November. You ain't gotta get like that, pardner.
Right tween the eyes.
The criteria???? No incumbent gets an American vote, party be damned. If Ron Paul, with his massive support base, hasn't been able to win a single state due to the corruption of our elections, I don't see how that tactic would work. Somehow I think that it wouldn't matter if no incumbents got any votes. They'd still be reported as the winners -- or whoever the control freaks prefered instead, as in the case of Kucinich being ejected by their incumbent Warbot Kaptur. Still, Ron Paul supporters should not sit out the vote, imo, unless they are unable for some reason to go to the polls and write him in. Edited for grammar. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Paul
should hammer into the voters heads, that eight months from now they CAN AND
SHOULD REMOVE THE ENTIRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Explain it to the people, the
power is in their hands and they have never used it.
The answer to this question is that you'd be asking a Golden Retriever to behave
like a Pit Bull. It simply isn't in his personality be be what he isn't. What RP
does, he does well, what you are asking him to do, he isn't capable of.
Perhaps you are still thinking along party lines. The Founding Fathers were not so much concerned about party as they were about having an immediate resolution to any "cabal" running counter to the interest of the people. To accomplish that and to bring fresh blood into the system, an election every two years for all was given as a relief valve. But the Fathers were wrong in their assumption, the voters have never availed themselves of this protection. Instead, we have seen men stay in government until age 100, or some "serving" fifty years or more. Party members have the impression that the longer a man resides in Washington, the better he becomes. The truth is just the opposite.
Not only do they become worse, but the older they get, the more that their staff do the work. Therefore, we are represented by those never elected, but working behind the curtain ... much like that of the evildoers.
No, my Party voting days are done and over with. I detest both Parties since the Neocons hijacked the Republican Party. I hoped it could be salvaged but this election has confirmed that it no longer represents Conservatives and Constitutionality. To me it's become a crumbling relic. The Democrat/"Progressives" are just a different way to spell Commie, imo. Kucinich was something exceptional there but he's been sidelined. I can't see any advantage either in replacing anyone who is working to uphold the Constitution just to put someone new in office who might not. The problem with the tactic to vote out incumbents as I see it, though, is not that it couldn't work well to get rid of the trashers of our Republic in D.C. but that the corruption of the election process would prevent that from happening by stealth even if we did vote them all out. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
yep
most voters don't want to do that as they're dependent on the bennies and/or paycheck they are receiving from the government. when Ron Paul speaks of cutting this department and that agency, the people quiver and shake because it could mean their jobs.
People gotta do what their conscience tells them to do. For myself, if Dr. Paul is not on the GOP ticket I will vote third party. I will not sit out. The way I see it, the more non-partisans who sit out instead of voting third party, the better it is for the two party fraud. It's what they want. It allows the media to give them a faux veneer of respectability. If all the people who didn't vote voted for a third party...any third party...it would destroy this veneer. Of course the two party fraud will never give up power peacefully. If there ever comes a day when people wake the fuck up and try to remove them from power, the facade of our "Democracy" will fade away like a fart in the wind. We will see real damn quick that the federal government under the control of the Republicrat/Democan oligarchy is no different than the governments of the Middle East, Myanmar, or any other tyrannical government you would care to name. The only thing that stops us from seeing this behavior now is the timidity and apathy of the American people. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown Jesus said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do. Evangelical Fundinuts say, "kill them all who will not bow down to the Zionist Jew." - F.A. Hayek Fan
They don't count write ins where I live so that would be an exercise in futility--and even if they claimed to count them, since they have stolen and "failed to report" votes that Ron actually got, how could a write in be anything but an unacknowledged and thrown away protest vote? Can you not protest the system as well by saying screw you and refusing to take part in what you already know to be a rigged game? Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
And at the end of the nice speech where he asked his supporters, most of whom would come out in a blizzard or hurricane to vote for him, he could say something like this. "You know, I have been telling you for years about how much I revere the Constitution and have used it to guide me in my thinking and my votes. Well, today I am here to tell you that I never meant a word of that and ask you to vote for this clown the establishment wants to foist off on you--actually they really don't care if it is him or his supposed "opponent." I am not running for anything else and I have decided to sell out my principles and core beliefs just so that we might get someone in the White House who has that R attached to him." And the day Ron makes that speech you will see that he will no longer have people who would go out to vote for him for dog catcher. As it is people don't just vote for the man Ron Paul but for his ideas and his beliefs about liberty. If he ever shows that he doesn't really believe the things he has been saying his whole life there goes his base. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
Granted... James Madison wrote extensively from his notes taken during the Convention, so that people would understand the thinking of the Founding Fathers, when they gave birth to the Constitution. It was their common belief that Americans of good will and temperament would go to Congress, serve "for a season" then return home to resume their normal life. On that issue they all agreed and they were all wrong. A form of term limits was discussed and discarded, again because they were looking at future Americans as high minded, country serving people. They were wrong. The term "professional politician" was never discussed to my recollect from the book. To their credit, the South saw this coming and in adapting their version of the Constitution, THEY DID INDEED APPLY TERM LIMITS TO THE PRESIDENCY. Something that took us another hundred years to do.
Hehehehehehe James has his thinker running full RPM today.
Even if you can't vote for Ron Paul by write-in, there are other races and issues on the ballots that could be important. Likely those are mostly rigged too but I think the act of voting is a protest in itself -- a way of saying that the Electoral process really belongs to us and we're not going to just surrender it to the corrupt. At least make them work harder than they would if you stayed home. If someone is sick or something, then don't go but otherwise staying home just sends a message of compliance more than disgust. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
James has he thinker running full RPM today. I have a lucid interval occasionally. >(;^{] Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
Well, you do have a point. If there is some kind of bond issue to further endebt us that is something to vote against. So if there is stuff like that on the ballot I might waste enough time and energy to go to the polls for that. But as for a "choice" between Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber, or the "lesser of two evils" as some folks say, no thanks, I ain't interested. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
Presidential term limits are not a bad idea. FDR was a disaster for America. Term lengths should be limited for all whose actions in office show them to be Constititonally unfit -- move against the Constitution and refuse to get back in line, out immediately. If our government was limited to Constitutionalists only, then regular rotations probably would be ideal but not such a good idea now as it is.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
It was an excellent effort. If you were not around prior to the change, term limits was THE LAST EFFORT BY AMERICANS TO RESTRAIN THIS CORRUPT GOVERNMENT. John Nance Garner saw the danger of a lifetime president way back in the 1930s when FDR said he liked being President and would run for a third term. Garner as VP, was so incensed he packed his bags and went back to Texas.
Comments (69 - 104) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestI want Paul to make Romney squirm and wet himself.
#29. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
Some here are going to vote for Obama.
#30. To: Esso (#25)
My money is on "salute and walk away", FWIW.
#31. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
Some here are going to vote for Obama.
#32. To: Cynicom (#30)
Sometimes I suspect you have a periscope into my inner sanctum???????
1. Under no circumstances shall any benefit be allowed to the common citizens (the 99.9%ers).
2. The truth shall never be allowed to reach the common citizens.
Question: Will Ron Paul be the next president?
Answer: No. A Ron paul presidency would be in violation of both rules 1 & 2 of the New judeo Century. It would benefit the people of the world and he speaks the truth.
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#33. To: Cynicom (#30)
My theory, shared by no one else, is that Paul is running this time for...RAND PAUL in 2016.
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#34. To: BTP Holdings (#5)
If you don't vote, you have no gripe about the way things are.
#35. To: Esso (#33)
Highly probable that Ron is laying the groundwork. It would certainly explain Rand's refusal to stand opposed to the jews/Israel.
#36. To: Cynicom (#30)
Santorum is the Bush family in disguise.
#37. To: Phant2000, Jethro Tull, Esso, randge, noone222, Christine (#36)
#38. To: Cynicom (#37)
The founding Fathers, planned it, we are too damned stupid to use it.
#39. To: randge (#18)
(Edited)
What do you suggest, old sport?
#40. To: Cynicom (#21)
#41. To: Cynicom (#21)
(Edited)
If Paul salutes and walks away, we have been had one more time.
The OneDollarDVDProject needs patriot activists
to help wake the town and tell the people.
Do your friends and family know what you know?
#42. To: wakeup (#41)
He never wanted to be President. He just wanted to remind us we can be free if we work at it. His message has already won the hearts and minds of sufficient numbers to do just that but... not today.
#43. To: Cynicom (#37)
#44. To: Flintlock (#0)
#45. To: Shoonra, Flintlock (#44)
Ron Paul's best move - best for the Republicans, not necessarily best for Paul - is to convincing and persuasively support the Republican nominee and urge all his supporters to do likewise.
DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR!!!
#46. To: Original_Intent (#45)
#47. To: Flintlock (#40)
#48. To: Original_Intent (#45)
Eff the Republicrat Party. Voting a party line or for a "Party" rather than voting based on reason and principle is for schmucks.
#49. To: Flintlock, All (#0)
#50. To: Flintlock (#39)
Well, if you're too stoopid to see the big picture,
#51. To: noone222 (#47)
Unfortunately, Ron is the carrot you get to look at right before you get swatted with the stick.
#52. To: Cynicom, All (#37)
(Edited)
Paul should hammer into the voters heads, that eight months from now they CAN AND SHOULD REMOVE THE ENTIRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Explain it to the people, the power is in their hands and they have never used it.
#53. To: Cynicom (#37)
I often wonder why Ron Paul, in the name of education, does not
explain the one easy and bloodless method of removing this government.
#54. To: GreyLmist, Phant2000, Jethro Tull, randge, noone222 (#52)
I don't see how that tactic would work.
#55. To: Cynicom (#54)
Party members have the impression that the longer a man resides in Washington, the better he becomes. The truth is just the opposite.
#56. To: Cynicom (#54)
Perhaps you are still thinking along party lines.
#57. To: GreyLmist (#56)
but that the corruption of the election process would prevent that from happening by stealth even if we did vote them all out.
#58. To: Cynicom (#37)
Clean house. People here say Paul is educating, well, if so, let him explain how easy it is to rid ourselves of this corrupt government.
#59. To: Flintlock (#0)
#60. To: GreyLmist (#52)
Still, Ron Paul supporters should not sit out the vote, imo, unless they are unable for some reason to go to the polls and write him in.
#61. To: Shoonra (#44)
Ron Paul's best move - best for the Republicans, not necessarily best for Paul - is to convincing and persuasively support the Republican nominee and urge all his supporters to do likewise.
#62. To: GreyLmist (#56)
. I can't see any advantage either in replacing anyone who is working to uphold the Constitution just to put someone new in office who might not.
#63. To: James Deffenbach (#61)
(Edited)
Well, today I am here to tell you that I never meant a word of that and ask you to vote for this clown the establishment wants to foist off on you-
#64. To: James Deffenbach (#60)
They don't count write ins where I live so that would be an exercise in futility--and even if they claimed to count them, since they have stolen and "failed to report" votes that Ron actually got, how could a write in be anything but an unacknowledged and thrown away protest vote? Can you not protest the system as well by saying screw you and refusing to take part in what you already know to be a rigged game?
#65. To: Cynicom (#63)
Hehehehehehe
#66. To: GreyLmist (#64)
Even if you can't vote for Ron Paul by write-in, there are other races and issues on the ballots that could be important. Likely those are mostly rigged too but I think the act of voting is a protest in itself -- a way of saying that the Electoral process really belongs to us and we're not going to just surrender it to the corrupt. At least make them work harder than they would if you stayed home. If someone is sick or something, then don't go but otherwise staying home just sends a message of compliance more than disgust.
#67. To: Cynicom (#62)
#68. To: GreyLmist (#67)
Presidential term limits are not a bad idea
.
.
.