Job Boom

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmZ1JilA0qg

[daddyo]

"And if, after four years, we decide we don't like success, we can always go back to the national nightmare we have now."

GREAT line.

[Guest bkelm18]

Gary is so dreamy. He'll make everything all better. I can't wait til he wins the election.....

[plank white]

Nice ad I shure hope the Libertarian party gets rolling hard and steps up his campaign efforts after the Republican Primary is over .

I also hope he is aloud in on the debates.

[daddyo]

Gary is so dreamy. He'll make everything all better. I can't wait til he wins the election.....

If you don't have anything constructive to add to the thread, please don't post. Thanks.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That was a good ad. Is it going to run on TV?

Don't get me wrong. I like the ad and I like libertarian ideals. How about mainstreaming

those ideas with grassroots campaigns at lower levels and building on a real base?

If that were the case, I wouldn't be a Republican, like a lot of people I know.

Edited August 13, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[E4 No More]

Personally, I see humor as constructive.

I thought it was a good ad too, but he still has an ice cube's chance in hell of getting anywhere with it. I'd like to see it get on TV too. It would make for some interesting conversations.

[Oh Shoot]

Nice ad I shure hope the Libertarian party gets rolling hard and steps up his campaign efforts after the Republican Primary is over .

News flash: the Republican Primary is over.

I also hope he is aloud in on the debates.

He won't be aloud there because he won't be allowed there.

The org that sponsors the debates has traditionally only allowed candidates with a 15% share of some poll or other to participate, and it hasn't happened but twice that 3rd party candidates got into debates since the formal debate process started in 1960, and the first time in 1980, it was quite the brouhaha.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980#The_debates

Not to say that the whole process ain't corrupt. The League of Women voters used to handle it -- that org denounced the whole process as "hoodwinking of the American public" in 1988 and ducked out.

- OS

[E4 No More]

I was going to point out spelling mistakes too, but I thought for sure that it wouldn't be viewed as constructive.

[plank white]

News flash: the Republican Primary is over.

My bad I was under the Impression that the delegates have not voted Yet and That is one of the reasons they wont let Dr. Paul speak at the RNC.

[Oh Shoot]

My bad I was under the Impression that the delegates have not voted Yet and That is one of the reasons they wont let Dr. Paul speak at the RNC.

All states have held their primaries.

However messy (or likely not) the convention could be, the GOP candidate is nonetheless a foregone conclusion, short of his croaking or something. In which case it still won't be RP.

- OS

[plank white]

All states have held their primaries.

However messy (or likely not) the convention could be, the GOP candidate is nonetheless a foregone conclusion, short of his croaking or something. In which case it still won't be RP.

- OS

Eitherway RP hasnt backed out which means it is not over. Once it is over I can see him throwing support behind Johnson which could in turn lead to a dramatic increase in dontations and ads . This is what I mean by after the Primary is over. It will not be over as long as folks are still pushing for Paul , once those supporters are screwed at the convention they will have to go somewhere and you can bet your sweet tush that it wont be to Romneys camp. So again I say

I shure hope the Libertarian party gets rolling hard and steps up his campaign efforts after the Republican Primary is over .

Edited August 14, 2012 by plank white

[Oh Shoot]

....

I shure hope the Libertarian party gets rolling hard and steps up his campaign efforts after the Republican Primary is over .

I admit your right to your own semantics.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Eitherway RP hasnt backed out which means it is not over. Once it is over I can see him throwing support behind Johnson which could in turn lead to a dramatic increase in dontations and ads . This is what I mean by after the Primary is over. It will not be over as long as folks are still pushing for Paul , once those supporters are screwed at the convention they will have to go somewhere and you can bet your sweet tush that it wont be to Romneys camp. So again I say

I shure hope the Libertarian party gets rolling hard and steps up his campaign efforts after the Republican Primary is over .

Once they are screwed. You mean to

say once they lose they will have to pick up

and leave because they lost. That's quite

childish. If they weren't Republicans in the

first place, what were they doing in the primaries?

I still don't get that. It's like they didn't want to

play to begin with. Whatever you mean by

your remarks, I don't know exactly, but if it

is change in the Republican Party you wanted, it's

a sick way of playing games.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sigmtnman]

Once they are screwed. You mean to

say once they lose they will have to pick up

and leave because they lost. That's quite

childish. If they weren't Republicans in the

first place, what were they doing in the primaries?

I still don't get that. It's like they didn't want to

play to begin with. Whatever you mean by

your remarks, I don't know exactly, but if it

is change in the Republican Party you wanted, it's

a sick way of playing games.

You must bear in mind that many of Dr. Paul's supporters are not Republicans but were drawn to the party by his voting record, and his consistent views on policy.

If we are going to compare this affair to a game, would we expect participants to play if the rules of the game which they thought they would be playing by were changed and the referee had a totally different view of how the game should be played?

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Once they are screwed. You mean to

say once they lose they will have to pick up

and leave because they lost. That's quite

childish. if they aren't Republicans in the

first place, what were they doing in the primaries?

I still don't get that. It's like they didn't want to

play to begin with. Whatever you mean by

your remarks, I don't know exactly, but if it

is change in the Republican Party you wanted, it's

a sick way of playing games.

If libertarians leave R party it is what neocons want so it should be cause for celebration, not scorn.

Always been power struggles. Goldwater libertarians took the R party over for a brief time from progressive R's. Then progressive R's got it back. Then Reagan managed somehow to come in as a 'progressive lite' on one hand with libertarian slogans and on the other saying stuff to make the 700 club jump on board. Then into the 80's it was basically a fusion of progressive R's with the 700 club for shock troops. Looked for awhile like the 700 club R party, except it was the progressive R's riding the backs of the religious and all they had to do was occasionly fail to pass anti abortion law to show they were trying.

So what rode GW into power was kinda a progressive plus neocon plus 700 club amalgam and we can see how well that turned out.

So which ones are the 'true republicans'? The progressive R's? The 700 club theocrats? Neocon warmongers? Libertarians? Which ones ought to leave if they can't play along?

Edit sorry for typos posting from android xoom and editing leaves something to be desired.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

The way to get this ad on tv is to contribute to his campaign. So if you like the message you are hearing, head over to https://donate.garyjohnson2012.com/

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You must bear in mind that many of Dr. Paul's supporters are not Republicans but were drawn to the party by his voting record, and his consistent views on policy.

If we are going to compare this affair to a game, would we expect participants to play if the rules of the game which they thought they would be playing by were changed and the referee had a totally different view of how the game should be played?

The Rockefeller fools took over the GOP a long time ago and it is troubling that they keep control of it. We now have

essentially three factions in the Republican Party, two of which I very much agree with: the Libertarians and the Tea

Partiers. Maybe RP would do wise to join with the Tea Partiers to get a damned grip instead of being a one man show,

since the Libertarians seem to only want the Presidency. That's my whole gripe with the Libertarians. They have been

doing this for how long?

I agree with you about the shenanigans the GOP did and it is wrong. What really troubles me is the Tea Party is still

growing and the Libertarian base is much more like them. Hell, put the two of them together and see what happens

with the Republican Party.

The GOP needs to be challenged to the core. The Rockefellers are neocon progressives. I hate that bunch. I want

the GOP to go away or be replaced. There just aren't enough Libertarians out there like you and I would love to see.

[E4 No More]

The way to get this ad on tv is to contribute to his campaign. So if you like the message you are hearing, head over to https://donate.garyjohnson2012.com/

It's easier to just put a match to my money, thanks.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If libertarians leave R party it is what neocons want so it should be cause for celebration, not scorn.

Always been power struggles. Goldwater libertarians took the R party over for a brief time from progressive R's. Then progressive R's got it back. Then Reagan managed somehow to come in as a 'progressive lite' on one hand with libertarian slogans and on the other saying stuff to make the 700 club jump on board. Then into the 80's it was basically a fusion of progressive R's with the 700 club for shock troops. Looked for awhile like the 700 club R party, except it was the progressive R's riding the backs of the religious and all they had to do was occasionly fail to pass anti abortion law to show they were trying.

So what rode GW into power was kinda a progressive plus neocon plus 700 club amalgam and we can see how well that turned out.

So which ones are the 'true republicans'? The progressive R's? The 700 club theocrats? Neocon warmongers? Libertarians? Which ones ought to leave if they can't play along?

Edit sorry for typos posting from android xoom and editing leaves something to be desired.

Lester, you know better than that. My comment was about the Paul followers wanting to walk out and start their own campaign if they don't get their way. That would be nonproductive, at the very least.

I would love to run the neocons and progressive wing of the GOP out. The only way is to stay and fight over the ideas. It takes time. I also don't want Obama to stay in office. That is a double edged sword, don't you think?

Change comes from within or destruction of one and starting another. Pick your poison.

Edited August 22, 2012 by 6.8 AR