More Ron Paul supporter scams! Change Party Affiliation to Republican?

Daily Paul web site ^ | May 29, 2007 | DailyPaul.com

[Designer]

"..I’d rather vote for Hillary. At least I’d be voting for the real deal.."

Whoo-ee! The Paul bashers are in superlative form today!

[George W. Bush]

You want to argue that manipulating party nomination processes is some sort of states right now?

You really are ignorant. Seriously. But I should thank you since this does give me an opportunity to post a banner that I post here at FR occasionally (with a link) so that people can find out more about which states they need to change parties in, which are open primaries, etc. Just useful voting information about the laws in various states. Here at FR, I'm only after those stubborn Libertarian types. They're pretty tough nuts to crack. All full of principles. Very annoying.

The two major national parties do have a right to seat or not to seat convention delegates, as in the Dims looking likely to refuse to recognize their FL delegates in '08. That decision was forced by the GOP-controlled FL legislature moving up their date prior to the one the DNC allowed, not even the state Dim party's fault as they all voted against it. State legislatures also control the distribution of electoral votes with their own legislation, something even you must have heard about. In addition, each state is free to determine qualifications for voting (allowing primary votes by students who will turn 18 for the next election) and to set their own rules on how long prior to voting they must register (a party-switching prevention measure I've suspected).

States also determine whether they have an open primary or a closed primary. Again, the national parties may try to influence this but they can't control it. They can only accept or reject the delegation entirely.

Since when is the intentional “outside” manipulation of party politics a legitimate part of the party nomination process?

Certainly, I have opposed it consistently. Motor voter, open primaries, all the Xlintonism voting "reforms". However, I recognize the laws in these states and where they insist on flinging open the door, I think every campaign will take advantage. We routinely saw candidates of both parties campaigning for members of the opposite party to enter and vote in their own primary. It is, in fact, becoming routine. Again, I object but I won't hobble my own candidate for legal voters.

I suspect you only object to Ron Paul and this is just your little stick to beat him with. Do you have the same objections if Fred invites Dims to vote in our primary? Or if McStain again invites them to do so? And certainly, Giuliani has already made such appeals. Again, your focus on Ron Paul indicates either simple malice for the good doctor or an even broader ignorance than your previous remarks indicate.

Make up any defense you want. We all know what we are talking about here.

I don't defend it. We're talking about how ignorant you are about state parties, state election laws, who controls them, the limited control that can be exerted by the national parties.

We are talking about a small fringe group of the party supporting a small insignificant fringe libertarian candidate inside of a party where the majority oppose that candidate and his views.

So why are your panties in such a tight little bunch about it?

So, the fringe candidate and his supporters go outside of that party to find like-minded supporters from across the political aisle, who are also opposed by the vast majority of that party, invite them into the party for the purpose of hijacking it’s nomination process and you think this is an ethical and healthy form of “democracy” at work?

I don't argue it. I suggest you write a letter to your state senator, your governor, your state party. If you're fretting over some other state, then write a letter to them. They're the only ones who determine these things.

No more devils advocate excuses. This is what you support??? This is good governance in your opinion?

It's wonderful. No, it's satanic. Well, it's actually just the law in various states. You just don't happen to like it. Join the club. You think that Ron Paul and some Dirty Hippies are abusing your rights (or the voting rights of Republicans in other states) but, in fact, Ron Paul and his supporters possess no such power. Like other candidates and their supporters (Dim, GOP, Indy, Green Libertarian), we follow the election laws.

[Don Carlos]

Physician, heal thyself! (Someone famous once said that)

[PlainOleAmerican]

The Republican Party is the nations “conservative” party. Conservatives allowed their party to drift left and I have preached for years now that it is up to conservatives to reform their own party, if they intend to ever reform the nation.

In this same regard, Libertarians should not be trying to hijack the conservative party. They clearly hold libertarian ideals dear and they as a result, they should operate under the Libertarian banner rather than the conservative banner for starters.

If they really believe (like they say) that the majority of Americans agree with them, then give the American people an honest chance to vote for those beliefs by representing those beliefs honestly under a Libertarian banner.

They were invited into the conservative (Republican) party during the “big tent” years, just as social liberals were. Now the party is full of non-conservatives from both ends of the spectrum and nobody can tell the difference between the Republican party and the Democrat Party anymore.

Inviting more liberals into the fold via anti-war national security and pro-drug liberal social policies is hardly the way to return the conservative party to its conservative roots.

Libertarians should give American voters a chance to support them out in the open, not hidden beneath any other name or identity.

Ron Paul should call himself what he is, a Libertarian Independent and he should be running as such. Anything less is dishonest and directing anti-war socialist to switch party affiliations to the conservative party supportive of our national security efforts for the purpose of undermining that party is unethical and at odds with a representative republic.

Stand out in the open and tell people what you believe and let them decide whether or not they agree. Don’t hide!

[George W. Bush]

Why won’t Paul run as a Libertarian Independent?

He promised his wife. But if the GOP/libmedia made Mrs. Paul angry enough...well, she knows full well that both the Libertarians and the Constitution Party are frothing at the bit to unite behind him as the candidate of both parties, something rather unusual. It does underline his broad conservative support and the long appeal he has had in these circles.

[DesScorp]

The Paulistinians have been rigging Internet voting...why not real ballots too?

[PlainOleAmerican]

So, you’re saying that even though you agree it’s a bad idea and even to one degree or another, improper and unethical with potentially negative consequences, because some state laws have a loophole through which other scum will slither, you will too?

Does something have to be illegal to be wrong?

Is everything that is illegal wrong?

Ron Paul scares nobody but his shrink...

But if he can manage to shift the power of MoveOn.org, Code Pinko and many other leftist organizations into hijacking the Republican nomination process, this is indeed a threat and you see this as a good thing?

You are working to trash exactly what you claim to support. And you think I’m ignorant???

This is very typical of leftists. Right and wrong does not exist in their world either. Just legal and illegal, which is why they need a HUGE government to determine right from wrong via the legislative process. That’s why we legislate everything under the sun.

People with no respect for right and wrong can not self-govern. They need to be held between the lines of social order by legislative means, legal and illegal.

And you think you’re the wise one here...

My third grader understands this much...

[PlainOleAmerican]

Tell her to lighten up and let her man be a man....

Let him run as the Libertarian he is... Let him be the man he wants to be....

Meanwhile, give the man an open microphone every day between now and the RNC convention. The more he talks, the more people will fit him for a long sleeve white jacket and a padded cell...

He promised his wife....? Why did he do that? Why would she ask for such a promise?

You’re wrong BTW - I wouldn’t support these unethical activities even if they were aimed at destroying the useless Democrat Party, even if they were aimed at destroying the Socialist Party USA.

Wrong is wrong, no matter who the beneficiary is.

I welcome all Democrats who have given up their liberal beliefs and adopted truly conservative values, into the Republican Party and if this is their motive for changing, I’m glad to have them and they can support whoever they like including Ron Paul.

But if they are in fact liberal socialists who remain committed to Marxist ideals of a nanny state, and they are coming for the sole purpose of voting for Ron Paul who is more anti-war than any sniveling liberal is today, then they are not coming to the conservative party for reason of adopting the conservative belief system. They are coming for the purpose of destroying the conservative belief system.

If you support and promote this, you are just as evil as they are...

[PlainOleAmerican]

Clearly, that is their plan and some here are defending that plan as we speak...

[George W. Bush]

because some state laws have a loophole through which other scum will slither, you will too?

It's not a "loophole". It's the law. Plainly stated. Passed by one or, generally, both parties in all those states. And the state laws mirror for both parties so neither gains a special advantage. In a given election, one party may have a strong nominee early, freeing up activists for mischief in the other party. But the only state I think it likely to have any impact at all is NH. And I think they make you switch parties by this next week. So very few Dim activists will go to so much trouble so early in the season.

The effect of party-switchers has never been felt in an open primary in modern times with the exception of McStain with NH voters in 2000. He appealed to them himself, just as Giuliani has done elsewhere, just as we saw candidates in both parties doing it in 2006. And yet, you fixate on Ron Paul who has never (yet) made such an appeal or focused any campaign effort on switchers. A small number of his supporters have but there is no reporting of significant numbers changing party. Does something have to be illegal to be wrong? Is everything that is illegal wrong?

No and no.

Ron Paul scares nobody but his shrink...

Seems to have you wetting your pants. Can't imagine why except you don't actually know much about individual state voting laws.

But if he can manage to shift the power of MoveOn.org, Code Pinko and many other leftist organizations into hijacking the Republican nomination process, this is indeed a threat and you see this as a good thing?

But their leadership condemns Ron Paul and their activists are looking for a chance to go after Hitlery. No, you're clutching at straws.

You are working to trash exactly what you claim to support. And you think I’m ignorant?

Not at all. And you are ignorant. Your statements make it obvious. Look, it's not that hard to find this info. You're not just ignorant, you're lazy and ignorant.

This is very typical of leftists. Right and wrong does not exist in their world either. Just legal and illegal, which is why they need a HUGE government to determine right from wrong via the legislative process. That’s why we legislate everything under the sun.

You're naive. Both parties do this stuff constantly. And both parties are monkeywrenching the electoral college for 2008. And both will be gerrymandering again after the 2010 census.

People with no respect for right and wrong can not self-govern. They need to be held between the lines of social order by legislative means, legal and illegal.

But you're a gloriously moral anarchist? This is purely self-serving and self-justifying rhetoric.

And you think you’re the wise one here...

No. I'm just the one who knows the law and doesn't blame some candidate who has nothing to do with it for people switching parties. Just how exactly would you, O Lawgiver, prevent people from doing naughty things that might ruin your little utopia? Let's hear it, Mom. And believe me, both parties and all the voters are a lot more slippery than your third-grader. So you'd better think carefully before you build your corral for that herd of cats. Then build fifty of your corrals in all the states. Or you could just destroy all the state parties entirely and run it all from the national level. Good luck trying to sell that to the RNC (a truly hated bunch these days) or to your state and county chairs.

[George W. Bush]

Tell her to lighten up and let her man be a man...

But he loves her dearly. And she just had a pacemaker implanted the day of the Iowa straw poll. You know how old couples are when one's health is in danger. Not unusual.

[George W. Bush]

Clearly, that is their plan and some here are defending that plan as we speak...

It's not much of a plan actually. We get all the votes we can for our candidate.

It may amount to a few thousand votes. I think McStain is the one with the real potential to bring Dims into the NH primary and score a win off them. They certainly crossed over to vote for him in 2000. And he did well at the debate the other night, really sounding Granite State themes. He knows his prey.

[George W. Bush]

kind of like flooding the system with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS who vote for Demos!

You don't suppose we could get some of those ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS to vote for Ron Paul, do you? Wow! Great idea. Thanks.

LOL.

[PlainOleAmerican]

Your colors are well established here on FR George...

I see other freeper’s have already properly ID’d you as scum.

No need to point out the obvious any further.

Thanks for the entertainment...

One last question, are you really a libertarian isolationist fool like Ron Paul, or are you one of the leftists angry with Hillary and Obama for not already pulling out of Iraq, pretending to be a libertarian isolationist fool?

[George W. Bush]

I’m a conservative Republican scum apparently.

[PlainOleAmerican]

Republican scum, maybe...

Conservative? NOT!

[hocndoc]

We were leaving the straw poll at the end of the day. As we came to a crosswalk about 3 blocks from the Convention Center, I saw a well dressed young woman with a clip board and pen (in a suit, with makeup - unusual for the RP’s and most of us by Saturday afternoon) talking to a mid-to-late 20’s man neatly dressed in jeans and a t-shirt. She was flashing him a big smile and saying, “then, if you want to help, you need to register as a Republican, so you can vote for Ron Paul in the Republican primary” He answered that he would *never* vote in the Republican primary.

I only caught this little bit, but my impression was not that she was with RP - she didn’t have any buttons or posters - but that she was just trying to sway our Republican primary.

[JTN]

Personally I think it’s time Fredheads Freep an online poll just to give the Paulbearers a taste of their own message.

Good luck with that.

[JTN]

Making a mockery of the primary system by hijacking or “spamming” the “other parties” primary process is NOT constitutional

Oh, I know. Of course, the Constitution doesn't say anything about this, but I'm sure it emanates from a penumbra or something.

This statement has NOTHING to do with the discussion. NOBODY is saying that people can’t “vote” for anyone they want (in the general election). We’re talking about corrupting the primary process of a political party. I’m saying that it is unethical at best, and at odds with the constitutional process to manipulate the results of a political party nomination by switching parties solely for that purpose, without adopting the belief systems of that party. It’s a SCAM, pure and simple.Now, you either know that and choose to applaud it, or you are ignorant of it and refuse to become informed. No matter which it is, you are dangerous, as is anyone like you willing to make up the rules of the game as you go.

I'm not making up the rules. Your elected representatives made up the rules. If you don't like those rules, contact your representative and ask him to try to change them. People who vote in accordance with those rules aren't violating the Constitution; they're following it.

[JTN]

You are as evasive as they come. They ARE NOT voting for a candidate they like. They are voting for a candidate because it insinuates their non-Republican, non-conservative beliefs into primary, trying to swing the vote of that primary to the candidate most objectionable to the majority of Republicans.

Right. A writer for a Ron Paul supporting website tells his Ron Paul supporting readers to vote in the Republican primary - but it's not because they support Ron Paul.