Libertarian History/Philosophy

Where Did It All Go Wrong?

A thrilling and dispiriting year for libertarian politics

|

On the afternoon of July 6, 2007, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas emerged from his taxi to what was becoming a shockingly familiar sight: Dozens of fans waving handmade or Internet-bought "Ron Paul" signs.

They had been waiting outside the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C., for up to 45 minutes, ready to greet the long-shot Republican presidential candidate as he arrived for an interview with George Stephanopoulos, chief Washington correspondent for ABC News. The famous interviewer had walked into the hotel minutes earlier, smiling at the crowd, but was barely noticed. The obscure congressman was greeted with shouts, cheers, and a bunch of hand-held cameras.

I asked Paul about reports that his rival Sen. John McCain—then cratering in the polls—might take public financing. "He needs it," Paul said, chuckling. "We don't need it!"

Inside the hotel the politician known as "Dr. No" told Stephanopoulos his campaign had raised $2.4 million in the second quarter, quadrupling his numbers from the quarter before. "We're on the upslope," said Paul. "We feel good about what's happening."

Stephanopoulos asked just one tough question: "What's success for you in this campaign?"

"What's success?" Paul pondered this. "Well, to win, is one, is the goal—"

"That's not going to happen."

Paul was taken aback. "Do you know for—absolute? Are you willing to bet your—every cent in your pocket for that?"

"Yes."

"You are. OK. I thought so when I ran for Congress." The congressman laughed and moved on.

Paul's life was changing dramatically. Within six months he would raise another $25 million for his campaign, giving him a larger war chest than McCain at the time. Within ayear he would draw thousands of supporters to a "Revolution March" in Washington, leading up to a massive "Rally for the Republic" just minutes from the site of the Republican National Convention. By the end of 2008, Ron Paul would be a bona fide national political figure: author of a No. 1 New York Times bestseller, subject of two quickie biographies, a frequent guest on cable news shows.

But 2008 would end with Stephanopoulos' question hanging. What was success? Having failed to win the Republican nomination, did Paul's candidacy affect the big-government direction of the GOP? Did it improve the fortunes of a more ideologically compatible political grouping, the Libertarian Party, which nominated Paul for president in 1988 and still counts him as a lifetime member?

Optimism for the Paul campaign peaked in December 2007 and faded by February 2008. Optimism for Libertarian candidate Bob Barr's effort to pick up the Paul banner peaked in May and was in tatters by September. By November, mutual recriminations from both camps put libertarians in a familiar political position: bitterly blaming one another for their ongoing marginalization. "Paul set the liberty movement back a decade by encouraging people to stay in the GOP," Barr Communications Director Shane Cory told me just days before the election. Paul Communications Director Jesse Benton described Barr's campaign as "disappointing" after the election. "They got more and more desperate."

Paul launched his presidential bid on January 11, 2007. In the first three months of the year, he raised only $640,000 and hired a skeletal staff. The momentum shift came on May 15, 2007, when Paul butted heads with Rudy Giuliani in the second GOP presidential debate. Pressed on whether he thought the United States could still follow a "humble foreign policy" after 9/11, Paul tried to explain the theory of blowback. "Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us?" he asked. "They attack us because we've been over there." A sputtering Giuliani demanded that Paul "withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that." The South Carolina crowd roared. Paul refused to back down, and was heavily booed.

"A lot of people thought that would be our death knell," Benton recalls. Back in D.C., a Giuliani-supporting peer (Paul won't say who) thanked the Texas congressman for "helping my guy out." But Paul benefited more than Giuliani, receiving a surge of donations and media profiles. "It really rocketed our campaign forward," says Benton. Of the $2.4 million three-month fund raising haul that Paul told Stephanopoulos about, nearly all of it came in the weeks after the debate.

The new energy around Paul siphoned attention away from the Libertarian Party. Eleven days before the South Carolina debate, minor celebrity oddsmaker Wayne Allyn Root had announced a bid for the party's nomination, entering a field that included medical marijuana activist Steve Kubby, Massachusetts party chair George Phillies, and software entrepreneur Michael Jingozian. But the only libertarian the press wanted to cover was Paul.

"While Ron was running there was no interest in anyone else in the libertarian movement," Root says. "Not for me, not for anyone in the L.P. The oxygen was sucked out of the room." On July 17, Kubby promised to leave the race and encourage the L.P. to run no candidate if Paul won the GOP nomination.

The excitement around the "rEVOLution" reached a crescendo on November 5 with an online "money bomb" that raised $4.2 million on the anniversary of Guy Fawkes' attempt to blow up the British Parliament. Paul had been winning nonbinding Republican straw polls in Iowa, Alabama, New York, and elsewhere, and was surging into double digits in early primary state polling.

The Libertarian National Committee chose to ride the wave. On the first weekend in December, the party's southeast regional representative proposed a resolution that "in the event that Republican primary voters select a candidate other than Congressman Paul in February of 2008, the Libertarian National Committee urges Congressman Ron Paul to seek the presidential nomination of the Libertarian Party." The motion was adopted unanimously. The representative behind the resolution: former Georgia congressman Bob Barr.

On December 16, the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, a second Paul money bomb raised $6 million. The Libertarian Party's 1988 nominee was about to raise more funds than any other Republican in the year's final quarter. The political aspirations ofmany libertarians were focused on a Republican.

The first signal that those dreams would fall short came in the January 3, 2008 Iowa caucuses, where a Paul campaign hoping to finish third with results in the high teens finished fifth with 10 percent. The candidate then belatedly threw himself into New Hampshire, hoping the Live Free or Die state, with its famously independent streak, would reward the only anti-war Republican in the field.

No such luck. Paul came in fifth again on January 8, with a paltry 8 percent of the vote, and the campaign never fully recovered.

"The fact is that our candidate was never sure about running," argues Justine Lam, Paul's e-media coordinator. "People in the grassroots blamed the campaign for Ron not spending more time in New Hampshire. I understand them, but that was the candidate's decision. He wasn't putting all his effort into it."

Although Paul finished an impressive second place in Nevada on January 19, the campaign failed to craft a strategy for the 22-state Super Tuesday on February 5, Benton says. Instead of concentrating on proportional representation states, where a second or third place showing could win delegates, they frittered away their time.

"We showed we could do well in caucuses," Benton says, "and if we had devoted more resources to them we could have won five or six states, like Montana, North Dakota, Alaska. We dedicated too many resources to closed Republican primaries. They were too hard to win, and we probably should have realized that."

Two days later, chief McCain rival Mitt Romney appeared at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., and officially suspended his campaign. Hours later, Ron Paul walked onto the same stage, after an introduction by Bob Barr. "We now have the gold standard for being a conservative," Barr told the enthusiastic CPAC crowd, "and it's Dr. Ron Paul!" A rumor buzzed around the room: Barr was ready to take the baton for his own run.

But for months, nothing happened. Instead, the energy of the Paul campaign just slowly dissipated. A neoconservative Republican named Chris Peden had filed against Paul for his House seat in Texas and was claiming to anyone who would listen that he had Paul on the ropes. On February 11—the day before primaries in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia—Paul released a perplexing YouTube message acknowledging that the March 4 House primary "might change my schedule a little bit" and that his presidential campaign was scaling down. "To tell you that Peden played no factor would not be honest," Benton says. Still, Paul ended up routing the challenger by 41 points.

Other politicians were beginning to angle after Paul's voters. On March 18, Democratic presidential candidate and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel told me, "If Ron Paul could raise all that money with his libertarian message, you know, I think I could raise a lot of money." Eight days later Gravel entered the Libertarian race. The same week, party mainstay Mary Ruwart joined the fight. Meanwhile, friends of Barr were making calls to see if the 1990s drug warrior could win the nomination of a party with many members who found him unacceptable.

Justine Lam considers this the period when the great libertarian momentum of 2008 was lost. "Ron didn't drop out in March, when he should have dropped out," she says. While Paul was focusing on his House seat, presidential campaign chairman Kent Snyder proposed that the national effort be officially dissolved and a new organization launched, to focus on educating voters, pushing libertarian legislation, lobbying members of Congress, and recruiting candidates for Congress. On June 12, a week after the final three primaries in Montana, South Dakota, and New Mexico netted him three second-place finishes and zero delegates, Paul finally launched the Campaign for Liberty, a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization.

By that point, Barr had won the Libertarian nomination in a narrow victory over Ruwart. Root, another '90s Republican, defeated Kubby for the vice presidential nomination, a reward for a last-minute endorsement that put Barr over the top. The Barr/Root ticket hoped to pick up not just Paul's voters but as many of his activists and donors as possible.

One stubborn thorn in Barr's side was the Constitution Party bid of the paleoconservative pastor Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin had defeated gadfly Alan Keyes for the C.P. nomination in large part by hinting he could get Paul's endorsement. Party founder Howard Phillips had commended Baldwin to delegates by suggesting that Paul's $35 million in fund raising were "resources we can look to if we nominate a candidate who has been a friend of Ron Paul." Over the summer, Baldwin and Barr campaigned for different halves of the Paul movement. While Baldwin inveighed against the New World Order at the D.C. Revolution March with speakers such as Phillips and leftist writer Naomi Wolf, Barr and Root campaigned at Freedom Fest, a Las Vegas gathering with speakers such as Steve Forbes and Christopher Hitchens.

"The tone from the Barr campaign had been getting more and more exasperated," remembers Benton. "They thought they'd swoop in and take Ron's supporters, hit 5 percent in the polls, get into the debates."

On September 10, Paul invited Barr and Baldwin, along with Green nominee Cynthia McKinney and independent Ralph Nader, to an event at the National Press Club where the candidates would sign a four-pronged statement of principles on foreign policy, privacy, the deficit, and the Federal Reserve, and win Paul's endorsement—all of them, equally. Barr signed the statement but pulled out of the press conference, scheduling his own event nearby to criticize Paul for splitting up the "pro-freedom" vote. Paul was furious. Twelve days later he endorsed Baldwin.

It would be easy to overstate the impact of the falling-out. "I'd like to think Dr. Paul doing what he did probably pumped a few hundred thousand extra votes into the third parties," speculates Benton. "But I don't think he had a tremendous effect." Barr campaign manager Russ Verney is more blunt: "Look what Paul did for Baldwin. Not much." Baldwin ended up getting about as many votes (186,457) as the Constitution Party's first candidate, Howard Phillips, 12 years earlier; Barr won 511,529 votes, the highest Libertarian total since 1980 but only the fourth highest in percentage terms. Paul, by contrast, won 1.2 million votes in the Republican primaries.

The year ended with George Stephanopoulos' question still hanging. What, for Ron Paul in 2008, was success? Whatever it was, the Libertarian Party could not capture it.

David Weigel is an associate editor of reason.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

114 responses to “Where Did It All Go Wrong?

  1. Yes, truly it was the Libertarians’ race to lose.

    Wait, what?

  2. Notice how I’m not even relevant to the story you cosmotarian fucks!

    Nobody fucking cared about the newsletters except you so you could rationalize supporting the “Messiah”.

  3. Libertarian Party, what a clusterfuck of irrelevant incompetance. It is such a shame because libertarian ideas are popular enough to receive national attention, while the party that espouses them flounders in obscurity.

  4. There were libertarians in politics in 2008?

    (I keed, i keed.)

  5. Glad one of the not-so-rightwingers is finally getting some space here again.

  6. At least Barr was honest with the conservaties when he told them Paul was the “gold standard” of what it means to be a conservative. Barr and Paul were both conservatives. Paul was a paleoconservative (not a libertarian) and Barr was more traditional conservative and less paleo than Paul (he supported interventionism in South America for instance.

    It is also clear and was at the time that Paul never intended to run a full on race. He was accumulating money. Anyone who looked at his FEC reports on campaign spending could see that Paul was amassing funds but not really serious about spending them on a campaign. I was noting to friends at the time that Paul was using the campaign to fund raise for some other project and just not being honest about it. The presidential campaign was a fund raiser for something else but I said, at the time, that we didn’t know what the something else was. Now we do.

  7. By the way, it would be nice if Wiegel could possibly write something without making it clear he is now a shill for Root, the way he was for Barr. I know Wiegel has a bias — that was clear in his reports from Denber — but surely he doesn’t have to have Root in article after article. I can’t think of a worse man to represent the libertarian movement than Root.

  8. Ron Paul did nothing for the Constitution Party because the philosophy of the Constitution Party (vaguely theocratic) is antithetical to the philosophy of most Ron Paul supporters.

    In any case, I really loathe Bob Barr/the LP. This loathing would temper if they’d at least change their name to the Sort of Libertarian Party, or something else a bit more honest.

  9. I can’t think of a worse man to represent the libertarian movement than Root.

    Hmm…you might be right. First person to think of someone worse than Root wins.

  10. “Hmm…you might be right. First person to think of someone worse than Root wins.”

    Mary Ruwart?

  11. No wait, I got that wrong. Jingozian.

  12. The problem with the (other) libs was, of course, those involved. They were even more cultlike than BHO fans. At least the latter were aware of the outside world. RP fans created their own special universe, refusing to acknowledge the wider environment and gathering in their compounds waiting for the (other) Messiah.

    If RP fans had had brains and had been in touch with reality, they would have realized that you have to attack your opponents, and do so in a salient way.

    They had months within which they could have publicly embarrassed McCain over this issue. Asking him real questions about that and uploading his response to video sharing sites probably would have ended his candidacy.

    RP fans simply did not have the intelligence nor the balls to do that, but instead choose childlike things that made them look bad, like blimps or costumed parades.

    Back in October 2007, I uploaded a video showing them how to win; that went on to only get 25 Diggs and only a couple thousand views.

    Meanwhile, their braindead leaders continued to engage in stupid stunts that only burnished their in-group credentials and made them look worse to everyone else.

    Not only that, but the supposed libertarians at this site somehow think holding politicians accountable by asking them tough questions is some kind of joke and worked to dissuade anyone from doing it.

    The libertarians could have had much more success in 2008, but only if they were completely different people: those with brains and balls.

  13. No wait, I got it wrong again. Philles.

    Ah hold on… Gravel! Yep, that’s my final answer.

  14. Hmm…you might be right. First person to think of someone worse than Root wins.

    DONDEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

  15. Egosumabbas,

    Goya FTW, dude. Woo!

  16. Not only that, but the supposed libertarians at this site somehow think holding politicians accountable by asking them tough questions is some kind of joke and worked to dissuade anyone from doing it.

    Not “anyone;” mostly just you.

    The libertariansLoneWacko could have had much more success in 2008, but only if theyhe were [a] completely different peopleperson: thoseone with brains and balls [and without that ludicrous, overweening SelfImportance, not to mention FaultySyntax].

    Fixed it for ya.

  17. Wow, OLS just made a decent point.

  18. Now he could have just stopped at “Ron Paul fans were out of touch with reality and created their own special cult-like reality” instead of going into five paragraphs where he shamelessly pimps his blog through self-linking, but still. I guess it’s a step on the road to recovery for him,.

  19. @SugarFree

    Given the virulent rhetoric that the liberty movement flings towards its own members, I have yet to find a metaphor more appropriate. Picture is a thousand words and all that.

  20. AMERIKA IS EATING ITS CHILDREN

  21. I thought “Weigal” was shilling for the Labour party on the pages of the Economist these days…

  22. Christine Smith?

  23. Optimism for Libertarian candidate Bob Barr’s effort to pick up the Paul banner peaked in May and was in tatters by September a little later in May.

    Ministry of Truth

  24. Just because you are not optimistic about anybody except “V”, Warren, does not make it true for everybody.

  25. What went wrong with libertarian politics in 2008? Hell, the same that goes wrong every election cycle… libertarians.

  26. Think of the fun we could have with a Dondero 2012 campaign.

  27. Hmm…you might be right. First person to think of someone worse than Root wins.

    Badnarik

    I know, I’m not first so I don’t win:(

  28. Frankly, nothing really went wrong. We ran a Libertarian who garnered the same percentage of the vote we get every year.

  29. Ron was a fool not to accept the libertarian nomination or to at least join Barr as the VP. even an endorsement of only Barr would have been better than what happened. in the end I don’t think he accomplished much, other than bringing some libertarian ideas into the mainstream. he got all of this attention and then at the end made it seem like a vote for any third party would be good enough, and even kind of endorsed Baldwin. really bad decisions on his part.

  30. If Harry Browne could not do it, heck, nobody will.

  31. I think the best shot at president we’ll ever get at winning electoral votes with the LP is to get a self-made from-the-bottom entrepreneur with deep pockets.

    Root is the closest we came to that, though I think he may have been too… energetic… for a lot of libertarians to handle.

  32. OLS has made a great point. Libertarians need some sort of “opposition research” operation to ask questions, document answers, and use them against politicians in later (maybe even years later) campaigns. The public has to be constantly reminded about the past votes, views, and stances of politicians running for new positions today.
    If the LP has any role at all it should be as the kid crying “the emperor has no clothes.”

  33. Ministry of Truth

    The convention was Memorial Day weekend, and was Barr’s high water mark. Every other political party rallies around their nominee – and when they don’t they almost inevitably lose (Douglas, Taft, Humphrey, Bush 1 – Reagan is just about the sole exception). Not saying that Barr’s failures are entirely Barr’s. It took, however, at least two months to see that he would neither be able to do a bank shot on Paul’s success (not helped by the reindeer games mentioned by Weigel), nor use what name recognition he had to build a more mainstream broader based support.

    And I’ll say this again. The biggest failure of the Paul movement is the median Ron Paul supporter not showing up to vote for the guy when it counted.

  34. Nothing went wrong, the 2008 election showed that politics is not the way to bring about freedom Trying to evade taxes still is.

  35. Kolohe,

    I voted for Paul in the primaries and Barr in the general. By super Tuesday I had already withdrawn my financial support and my hopes for Paul. Even so, Paul 10x > Barr 100x > Root.

    Egosumabbas writes:
    Root is the closest we came to that, though I think he may have been too… energetic… for a lot of libertarians to handle.

    If by “energetic” you mean, has diarrhea of the mouth, the personality of a used car salesman, and no understanding of libertarian principles, then yes

  36. @Warren:

    As far as I know, he had the backing of the Chicago LP. He had the required energy to not come across as dead on camera, and honestly I think we need somebody to agressively “sell” libertarianism. I know most people on here don’t mind reading dry economics and philosophical texts, but thats like… 2% of the population?

  37. *sigh* The biggest mistake the Libertarian Party ever made was calling itself Libertarian. This just opened the party up to a bunch of purges, litmus-tests and irrelevancy.

    Maybe Barr isn’t a “True-Blood Libertarian” by the standards the Libertarian Inquisition has set, but he’d make a fucking great addition to the Freedom Party.

  38. “Not saying that Barr’s failures are not entirely Barr’s.” -> i.e. Barr’s failures are entirely Barr’s.

    And I agree that Root rubs me entirely the wrong way. It seems to me a necessary condition to have a ‘cult of personality’ as part of a successful political movement. But that’s not all you can rely on. And definitely not Root’s personality.

  39. It should be clear by now that the Libertarian Party cannot be competitive in a race for President. It should also be clear that a limited government, antiwar candidate cannot win a Republican nomination for President.

    But Ron Paul has been elected to Congress, and LP candidates in a number of districts ran up impressive vote totals. An LP candidate for Congress in Ohio received 56,000 votes, and another in Texas received 46,000 votes.

    We need to build the Libertarian Movement from the bottom up, and work to elect antiwar/antistate candidates to Congress, to be the opposition no matter who wins the White House.

  40. No, we need to stop calling the party Libertarian. SRSLY.

  41. The “great libertarian momentum of 2008” never actually existed.

    Ron Paul got the attention he got because he was the most loudly, unabashedly anti-war guy who made it as far as the debates. That’s what got people excited, people who’d never heard of Hayek or the non-aggression principle, who didn’t give a damn about the gold standard, and who’d probably never read H&R or picked up a copy of Reason.

    None of the fiscal issues that gave the pinkos tight pants mattered to the bulk of Paul supporters. Most of those people would have voted Green if there’d been an equally earnest and charismatic Green candidate (and if a Green could get the press coverage of a dissident Red Congressman).

    I don’t know what the paleos and the pinkos thought would happen with the Ron Paul campaign. That he’d get the nomination of a Team Red that hates everything he stands for? That Obama would give a speech at the Blue convention exhorting delegates to draft Paul for their team? That squillions of Americans would write in his name and he’d be forced to accept a January coronation?

    No. Paul said he was running for the Red nomination, a goal that he and any adult supporter of his knew would never happen. Neither David Weigel, Reason, the Great Cosmotarian Conspiracy, racist newsletters, or his being pathetically beholden to whoever wrote those newsletters caused his doomed campaign to fail.

    As for Barr, he was the damned LP candidate for president – if any longtime US citizen is seriously asking why he was a footnote in the 2008 election, I’m mildly horrified.

  42. We need to build the Libertarian Movement from the bottom up, and work to elect antiwar/antistate candidates to Congress, to be the opposition no matter who wins the White House.

    And create another irrelevant party..

  43. Well said, Eric the .5b.

  44. “No, we need to stop calling the party Libertarian. SRSLY.”

    Well, it was supposed to be the Liberal party, except the meaning was completely warped by the left. For whatever reason we decided to steal a name from the left as revenge:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialist

    The LP in any case needs to be a reformist party. Having an anarchist political party is a bit silly. If you’re a principled individualist anarchist your only option really is counter-economics.

    Good luck trying to rebrand the LP as the Freedom Party. Is that even possible under the current bylaws?

  45. 2008 taught us an important lesson: Fuck politics. Let’s blow up some trains.

  46. I have nothing to add to Eric @ 5:41 pm.

    That is all.

  47. Well, one thing we can glean from the past ten years is that blowing things up gets you a lot more attention than any libertarian presidential candidate has ever gotten.

  48. For one thing, the RP campaign ran a typical political campaign. It was as though RP’s campaign manager didn’t get the rEVOLution at all.

    The commercials were a big turnoff to many as was the pandering to RTLers.

  49. Ron Paul got a great deal accomplished for a single election cycle. Besides demonstrating that not all Republicans have forgotten the constitution, he put a lot of issues back on the table that had been given up for lost almost a century ago.

    Thanks to Ron, tens of thousands of people now understand that inflation does far more damage than just robbing us of purchasing power. They know what the Fed is, who owns it, and why it inflates the currency. They no longer take it for granted that the USA should have troops in 130 countries around the world. They understand that the bailouts can’t help the economy recover.

    -jcr

  50. The Ron Paul campaign demonstrated the essential dynamic between libertarians and the Republican Party: they’ll be glad to take your votes and money but they’ll keep you far, far from the centers of power. Note how hard the party worked to keep Paul off stage, out of the limelight and out of the debates. And nobody in power said anything.

  51. JCR demonstrates, and further illustrates what was noted by Weigel, which is that the LP had no intention of doing anything serious until it found out whether Ron Paul would be accepted by the Republicans. They waited and waited and messed around and finally fielded Barr/Root.

    The LP is less than a “political party” yet more than a “coffee klatsch”. To quote from the article: “He wasn’t putting all his effort into it.” That sums it up.

    Wishing it were different, but doubting it could be, given the nature of most libertarians.
    (A bit like trying to form the “Individualist Party”.)

  52. I’m sorry, but the Paul campaign ran a crappy campaign itself. They had how much money poured into their camp and tons of support in NH, a state they could have done well in, and there was no coordination at all.

    After he lost in that state, he shoulda dropped his republican bid and gone third party. He could have been a force, but he screwed that up. I guess he is pretty old, but alas, I was dissapointed.

  53. Libertarian politics went wrong when too many of its supporters went into something similar to the democratic party’s Bush derangement syndrome in order to shut down nearly any discussion or comments other than how wonderful Obama is.

  54. A good write-up, but I have only one thing to ad about Paul’s campaign: its ads. That it put out such pitiful ads with the money they had is unforgivable. What few ads they did run focused on the issues- abortion, immigration, the budget- where to the average listener Paul just sounded like a plain vanilla conservative Republican. They should have been running ads on the war, civil liberties, and other issues which would have appealed to the non-Republican voters that were key to any plausible NH strategy and which eventually gave that state to McCain. Anti-war voters (something like ~30% of NH GOP primary voters iirc) went to, of all people, McCain, for the simple reason that the tone of his message was “I’ve been the only one criticizing the management of the war”. That McCain was more of a hawk than Bush was irrelevant- to the average, marginally-informed voter, McCain was the only guy criticizing Bush on the war. The only people who *ever* got a coherent picture of what Ron Paul was about were those who got it online- and only about 20% of Americans monitor politics online. Aside from the fleeting glories of the debates, which are valuable to the candidates more for how they affect media coverage than as a direct outreach to voters, no one whose only exposure was mainstream media and ads (most people) ever even heard that there was this guy running as a radically anti-Bush Republican. Yeah, they might have seen the signs plastered everywhere and maybe even an unsightly mob of supporters or two, but that didn’t tell them anything of consequence.

  55. Forget the libertarian party because there is none, and if you think there is, it’s irrelevant. Ron Paul lost NH because of massive voter fraud.
    He was the ONLY candidate to have 400 people outside the first debate, but CNN of course only showed the 50 or so for each of the other candidates and not ONE RP supporter. So the perception when he lost was that he had no support.

    At least Stephanopolous was honest is telling him he knows that presidents are annointed then promoted in the press and certain candidates will not be allowed to win.

    Also a lot of people in NH just refused to run a normal campaign and volunteer to do the normal things one must do to get the word out. They preferred to make handmade signs and party amongst themselves and make those stupid revolution banners instead of getting the word out to the voters of the real world. It was very frustrating for the people trying to do the event circuit for the campaign when they couldn’t even get two people to help them.

  56. Why doesn’t this article mention attacks on Ron Paul by Reasonoids and Catoites?

  57. A good write-up, but I have only one thing to ad about Paul’s campaign: its ads. That it put out such pitiful ads with the money they had is unforgivable. What few ads they did run focused on the issues- abortion, immigration, the budget- where to the average listener Paul just sounded like a plain vanilla conservative Republican. They should have been running ads on the war, civil liberties, and other issues which would have appealed to the non-Republican voters that were key to any plausible NH strategy and which eventually gave that state to McCain.

    Sadly, the campaign, like the people who whine about the disloyal and most counter-revolutionary actions of Reason, really believed that all their support came from a vast groundswell of gold-buggery.

  58. >They preferred to make handmade signs and party amongst themselves and make those stupid revolution banners instead of getting the word out to the voters of the real world.

    I’m sorry, but the official campaign sucked in that respect. They made it a pain to get GOTV/info packets, in that they made everyone drive to concord daily to get it. Seems like there should have been a digital solution since everyone was so in tune with the internet.

  59. Libertarians and the Libertarian Party are damaged every time they give a national forum to pieces of shit like Jesse Ventura. Ventura was a fucking disaster in Minnesota, but that is not the real reason he shouldn’t have been allowed on stage. Every time he spouted his “9/11 was an inside job” bullshit, libertarians lost the respect of more of the electorate, whether he was on the ballot himself or not. You don’t give a prominent speaking role at a convention to a man who thinks the WTC was brought down by controlled demolitions. He may as well of gotten up there and talked about the Jews and international banking or the Illuminati. I don’t recall anyone prominent rebuking that motherfucker, and they certainly didn’t stop inviting him to their national functions. And Paul appearing multiple times on the radio show of a man who out-and-out claimed 9-11 was perpetrated by George Bush, with no rebuttal or even feigned outrage from Paul did not help. This combined with his already weak denials that the US was responsible for 9/11 did an incredible amount of damage. And don’t even get me started on those fucking newsletters that read like they were plagiarized from the Grand Wizard of the KKK.

    The Libertarian party will never get anywhere as long as it allows itself to be associated with such fucking nutters. Do you think Barack Obama would have won the election if he didn’t distance himself from Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pflegler? Would he have won if Rosie O’Donnell was allowed to spout her bullshit at the Democratic National Convention, or if Obama was actively seen courting voters who wear Che shirts and hold up signs with the face of Mumia Abu Jamal or, worse yet, banners calling for the destruction of Israel? Successful candidates separate themselves from those piece of shit nutcases. The Libertarian Party seems to believe it is good strategy to embrace those kinds of turds.

    “Eleven days before the South Carolina debate, minor celebrity oddsmaker Wayne Allyn Root had announced a bid for the party’s nomination, entering a field that included medical marijuana activist Steve Kubby, Massachusetts party chair George Phillies, and software entrepreneur Michael Jingozian”

    But really, the above quote says it all. Fringe is a fucking understatement when describing those candidates. And seriously, an endorsement from Mike Gravel does no one any good.

    “Why doesn’t this article mention attacks on Ron Paul by Reasonoids and Catoites.”

    And lastly, the “we can’t have any dissent at all” attitude as epitomized by the above quote is incredibly hypocritical given the platitudes spouted by so many libertarians. I know it doesn’t really explain the party’s defeat, but I see shit like the quote above on this site all the time.

  60. Forget the libertarian party because there is none, and if you think there is, it’s irrelevant. Ron Paul lost NH because of massive voter fraud.
    He was the ONLY candidate to have 400 people outside the first debate, but CNN of course only showed the 50 or so for each of the other candidates and not ONE RP supporter. So the perception when he lost was that he had no support.”

    There is absolutely no evidence at all of voter fraud in New Hampshire. And the 400 people outside of a debate is evidence of absolutely nothing, other than the fact he had 400 supporters. Using this as evidence of huge nationwide support for Paul reminds me of the people who insist Paul’s winning of internet polls on various blogs was evidence of a huge groundswell of support for Paul. The last time I checked, the primaries were won by actual votes, not the size of a crowd of zealots.

  61. In the above post, I forgot to include a quotation mark at the beginning of the post. The first paragraph is not my own.

  62. B, if you had a newsletter, I’d subscribe to it.

  63. I live in Panama, so I obviously have no vote in the US. I was neither privvy to nor interested in Libertarian or Constitutionalist nor Green Party infighting.

    I watched all the debates on TV here and then again on Youtube and it seemed to me that the only candidates who spoke the truth and had some idea of how to extricate the States from their problems were Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. For some reason, thought Paul and Kucinich themselves are quite good friends, neither of their supporters could agree to disagree on lesser stuff and focus on peace and a strong economy based upon the type of fiscal “conservatism” both agree on.

    Barack Obama has never made a secret of being a Theocratic Authoritarian with the same views and policies as George W. Bush had. He was merely not as reckless as McCain.

    If there’s a way forward for you folks to rejoin the rest of the capitalist, self-governing world, instead of your bizarre Axis with China, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Kuwait, it will have to come through a libertarian/progressive fusion in which the stuff both sides agree on: PEACE, the CONSTITUTION, CAPITALISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT, and most important, PERSONAL FREEDOM are emphasized and you do a little mixing and matching with the rest.

    That is how Europe does it. That is how South America and Oceania do it.

  64. Interesting, this article is from the future…

  65. I guess you could include Colombia, Israel and Peru in the USA-SA-PRC-DRN-KOK axis, except that believe it or not, those three countries respect civil liberties, civil rights, and national sovereignty (except for ISR) than the US does.

    Si. Soy panameno judio asi que puedo decir cualquier tema sobre Israel que quisiera yo segun las leyes suyas de la “political correctness,” si o pa’ que? Jajaja!

  66. I wrote a post mortem of the Ron Paul campaign shortly after super tuesday. In a nutshell: Lack of central leadership, unresponsive campaign, acting like a cult, libertarian naivete, and ignoring Republican voters.

    Do I still agree with my assessment? It’s almost a year later, and yes I still agree with it. The campaign took our money but didn’t spend it. We got a “Campaign For Liberty” instead, but that’s nothing more than a network of meetups that are still arguing over conspiracies. The naivete is still there, the wishful thinking that if the signs were just waved a bit higher and the screaming a bit louder, then Paul could have won.

  67. ignoring Republican voters.

    Can’t a agree with you on that one. The Paul campaign did a fair bit of pandering to the anti-immigration crowd.

    -jcr

  68. To totally ignore the issue of unrelenting mainstream media negative bias toward the Paul campaign, as well numerous verified incidents of voter fraud, call into question the veracity or at least the intent of this article.

  69. PEACE, the CONSTITUTION, CAPITALISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT, and most important, PERSONAL FREEDOM are emphasized and you do a little mixing and matching with the rest.

    That is how Europe does it. That is how South America and Oceania do it.

    Really, this must be a joke.

  70. This has got to be the most absurd article ever written on the Libertarian movement’s 2008 election experience.

    Weigel blames Barr’s less-than-stellar porformance on Ron Paulists not latching on to the LP. And makes not a single mention of Sarah Palin.

    My gosh! Barr was polling 5 to 6% in Zogby days before Palin was picked in late August. He was well on his way to a near-Ross Perot type campaign for the Fall.

    And then McCain stunned everyone, by picking one of the three most libertarian Governors in the entire US. (Otter and Sanford).

    Headline columns in the Denver Post hailed Sarah Palin as the “Libertarian pick.” Howie Carr on Boston radio was prenouncing that this was the first time in History that a major party ticket chose a Libertarian. Barr’s numbers immediately tanked.

    And Weigel doesn’t even mention that in his entire 20+ paragraph story?

    What a weasel he is, and what a partisan hack.

  71. Although I have contributed to and voted for Libertarian Party candidates for decades, I would pose the following question – should the LP be dissolved (even if for the next 2 years) as a “failed experiment” in the same way that General Motors has been failing for decades but hangs on – { for no particular reason as far as I can see since it will bleed money making crappy cars }. Small l “libertarians” talk about the judgement of the market but where is there any judgement of the effectiveness of a party that nominates exceedingly marginal characters {who beat out blind John Birchers, etc.} for office and cannot even raise .1% of the money of an Obama, etc. Reading LP news is depressing to me while I see the US Government sliding towards bankrputcy, etc.
    Maybe it is time to end the charade and dissolve the LP – a mercy killing of sorts.

  72. Paul and Barr failed simply because the vast majority of voters in the United States don’t agree with pure libertarianism. Period. Granted, the general incompetence of both of their campaigns certainly didn’t help.

    The choices are to moderate your positions or fail at the ballot box. Barr, Paul, and the LP in general choose the second.

  73. 2008 was a building year. I and a number of my friends never cared about politics until we heard about Ron Paul. The idea of a constitutional government appeals to the younger generations who are being saddled with the debt of their parents. Many people I know, for the first time in their lives, had the stray thought that maybe the government can’t solve everything. A number of them were swept up by Obama’s charisma and empty promises. They voted for Obama but told me they just “wanted to see if it could really work.”

    Like the person who gets scammed on a deal that’s too good to be true, they’ll be more careful next time when all Obama’s promises do nothing but extend the recession. Our focus should not be on what went wrong last year but on documenting every single misstep the democrats make and incessantly pushing it on the media for the next race.

    The key is to discredit the government so much that voters are interested in new candidates who promise a government that stays out of their lives.

  74. Eric Dondero-Palin is no libertarian.

    Here’s her Nolan Chart (bottom of the page):

    http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_Palin.htm

    She’s a Populist-Leaning Conservative. She doesn’t even lean Libertarian-she leans the other way (Populist) on economic issues.

    In fact, Mike Huckabee(!) is more Libertarian than she is:

    http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Huckabee.htm

    For comparison, here’s Paul’s chart, in which he’s firmly in the Libertarian category:

    http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

  75. “And makes not a single mention of Sarah Palin.”

    why would it? sarah palin is about as libertarian as any other socialist-republican type.

    or is it “anything donderoooooooooo wants to fuck is libertarian”?

    in which case it’s good news for the textile freedom industry, as tube socks are hells of libertarian.

  76. There’s just too much extremism in the Libertarian Party. We need to start with some sort of centrist party, make some gains, and move toward a more libertarian position from there. The GOP is a pack of religious shitheads, and the Dems are perfectly represented by the brainfucked, innumerate retards of the California state legislature. There is NO ONE serving the middle right now, so that seems the most fertile ground to sow. I meet so many people who are moderate in their views and open to libertarian ideas.

  77. It really seems awful harsh of the author to not note that due to Dr. Paul, giant strides have been made in spreading the ideas of libertarianism. So what if the LP didn’t get every single Paulite vote! I hate to remind them, but some folks, like myself, didn’t even HAVE THE OPTION TO VOTE FOR THE LIBERTARIAN TICKET (I’m in Oklahoma, and chose to abstain from voting for a presidential candidate). Also, I was sorely disappointing that the Barr campaign had to get so up in arms that Paul would not throw his support to a single candidate. Paul ran under the banner of fusionism as did Barry Goldwater, and many of his supporters (mostly those from the far left and far right of the 2D political field) would have been turned off of the liberty movement had Paul thrown all of his chips into the single basket of the Libertarian Party candidate. The point is, he got many Americans really thinking and realizing that there is more to the political landscape than republicrats.

  78. ” guess you could include Colombia, Israel and Peru in the USA-SA-PRC-DRN-KOK axis, except that believe it or not, those three countries respect civil liberties, civil rights, and national sovereignty (except for ISR) than the US does.”

    Believe it or not? Ok, I don’t believe it. Columbia? Hahahahaha give me a fucking break. The “sky is falling” wing of the libertarian party has finally gone of the deep end if they truly believe this bullshit.

  79. “Barack Obama has never made a secret of being a Theocratic Authoritarian…”

    Sorry, but this is just fucking retarded. I hate Barack Obama, but I don’t even begin to believe the man is some sort of theocratic authoritarian. Iran is a theocracy, and its ruler is a theocrat. Neither Bush nor Obama are or were anywhere near that and never will be.

  80. Next time we know that we need to only have one libertarian across all parties. Whether that is constitution, libertarian or republican. We just need to take the best libertarian out of the bunch and the others should drop out. It’s the only way we’ll win.

  81. Great article. Thanks for writing it. The LP peeked in 1980. Subsequent LP presidential candidates have struggled to get even half the votes that Ed Clark won 28 years ago. The LP is not the answer. Over the last 8 years, the GOP has proven that it is not the answer either. Perhaps it’s time to stop focusing on electoral politics altogether. Instead, there are more direct measures that can be undertaken to fight the growing tyranny in D.C. including various types of civil disobedience.

  82. Funny how people who are not libertarians, feel they can judge other people on their libertarianism.

    Question for the two un-named/faux on-line named posters above:

    What makes you think you all are libertarians?

    Palin gets slammed all over the media for being a “libertarian.” She gets attacked in the GOP primary for Governor in 2006 for being a “closet libertarian.”

    And you have the audacity to slam her for “not really being a libertarian”?

    Who the fuck are you to pass judgement? How about presenting some of your libertarian credentials on this Forum. And while you’re at it, how about USING A FUCKING REAL NAME INSTEAD OF HIDING BEHIND SOME PUSSY-ASS FAKE ON-LINE MONIKER.

  83. I have criticized David Weigel in the past for his Ron Paul coverage. Now I shall praise him, because this was a very well written article.

    Paul ultimately proved that you can unite a sizeable group disperate libertarian, leftist and true conservative voters around an anti-interventionist platform both at home and abroard and make an impact in the major party system through the primary process.

    But what’s also clear is that coalition cannot sustain itself through non-major party politics on a national level. It’s simply too diverse and their are simply too many parties are around to pick off voters from that coalition and lead them into political ghettos nationally.

    If yout think about it, Paul had as many votes on the GOP convention floor as Barry Goldwater did in 1960. There’s no reason why, through hard work and hard activism, that Paul’s movement can’t play a major role in national GOP politics in 2012.

    If non-major parties wish to survive and have an impact they need to focus their attention locally and if they want to play ball in the big leagues they have to back like minded candidates like Ron Paul. Or become so effective on the local level that the major party politicians seek them out. That’s the way it should work. LP and CP activists worked together to help Dr. Paul during the primaries. That is a remarkable achievement and it got the Paul campaign off the ground.

    The Paul movement faces an obvious crossroads as to where it goes in the future. No doubt the movement will stay united if Paul runs again. But any future bid for the White House must be better organized, planned, and Dr. Paul must make the early effort in Iowa and in New Hampshire and South Carolina that’s essential to winning the nomination. No more staying in Washington D.C. to vote on resolutions about National Artichoke Day while his opponents are out campaigning. The grassroots will settle for nothing less.

    If he is not willing to make that committment, then he needs to pass the torch, visibly to potential candidates like a Gary Johnson or a Mark Sanford so the Paulians can rally around them instead of leaving fate to the wind and have our natural differences divde us between different candidates.

    As with most things life, whether Ron Paul’s movement was a success or not, well, it’s too early to tell.

  84. It should be clear by now that the Libertarian Party cannot be competitive in a race for President.

    Sad but true.

    It should also be clear that a limited government, antiwar candidate cannot win a Republican nomination for President.

    Not necessarily. If the Ron Paul moneybombs had come a few months earlier, and the Paul campaign had been a little more opportunistic, and the war in Iraq had deteriorated instead of leveling off, and if the economy had tanked a few months earlier, Ron Paul might have done much better.

    People forget that he finished in double digits in over a dozen states. They forget that he barely campaigned in New Hampshire. They forget that an amateurish mixup with the caucus database in Iowa may have cost him 3rd place and a big surge in momentum. They forget that Obama ran a primetime nationwide infomercial for far less money than Paul blew on glossy mailings that ended up in the trash in NH and SC.

  85. Even so, Ron Paul has improved tremendously as a voice for liberty in the past two years, and is to be greatly commended for his efforts.

  86. @ Eric Dondero 11:00pm:

    Provide some libertarian credentials? I’m sorry, but did I not get a membership card in the mail?

    WHO IN THE FLYING FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TO QUESTION THE POLITICAL BELIEFS OR STATEMENTS ON THE INTERNET? Oh, I’m sorry! You’re a fucking internet blogger. Self-righteous pricks that make such asinine statements like you did in your post are what drive folks away from the the Libertarian Party. You’re call for “credentials” reminds me of the high school arguments between emofags (no insult intended, it’s just the colloquial term we used) of who is more emo. Eat a dick.

  87. I apologize about the typo. I meant to say

    WHO IN THE FLYING FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TO QUESTION THE STATEMENTS OF POLITICAL BELIEFS OF OTHERS ON THE INTERNET.

    My typing tends to suffer while I RAAAAAAAGE against self-righteous douche bags.

  88. Geopt, my statements above apply to you as well, but at least you were polite in your assertions of non-libertarianism.

  89. Mr Weigel speculates on “where libertarian politics went wrong” in 2008, but misses the real #1 main place they went wrong: That the whole movement rallied behind a no-good dirtbag like Ron Paul. I don’t care how long he’s been in Congress, he’s an evil nutjob, and racist homophobe. And I say that as something of a rightwing nutjob myself, who has little patience for such things.

    I voted, indeed campaigned for Paul in 1988 – but that was because I didn’t know about him like we all do now. Those goddam newsletters, years and years of them, should disqualify him from being accepted in any kind of polite society. And I would surely never vote for anyone who suggested in writing that homosexuals don’t really mind having AIDS, cause they like the attention. And that’s not even the beginning. Then he lied about not knowing anything about these decades worth of accumulated wickedness with his name on them.

    Then there’s the perhaps even more disqualifying fact that he just LOVES evil conspiracy theories. Loves them. That’s a HUGE turnoff to any half sensible and benificient human being. For crying in a bucket, the man absolutely formally endorsed the JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY.

    And all that’s before you get to his absolutely unacceptable foreign policy nonsense. Not that we might not benefit from re-examining and cutting back our foreign troop presence in many cases, but he’s truly anti-American in his foreign policy – no matter what protestations he makes to the contrary.

    Particularly, that famous exchange with Giuliani pretty well killed whatever chances the movement had at making any inroads this year – or probably for a good many. Screw him and his supposed “blowback.” Yeah, it excited .1% of jackasses to enthusiastically support him and shovel him their cash – but absolutely turned off at least 90% of any kind of conservatives or Republicans or moderates.

    As far as individuals go, Ron Paul’s 2008 has been the absolute worst thing to happen to the modern libertarian movement. His wicked racism, conspiracy mongering, blame-America-first foreign policy have gone a long way toward discrediting the whole damned movement.

    See the extended notes at my URL

  90. Also remember Bob Barr has a past (Drug war-Anti Gay) that many Libertarians were not willing to forgive. If you normalize for ballot access, Barr bettered 04’s numbers by 25% Not too shabby.
    Fred
    fourpointreport@blogspot.com

  91. I would respectfully request that Libertarian Free Market Economic conservatives look at the Ron Paul for President Campaign ’08 and understand what is and isn’t possible in American politics.

    Most American – I would say 98% + are not in to this 24/7/365 Libertarian cult. 98% do no live, breath and sleep Libertarian Free market economics.

    This is not to say that candidates who support Libertarian ideas can not do well, even challenge to win important elections. Ron Paul once won elections – including being elected to Congress from Texas. Jessie Ventura won the Governorship of Minnesota.

    But, in the US Presidential campaigns, full time economic libertarian conservatives like Ron Paul, Phil Graham, Steve Forbes have done very, very poorly.

    Despite Ron Paul’s enthusiastic supporters and the large amount of $ campaign contributions, Ron Paul won – what 23 delegates. The Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr didn’t win 1%.

    Let’s come down to earth and get back in to reality – support candidates who are competitive and who can bring in Libertarian, less government, more personal freedom policies by running campaigns on personal trust, voter identification that “he’s like me”, or just run competitive candidates.

    Ron Paul for President 2008 was never a serious competitive campaign.

    Ron Paul has as much chance challenging for the Heavy Weight boxing championship, racing 3 year old Thoroughbred horses in the Kentucky Derby as he did to challenge to win the GOP Presidential election.

    Most Americans like some government – Americans in Colorado Springs CO like government $ for the US Air Force. Americans in San Diego like government support for the US Navy/US Marines. Americans in Florida will brutally destroy any candidate that talks too much about privatizing/ending social security.

    Libertarians are usually bright folks, let’s see you bright folks do a better job of picking Presidential candidates.

    Next time – support an ex Football Quarterback who seniors remember and identify with, trust, one that doesn’t frighten Religious Protestant Evangelicals who don’t like the Church of Latter Day Saints.

    How about picking Roger Stauback from Texas? Run and win the campaign with a strong, admired public figure and run campaigns to win the ways Nixon and Reagan, Lee Atwater did, using populist issues like crime, wedge issues that work, win the election, try to win 48 our 50 states like Nixon and Reagan and then work in Libertarian free market economic ideas after you/we win the elections. It isn’t enough to hold true believer Libertarian ideas, you have to sell the ideas, program to the public.

    Learn to cut out government for some other hated group, don’t scare the public that beloved grandparents are going to be put out in the street forced to eat dog food or get jobs in sweatshops run by Chinese Triads.

    And most of all Libertarians – please try to be competitive, fight to win something. Getting 22 delegates or less than 1% of popular votes, that’s not winning, that’s falling into a cult of losing.

    Isn’t WINNING better than always losing.

  92. This is just another cheap hit piece trying to peg Ron Paul’s politics as Libertarian.

    THEY ARE NOT.

    ‘l’ibertarian, yes.
    Libertarian, no.
    They are libertarian and thoroughly REPUBLICAN as they have always been and as they always will be.

    Ron Paul has always been a Republican except for a BRIEF 6 month stint as a big ‘L’ at the big-L’s request.

    Whether you like it or not, he’s as Republican as Republican can be. And I’m proud to be a patriot-conservative Ron Paul REPUBLICAN.

    Reason and other publications are just going to have to deal with this fact or else their analysis will always be skewed and they will always fail to understand the phenomenon.

  93. Lot’s of armchair quarterbacking as usual.

    I never thought RPs campaign was anything more then a way to highlight certain issues.

    I never thought he would win anything, period.

    Why is that? Because I listened to RP. He stated he wouldn’t win, and it was about getting the message out. He said it many times.

    You think you can do better, and bring more excitement then Ron Paul, run for office.

    It’s simple, fill out some paperwork, grab your nuts and have the courage of your convictions. If you had an unbeatable strategy and now how to get a 3rd party rep in there, or a non mainstream candidate, then why not yourself?

    For every 1 person that tries to make any kind of difference, there is 1000 people sitting on their butts telling them they are doing it wrong.

  94. One says, “Jewelie has no freaking clue what twitter is and needs to know how people have time for this?” In another, the person says she is “order clothes from china.” As with the Facebook and MySpace profiles, it is not clear whether the Twitter page belongs to the woman alleged to have had an affair with Woods.

  95. The distinction between paleoconservatives, and (L)ibertarians, is that Paleo-cons are for a nation-state, at the expense of the free-market. (L)ibertarians want global order at the expense of nation-states, by the free-market.

  96. The Tea Party movement will be the thing to watch in Nov. I think we are going to see some shocking results in the elections because of it.
    droid x accessories | droid x cases

  97. thank u man a lot’s

  98. o a “Revolution March” in Washington, leading up to a massive “Rally for the Republic” jus

  99. y attack us because we’ve been over there.” A sputtering Giuliani demanded that Paul “withdr

  100. or celebrity oddsmaker Wayne Allyn Root had announced a bid for the party’s nomination, entering a field that included medical marijuana activist Steve Kubby, Massachusetts par

  101. Texas congressman for “helping my guy out.” But Paul benefited more than Giuliani, receiving a surge of donations and media profiles. “It really rocketed our campai

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.