Paul in the Primaries

As last night's debate makes clear, Ron Paul and his fans stand out a bit from the general Republican pack. Which explains why the web site "Primarily Paul" has created this chart explaining to Paulistas the states in which they need to register with the GOP in order to vote for their man in the primaries, and the deadlines to do so. In my home state of California, for example, you do need to be a registered Republican, and the deadline for registration would be Jan. 21.

One may also, Paul admirer or Paul hater, come primary day or election day fall back on your sacred American right to not vote at all. Or see here former principled non-voter Bretigne Shaffer explaining why Ron Paul has made her change her mind.

Comments

[Anonymous]

The red blocks on the chart are very difficult to read.

[SugarFree]

Your colorblindness is a symptom of your refusal to adopt a comment board handle.

[AC]

Dirty as it made me feel, I changed my party to Republican a few weeks ago so I can vote for the good doctor. A number of my friends have done the same, and even one who is opposed to voting. It probably won't make any difference since we live in Arizona, but it's worth a shot.

[de stijl]

The red blocks are for deadlines in December. Haul ass, people.

[joe]

I keep going back and forth on whether to register as a Republican and vote for Paul in the Massachusetts primary.

If he wins, no matter what happens in the general, we're out of Iraq.

And none of the candidates I like in the Democratic primary are, as of yet, anywhere close to winning.

It's good to know I've got another two months to see how things shake out.

[Reinmoose]

In NY I registered as a Republican (formerly not affiliated) back in October. I share your pain, AC. I totally felt grimey after I dropped the form off in the mail box.

[iowan]

I already changed to Republican. My wife has also. So we both plan to hit the caucuses and vote for Ron.

[robc]

I recently moved and "attempted" to register R for the first time in my life. Not sure if it took though. As KY is about 47th in line for primaries, it probably doesnt matter much.

The reason Im concerned is that there was a section with mulitple options such as:
New Registration
Change of Address
Change of Party
(I think there was 1 or 2 more options)

It also said "Select 1", so I selected change of address - however, I checked Republican in the party section. So, I dont know if they will look at the whole card and change both my address and party or just look at the address section. I have until the end of the year, I guess I could go fill out another with just a change of party.

[Rattlesnake Jake]

Ron Paul could be to this election what McCain was to 2000 with lots of Democrats voting in the Republican primaries for him.

[iowan]

I look forward to insulting a good many Romey/Huckabee social conservatives on the 3rd. Should be far more entertaining than any football game.

[Stephen]

Ron Paul is going to take NH!!

We need your help to win the other states! If you support Paul ensure that you are registered appropriately, and that you get at least one friend to register and vote for Ron Paul in your states primary!

[SugarFree]

The best thing about registering Libertarian* in Kentucky: You never seem to get called for jury duty.

Changing over to vote for Paul.

*Not that I have much love for the Big-(L)s, I just think (I) makes you really easy to ignore.

[Rattlesnake Jake]

You people changing registrations, were you registered as Democrats or Libertarian?

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"Ron Paul is going to take NH!!"

Why don't the polls show that?

[Reinmoose]

Rattlesnake Jake

I was registered as a nothing, but had only ever voted Libertarian (and once some obscure party that sounded interesting)

[Nathan]

Libertarian.

I voted straight Republican from the late 80s through 96 when the takeover by the republicans netted nada but more of the same and Rush turned from Big Government hater to apologist.

Was independant (registered Republican but not very enthused) through 02 then registered big L.

[Bronwyn]

After last year's elections, I switched my registration from Libertarian to Republican so I could vote in the primary.

Not that it will matter, as robc pointed out that we here in Kentucky are at the back of the primary line.

[iowan]

You people changing registrations, were you registered as Democrats or Libertarian?

Independent

Iowa only allows R's, D's, and Independent

[robc]

SugarFree,

The best thing about registering Libertarian* in Kentucky: You never seem to get called for jury duty

Jake,

You people changing registrations, were you registered as Democrats or Libertarian?

I can comment on both of these at the same time. I was originally registered as a D. The last time I moved (in 1998) I attempted to change party to Libertarian, but it failed. I went to vote in the primary earlier this year in order to vote for a judge, but they couldnt find me in the Ind book. I was still in the D book. It was the first time I had voted in a primary in a decade. It apparently also explains why I got jury duty 2 years ago.

I just moved again, so I decided to register R this time.

[AC]

Jake: I had no party affiliation.

[Bronwyn]

Oh, and I'd switched to Libertarian from Independent prior to my more recent switch.

[Eric]

Looks like Republican registrations must be way up. I have been a registered Libertarian for 12 years and recently switched so I could vote in the California Republican primary.

Go Ron Paul!

[thoreau]

I switched so I could vote for Paul.

joe, just do it. You'll feel good about yourself if you do.

[Pinette]

I'm so glad i read reason online. I moved to California for the first time in early 2006 and registered L. I could have sworn i heard it was open primaries hear and i could vote in the republican primaries without being registered republican. If i didn't read this post, i might not have realized until it was too late.
I'll be switching over to R to vote for Dr. Paul. I've never been registered as a republican in my life.

[immigrant]

Ron Paul Again Easily Wins Debate Polls
Thursday, November 29, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

NEWS ANALYSIS/OPINION

The CNN/YouTube Republican presidential debate yielded a predictable rerun of what has become a pattern of responses and results, nonwithstanding the submission of "video questions."

As many observers, blogs and alternative news sources point out regularly on the Internet, the economy is teetering, the US national debt is overwhelming, the country is engaged in at least two "hot wars" and threatening a third with Iran, the Patriot Act and other provisions are overturning traditional American civil liberties. Yet the debate did not spend much time on these issues. What was the seeming focus? Immigration, gays in the military, the role of religion in political life, etc.

What else was predictable? Only limited government candidate Ron Paul (R-Tex) seemed engaged and willing to comment on such serious issues. Perhaps for this reason he once again finished ahead of the pack by a wide margin in various Internet polls.

Over at CNN, the results are (9AM/EST, Nov 29):

Who do you think won the debate?

1. Ron Paul 50% 6732 votes
2. Mike Huckabee 22% 2959 votes
3. John McCain 11% 1473 votes
4. Mitt Romney 9% 1242 votes
5. Rudy Giuliani 5% 703 votes
6. Fred Thompson 2% 277 votes
7. Duncan Hunter 1% 91 votes
8. Tom Tancredo 0% 49 votes

=====

Over at Youpolls, the results were as follows

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1119

Fred Thompson 0.8%
Rudy Giuliani 1.6%
Mike Huckabee 7.2%
Duncan Hunter 1.9%
John McCain 2.3%
Ron Paul 83%
Mitt Romney 2.1%
Tom Tancredo 1.1%

[Dr East]

The polls reflect only the people who voted in last cycle's primaries, in which the only real choices were neocon 1, the incumbent wartime president, or neocon 2, McCain.

America is FULL of libertarians (little-l). It's our national heritage, from the days of Jefferson. They don't vote when they don't feel they can endorse any candidate they'd be able to vote for. It's not laziness that keeps people at home on election day, it's apathy.

Especially when the only Republican options are big-government Republicans.

So there is, I believe, a good shot of Paul sweeping New Hampshire, if only because it's New Hampshire, and doing very well in most other states. So long as people get to hear about him. The current media is doing their best to marginalize him, despite the fact that he's the only classical Republican running, but the polls won't reflect much more than momentum at this point, and that loosely. The people they're polling, after all, voted for Bush.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

were you registered as Democrats or.....

Libertarian

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Thanks for the info Brian, Lisa and I were really caught by surprise when we learned that California really doesn't have an open primary any longer. We would have been shut out.

[joe]

thoreau,

I don't Paul as much as Dodd or Richardson.

[The Democratic Republican]

Where is Donderrooooooo with his name-dropping, mind-numbing words with no meaning?

[thoreau]

joe-

I respect the Dodd. I do. But while they are no more likely to win than Paul, they get far less attention. A vote for Paul sends a message that a vote for Dodd or Richardson won't send.

Besides, it's healthier for America when you can find anti-war voters in both parties. A vote for Paul helps balance some things out.

Just do it.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Immigrant, the poll numbers surprise and please me because I didn't think RP did as well at the debates as he did on Face the Nation. I also thought some of the bad guys debating were pretty well spoken.

[sage]

Someone please help me with this delimma.

I want to help deliver the state of Washington to Ron Paul. Besides my vote and contribution, one of the things I can do is become a precinct officer in my county. I have started the ball rolling on this, but as I read the requirements I start to feel a little grimy. Here they are in an email from my county's republican party chair(sorry it's so long):

**Precinct Committee Officers Duties, Responsibilities, and Authority

The Precinct Committee Officer is the official representative of his or her precinct to the Republican Party. This is a partisan office that is established to represent the voters within a specific geographical area (as determined by the County Auditor's office). The office of Precinct Committee Officer carries with it duties and responsibilities as set forth in law and the KCRP By-laws.

1. Legal Duties: RCW 29A.80.030 and KCRP By-laws
a. Responsible for electing the Kitsap County Republican Party Officers and Executive Board at the re-organizational meeting held after the even year General elections. ( meeting held prior to second Saturday of following January)
b. Responsible for electing replacements to fill vacancies in other elected partisan offices such as County Commissioner or State Legislator
c. Serve as a voting member of the KCRP Central Committee.
d. Petition for meeting of the Central Committee
e. Call and conduct precinct caucus, as directed by the County Chair.

The legal duties of an appointed PCO and PCO Captain are the same as for a PCO except for the legal authority to vote in the Central Committee reorganization meeting.

In addition to the assigned legal duties, as a long standing practice, and as specified by the WSRP Convention Rules and Procedures, a PCO who completes the requirements for participation in the caucus immediately preceding the County Convention, is automatically designated as a delegate to that convention. Because PCO Captains are not resident in the precinct which they serve they are not eligible for the automatic delegate assignment but may be elected as a delegate from their actual home precinct.

2. Administrative Duties
a. Actively participate in the business of KCRP through attendance of periodic meetings, service on a committee or special interest group, and participation in party events. Provide input to the Chair, Executive Board, and/or Central Committee to make the KCRP more effective.
b. Remain current in issues within the county and precinct and to communicate on those issues with the Executive Board and Central Committee.
c. Maintain data file, lists or other mechanisms and other information that identifies the Republican and non-aligned voters of the precinct to provide for effective communications with those voters.
d. Establish initial contact with the Republican and non-aligned voters of the precinct to extend an offer of service and information on voting, in general, and issues, in particular. Get to know the voters of the precinct.
e. Serve as an information conduit between the voters of the district and the KCRP.
f. Assist in the identification of potential candidates for elected office and appointed positions within government.
g. Identify new residents in the precinct community for the purposes of voter registration and voter outreach.
h. Assist in maintaining voter contact information correct through participation in KCRP voter outreach programs.
i. Conduct precinct caucus or participate in pooled caucus, when called and as directed by the County Chair.
j. Use and evaluate for effectiveness the tools provided in the "PCO Toolbox", identifying deficiencies in the tools provided or identifying additional tools or assistance required.
k. Actively participate in Get Out Our Vote programs.

To be strong and effective, the KCRP needs each PCO to perform those basic tasks tasks.

A few extra hours a month will create a strong precinct. These few hours will allow you to build a rapport with your neighbors such that they will come to you for advice on political issues and candidates, whether they are preparing to vote or writing to their representative in government or to the local newspaper.

We are all in the same boat together when it comes to county and state government. The boat needs a strong captain to make it go in the right direction. Without an effective Republican PCO in a precinct, that precinct is fair game for misinformation and misdirection by a Democrat.**

So the question is, should I do it? Thanks in advance for the input.

[Malto Dextrin]

I think I'll vote for Paul; the Google candidate ("Don't be evil").

[joe]

thoreau,

I'd only do it if Paul had a real chance of winning the Mass primary, and neither of the guys I like had such a chance.

The last time I voted to "send a message" about something something something political parties, I ended up voting for Ralph Nader.

The problem with "sending a message" with your vote is that it's probably going to be garbled.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Just Do It, Sage!

Then get NoStar to sign on for his precinct.

There, that was easy (for me, anyway) 🙂

[Jake Boone]

Sage,

Absolutely.

There are ways to follow their rules without deviating from your principles, I think. For example:

f. Assist in the identification of potential candidates for elected office and appointed positions within government.

... is a great opportunity to sniff out local Ron Paul-style Republicans to run for office, instead of letting someone else pick another pile of neocons.

[John C. Randolph]

I'm finding it very amusing to watch the country club republicans throwing fits over people registering as republicans so that they can vote for Ron Paul in the primaries. This has happened before, of course.

The last Republican to get a a large number of crossover voters was Ronald Reagan, and they hated him, too. Who can forget Bush senior denouncing free market ideas as "voodoo economics"?

-jcr

[Dennis]

Vote on principles, you may lose the election but you'll be able to look yourself in the face.

[Legate Damar]

The problem with "sending a message" with your vote is that it's probably going to be garbled.

Depends on your timing. If you're voting in March, then, yes, you should choose the least evil of all remaining viable options. If, however, you're voting in January, you are DETERMINING the viability of various options. A fact I keep reminding my brother of. He lives in Nevada and likes RP but won't vote for him because he's committed to voting against HRC is the Dem primary. Dumbass.

[greenish]

I thought California had some deal where you could be "decline to state", but could request a Democratic or Republican primary ballot. It turns out you can, but the Republican party won't let a "decline to state" vote for a presidential candidate in their primary. Good to know.

I was Independent, then Democratic (strategic - I figured their primary is more valuable); I just sent in a card to change to Independent, and now I'll have to change again to Republican, and change after the primary too. Yeesh!

[tim]

In my state of minnesota we no longer have primaries but caucuses. And its been my observation that the loudest most obnoxious wingnut ends up choosing the candidate from the district in a caucus system (I'm informed what I really saw was a "debate" but I call it people yelling at each other). I am just going to make sure I am as far away from any caucus gathering I can possibly be that day. It just so happens - at a bid at irony - I'll be in mexico that week.

[NY Voter]

were you registered as Democrats or.....

Democrat. The only choice* in NYC is if you vote in the democratic primaries.

*Mayor doesn't count

[Rattlesnake Jake]

"He lives in Nevada and likes RP but won't vote for him because he's committed to voting against HRC is the Dem primary. Dumbass."

I live in Texas where you can vote in either party and don't have to register as Republican or Democrat ahead of time. You register to vote, but don't register as belonging to any particular party. I usually vote Libertarian in the general election, but vote in the Republican Party primaries because I tend to lean a little closer to the Republicans than to the Democrats. I used to be a Republican. If Ron Paul were not running, I'd love to vote in the Democrat Primary just to vote against the Hildabeast, but with Ron Paul I finally get a chance to vote FOR somebody rather than voting against people as the case usually is.

[Elemenope]

re:the Primaries

I like the way my home state does it (Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Yeah, that's right, say our name five times fast, bitches!) It is an "open" primary, where if you are affiliated, you can only vote in your party's primary. If you are unaffiliated, you can choose which one you want to participate in, and that choice causes you to be affiliated. Then, if you wish to preserve your precious unaffiliated status, you must stick around five minutes after you cast your ballot to fill out the forms to disaffiliate.

We also print the Republicans on blue paper ballots and Democrats on red, because we hate conformity that much. Or at least we did in 2006, when I last voted in a party primary.

[Nick]

I was Libertarian and my wife was unaffiliated here in NY. Changed to Republican and felt great doing it because I like fucking with them. I only wish I has a Ron Paul shirt on when I went to the county office to change my affiliation (heavy GOP county).

I would recommend people in late primary states to double their efforts. Ron Paul will need those delegates and faithful ones at that. He can't expect to gleen any delegates his way at convention because those that aren't faithful will go pro-war candidate. Another thing to consider is that many people won't show up by then if they think the pro-war guy everyone has heard of is leading so we can win those states' delegates for Ron Paul simply by showing up en masse. Steal a state here and there and watch the GOP freak out. Good times.

[Reinmoose]

I should like to make a Ron Paul shirt for when I vote at the NY primary.

When passing a Ron Paul sign last weekend, a girl in my car asked if anyone knew anything about this Ron Paul guy. I told her all about him, and she was all like "I'm going to vote for Hilary." Figures.

[Edward]

You people are nuts. Ron Paul is a joke, and I'm really going to enjoy the punch line.

[Fluffye]

It isn't entirely beyond the realm of consideration for no candidate on the Republican side to have enough delegates at the convention to win on the first ballot.

In that circumstance, if Paul has a handful of delegates, expect most of them to bolt after the first ballot. I also would expect Huckabee delegates to bolt. The "professional Republican" class that will make up most of the delegate pool will fuck over the candidate representing libertarian / conservatives and the candidate representing religious conservatives in order to close ranks behind a war candidate, probably Giuliani. And that will be the moment that the Republican party pretty much dies.

Good times.

[sixstring]

Edward:

Enjoy!

punch

[Fluffy]

Joe -

I hope Dodd is still in at that point, to give you the chance to vote meaningfully for the candidate of your choice.

I think Richardson will still be there, angling for VP, so at least you'll have one of your top two guys.

[rdkraus]

That's OK Edward, we owe you one for all the laughs you've given us

[VM]

Edward | November 29, 2007, 2:37pm | #
You people are nuts.

REPLY TO EDWEIRDOOOO.

And about H&R? hier.

[T]

sage,

The wife is the local precinct chair here in TX. They want you to do all that crap. You can do as much or as little of it as you like. Worst case scenario? You lose the job after the next primary. I somehow can't imagine that would bother you too terribly much.

Downside? Every jackass running for elected office with an R after their name will call you asking for an endorsement. Plus, if you actually do anything, you have to spend time with the rest of the local Rs. My tolerance for that is extremely limited. They creep me out.

[Nick]

Why would Paul delegates bolt? I don't know about other states, but here in NY the winner takes all 87 delegates and they are chosen by the campaign of the man that wins. They have asked us for people to register as Paul delegates should he win them and we would be loyal because we are so diametrically opposed to the others? What do other states do?

I suspect Huckabee delegates would not vote unless they were promised VP preference, say if giuliani or McCain win. Romney is burning every bridge he can find, so if he doesn't win his delegates might bolt for the winner but they won't be promised anything. I'm guessing.

[gaijin]

Interesting 'after debate' interview by CNNs John Roberts with Ron Paul...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smDEz9ovUao

I wonder if this is some sort of CNN make good for the lack of attention Paul received relative to the other candidates last night.

[Edward]

It may be that snowballs will melt in Hell, pigs will fly, cats will talk, dogs will walk upright, fluffy will say something sensible, and Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination. The smart money's on the snowballs and the pigs.

[VM]

Dan T: for someone who doesn't believe in intellectual honesty, your EDWARD is pretty good.

[Ron Paul Revolution]

Everyone Vote For Ron Paul! Who cares about parties. They are basically corporations. It's time to stop letting CNN and the rest of the mainstream media tell us who it's OK to vote for. This is a democracy. It's time to remind the world what America is REALLY about. Ron Paul: Hope For America. I'm excited. This is a revolution. Let's change the world.

[Edward]

Ron Paul
Has a lot of gall
Bein' a Jesus freak and all
Talkin' about God in the constitution
And a libertarian revolution
At the same time
As he's closin' the borders
Takin' Nazi money (if not orders)
Bashin' Mexicans for not bein'
American enough
And that kind of stuff
We should call his bluff
Just who are you really, Mr. Paul,
All libertarian hotsy-totsy
Are you really one of us,
Or are you just a Nazi?

[Edward]

What's the difference between Mr. Libertarian Ron Paul and Tancredo on immigration?

[Geotpf]

Stephen | November 29, 2007, 12:20pm | #

Ron Paul is going to take NH!!

No, no he's not.

http://www.pollster.com/08-NH-Rep-Pres-Primary.php

He's in fourth, according to this measure, with 7.5% (just beating Huckabee with 6.9%). Romney has 31.5%, Rudy has 20.2%, and McCain has 15.5%.

At least Paul is kicking Thompson's butt-he only has 2.8%.

And New Hampshire is probably one of the most pro-libertarian states, although not as much so as states in the non-coastal west, or Alaska.

If Paul wins any one state, I predict it will be Alaska. I've seen no current polling for Alaska, but it's traditionally been the most Libertarian state in the nation-Ed Clark got 11.66% of the vote there in 1980.

[prolefeed]

I keep going back and forth on whether to register as a Republican and vote for Paul in the Massachusetts primary.

If he wins, no matter what happens in the general, we're out of Iraq.

Nice try, joe, but if HRC wins, according to her own words we probably won't be out of Iraq by the end of her first term.

[VM]

DanT:
"What's the difference between Mr. Libertarian Ron Paul and Tancredo on immigration?"

one dresses his answer in target-constituent ear-pleasing "let the states decide" rhetoric, while the other dresses his in target-constituent, ear-pleasing, navitist rhetoric.

that's the difference.

[Edward]

I am intent on making this immigration issue part of the national debate during that Presidential election... and I will do that any way I can. --Tom Tancredo

How much longer can we maintain huge unassimilated subgroups within America, filled with millions of people who don't speak English or participate fully in American life? Americans finally have decided the status quo is unacceptable, and immigration may be the issue that decides the 2008 presidential election.--Ron Paul "The Immigration Question"

[Ruthless]

Below is a quote from an e-mail I just got from my irrepressible daughter in CA. She's apologizing because my fatherly advice is to not vote, much less give money.

"I is so bad I even went online and gave him another 25 smackers. I promise I won't do it again. It's just that he's like 50k behind Fred Thompson in fundraising which got me riled up. Any chance to pass up that pompous useless idiot is a chance I cannot pass up. I so bad."

[Chris S]

This just in:

The Dondero has been spotted here:

http://www.juancole.com/2007/11/mccain-blames-rise-of-hitler-on-ron.html

The usual. Slamming Ron Paul. That guy is such a joker.

[Seen on a U of ND Bathroom Sta]

South Dakota, where the men are men
and so are the women.

[Jamie Kelly]

I've seen no current polling for Alaska, but it's traditionally been the most Libertarian state in the nation

With the biggest federal handouts in the nation.
Ever heard of Sen. I. Ron E.?

[Edward]

Famous Libertarian quote:

Birthright citizenship similarly rewards lawbreaking, and must be stopped. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the perverse incentive to sneak into this country remains strong. Citizenship involves more than the mere location of one's birth. True citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States. Americans are happy to welcome those who wish to come here and build a better life for themselves, but we rightfully expect immigrants to show loyalty and attempt to assimilate themselves culturally. Birthright citizenship sometimes confers the benefits of being American on people who do not truly embrace America.--Ron Paul "The Immigration Question"

[sage]

OK everyone (that matters), I've replied to they guy and I'm going to do it. I have to go to a meeting this Sunday, so I'll let you know how it goes.

[Edward]

Ruthless,

Kids can seem so brainless. Don't worry, she'll probably grow out of it.

[CM]

Sage -

say what? huh/ confoozd.

[VM]

d'oh. VM.

/kicks elmo in taint.

[Edward]

"It's not hatred of these other people why we oppose this immigration. It's simply that we know that massive immigration into our own countries will absolutely destroy what we find beautiful and valuable." --David Duke

[Dan D.]

1. Ron Paul
2. Has a lot of gall
3. Bein' a Jesus freak and all
4. Talkin' about God in the constitution
5. And a libertarian revolution
6. At the same time
7. As he's closin' the borders
8. Takin' Nazi money (if not orders)
9. Bashin' Mexicans for not bein'
10. American enough
11. And that kind of stuff
12. We should call his bluff
13. Just who are you really, Mr. Paul,
14. All libertarian hotsy-totsy
15. Are you really one of us,
16. Or are you just a Nazi?

2. Sure does
3. Source? I think he's talked less about religion than anyone else on stage.
4. Source?
5. The nice thing about a libertarian revolution is that no matter how despicable you are, as long as you haven't actually committed a crime, you won't be up against the wall.
7. No, closing the borders to terrorists, the contagious, and spies, and merely removing the incentives for illegal aliens to remain here.
8. If 20 years in Washington hasn't changed Ron Paul, I don't think $500 Nazi dollars will. If the Nazis want to waste their money, let them.
10. Source?
12. I'd love to see you try.
15. Yes, but apparently you're not
16. No.

[Edward]

Wow, talk about a measured response!

[Edward]

Talkin' about God in the Constitution:

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion.--Ron Paul "The War on Religion"

[sage]

Moose,

You have to scroll up a bit to my first comment on this thread. I'm going to kick my involvement up a notch for the good doctor.

[Fluffy]

Nick -

In many other states, the delegates aren't selected by the candidate. The delegates are party functionaries who are only obligated to vote for the winning candidate on the first ballot. In my state, if you're a Paul supporter off the street and you decide today that you might want to be a delegate, you have absolutely no shot, because the rules require past participation in state conventions, signoff by county chairs, etc. Stuff like that.

A brokered convention is only good for Paul supporters who are OK with scorched earth as second best to winning. After the first ballot, Paul's number of delegates can only go one way - down.

[robc]

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers.

TJ did mention thr phrase, but generally true.

On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs.

Ture, including the beliefs of the Theists and Atheists.

Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion.

True. None were in favor of hostility to religion. TJ might have killed some priests, but he was very tolerent of religious beliefs otherwise.

So what is your point again?

[Edward]

Robc,

Look up "replete" in a good dictionary. Then go find the many references to God in the Constitution for me. I'll wait.

[Urkobold?]

FAMOUS QUOTE FROM EDWARD: "Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination."

[Edward]

Gosh, you Paulistas just want to chant slogans. What about Ron Paul's Tancredo-like views on immigration? How do you square them with libertarianism? How about his absurd claim that the Constitution is "replete" with references to God? Is he nuts? Are you?

[highnumber]

Edward,

I, too, have misgivings about Ron Paul.

[robc]

Edward,

"Declaration and Constitution" != "Constitution"

[Edward]

Highnumber,

Jesus, thank God! Figuratively, of course.

[robc]

Edward,

Although he did say both, which would be wrong, but the point of hostility, which is what I was saying true to, not every clause, is still true.

[Edward]

Hignumber,

I just read your post on Urkobolf (or whatever). Well, at least you have misgivings.

[robc]

Edward,

I have never known a politician that I agreed with 100% of the time. Duh. If I run for office, that might change, it also might not.

[Edward]

robc

How aghast do you think Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson would be at the federal governments' "hostility" to religion?

"It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine, and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man." --Thomas Paine "An Answer To A Friend Regarding The Age Of Reason," The Prospect, 12 April 1804

Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

[sixstring]

Up, Up, and Away in my beautiful balloon!

Would you like to ride in my beautiful balloon?

[Edward]

I have never known a politician that I agreed with 100% of the time. Duh. If I run for office, that might change, it also might not.--robc

Yeah, but politicians who take positions comletely opposed to your core principles and spout nonsense about God in documents they either haven't read or don't understand??

[Rick Barton]

Yeah joe, just do it. It's a revolutionary act, and you're a revolutionary kinda guy, right? (In a considered sort of way, of course.) Also, you'll wanna be part of it if the nation has a fit of rationality.

[robc]

Edward,

A lot. Jefferson favored religious tolerence.

We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries. -- TJ

[Edward]

I think we should ignore Edward and his Ron Paul quotes and get on with supporting Ron Paul. Who cares what the man actually said and believes?

[robc]

Edward,

Which of my core principles does RP oppose? On almost everything [everything I consider important, anyway] he disagrees with the LP (for example), I agree with him.

[robc]

Edward,

I, for example, favor shrinking the fed, state & locals governments so small that churches become far more important than them.

Sound familiar?

[robc]

Religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted. - TJ

I hadnt seen that one before. Edward does go around posting it.

[Edward]

robc,

A year from now, Ron paul will be a distant memory for most, but still cherished by his faithful. I have to run. You carry on. Keep the faith!

[robc]

I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority. -- TJ

Another, TJ claiming religous meddling belongs at the state level. 🙂

[voisine]

Joe - all the leading Dems have stated they can't get us out of Iraq by 2013. They can stop the funding at any time and haven't. They want a permanent base in Iraq and would like us to get involved in Darfur and elsewhere. They won't close down the bases we have in 130 of the 160 or so countries in the world. Stopping the fighting while continuing occupation around the world would the worst of all worlds.

[Rick Barton]

Edward:

What about Ron Paul's Tancredo-like views on immigration?

VM at 3:38pm answered that:

"one dresses his answer in target-constituent ear-pleasing "let the states decide" rhetoric, while the other dresses his in target-constituent, ear-pleasing, navitist rhetoric.

that's the difference."

[robc]

Another, if Edward catches up, he needs to add it to his TJ spam-bot:

In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies.

[iih (aka Ali)]

As an immigrant I am 100% with Ron on the issue. His position is nothing like Tancredo's. To you, Edward, they may sound the same, but they really are not.

[NoStar]

In April 2007, Fred Thompson said he had had Non-Hogkins lymphoma 2.5 years earlier, but it was in remission and he was no longer on any medical treatment.

With that nagging cough, grayish pallor, and loose skin, he looks like he has stage 3 or 4 lung cancer. Get back to your doctors, Fred.

[NoStar]

I just took the CNN poll on who won the debate.
I have two things to report.

1. Ron Paul is winning with 60%. (He does lose out to Mitt in the snappiest dresser category.)

2. Fred Thompson isn't listed as a candidate/participant in the debate, but Tommy Thompson is!!?! (gotta love CNN.)

[pdog]

NoStar: I think you clicked on a previous debate poll.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Vote on principles, you may lose the election but you'll be able to look yourself in the face.

Sound advice, my man. Sound advice.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

NoStar, Sage wants you to join him as a precinct captain in your neighborhood. He's gonna sign on in his.

[NoStar]

TWC and Sage,
A few years back, I filed for and ran unopposed and was elected to be a Libertarian Precinct Committee Office with 19 votes. That was back when the caucus system was overshadowed by the primary and was pretty much superflous for Libertarians.

If there is not a Republican Precinct Officer in my district, I will apply. I'll be attending the caucus either way.

[NoStar]

pdog,

Thanks. You are correct. The current poll for the Nov 28 debate has Paul leading the pack.

48% say Paul won the debate. Huckabee is second with 23%.

The seventh question is about who had the best video, but when you click to see a more detailed voting result, the question is listed as "who is the snappiest dresser?"

So, while my final comment will remain unchanged, the reason for it is different: Gotta love CNN.

[sage]

The chick that got me to sign on put it very plainly: we have to go precinct by precinct, county by county.

She also wanted me to keep sorta quiet about who I was supporting for the time being. Apparently Thompson has some supporters trying to do a stealth run as well.

[NoStar]

There is no Precinct Committee officer in my precinct. I just contacted the county Republican chairman and volunteered.

We will arrange an evening meeting very soon.
I've got an unused bedroom I can use as a backroom, but I don't have any good cigars to fill the backroom up with smoke.

Let me know if you have any cigars you would like to donate to a good cause.

[Brandybuck]

I changed to Republican months ago, but I will stay R after the election, regardless of how Ron Paul does. Why? Because Ron Paul has done more for liberty by running as an R, then all prior LP candidates have done combined (including the earlier Paul incarnation).

I'm staying R to help drag it back to a party of small-government. People who can't stand the R, should try to do the same with the D.

[Hugh Akston]

I'm glad I saw this, my last day to affiliate is comin' up here.

[Kris]

NoStar,

I don't have any cigars, but I do have a cool monocle, and even a top hat, if that will help. 🙂

[sage]

Brandybuck,

I'm with you. I think the people that want to effect change need to work one of the big two parties, as ugly as that sounds. And work from the inside out.

Look at all the special interest groups that infested the democrat party. Why can't freedom-starved Americans do the same?

[Dave Woycechowsky]

This was the first time a registered with any sort of party affiliation at all. Ron Paul rules.

He is gonna get Howard Deaned bigtime.

[sid davisson]

I have grown fed-up with all of the raging nitwits that toss the word "isolationist" around without realizing that to be Green or a rational human being means that you realize all of America's natural resources are finite and that tax dollars are also finite.We may not squander either on mindless endeavors. We must take the long view from here on out.All of our options are gone.Entangling international alliances are not inevitable.

[Gene Trosper]

I have been a registered Libertarian voter since 1988, but changed my registration to Republican specifically to vote for Ron Paul in the California primaries. If I happen to notice a change in the GOP toward a more libertarian outlook, I just might stay there.

[bob]

This afternoon the Libertarian Party called me asking for money to help get their candidate on the ballots in the several states.

I politely explained that my money and my time were going to the Ron Paul Revolution.

They took it well, and didn't seem a bit surprised.

[Chris S]

It is easy. When someone asks you if Ron Paul can win, you say yes.

[mookrit]

I'm an Australian. Just wondering why the Libertarian Party (is there also a Constitution Party?) is even bothering to run candidates for President or anything? Why not just divert resources to Ron Paul's presidential bid?

I mean, this is a very rare opportunity for the entire freedom loving community in the US to get their financial and voting bloc support behind a single candidate.

If I were in the US I'd be persuading everyone who claims to be a libertarian to drop everything and support Ron Paul, even if they don't agree 100%. But I've been reading stuff about how even the libertarian think-tanks aren't united behind Ron Paul. What an absolute shame.

[Scott]

Mookrit

They are diverting resources, alot, but just doing so informally. Their respective media officers have publicly stated they would love for Dr. Paul to represent them in a third party bid, but, unlike Australia, the U.S. system is winner take all. There is no proportional representation. It would take a national catastrophe to propel a third party candidate into power.