152 votes

Analysis of the Current Factions on the Daily Paul

There are:

  • The No One But Paul! faction. Two subsets:
    • "Ron Paul can still actually win!"
    • "I can't bring myself to vote for anyone else"
  • The Vote Gary Johnson faction. Also two subsets:
    • GJ can actually win!
    • "Let's send a message to the GOP!"
  • The I'm not voting for nobody faction. "Voting is a scam, and I refuse to be anyone's monkey."
  • The Vote Romney faction. "Because Ron Paul told us to stay in the GOP."
  • The Vote Obama faction. "Let's really punish the GOP!"

Any others that I missed?

People say we need to "be united," but that is not true. We are all individuals and we need to follow our own paths. People say, "Ron Paul united us, so we should do what he says." But that is not true either. Ron Paul did not unite us, we all voluntarily chose to unite behind him. There is a big difference. And that difference means that there is no need to drop our individuality now. We are still all united in our love of liberty, regardless of how we choose to express it.

Whatever path you choose - and all pursuers of all are welcome here - what I ask is that you please don't attack one another. Furthermore, please don't preach about how your path is the one and only true and correct path. This is getting tiresome. Your path is the one true and correct one, for you, for now. Don't try to force others into it. Offer your observations and explain and share with us what you're doing and why, but don't expect people to follow you.

This is my observation on the first faction: No One But Paul - was a campaign slogan. It originated in the grassroots, but was coopted by the Campaign and used to great effect for a moneybomb that raised a lot of money. But clearly, from the campaign's leadership perspective, it was nothing more than a slogan.

No one but Paul... And Mitch McConnell?


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Choice #1 ?

I'd say vote Gary Johnson... The fact that he can't win is irrelevant. Elections are nothing more than straw polls. You're not voting for the man, you're voting for a philosophy and set of principles. If he gets so much as 5% of the vote, then even that small number demonstrates strength of the liberty movement. That 5% is enough to make an impact considering Obama and Romney are within 5% of each other in swing states. It at least shows the GOP that they aren't going to win elections if they can't integrate the liberty movement.

But that's all symbolic with the presidential election.

What really matters now is the US Congressional elections. Most of the people in the Ron Paul community can agree to support the candidates endorsed by Young Americans for Liberty. They have a PAC. Why isn't anybody organizing money bombs for those candidates like they did for Ron Paul? US Congressional races are also cheaper to win than presidential elections. A US Congressman only needs about 3 million dollars to be competitive. A US Senator needs about 7-10 million. That's a heck of a lot less than 100+ million dollars needed to win a presidential election.

Consider this Strategy

The Ron Paul movement is a large voting block. If everybody as one large group supported one or the other candidate it be the decisive factor that could give the candidate the clear majority needed to win. So consider this: Why not do a deal. In return for our support one of our people gets a cabinet position like Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense or Attorney General etc. So maybe we cannot win the Presidency on this round, but perhaps we can help steer the country in the right direction. So here's what we need to do. 1) Have a debate on what we want from the next President, 2) create a way for everyone to sign up as one large voting block, 3) make the deal and WIN!!!

That's what you do at party conventions.

But our national campaign seriously miscalculated back in April sometime thinking that capitulating would gain them respect.

So, nice thought. But way too late.

I disagree, Minority Rules

In Europe sometimes a large party joins with a smaller party to win the majority and form the government. In this process the majority party has to give up something so that the minority party will join them and give them the majority that is required to win. We could do the same thing. Right now the Liberty movement is scattered and there for you can be made irrelevant. We are not a threat in our current state. Everyone squabbling and pulling in different directions. Remember "Divide and Conquer". However, in reality, we still are fairly organized with a really well connected social network and media communication system like the Daily Paul, I don't think it would take much to come together again and focus through online dialogue and determine what it is that we want, not just a plank in platform, but a position in the Cabinet that has the authority to audit the FED for example, keep the Internet free and open, or not enforce the NDAA etc. In Ireland for example the Green party joined the conservative Fianna Fael party (like the US Republicans) and were able to push through all kinds Green ideas while being in Power. The same can happen for the Liberty movement. If we are strong and organized to the point where we know that our undecided vote could determine who wins the election, believe me they will sit up and listen. The question is can we get ourselves into this position, and if so, we then can demand what we want. Kind of like Hillary getting the position of Secretary of State in return for joining forces with OBAMA. So from my POV, this is the opportunity that lies before us.

How I will vote

I will vote for the candidate that espouses liberty principles. If he or she happens to be a member of the main parties, I will eliminate that person from my deliberations. Those who remain, will I contemplate as to their beliefs, and pick one from them. This goes for local, county, state, and federal candidates. I will write in Ron Paul for president. In so doing, I feel true to my principles, while voting in the other choices I have for people who will further my idea of liberty in this land. In South Dakota, that will be my vote.

In Other Words.... WE Don't Have a Defined Leader

Go and do something, it's good for the spirit. Raise your voice, but complain only if you have a better idea.... to just complain is cheezy man.

Politically, I'm taking the ball and running with it from where I stand, no time for doom or gloomy thoughts. Spent what money I had this week on a visit to LPAC. I'll be bouncing a check on Monday if I don't pull a rabbit out of the hat today and replenish the funds spent.... either way wouldn't trade my experience at LPAC for anything, even, well even money in the bank.

Ramblin Randy

Though I'm staying GOP for a Liberty Takeover (as urged by RP)..

my loyalty to the party ends (from Romney) where Liberty begins (by Ron Paul)...I'm fighting for it at all fronts.

I'm voting for anyone this year who represents TRUE Freedom & Liberty....regardless of party affiliation.

vote obama

a reason tht was missed is that if romney wins, and the next collapse happens on his term, then capitalism will get the blame, just like in the last depression

so vote for obama, then system will fail, and we will be able to get a libertarian/austrian president in 2016.

"I don’t care about [Ron Paul's] chances. I support him. We have no other solutions. It is my duty as a citizen and as a taxpayer who doesn’t want to be hoodwinked in the long term by bureaucrats." -- Nassim Taleb

If all other things are equal

and you are set on voting for one of the two major candidates and think that a 3rd party candidate is unlikely.

(Equal meaning you view them how I do: basically the same)

Consider this:

If Obama is elected, we KNOW he will be replaced in 4 years.

If Romney is elected, he may be President for up to 8 years before we get a chance to unseat him.

It's always harder to run against an incumbent. And the liberty movement is more focused in the GOP right now. This means that to replace Romney 4 years from now, we'd have to build inroads into the Democratic party.

On the other hand, an Obama victory would be substantially the same (policy-wise) for the next 4 years, but would give us the chance to solidify our hold in the GOP (stay active guys!) and move a liberty-minded candidate into office in 4 years.


Sorry but

I can't hold my nose long enough nor hard enough to vote Obama. I could never forgive myself regardless of the outcome.

This is not to say Romney has any chance of getting my vote either. Uh uh.


Because I feel the same way.

I just figure, if anyone here is considering voting for one of those two, they should consider the long term strategy of getting one of "our" guys in the White House - rather than which one is marginally less bad. Because they are both just bad.

I understand the POV

I'm just not sure things will hold together long enough for a long term Liberty plan to work out in our current system.

I'm also a proponent of carving the USA up into 3 or 4 sections/countries and people can move where their interests lie within them or sit and suffer it out in a section they don't believe in. Probably not going to happen though :-)


The greatest honor we can offer Ron Paul..

is to follow his strategy of taking over the Republican Party to use it as our stage to promote the idea of Liberty. Once their is no way to avoid our message, it will take power.

We will not give up.


I try to change people every day. Do You?

reedr3v's picture

The greatest honor we can offer

Ron Paul is to each find his/her individual niche, the talents that will empower ourselves best, to carry forward his educational mission toward personal virtue and pure truth. Taking over the R. party is one terrific direction. Rendering the state obsolete is another. There are many excellent pathways, we as a movement can be most effective exploring them all.

This is what we do

Quite frankly, I don't think the presidential election (or even most senate and congressional elections) are worth focusing on, as they won't do anything to seriously challenge the powers that be.

We ought to be concentrating on taking power from the Republican party - especially in the states that screwed over our delegates. We are now not only promoting a platform of liberty and free markets, but we will also be rooting out the most blatant instances of political corruption, which will definitely attract popular support.


There is absolutely no future at all in the 'nobody but ron paul' faction.

I look at the nobody but ron paul as

- it is his frame of thinking that is to be continued into the future.

That is what drew me to this site. Getting cutting edge information ended up a benefit participating here.

Support Ron Paul candidates for US Congress

I'm a combination of:

•The Vote Gary Johnson faction. Also two subsets:
◦GJ can actually win!
◦"Let's send a message to the GOP!"


•The I'm not voting for nobody faction. "Voting is a scam, and I refuse to be anyone's monkey."

I don't believe America is a real democracy. Elections are nothing more than opinion polls. What really matters in politics, and determines who will most likely "win", is MONEY. We have a DOLLAR DEMOCRACY. The political issues with the most financial backing get moved to the top of the agenda, and the ones with the least backing get moved to the bottom of the agenda. The candidate who raises the most money, wins over 90% of the time. I therefore vote with my DOLLARS, not with BALLOTS.

I've donated over $2,000 to Ron Paul between 2007-2012. I've given about $500 to Campaign for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty. I've donated about $3,000 to PACs like Club for Growth; most of that was donated before YAL PAC existed. I've donated to Jim Demint's Senate Conservatives Fund.

I donate money to numerous policy institutes like Lundwig Mises Institute, CATO Institute, Drug Policy Alliance, Milton Friedman Foundation for School Choice, and others.

I leverage my voice through donations.

With that being said, my approach has helped give the GOP a realistic shot of retaking the US Senate and pushing the US Congress in a stronger fiscally conservative direction with organizations like Club for Growth and the Senate Conservatives Fund leading the way.

I support Ron Paul's YAL PAC. But there hasn't been any aggressive fundraising for it yet. I haven't seen the Ron Paul community organize any money bombs, or do any type of aggressive campaigning for those candidates. They're mostly sitting on their hands asking "What should I do?" because Ron Paul isn't there to spoon feed them and tell them what to do. What is the point in fighting for individual freedom if people can't think without waiting for Ron Paul to tell them what to do? If you don't like your choices for US President, then organize, fundraise, and support the US Congressional candidates supported by YAL PAC..

So, to answer the question on the main post, you are missing "$uck the US Presidential Election, and aggressively support Ron Paul candidates for US Congress through YAL PAC!"

You forgot about the "9/11

You forgot about the "9/11 Conspiracy", "Raw Milk", "Chemtrailers" and "Perpetual Energy" factions. ;^)

Jefferson's picture

Or the

"it's nice and cozy with my head stuck in my posterior" factions...;^)

wear the blinders, drink the koolaid

... and believe everything tv news-babes tell you... bury your head up your ass... then cover your entire body with sand while taking extra-large fluoride doses at every opportunity and eating Velveeta cheese-substitutes made from real plastic ... then your crumbling fraudulent worldview can remain intact a little bit longer ... faction !

As far as I can determine,

As far as I can determine, there is only one important issue dividing Virgil Goode and Gary Johnson. There are some incidental ones: Goode is more decisively pro-life than Johnson, but both agree that the central government has no part in the issue anyway, and they are running for president, not the state legislature, so their difference is really irrelevant. There are some other issues of this kind, which also do not matter in relation to the presidency. The one real difference I see that affects national policy is about the many foreign wars begun by Bush and Obama. Johnson says he wants to get out of Afghanistan and reevaluate the others. Goode wants to enforce the Constitution and get out of all undeclared wars. [Both have repositioned themselves a bit in establishing their presidential candidacy, which is normal for candidates for any office, Ron Paul being almost the sole historical exception. If we demand lifelong consistency on issues before we will vote for a candidate, we must never vote for anyone but Ron Paul for the rest of our lives.]

Goode also won't be on most

Goode also won't be on most ballots.

So in those states Johnson is

So in those states Johnson is the easy choice. But let's get the facts straight. See "Ballot Access" near the bottom:


Immigration is also the difference

Virgil Goode wants to stop legal immigration via green card. If this guy was the president when I came to the US, I probably would come here illegally since the legal way would be shut anyway.

Why are people so desperate

Why are people so desperate to discredit Goode that they will say or believe anything at all negative about him? Next, somebody will say that he is an extraterrestrial. I actually have no desire to be disrespectful here, but what you are saying is ridiculous. No country in the world could operate for a week if they did not permit foreigners under some circumstances to work. Even Mexico, which has unusually stringent immigration law--much stricter than the U.S. has ever had--permits foreigners to work under certain circumstances.

Here is his actual platform position on immigration:


Below is one reason why some folks may be so desperate to discredit Goode. I do not think it is very edifying for people to be calling each other "troll" but politics are politics and here is some food for thought:


United on Issues/Ideals and Elections Matter

Folks, our battle with the Presidential race for the general election is a side show. Ron Paul is not going to run a write in campaign, except in some states where write in counts without active participation via Dr. Paul. Barrack Obama is on par with winning reelection because of Mitt Romney inability to connect with voters, a very biased dinosaur media, his issue flip flops, and much more. Now, I will advocate again that we focus on winning seats in the US Senate, House, State House, State Senator, Governor and other down ballot elections.

Please remember the liberty candidates on the ballot. Personally, I have gone back and forth on not voting at all in the Presidential race and choosing the Paul Ryan ticket despite Mitt Romney. Once again our liberty only grows because we educate, advance, and realize that elections really do matter. Others have made this same argument, so I agree with this camp.

You are absolutely right on

You are absolutely right on this. I have been arguing with the Goode-haters not because I am trying to solicit votes for Goode, but because I am weirded out by the prevalence of the practices of not mentioning of Goode, or else slandering him with wild and fanciful accusations. Were it not for this, I would not even be following the discussion on this subject.

Tom Mullen's picture

Stay united on ideas - election doesn't matter

It is important that Ron Paul fans stay united on the ideas that he promoted and stay active in trying to educate people about them.

The presidential election will be won by Romney or Obama - and it won't make a sliver of difference which one wins, so don't stress about it.

In my opinion, the most constructive thing to do is vote for Johnson. Even though I am HIGHLY skeptical of him as a libertarian, a surge in third party votes would attract more people to at least consider voting outside the two major parties in future years. That is all that can be accomplished in this year's election, imho.