We have seen your signs. You heart Ron Paul. You wish we would join the rEVOLution. Fine.
But could you take down the bloody signs now, please?
I've seen them around the greater Seattle area. I have seen them while driving across the state to the east (business in Spokane). I have seen them while driving across the state to the west (pleasure in Ocean Shores).
Thanks for playing, but it's time to stick a fork in this one.
Posted by Eric Earling at April 01, 2008 06:48 PM | Email ThisYou don't understand. These folks still think Ron is going to somehow win. Yeah, that's way harsh, but these folks are not going to join any kind of mainstream political team. Their continued display of signs is their way of protesting the status quo. Lord only knows we need more of that.
Put 'em in the same category that votes for Ralph Nader every four years.
To paraphrase Churchill, with democracy, the people get the government they deserve.
The dedication and tenacity of the Paulites is admirable from one perspective, but I have to respectfully question whether some of them have ever really reflected on one of the oldest of political axioms:
''Politics is the art of the possible''.
I also have to respectfully question whether many of them have gotten beyond running and ''making a statement'' to doing some serious reflection on actually GOVERNING....
And as for writing in Ron Paul in November:
Good grief, people:
The next President will be either an (R) or a (D). Guaranteed, 100-percent lock. And to somehow try and suggest that there would effectively be no difference between a President McCain and a Pres. Obama-or-Clintion is to totally ignore a VERY long list of objective realities.
To slightly expand on Unkl Witz @ 1:
Be careful what you deserve, because what you get may be the opposite of what IMO a rational libertarian would want; i.e.:
To NOT get a far-left, big-government, nanny-state socialist Pres. Obama or Clinton.
SIDEBAR: I say the above as someone who occasionally has flickers of libertarianism himself; but that does not ina any way detract from making it slam-dunk easy for me to say that I will go all-out for McCain over either (D); no contest.
Posted by: Methow Ken on April 1, 2008 08:32 PMSo go ahead, and denigrate us some more. You only drive us away. Maybe you won't need us, but my bet is it wouldn't hurt in terms of fundraising or votes when your hero faces Obama this November.
Ron Paul is the only politician that's ever gotten my time or money in his favor. I hope he won't be the last, but your brand of big brother wasteful government sure isn't going to get it voluntarily.
Posted by: Andrew Brown on April 1, 2008 08:52 PMWho takes down yard signs? On private property, the property owners. Everywhere else? Campaigns and district organizations, because they may want to re-use the signs if the candidate is expected to run again (especially if they're corrugated plastic), and they definitely want to re-use the wood (again, if applicable). And (the PDC?) will issue fines after a certain amount of time for non-Federal -- not sure about federal. Now, I just can't see any district organizations sending out the word for volunteers to go yank up Ron Paul signs after he bowed out partway through primary season, since the order to pull signs typically only comes after major elections. So if the Ron Paul campaign itself, for whatever reason, never sent out the word to go pull up signs, there they all are, still in the ground.
Yes, I could be completely wrong.
McCain has won the nomination but Ron Paul still has a chance of winning of the Heart of the Republican Party.
Oh and just an FYI... The Travis Posting above is not me.
Posted by: Lysander on April 1, 2008 10:37 PMSo why is driving you away a negative thing then? Just curious.
I do not share Eric's view on this, but I sure don't share yours, either. The Republican Party does have a vested interest in attracting people who want to help get Republicans elected. This obviously isn't you, so ...
I think the GOP has a vested interest in promoting its ideals, not getting people elected. We could compromise and nominate candidates who want to spend more and more each year (McCain), or want to limit free speech (McCain), or expand the federal role in education (McCain), or hand out millions to millionaires (Rossi), etc... But that does not move forward the ideas we want to see move forward.
We are better off promoting candidates that actual want what we want.
Posted by: Lysander on April 2, 2008 05:37 AMHillary Clinton as Nixon in drag? Toooo funnnnny!
Posted by: Saltherring on April 2, 2008 05:38 AM
But hey man, if you don't want my vote, then go right ahead. The sooner the current iteration of the Republican party dies out from lack of support, the better - from my standpoint, anyway.
Posted by: Andrew Brown on April 2, 2008 06:29 AMI'd ask the Dennis Kucinich supporters to take down their spattering of signs I still see up, but from what I understand, they've been herded upon the Mothership for an indefinite period of time...so you get a pass for now.
Posted by: Rick D. on April 2, 2008 06:35 AMNo, I didn't.
But hey man, if you don't want my vote ...
Ummm. YOU are the one who said you wouldn't vote Republican.
Posted by: pudge on April 2, 2008 07:06 AMNot sure where you get either of those ideas from.
You asked what's the negative about driving me away. The answer, which you edited out, is my vote.
You also assert that I said I won't vote Republican. I *am* voting Republican. Unfortunately, I just have to write in the Republican I support.
Posted by: Andrew Brown on April 2, 2008 08:37 AMDo you REALLY believe anything you write will change the Paulistinians? When have they listened to you in the past?
Who do you think will be influenced by what you write on this topic?
Does it boost the self-esteem of the McCainiacs?
Or is it just another weak April Fool's Joke item?
You stated yourself: "Ron Paul is the only politician that's ever gotten my time or money in his favor."
Therefore, the only thing you've ever done is vote. Commendable. But you've never donated time nor money to a Republican in the past, so why do you care about the current Republican party? You didn't care for Nixon nor Reagan nor Bush nor Dole nor Bush from what you have stated, so what's the big deal now?
I've volunteered my precious time for several Republican candidates in the past, in Seattle, even though I'm not very politically active overall. If you've never raised a finger for a (R) candidate in the past - why do you make such a big deal that you've been driven off the ranch? You were never on the ranch to begin with, judging from your own words. And unless you've voted straight (R) Presidents throughout your lifetime, the (R)s aren't really even losing a steady vote.
You're off on the sidelines, never having played in our game, yelling about how we drove you off the field. Nothing could be further from the truth. You're an outcast and you enjoy it.
What's most humorous is all the Ron Paul supporters in WA who think that their vote for Ron Paul will hurt McCain. Newsflash to those who have never followed an election: The (D) Presidential candidate will win WA, unless it's an absolute landslide nationwide for the (R). Therefore, your vote will not count for anything whether you're voting (R) or (I), but for the national popular vote. The Electoral College will not be affected one iota from your vote.
Posted by: Larry on April 2, 2008 03:53 PMSo he is saying, hey, I won't give you my time or money or vote, but YOU'LL BE SORRY IF YOU MAKE ME GO AWAY.
To which I say: shrug.
However, Larry, I think McCain has a very good chance of winning in WA if Hillary is the nominee (and still a chance even if it is Obama). McCain is very popular among the nonpartisan moderates of Washington -- the "Reagan Democrats" and "Dinocrats" -- and he can win here, where Bushes and Doles cannot.
Posted by: pudge on April 2, 2008 04:34 PMHow is that a good thing, Pudge? Is that good just so you can feel like your party is the winner? I hate to break it to you, pal, but if Juan McAmnesty wins, conservatism loses. The extreme left wing will hate his guts, just like they do Bush, for not being lefty enough, even as he pushes through laws to destroy the sovereignty of the US, restrict free speech some more, further ruin the economy with "Global Warming" laws, and in general be the ass that he is.
You are just not the brightest guy, Pudge. I know, I have said that before. Once in a while, like a broken clock, you are on the money, but, damn, boy, get a clue! Don't you care about freedom? Would you even know what it is if it came up and bit you on the ass? I think not.
Posted by: Dave Lincoln on April 2, 2008 06:07 PMFind a different route on your commute, Eric, and you won't have to look at it; then your subconcious mind won't keep doing what it has been, causing this posting, I assume:
"Eric"
"Eric"
"Maybe you're stupider than you think"
"Eric, this is your concience speaking - you should have vote for freedom."
"Eric, can you understand? This is why you are feeling bad looking at the Ron Paul signs."
"Eric, do you see?"
"Eric?"
"Is this thing on?"
"fuck it, nobody home, I guess ..."
Posted by: Dave Lincoln on April 2, 2008 06:15 PMYou don't think that these incessant attempts at needling "Ronulans" are driving people away from your candidate?
I wasn't old enough to vote for Reagan - In fact being born in 1980, I wasn't old enough to vote for the majority of the republican candidates in my lifetime thus far.
Anyway, it's not something I'm going to argue with you. If a vote in your favor isn't worth anything to you (or your party leadership) then hey, keep on failing at elections in Washington. Good luck with all that, bud.
What a bad time to sucker punch Ron Paul supporters--right after the bipartisan bailout of Bear Stearns.
The beauty of capitalism is that it weeds out bad ideas and privatizes failure, so everyone doesn't have to pay for a restaurant no one likes or an investment firm that made bad decisions--until now.
Paul is the only candidate of either party who would see the bailout of Bear Stearns as the historic wrong turn it was.
Thanks all, New Left Conservative #1
Posted by: New Left Conservative # 1 on April 2, 2008 10:27 PMDitto for Texas. Ron Paul signs are still up everywhere here, weeks after the primary. He's the only one with signs still up.
I see tons of them while driving into Houston to work every day.
And these guys are supposed to be in favor of property rights?
They're giving libertarians a bad name.
Eric Dondero, Publisher
MainstreamLibertarian.com
You are a pathetic loser and nobody likes you.
I can't believe you still have the arrogance to insult Ron Paul after he handed your butt to you on a platter.
Look up Eric Dondero, folks for a look into the world of no-class white trash.
Posted by: James A. on April 3, 2008 06:59 AMBut no post I've seen... no projection made... no completely illogical boast... none of that compares with the utter stupidity and arrogance of the whiney sniveling idiot that posted this garbage.
Good God, Eric.... this IS America, after all.... have you forgotten that like you've forgotten every other tenet of your fake Republicanism?
Don't like the signs? THEN DON'T FRICKING LOOK AT THEM, MORON!
Keyrist in a Volkswagon... what the hell has gotten into you? This isn't Kos. The First Amendment isn't the First Suggestion.
I can't stand Paul. I believe him to be a waste of skin and air.
But of all the things you can snivel or whine about just now, this particular issue is beneath contempt. And given your whacked political positions, that's saying something.
Posted by: hinton on April 3, 2008 07:01 AMDid it hurt than even your father voted for Ron Paul instead of you or Chris Peden? I hear it was a complete landslide....
I remember all your arrogant BS about how the people in his own district were sick and tired of Ron Paul. Yet they voted, what, 80% FOR him?
Keep making a fool of yourself.
Posted by: James A. on April 3, 2008 07:06 AM"You don't think that these incessant attempts at needling "Ronulans" are driving people away from your candidate?"
I think you're mistaken if you think blogs and TV programs that are 'needling' Ron Paul will drive enough voters to do anything that will make any difference whatsoever. You're making the mistaken assumption that most of America pays attention to these things. Nobody cares about Ron Paul any more, except the people who are still holding out their Ron Paul votes. And if those folks, like you, don't know whether to vote for a liberal conservative or a socialist at this point, your vote isn't worth negotiating for in the first place.
"In fact being born in 1980, I wasn't old enough to vote for the majority of the republican candidates in my lifetime thus far."
You're further admitting that Republicans aren't even losing your vote.
"Anyway, it's not something I'm going to argue with you. If a vote in your favor isn't worth anything to you (or your party leadership) then hey, keep on failing at elections in Washington. Good luck with all that, bud."
Now you're changing the goalposts to elections overall, not just Presidential elections. The goal of the Presidential election is to win the entire country state-by-state - the Electoral College - and not just one state. So the Republicans 'failing' in Presidential elections in Washington has led to winning 7 of the last 10 Presidential elections, including 5 majority votes to 1, if my memory is correct. Thanks for the wishes of Good Luck, anyway.
If you want to talk about Republicans failing in elections in Washington, then you're talking about Governor and State Legislature, and we're no longer talking about your Golden Boy Ron Paul, now are we? Nice try, though.
Posted by: Larry on April 3, 2008 10:26 AMYou're welcome to care or not care about Ron Paul, but rubbing the loss in the face of a group of people who did so much fundraising and campaigning with so few people and so little centralization is probably not a wise choice.
Posted by: Andrew Brown on April 3, 2008 10:46 AMSo if we PROMISE to quit teasing you, do you PROMISE to vote for McCain??
Or is there really more behind it? Is your vote not guaranteed regardless of what we do here?
You won't "throw in" with us because we "can't even be civil"? Oh, go cry to mommy, but don't bring that shwag around here.
You want to talk civility in politics? You want to throw in with the 21st-century Democratic Party, that of Jim McDermott, Dean Logan, Ron Sims, Howard Dean, Elliott Spitzer, and endless "Bush is Hitler" comparisons because of their civility? They'll eat you alive, Andrew.
People will stop rubbing the loss in your face as soon as you admit you have lost.
And if you're looking for civility in politics, I wonder if you were born in 2000 and not 1980. Politicians must be civil; politics are not.
Posted by: Larry on April 3, 2008 12:12 PMHypocrites, all of you. At least I vote my principles and stick with them, instead of giving them up as soon as it's convenient for me.
As for admitting I lost, see post #7.
Andrew still needs to figure out politics.
Candidate #1: You agree with him or her on everything; he or she has 0% probability of winning.
Candidate #2: You agree with him or her on 55% of issues; he or she has a 50% probability of winning.
Candidate #3: You agree with him or her on 15% of issues; he or she has a 50% probability of winning.
That's politics in the 21st Century, and from what I remember - it's been like this for a while.
Most folks reading this, (R) or (D), would vote for candidate #2. A few would vote for #3, thereby cutting of their nose to spite their face (#2). And then there's Andrew, who votes for candidate #1 and then wonders why nobody else does.
As you told me several comments ago - good luck with that, Andrew. If you insist on voting for candidates who have no chance of winning, then you'll get the Democracy that we (Rs and Ds) give to you, and you'll like it.
Posted by: Larry on April 3, 2008 01:07 PMYour Victory has ensured America's defeat in the General election.
You can be so proud.
I for one will not vote for Juan McLain. If he wins it means that we will get to socialism just a little bit, just a little bit slower than the Demos. But the Demos Fast Track might generate enough heat to build enough resistance whereas McLaim's steady path towards socialism will not.
Yeah, its a move of desperation but these are desperate times. I am sure you have heard of the frog analogy so many times I will not repeat it here but the frog jumped in 1980, the frog jumped in 1994 and the only chance we have is the frog jumping again.
That is why I am voting for the Democratic Presidential Candidate in 2008. Again to me the question isn't one about socialism vs freedom as McCain offers this country the same poison that the Demos do just at a less concentrated dose. So ten years five years,it still gets the Left the direction it wants to go.
But with the Demos, there's a chance, albeit just a chance but still a chance that the frog will jump. For all the evil that Carter did, if it wasn't for Carter the Cold War would still be going on. For it it wasn't for Carter we will not have had a Reagan. So, yeah, I am voting for Hillary (hopefully) and even Obama because I am holding out for a Reagan, as without a Reagan we are doomed regardless.
Posted by: Kim on April 3, 2008 01:12 PMI am trying to tune out the Presidential elections this year as much as possible since regardless of who wins America will be much worse for it.
Our only hope is to look to the future. I for one understand why strong conservatives will want Hillary to win. McCain has already stated that Hillary would make a great President so that kind of shows that his policies will be similar to hers. But with him proposing them the Republicans will feel compelled to support them whereas if she proposes the exact same policies republicans will oppose them.
But of course it doesn't matter what I think or Eric thinks or any of us. The Democrats will take the electoral votes of Washington State so our votes won't really count regardless of who we decide to vote for or against.
And looking at it as a whole, with the economy doing so bad and it all, it is obviously just a Democratic year. It really disappoints me that Rossi decided to run this year when his defeat is certain. For that might not be the case in four years. I thought that Rossi was much more politically smart than that. But I guess he isn't.
By the way, David Horowitz and Ben Johnson's "Party of Defeat" - great book. That's the GOP in 2008 for sure.
I admit it. I care about party labels just as much as YOU really do Eric. But I care about America and freedom much more than you.
As for me being a Republican has always been a means to an end. But not a selfish end like for you. I would much rather be a good American than a good party follower!
By the way, I am still waiting for you to stab the the Republican Party in the back in an Sid Morrison type act for your own personal benefit. For all your talk about how you have to vote for a R regardless, your acts speak louder.
Posted by: Sal on April 3, 2008 02:02 PMWhen his mother expresses concern about Obama's high school friend being busted for drugs, Obama says he patted his mother's hand and told her not to worry.
This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: "It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved -- such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn't seem angry all the time."
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama's entire presidential campaign. But moreover -- he was talking about his own mother!
Posted by: Fred on April 3, 2008 02:22 PMGreat in the way Das Capital, or Mein Kaupf is great. Not great in being good but great in meaning important because of the book's effects.
All America should read Obama's Book just like all the world should have read Mein Kaupf before WWII because just like Mein Kaupf it is all spelled out. All of Obama's evil is spelled out in his book just like all of Hitler's evil was spelled out in Mein Kaupf.
Posted by: Fred on April 3, 2008 02:30 PMAnd if those folks, like you, don't know whether to vote for a liberal conservative or a socialist at this point, your vote isn't worth negotiating for in the first place."
Hey, Larry you idiot that isn't the choice anymore. The choice is whether to vote for a fast track socialist or a slightly less than fast track socialist.
There isn't a conservative to vote for in this race now (if there ever was to begin with).
You are really thick aren't you Larry?
Posted by: Kim on April 3, 2008 02:39 PMBookmark this discussion and return to it if you must on election night.
Here is what will happen.
The Democratic Presidential Candidate will win.
Rossi will go down to defeat by a good margin.
Okay, Bookmark this and return to it election night. Post how wrong I was about this.
I wish you would, especially with the Governor's race. I actually think the best thing for America is for Juan McLaim to lose. But I am sad that Rossi had to be sacrificed in a 2008 campaign. For I believe he could have really kicked butt in 2012 against whomever the Democrats would have put up for governor. We could have even run him in 2010 against Congresswoman Burner and I believe he would have defeated her. But since we wasted him in 2008 all that isn't possible now. Rossi running in 2008 was extremely stupid.
Even a novice in politics can see that this year is 1992 and next election year is 1994.
Posted by: Sal on April 3, 2008 02:55 PMThere is no way that Republicans will win this year in Washington State. That's not defeatism. That is "not drinking the kool-aid". That is looking at the reality of the situation.
Since that is the reality of the situation we need to prepare for when that reality will change. Which it will when things get so bad because of the liberal policies of the Left. When that happens people will be wanting real change and we need to be there then to give them that change and not be all "Me too but slightly less".
So, what we do now we should do with an eye to 2010 and 2012. If we run a candidate that candidate should not run trying to win but run with an eye to the next election. The candidate should set him/herself up in a "I told yourself" role.
As for Rossi, he ran once, if he is defeated this time as he will be, and this time strongly I don't think he will be able to run again like the candidates I mentioned above. Therefore he should drop out this year and instead file for 2012. He can raise more funds that way and then when the wave comes his way in 2012 he will be in a position to surf that wave instead of being drowned by the wave as he will be this year.
Posted by: Steve on April 3, 2008 03:13 PM