Has Ron Paul done his followers a disservice?

Let me see if I understand the argument. Ron Paul runs as a Republican, rather than a Libertarian, in part to avoid the spoiler effect. The spoiler effect cannot occur between competitors in the same primary, since it is impossible for them to split the vote in the general election.

But somehow, now "splitting the vote" at the Convention is lumped into the same category. It is Ron Paul's fault that Team Romney could not abide even the presence, even to count the votes, of the Ron Paul delegates. Ron Paul could have solved this problem by withdrawing from the race. This way, there would only be one candidate at the Convention, and no conflict. Ergo, Ron Paul caused the conflict. Sounds logical to me!

I think Dr. Paul did the nation a huge service by re-focusing a considerable amount of national attention on the Constitution, on the idea of small government and on the need for fiscal responsibility.

I think some of Dr. Paul's adherents did the nation a disservice by their strident approach, their inflexibility and their immature approach to the political process. And to that end, I do think Dr. Paul would have served the nation even better if he'd made it clear that this take-no-prisoners approach was potentially undermining the core message.

Thank you JMC for your thoughful analysis. TPP, has anyone explained to you why they didn't announce Ron Paul's or Santorum's delegate votes? If not, the reason they didn't is because neither Ron Paul or Rick Santorum had accumulated enough support to have their names placed in nomination. It wasn't just because they were trying to stiff the Paul delegates, it is procedural in nature.

JMC, as further analysis, those of in the RP corwd who have poltical insider experience, although limited, are sometimes chastised by even our own team because our analysis doesn't support "the agenda". We would be wise to lean on the political experience of the likes of Stavros and others who have been around the block a few times in this fight. Stavros showed genuine leadership this past week in his efforts to bring the groups together and represented us well. I have had issues here with Stavros in the past, but I have to admit he impressed me.

That is the remaining LARGE hurdle that the "liberty movement" has to overcome to succeed in this state and in this country. Just because I disagree with Ron Paul's foreign policy, but I support his fiscal policy, and therefore voted for him, does not somehow make me the enemy. Too often, the likes of Cynthia Rosen and Pete Herring, have treated others (yes, even those on their side), as enemies because of a particular decision that person makes. The question begs.....as long as I voted for the guy, what difference does it make if I have disagreements with him on the issues? Leadership is needed on both the Maine GOP and the Maine Liberty Movement sides. I think a strong partnership could be formed if we were to elect a State Chair like Rich Cebra and have someone like Stavros take the lead on the liberty movement. I am confident that both men could work closely together to form a bound between the two that doesn't focus on our differences, but celebrates our common goals.

I think this article about the Maine RNC delegate situation adds a lot to this conversation as it offers a perspective from a couple of Ron Paul campaign advisors. I offer it without further comment. http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/inside-maines-convention-revolt

A sample of how the general public will remember this story:

Today's SunJournal editorial.

The Paul supporters are accustomed to spreading chaos. That's exactly what they brought to the Maine Republican Party convention in May.

They flooded the meeting, seized control of the proceedings and elected a slate of libertarian-leaning delegates. This despite the fact Romney had been declared the winner of the party's caucus votes earlier in the year.

I don't believe so, jmcards. Paul made it very clear when he suspended his campaign that he was not giving up, nor did he want his followers to give up on trying to accrue delegates. It was unfortunate that some of the followers did not heed his call for respect of others. The message became drowned somewhat by the zeal for "winning" by all sides. And that's the unfortunate part.

As a middle aged veteran of the Gulf War I know I'm not in the demographic of most Paul supporters. I believe in Paul's non-intervention foreign policy, that national security has been severely weakened by war-on-everything, and that the economic problems we face must be solved by keeping our money (mostly) at home.

I've read a lot about how other Paul supporters feel about things. Sure, there are anarchists who supported Paul as increased liberty gives them more opportunity. And there were a bunch of people that just wanted to ride the anti-party, anti-establishment bandwagon. Good for them, ride's over, and Dr. Paul didn't owe you anything anyway.

But there are a lot like me that believe America doesn't have to be the world's bully, paying for their friends, creating adversaries for public support, and ignoring the real threats to our society. I don't know if that's a stance appealing to youth, but I do know that it's pervasive.

Romney campaigns on a different policy, and I appreciate his honesty in that regard. Obama campaigned on many ideals I agreed with, but his actions show that not only didn't he agree with them, but he was willing to flagrantly disregard the Constitution that he once taught. Neither can be trusted with the most powerful military in the world. And that, simply, is a deal-breaker.

So Dr. Paul fought for his cause until the end, just as he had promised. He's left no further instructions for his followers as yet. It's like when Forrest Gump stopped his cross-country running and all his followers were standing around, saying, "what do I do now?"

So I'll make the argument that he did what he said he'd do, and perhaps also hasn't figured out his next step. The people who followed him that actually had shared opinions will likely not change their minds. Those who were just along for the ride will find another bandwagon to jump on. The GOP could have attracted them, but likely will not now.

Paul certainly did no disservice to his country, he brought his vision for America's improvement just as far as he possibly could.

The BuzzFeed staff hates Ron Paul, especially since that former politico guy became editor. They imply that the unnamed "strategist" speaks for the Ron Paul campaign, but it doesn't match the tenor of the speeches and emails actually coming out of the campaign.

Well said, Jimcooncat. And thank you for your service.

Ashley Ryan, Violet Willis and others were telling people that Ron Paul was going to win the nomination, clear up until the time they were yelling "point of order" on the convention floor two days ago. I think most of them believed that somehow Ron Paul was going to be the nominee. This comes largely from their youth and inexperience, and there is nothing wrong with that, in believing in your candidate. Ron Paul is definitely a positive influence for the Republican Party, no doubt about that. The only disagreement I have with Ron Paul is he seemed to encourage his followers to cause chaos at conventions across the country where the rules enabled him to go in and do that. Almost like chaos for chaos' sake. I didn't like it at all, and many people felt the same way, Ron Paulers coming in with a huge chip on their shoulders, seeking to be confrontational for no apparent reason. Example - someone mentioned in another thread how at the Windham caucus, Ashley Ryan started off the caucus by saying "we are videotaping this caucus, and we have lawyers!". Did it occur to you that maybe the "establishment" Republicans would have worked with you fine if you had an attitude of cooperation? Another thing that makes people wonder are the goon tactics (threats, harrassing emails and phone calls, following people, taking their pictures, etc.) employed by the leadership of the Ron Paul movement, and how they march in lockstep with whatever people like Brakey or Tweed tell them to do.

I think Ron Paul did his followers and the country a huge dis-service by not acknowledging that his race was over. As far as I am concerned Paul never thought he was in the race to win it but was using the election cycle to bring attention to the federal reserve- an issue that only a candidate who is not in it to win it could give such focused attention, since it has not been a priority issue in the minds of the general public. Paul's campaign was intended to change that but in the process he has done a lot of harm to the team on which he is supposedly playing- The Republican Party. Paul's supporters not only advanced a false smear campaign against Romney that attempted to portray Romney as another Obama but they also ran a smear campaign against the republicans and anyone who disagreed with their choice- forgetting the Ron Paul was running for the Republican nomination. In the end the Ron Paul supporters have assisted the Obama campaign, and opened the door for Obama campaign plants into what were formerly known as "Tea Party" forums. The Ron Paulers came to believe that in order to be a member of the Tea Party , one had to be a Ron Paul advocate. They perceive themselves as the "rulers' of the Tea Party and in the process they have alienated themselves from the rest of the movement- which does not have rulers and still exists in the general populous.

I credit Paul with bringing attention to the federal reserve but if it is true that he is leaving office in January, it only underscores that his support is only rhetorical and he is clueless about how to actually achieve the purported goal of his own rhetoric.. The fact is no president can make that happen without the support of the House and the Senate. While Paul lacks the leadership ability and executive skills to be president, he could still serve an important function in advancing the movement to audit or get rid of the federal reserve in Congress- but for all his hoop-lah- he is leaving now? Was there ever a better time to advance the movement to audit the federal reserve than now? So if Paul is intent on more than a rhetorical stand- why is he leaving now? It takes two branches of government to achieve!

I don't credit Paul with advancing attention about our constitution above and beyond others.

Apollo, having read everything I could find that was actually written by Dr. Paul throughout this year, he's told, and sometimes admonished, his followers to behave with respect and dignity. But there were many supporters that wouldn't listen, more than a few with their own agenda. Had the delegates actually followed Dr. Paul's instructions they may have gotten farther than they did with the nomination, but who can tell. Not everyone has that Ghandi-like patience.

No disservice done, IMO. Hopefully we can get more people elected similar to RP elected at the local, State and Federal level so that when we get to the presidency something can actually be accomplished.

Mackenzie has said it very well .

A thought ,one that ,many will not like I am sure.
When I left my house today I did my business w/out my freedoms being overtly hindered by government. When I am online I am not either.
There are many things I agree w/ that gov. can do better or not at all.
However ,when I hear the "Liberty Movement" this and that it really does nothing for me and I bet others. It appears if your not proclaiming it every minute in every way you are some sort of
defective person or something. It is a real turn off IMHO.
As I said in other posts all this new whatever is fine but it has come with various labels . and muddies the waters.

I will always believe he did a disservice w/ no intention of becoming President at all .
If he had just run as a third party I would have understood that.
The message never equaled the intent but the real intent was obvious and a disservice.!

Rand Paul endorsed Romney within 24 hours of the suspension of his dad's campaign. That should have served as a sign that the jig was up and it was time to admit defeat for this campaign season. Instead, Rand was attacked as a sellout by the true believers. That said a great deal about the degree of detachment from reality among the Ronulans.

Rand knows that it is necessary to play the long game and that change is going to have to come in degrees, not in one fell swoop.

I remember that Roger. Rand Paul is still considered a sellout. People were posting on here how his Facebook likes were dropping, so that proved he was now "Establishment". I've also seen some Ron Paul web pages saying that Rand Paul was blackmailed by the Republican Party, and / or that Ron Paul's emails were co-opted and sent from servers based in Boston, so Romney was behind it. The conspiracy theories among some of the Ron Paul supporters are without bounds.

Another thing, when Brent Tweed made the statement that Obama would be better than Romney, it probably did more damage and division to the Republican Party than anything Ron Paul said or encouraged.

Ryan, thanks for the explanation. However, Dr. Paul was nominated by six states... they just subsequently raised the threshold to eight.

Apollo, I have never understood those RP supporters who remained absolutely convinced that he would win even after he announced that he didn't have enough delegates.

I also want to thank jcmcards for his honesty is assessing the Maine Convention repeatedly on AMG.

I believe I understand perfectly what Jcmcards is referring to, at a point after the Maine Convention and as the caucuses thinned and primaries ruled in the left coast of the US, where Paul had little chance to win delegates he suspended his campaign. I agree with jcm, I was perplexed at that move.

The whole purpose of us winning these state caucuses was to get at least 5 states or more so we could put Paul's name in nomination with the hope that Romney would not get the numbers needed on the 1st ballot and the hope that it would become an open convention.

I could not understand at the time why he suspended the campaign. I think it was the wrong move and he should have kept going until there wasn't a dime left in the coffers.

Unfortunately considering the heavy hand of the RNC in retrospect it probably wouldn't have made a difference, but maybe it would have and I don't think he did us a service by the suspension

PS also I think the RNC by its heavy hand did Romney a great disservice, any GOP candidate in this nation needs great support by independents if they are going to win POTUS. Why they chose to show this heavy hand to the electorate of the US is beyond me. Romney would have won anyways and to have some debate in the GOP Convention would have shown independents that the GOP was honorable with its differing members and thus might welcome independents into the fold.

My sentiments exactly: " The only disagreement I have with Ron Paul is he seemed to encourage his followers to cause chaos at conventions across the country where the rules enabled him to go in and do that. Almost like chaos for chaos' sake. I didn't like it at all, and many people felt the same way, Ron Paulers coming in with a huge chip on their shoulders, seeking to be confrontational for no apparent reason."

They made a mess of the convention because they could. Despicable. I'm glad they got the treatment they deserved in Tampa ...

Zmogus

The GOP is shooting themselves in the foot with an attitude like that, there is always disagreement, do you think independents are going to agree with the attitude that its the gop way or the highway?

I have to wonder whether those that control the RNC want to win this election?

You are the big tent party aren't you? The democrats march in lockstep, do the GOP have to also? apparently so.

Another thing, when Brent Tweed made the statement that Obama would be better than Romney, it probably did more damage and division to the Republican Party than anything Ron Paul said or encouraged. apollo

Apollo do you actually think that any of us who voted for RP slate in the convention gives a rat's ass what Brent has to say? You look at us like we don't have a opinion that was made decades before this convention. They were just well organized and brought this thing together, kudos to them for that. But after that was done, we do what we always do, decide on our own.

That said a great deal about the degree of detachment from reality among the Ronulans.

With all due respect Roger, you who have toiled in the GOP these many years, what it shows is the independence of RP supporters. And that is a good thing, because other voters in this country, who sit out elections out of disgust by the choices, want to see a different result and candidate, they are not given one by the RNC or DNC.

We have to wonder what is the benefit of being a soldier in the Queen's army. Can we do better for our fellow citizens and family by being a benevolent soldier, rather than a tyrannical one?

Mike, I'm glad to hear you say that, and I hope it's true, but at least in Cumberland County, they follow lockstep whatever Brakey tells them to do.

Apollo, you've said some pretty stupid things in this forum before, but I don't need Eric Brakey to tell me who to support. I've supported Dr. Paul since 1996, when he decided to run again for Congress, and have contributed to nearly all his campaigns for Congress and for the Presidency. You're thinking that everyone who lives in Cumberland County is some sort of "Rush Dittohead" goon is insulting.
And finally, Mr. Tweed doesn't support either Obama or Romney for the same reason I don't support them. He sees little to no difference between the 2. I know that's a hard pill to swallow for alot of you here, but if you look critically at all the important issues concerning what this country faces, they are nearly in lockstep which other. And Paul Ryan's budget will balance the budget in 30 years? Are you kidding me?
Have you ever met Mr. Tweed? I have. He's a decent young man who is concerned with what is happening in this country, and saw Dr. Paul as a means of addressing this problems correctly. Why not call him, or go meet and talk with him. He lives in Berwick, which isn 't to far for you if you live in Cumberland County.
I'm not going to defend some of the actions of some of the supporters. I still remember telling some of them to shut up when Willard spoke at the Portland City Caucus. They didn't have politcal savvy. They were disrespectful at times. But what happened in Tampa and what happened with what the RNC did to the delegation is far more insulting than what these supporters did.
I would reccomend to you to watch the Daily Show interview with Michael Steele, who is a former RNC chairman. Also, Roger Stone, who has been a GOP consultant for years has written what the RNC did to Dr. Paul and the supporters was insulting as well. Go read or watch it for yourselves.

Ron Paul did a tremendous service to his supporters. He proved to them that honest politics can still win and that it isn't easy in a dishonorable and disgraced political world. I can't speak to the future of the R party in Maine but I can say that Gov. LePage has taken giant steps to securing a second term . . if he wants it.

I've asked this elsewhere on AMG and don't believe I've ever been given an answer: Did Ron Paul's Maine supporters really believe he would a) receive the national GOP nomination for U.S. President, and then b) go on to defeat President Obama in November 2012? If so, how?

There is much to applaud about Paul supporters. If there is a lack in the movement I would say it is an aversion to the public education necessary to shift a majority of American voters into the Paul camp. Strategic maneuvering at state/national conventions goes only so far. If you don't have a majority of voters for either a primary or general election -- there is still more work to do.

I also think if Paul supporters are serious about bettering America their key goal now should be defeating Obama/Biden. Mitt Romney was not my first pick in the GOP presidential primary. In the general election, with Romney v Obama, Romney is my first pick. Will a Romney/Ryan administration be the antidote to all that ails the nation? No. But it will be a heck of a lot easier to work towards that end under Romney/Ryan than under Obama/Biden.

Best,
skf

Editor, I can't speak for everyone, of course, but in the beginning I would say most RP supporters believed it was possible. This should not be all that shocking if you look at two things. First, we got roughly 10% of delegates at the convention, but remember that numerous states had their delegations knocked out. There was also downright corruption in some states that prevented us from picking up delegates we otherwise would have. It's hardly a stretch to say that in a fair fight we would have had at least 20% (I'd be happy to make a a more detailed case for that if you like). And I say "at least" because if RP hadn't been hobbled by the Republican Party, he might have been treated as a "real" candidate by the media, leading to even greater numbers. If our momentum hadn't been cut off, who knows what could have happened.

Second, in most polls "vs Obama" that I have seen, RP did either similarly to Romney or better. Despite all the propaganda that Dr. Paul's views are "fringey", his positions actually square much more closely with America on many issues that the candidates who are left standing. For example, what does it say when 91% of the public believes the Patriot Act should not be renewed, but none of the "mainstream" candidates left standing take that position?

I can't speak for anyone else but:

1. At the time of the state convention, a brokered convention seemed possible and worth the effort. By the time Paul stopped campaigning actively, a five state nomination and a 15 minute speech seemed to be a reasonable short term goal. All along, growing the GOP with liberty minded independents was the long term goal that, to me, was far more important and more likely to succeed.

2. I'd been an independent since joining the military and was never motivated to join the Maine GOP until this year's campaign. I met a lot of folks with similar stories at the state convention. So there already has been a significant shift of voters into the Paul GOP camp this year. Obviously, hanging on to them and continuing this growth of the GOP is one of the challenges now that the presidential campaign is over. Now that the focus will shift from the retiring Dr Paul to other liberty candidates, I think we'll find that some of the next crop of candidates will have even more appeal to the independents and fiscally conservative Democrats.
The convention maneuvering was a short term tactic, not a long term strategy.

3. I disagree that the key goal now for Paul supporters is to defeat Barack Obama at any cost. I find that odd to write because, as a physician, I'm horrified by how the PPACA will take the failing third party prepaid medical system and make it much worse. Four more years of Obama will be terrible, but so will eight years of the father of Romneycare running both the country and the party. Many of us were planning to hold our nose and vote for Romney but the crude and surprisingly open display of power politics at the convention has rekindled all of my doubts about him.

I plan to work hard to get liberty minded Republicans into state and federal office and to reelect Gov. LePage. Hopefully, they can limit the damage caused by Romney or Obama. I now plan on voting for Johnson for president. I doubt that will have an impact on Obama's likely Maine victory (especially here in the first district) but that is the best option for liberty in the presidential election.

Breaking news... Convention-goers LOVE this forum!

;) via thedailypaul

Mike G wrote: "Zmogus The GOP is shooting themselves in the foot with an attitude like that, there is always disagreement, do you think independents are going to agree with the attitude that its the gop way or the highway?"

Why do you think ONLY the Ron Paulites should have respect? What about people like me who went to the state convention expecting a convention and then being totally dissed by the facist, white capped Paul-ite jerks? You people made a mockery of the the convention process. Good job for you, but don't think for a moment that everyone else liked it. You got what you wanted in Augusta and you got what you deserved in Tampa. I'm glad the Ron Paul delegates spent their own money on a wasted trip to Florida. I'm glad the Maine Paulites with the clothes pinned noses were on the front page of the BDN, so everyone else in the state could see what jerks they were/are. I wasted my convention registration and a good springtime Saturday in Augusta.

Lol, zmogus thinks that if only the paper would run more pictures of RP supporters, the public understand why he hates us.

Zmogus, fascism has a definition. Economically, speaking it is the buddy system between big-government and government-empowered mega-corporations. In other words, the system our country is degenerating into. Not the fascism of Hitler and Mussolini by any means -- and I agree with Dr. Paul that we don't need to fear their styles of government any more -- but nonetheless a disturbing situation. Case in point, the Congress did not recently socialize health care, they mandated that we all buy policies from a small and shrinking number of huge corporations (and in doing so, tacitly approved of the further price increases that will follow when massive artificial demand is created by law).

Dr. Paul has been the only candidate from one of the two main parties to plainly denounce this for what it is. You are of course, welcome, to use the term in an ignorant fashion, but it has no more effect than any other ad hominem attack.