You Can’t Ignore Ron Paul
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, 3rd Party, Money, Ron Paul
Money talks people. Just remember that. Without his November 5th money nuke, he wouldn’t be getting this type of traction in the media. Now reporters are focusing on his supporters’ dissatisfaction with not being involved in debates or polls, etc.
For example, take the GOP’s new rule that debate candidates must have 5% or above in national polls. Paul supporters didn’t take kindly to that and they flooded the phone lines in Iowa…
News of the party’s decision and how to protest it was spread quickly over the Internet by supporters of the anti-war, anti-tax, anti-abortion libertarian. “We are getting bombarded” with calls and e-mails from Paul’s supporters, said GOP spokeswoman Mary Tiffany. She said there were 25 voice mails from angry Paul supporters before the start of business Thursday.“I’m all about the First Amendment, but at the same time, how is this productive?” she asked. “They need to start calling voters and start door-knocking instead of calling the Republican Party of Iowa.”
So Paul supporters, do you REALLY want to take back a party like this or jumpstart one of your own? The choice is yours folks, but the GOP as it stands now is strongly pro-war, pro-spending and pro-partisan loyalty. That’s it. They don’t care about the constitution, and neither does your average GOP voter once they’re exposed to what that would really mean on a organizational scale. The powerful want to stay in power and the way they do that is give money out to their communities and friedns and spend, spend, spend.
Here’s some more on how Paul could attract voters from both sides and create a new 3rd party movement…
And as to the presidential race, Paul freely admits he has stumbled into something he didn’t quite expect. He has a huge following on the Internet and routinely wins online surveys critics say are easily manipulated but supporters say are the truest measure of political action in a cyberspace age.In a telephone interview from New Hampshire, Paul said his campaign has become the political model of his libertarianism.
“We offered the message and the message spread and the organization was spontaneous,” he said. “It is interesting. We sort of see the campaign operating the way the free market works. Not by central economic planning” but by “individuals doing things in their own best interest.”
Free market politics. He’s seeing it in action as the internet provides the platform to allow it to happen.
So what do voters think? What do they want? Well, if the GOP is looking for another Reagan…
On a broader scale, a recent USA Today poll found 72 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country. That kind of discontent presents an opening for Paul, a plain-speaking outsider, an anti-politician challenging the status quo. [...]Elam compared surging interest in Paul’s campaign to Ronald Reagan’s 1976 campaign, where he also worked. Paul’s appeal also has a whiff of Democrat Howard Dean’s insurgent 2004 campaign, which similarly drew the disaffected and gained momentum via the Internet.
All that said, Paul remains an extreme long-shot politically. But betting on the underdog is something many of his supporters clearly relish.
“It really is an insurrection,” said Harvey Kronberg, editor of the Quorum Report in Austin. “These are people who, generally speaking, have given up on politics and government.”
Ron Paul is all message and no politics. That’s why I respect him and feel increasingly comfortable talking to people about him and his campaign. I don’t agree with all of his policies, but out of the current crop of candidates from both sides, Paul embodies the most genuine political spirit in decades.
And oh yeah…there’s also another money bomb scheduled for December 16, the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party…
A donation day in the works will apparently be tied to another historical event — the Boston Tea Party on Dec. 16, 1773, when patriots dumped tea into Boston Harbor to protest taxation without representation. Paul campaign spokeswoman Kerri Price said she had no official confirmation of the event because it is being organized entirely by volunteers.
Entirely by volunteers? That’s amazing stuff because even though Dean raised 4 times the amount of money Paul has, he did it through his campaign’s website, not through self organized groups that had few if any ties to the actual campaign itself.
Exciting times ahead…
This entry was posted on Friday, November 9th, 2007 and is filed under 2008 Election, 3rd Party, Money, Ron Paul. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
I think the biggest problem with disallowing any hopeful from the debates at this point is because people in mainstream America are only now starting to perk up and listen to the candidates.
Sure, I’m voting for Ron Paul, and want him in the debate, but I want all the other candidates there as well. It’s far too early in the political season to be blocking a voice from being heard, and especially coming from an unabashedly biased news source, Fox news once again seems to be just trying to choose the nominee for us, negating their so-called claim that “we report, you decide.”
And to GOP spokeswoman Mary Tiffany and those that agree with her assessment that we should be spreading the message instead of calling her? Don’t worry… we’re doing both.
For the rare few of you who are surfing the internet looking for Ron Paul information, to really see what a brilliant economist he is, google his challenges to former FED Chairman Alan Greenspan or current FED Chairman Ben Bernanke. Not even they can refute his logic, and you’ll find, he makes perfect sense.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
I want to take the party, not start one of my own and there’s a lot of Republicans that feel this way.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Why do Ronpaullians have such a problem with the 5% rule? Since Ron Paul consistently gets upwards of 75% on Internet polls, why should you worry about legitimate, scientific polls?
November 9th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Take it over. It’s about taxes and the constitution stupid.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
There’s so much enthusiasm for Ron Paul’s message and there’s such a huge void in our political spectrum that’s not filled by the republicans or the democrats. I wish all this energy (and money) could be put towards forming a “libertarian lite” party, which would be a conservative party without the theocons and neocons. Seriously, after this election, what are all the Ron Paul people going to do?
November 9th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
“So Paul supporters, do you REALLY want to take back a party like this or jumpstart one of your own?”
Good question; but I think it’s important to remember that we don’t have true democracy in the states: just an ingrained “two-party” system, which is increasingly looking like a two-headed hydra with one body.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Our two-party system is biased against third-party candidates. Ron Paul is very aware of this, and attempting to run as a third-party (Libertarian or other) at this point would be campaign suicide. I don’t care what the media tries to make us believe, the real Republican base is made up of voters like me who are disgusted with the sad state our party is in, and we are demanding change. Ron Paul embodies everything a real republican should. We should not persuade him to just step aside and let the current regime continue their police-state agenda. He’s our only hope for real, honest, change.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
“Why do Ronpaullians have such a problem with the 5% rule? Since Ron Paul consistently gets upwards of 75% on Internet polls, why should you worry about legitimate, scientific polls?”
1.) i’m new to politics, are the weird school yeard inspired name calling just part of the whole package(moonbats, wingnuts, ron paulians, paulites, billary ect.), i feel like we’re discuss brangelina instead of the future of the country…
2. good reason not to trust those polls. example:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016710.html
when the choices are Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Thompson, Other, and Undecided how is Paul supposed to register in polls?
November 9th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Jamie, if you wanna be “true to your school” (the Republican party), your best hope for real change is to “cut class” on November 4th. Anything less than that on Election Day will be wasted breath and energy on a message that goes ignored.
Am I saying that you shouldn’t vote at all? No. What I’m saying is that any vote for a Republican or a Democrat is a wasted vote. This is the truth of the matter! For many decades, we’ve been brainwashed into thinking it was the other way around.
I don’t know what it’s going to take to snap everyone out of this defeatist attitude when it comes to third-party candidates, but if it doesn’t happen soon, we’ll have our two candidates the morning after Iowa, and that’ll be the end of it, folks.
Look at all these people!!!!
It’s a lot more intimidating when you rattle the cage from the outside!
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
November 9th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
I want to take back the GOP from the neocons (big-government nation-builders) not build a third party. The rules are so stacked against 3rd parties. Ron Paul won’t be tricked like Buchanan was.
As for you Jimmi, The Plain Old Telephone Surveys (POTS) are as crooked as a Lousianna politician with a freezer full of cash. They are biased in so many ways that a complete listing is not possible here.
But just a few of the ways:
1) Cherry picked group (GOP primary voters in 2004 when “W” was unopposed)
2) Landlines only.
3) Inclusion Bias (Ron Paul still isn’t included in some polls.)
4) Metric bias (these show name recognition only – not support.)
5) Reporting bias (online polls get pulled when Ron is winning – would we even hear about a POTS in which he got better than 5%?) It’s too easy to throw away results you don’t like.
Later.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Take it back. After this next election the party will be more open to being rebuilt from the ashes.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Why all the talk of a third party bid? Ron Paul is leading the Republican field in volunteers. He’s leading in straw poll wins. He will probably lead the Republican field in fourth quarter fundraising. The only area he doesn’t lead (yet) is in random telephone surveys of people who are barely following the race. Most of the respondents to those polls are really undecided. 2/3 of them are not committed to the candidates they “support.”
Ron Paul is one of the leading candidates for the Republican nomination. In another two months, he could be THE leading candidate. Why on Earth would he consider a third party bid?
November 9th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
In a system where the winner takes all, there are only two parties. Every governmental agenda item must fit into the dicotomy or it will fail to attract sufficient votes. The only caveat to this is if one party so loses touch with its base that the base is pulled out from under it. The rules that have been instituted by the dominant parties over the last 100 years make this practically impossible. Instead, the parties just trade positions back and forth in an effort to gain the largest majority. In the time of the Civil War, Republicans were Radical abolitionists and pro-Federal government. Democrats were the States Rights party. In the beginning of this century, Democrats were progressive socialists who were willing to go to war to defend democracy abroad, while Republicans were for a humble, fiscally conservative foreign policy. Democrats used to be pro-life and Republicans pro-choice. The Democrats ruled the south and the Republicans ruled the north.
Small issues can rear their head, and move the parties around on their foundations. But ultimately, all policies will inevitably favor big government, social/central planning, and the existence of the two entrenched parties. That is why the US will eventually fall like every other State on earth. Only anarchy produces the freedom necessary to fuel the growth of wealth, and wealth seeks to limit the competition inherent in freedom and anarchy. States always rise through freedom and fall through constriction.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
The only material thing I learned in Berkeley polisci was that fund raising data is often more reliable as an indicator of the final electoral voting pool (how many people care enough about the campaign to donate reflects by a kind of multiplier how many will show up to the polls).
The scientific polls are indeed scientific, but they are limited by their sample selection. This fund raising cycle may indicate a dramatic shift in the composition of the voting populace since 2004. The current polls, using the 2004 election rosters, may be perfectly faithful to the data, but yet unrepresentative of the pool of voters for this election.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Building a third party is more difficult than taking over one of the two existing major parties. Why? Because 2/3 of American voters automatically vote for either the D or R label in the general election. For a third party to win, they would need 34% of the vote or more.
Since less than 15% of the people vote in the primaries, a candidate or a movement with 10% support could take over either party, then coast to a win in the general election. Just turn out your people for the primaries.
The Republican Party doesn’t “stand for” anything. It stands for what its nominees stand for. The nominees are determined by who actually turns out to vote, not a random telephone survey of the people who turned out to vote last time.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
“I’m all about the First Amendment, but at the same time, how is this productive?†she asked. “They need to start calling voters and start door-knocking instead of calling the Republican Party of Iowa.â€
^Hey lady, they’re already doing that. Ever heard of Meetup Groups? Ron Paul has among the largest number of Meetup Groups and members of all the presidential candidates.
Just let her wait until December 15th and 16th during the nationwide sign bombardment.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
I’d recommend some of you folks look back into American history… especially the period, oh, say 1850-1860.
Coupled with the comments in this thread…
Oh, the irony!
–Ag
November 9th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
To quote Kevin above:
4) Metric bias (these show name recognition only – not support.)
5) Reporting bias (online polls get pulled when Ron is winning – would we even hear about a POTS in which he got better than 5%?) It’s too easy to throw away results you don’t like.
I agree with most of the other points but I want to make a comment on these two. As far as name recognition goes, that’s actually very important. Ron Paul’s biggest hurdle now is name recognition (though progress is being made quite well since both the Leno interview and Nov 5 moneybomb).
As far as #5 goes, while that point is true, it can also lead to a bias (people active online, for example, sort of how the traditional polls pick only people with land lines). A much better example to use and what I think is a more accurate measure are straw polls, since in that case people need to actually come out and vote (much like they do in elections). In that regard, Paul is doing very well (though the MSM seems to like discussing those straw polls where Ron Paul DOESN’T win rather than all the ones he does).
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_polls_for_the_2008_United_States_presidential_election
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/
http://www.usastrawpolls.com/
As far as a new third party goes. If our system allowed for such, it would be interesting. But the problems with that (or a third party run in general) are numerous. The system to get on state ballots and the electoral process in general in the US doesn’t favor anything more than a two major party system. Gaining enough support as a third party would take more time than we have to be at all effective. For Ron Paul to do a lot of the things he wants to do, it’s going to take at least some cooperation from congress- and that means the traditional conservative republicans in the party. The whole NeoCon position is a relatively new one in the republican party. Yes, there is a loud vocal minority (and a surprisingly loud evagelical pro-war right involved there) but these positions are part of why the republicans lost in the last elections. Remember this, Ron Paul is bringing a lot of people BACK into the party who left (either literally or simply with their vote) as well as new voters. He’s not taking away from the people supporting the pro-war/big government spending position. If Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination, then the GOP’s only hope is that Hillary gets the Dem nomination and that they can garner enough “anyone but Hillary” votes.
November 9th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Some times i just want to give a big wet kiss to who ever is running FOX news. I can think of nothing that will add more to the revolution that is now Ron Paul. We just need of to come up with ways to make sure they pay to the max. That is if they are dumb enough to keep him out. In the end i think they will come to their senses. They have got to see that this will only make Ron Paul stronger.
November 9th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Just curious …. how many posters in this group have ever heard of, or for that matter, taken the fews hours needed to read the “Federalist Papers” written in 1787-88 by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, paper #10 specifically. These provide an excellent insight as to what our Founding Fathers contemplated and considered while undertaking the incredible task of setting out the plan for what we all know as the “Constitution of the United States of America”. God Bless America and God give us the strength of elect Ron Paul.
November 9th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
So when does the Ron Paul AC/DC “Money Talks” video come out on YouTube? LOL!
Seriously, and all comments by Dimmy Jimmy aside, if Dr. Paul can take back the GOP then great, it’s needed. But the real question is what happens if he can’t? How does the so-called two-party system work when one on the parties is dead ala the Whigs of old, and how can it recover without another Civil War?
November 9th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Hi Justin,
Remember your post a couple of weeks ago where you reported that Ron Paul fell short of his October fundraising goals?
How is he doing now? I would be shocked if we do not reach $12 million by the end of November. The November 11th fundraiser hopefully will put him above $10 million with 19 days left in the month. The December 15-16th fundraiser, which I personally think should be moved to December 4th and called the Fox Smart $ Bomb, will probably move the quarter totals close to $17-$18 million. I anticipate we will finish the quarter between $22-$25 million.
Looking at the downward spiral of donations of the other “so-called” front runners where will they finish.
Rudy Giuliani – $15 mil
Mitt Romney – $20 mil ($10 mil from his own funds)
John McCain – $10 mil
Fred Thompson – $10 mil
Mike Huckabee – $8 mil
I think Dr. Paul is fine in the party he is in. You know, the one he has been elected 10 times in.
November 9th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
I am a Republican and have voted a straight party ticket in every national election since the early 1980’s.
If the Iowa GOP excludes Ron Paul from the debate, then it is time to OUST the leaders of the Iowa GOP. They would be STUPID to exclude Ron Paul. If they exclude Ron Paul, then there will be a STORM of protest, the likes of which they have never seen.
It is too early to be excluding U.S. CONGRESSMEN (and women) from presidential debates. Iowans need to see a real debate, not a commercial for the special interests like Fox News.
I want my party back. It is time to rebuild the GOP. It is time to restore the principles of the party.
Republicans for Ron Paul!
November 9th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
The GOP has clearly decided that they are going to not allow Paul to join in the debate. You should call the Iowa GOP and hit ext. 109. You will get a message saying they will only allow people who have 5% or more in the polls to join in their reindeer games.
Only here is the kicker – they get to pick any poll they want as the standard. They will look at them all and then decide which one has the most accurate, ahem, least number of votes for Ron Paul.
I recently called on of these official scientific polling places that is sited by many including realclearpolitics, pollster.com, the Raleigh chronicle, newsobserver.com, the New York Times and others. It is called Public Policy Polling. Their last poll linked here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016710.html doesn’t allow you to choose Ron Paul as a choice. You are only allowed to choose between who they call the top 4. Rudy, Mitt, Fred, and John. When asked why they chose this very scientific method of choosing candidates they stated they didn’t have the equipment to include any more choices. Moreover, Ron Paul didn’t do very well in their last poll where he was not included either, so they don’t think he has much of a chance.
If this is the kind of scientific garbage that the media calls polling, then it is obvious the game is rigged! Why include a sentence like “we can decide on any poll we want” to base our decision on, if you do not intend no matter what to exclude Ron Paul.
If you call the number for the Iowa GOP hit star a couple of times and a directory of names comes up. The first time it gives you a choice to input a name after that it starts listing names for you.
Perhaps the Iowa GOP is unaware of how out of date, useless, lazy, and unprepared the polling companies are. Not one of them calls cell phones and all of them rely on “probable” GOP primary voters based on the last primary.
I can tell you right now – most of Ron Paul’s support comes from a wide range of people are few are the kind that voted Bush back into office.
Instead of wondering where all this support is coming from and how he can raise 4.3 million in one day with an average donation of $103 bucks, why can’t anyone have the brains to ask WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE POLLS? WHY ARE THEY GIVING US SUCH INSANELY INACCURATE DATA?
Instead they all assume the number have to be right, Ron Paul only has 1% of the vote and that one percent is capable of donating $7.7 million dollars in the past five weeks. With a limit of $2300 per person, I don’t think if every voter in the country maxed out, he could get that much from only 1% of voters. Someone do the math please?
So, clearly, this is a hoax by the Iowa GOP that is terrified of Ron Paul and would rather lose the main election than let Ron Paul win.
If you are a Republican, I would call the Iowa GOP traitors. They are selling you down the river and making you look like monsters in the process.
November 9th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Stephanie,
The reason there is a problem is that the GOP will get to decide which poll they want to rely on when making their decision. Ron Paul consistently gets 60% or higher in online polls, but as you correctly stated, in polls where his name is not included he does not do well. Of course in those polls, “other” is raking in around 14%, but we do not discuss that in polite society.
If they get to randomly pick any poll they want as the official indicator, there are plenty of “no Paul” polls to choose from. If you saw a recent news item on some station they showed that in the last year Ron Paul’s name had been mentioned around 4000 times on some station, while McCain’s name had been mentioned roughly 20,000 times. Think that might have any affect on polls? Hard to vote for a guy no one on the news has ever mentioned.
You see my dear, this is a game. It is a rigged game. And we all know that Ron Paul is rigged to lose. If they get enough pressure, they may decide to “pick” a poll that shows him doing well enough and let him in the debate. If not, they will steal from all Americans the chance to get to know the only man capable of saving this country.
These are not nice people Stephanie. They are not playing fair. This is the very definition of dirty pool.
November 9th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
As a recent college grad with a degree in politics, I am quickly losing my naiveté.
There is clearly a groundswell of supporters for Paul. There is CLEARLY some disparity between POTS polling and the real support of a candidate. I cannot understand how the GOP has moved so far from its roots.
If Paul is left out of Iowa, I will be participating in the expected Paul rally held nearby which will more than likely have more attendees than the GOP debate.
-Erik
November 9th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Look at all of the people here trying to convince us that Ron Paul needs to get out of the GOP. Now THAT’s funny. The fact is, there are scads more of us then the phony republicans who think they are in the majority. Saul Anuz (sp?) the fellow who attempted to get Ron Paul kicked out back in June, is now a supporter.
Look, the GOP will come around. And we are going to take the party over, anyway so they aren’t going to have a choice. Not a lot of people have mentioned this, but we don’t need to win all of the delegates via the elections. We just need to get RP supporters elected as delegates. It is the delegates who chose the nominee not the voters at the polls. They can try and keep Ron Paul out, but come the national convention it will be Paul supporters who show up there as delegates. Mark my words.
Ron Paul is going to win this primary election and then he’ll win the general election in a landslide, as a republican.
November 9th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
The Republican Party has moved far from its roots of small government, less spending and no nation building into the empire building, big spending entity it is now because the people listen to neocon-radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and they have brainwashed the masses into thinking that is conservative when in fact it is nothing like conservatism. These neoconservative radio hosts need to be flooded with phonecalls and e-mails calling them on their scam!
November 10th, 2007 at 12:45 am
Wow, this is just like Atlas Shrugged!
Soon you’ll all be living on a secret compound in the Rocky Mountains, with a big golden dollar sign flag flying over it.
I think people are already gathering in this compound. Have you noticed how many people are unaccountably disappearing? Like, whatever happened to that guy who used to smash watermelons with a sledgehammer? And that commie chick who was Pat Buchanan’s running mate?
And have you noticed that the condom machines in public restrooms have WHO IS RON PAUL scratched on them? Right next to DON’T BUY THIS GUM IT TASTES LIKE RUBBER. Something really weird is going on.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:07 am
“So Paul supporters, do you REALLY want to take back a party like this or jumpstart one of your own? The choice is yours folks, but the GOP as it stands now is strongly pro-war, pro-spending and pro-partisan loyalty.”
You are darned right I REALLY want to take back the GOP, and you have put your finger on the reason why. If the GOP is not reformed, it will remain a terrible menace to America and the world.
November 10th, 2007 at 9:05 am
If the American people do not have the good sense to elect Ron Paul in 2008, then it doesn’t much matter whether Hillary or JulieAnnie wins. The former would bankrupt the country with her Marxist domestic agenda, while the latter would bankrupt the country with his nation/empire building, world policing military adventurism. Given that choice I would probably vote for Hillary in order to protect my 16 and 23 year old sons from being conscripted to go and get maimed or killed in some stupid neocon war zone like Iraq. A waste of life which would only serve to make the country more hated and less safe for their older brothers and sisters.
In either case maybe it will take the complete economic collapse caused by one of these two sides of the same bankrupt political coin, to finally wake up the electorate to the futility of continuing to elect more of the same CFR/NWO corporate/banking elitist puppets, and then they will be open to voting for Dr. Paul, or his ideological successor, in 2012.
November 10th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Richard, in regard to “…and then they will be open to voting for Dr. Paul, or his ideological successor, in 2012.”
The problem is that there IS no ideological successor. Ron Paul stands alone. One can maybe make a case that he is the ideological successor to Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater, but in actuality he towers over both of them. His ideological ancestry comes from the founding fathers.
He has stood alone in Congress many times, but has also many times been aligned with many congressional peers, those differing from issue to issue. In all of that he has always received the utmost respect from fellow Congressmen who recognize that he is a man of principle and probably envy him and his quiet statesman like courage (as opposed to the ridicule and laughter he has gotten in debates from the mayor and the governor ).
There is only one candidate, at this time, who can save the country from where it is bound. There appears not to be a successor to his powerful message. This, unfortunately seems to be the last chance for hope for America. It is Ron Paul, now or never.
November 10th, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Paul Supporters Still Political Novices…
We know Rep. Ron Paul’s supporters can raise money as well as spam online polls. There are even glimmers that they’re figuring out how to put together a ground game. But it’s only a glimmer. When the Iowa GOP announced the standards f…
November 12th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
For any iowan’s out there, go to http://www.iowagop.net/countycontacts.asp and email your corresponding county contact. If they don’t have an email then call them or mail them. Something simple like:
“I am a registered Iowan voter, and if Ron Paul is not part of the upcoming debate I will never give another dime to the GOP, and will never vote republican again. Thank you.”
Be sure to put your Name, and city. Your whole address would be even better. That would get their attention.
November 13th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
We need to stay the course and win most of the early primaries, foremost, New Hampshire. We can win, even with out Iowa. Last I heard Iowa’s GOP said he has met the 5% minimum to be included in the debates. However, I have not heard that he has received an invitation as have all the other candidates.
If someone knows, please advise when or if he recieves and invitation, I don’t trust the GOP.