The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
35 votes

Time to start courting the Democratic Party

Lots of folks in the Liberty movement still imagine the situation in the US as a left-right issue, but it's really a freedom-totalitarian issue.

I admit, it often seems that Democratic politicians are more unabashed about frankly hating the idea of freedom, and are cozier with the idea of state control of everything, but they don't generally represent actual people that vote Democrat any more than Peter King represents Ron Paul.

I think the Liberty movement has done a great job bringing in the guns and patriots, but probably hasn't done as well getting the hookah and Haight-Ashbury crowd on board. This is tragic, since the "do your own thing" group isn't ever going to be homogeneous, and the 20-acres-and a-deep-well bunch does ideologically belong with the hippies who want to expand their minds and do handstands together in Greenwich village. The gospel is freedom, and freedom isn't just one thing or one idea.

I feel like many of us do a lot of Democrat bashing, but we ought to reach out and help people ask themselves "What can liberty do for you?" instead of demonizing the party they are currently identified with.

For instance, "libtard" is probably a bad opening line for getting that fringe on our side, and we ought to do more to invite them over from the waste of time that is the two-party system. I'm sure most of us can agree that the warmongering neocon bunch is just as offensive to us as the Feinstein bunch.

By simply using the word "Democrat", most people would assume that you are a "Republican", which for most of us, couldn't be further from the truth.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Well put

Great post


Michael Nystrom's picture

The broad definition of politics

Politics (from Greek: politikos, meaning "of, for, or relating to citizens") is the practice and theory of influencing other people on a civic or individual level.

Let's get back to basics. Politics is about influencing other people. Parties are tools to that end. They are one tool. They are not the only tool. We have a variety of tools at our disposal. What we need is the creativity to identify and use them.

basic politics

This reminds me of a comment I made not long ago to BILL3. I find it quite beneficial to not only good effect but my sanity in recognizing my general attempt to influence other people in my communication with them. Denial of such is the gateway to delusion and isolation. First we identify our potential influence, then we create or identify our tools.

Cyril's picture

I agree with Michael.

I agree with Michael.

AFAIC, I focus on the individual level, over here.

Relatives. Coworkers. Acquaintances.

I try to challenge their critical thinking about the suckers in charge who ask them, and us, to bend over, because they know better than anybody what is good for everybody.

One of the methods I use is simple.

One way or another, I invite them to answer seriously, quietly, this very simple question, which encompasses, I think, most of everything else in human affairs where some are recklessly willing to trade liberty for safety:


I still haven't found anyone only daring to try answering it.

What does that tell us?

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture

This is an interesting experiment I can recommend to everybody

This is an interesting experiment / exercise that I can recommend to everybody to give a try at, with their surroundings, anyway.

Especially wrt. today's self-proclaimed "democrats" (or whatever is actually left of them) around us.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Damn straight

The PTB love it when the peasants are at one another's throats -
the prospect of them acting in a unified way in their own interest
scares the crap out of 1 percent.

Notice - for example - that they didn't kill Malcolm X until he
started becoming more conciliatory toward whites:

"In his last year, Malcolm X gave up his racist conception of Whites, saying that he was willing to work together with Whites of good will. Asked, “But you no longer believe in a black state?” he responded, “No. I believe in a society in which people can live like human beings on the basis of equality” (p. 197). Nor was he, in principle, against all multi-racial organizations. He gave up his opposition to racial intermarriage. He separated his religious organization (the Muslim Mosque Inc.) from his political organization (the Organization of Afro-American Unity). “Our religion is Islam but we don’t mix our religion with our politics and our economics and our social and civil activities—not any more” "

Radical Earth First! tree huggers didn't start getting blown
up until they started talking to loggers:

Anyway, when liberal/leftie icons like Nat Hentoff are
talking about impeaching Obama I definitely think we
all have something to talk about:

“Apparently he doesn’t give one damn about the separation of powers,” Hentoff told WND. “Never before in our history has a president done these things.”

And just to make sure everyone knew how extremely serious he regarded the situation, the journalist added, “This is the worst state, I think, the country has ever been in.”

"Court" everyone, Party or not

I'm a registered Green. Yet I spent a year on the Ron Paul campaign.

Simply stop being prejudice about Party, and work on issues and policy. You'll find "allies" everywhere.

In the end we will find a coherent and comprehensive "moderate" (everyone just get along) platform, and Party will be irrelevant.

Look into the concepts of Basic Income and Free Clinics to solve Welfare and Poverty.

Get revenue from Public Banks and taxing drugs and alcohol (while cutting income, sales and property taxes).

Being stumborn about what you think is "the right way" is anti-social, and counter-productive.

If access to health-care and safe/legal abortions, and "family planning" services (and supporting adoptive services, including same-sex couples) actualy reduces abortions, then shouldn't we all get along on that?

Instead people think that we must stick to some ideal, if abortion is wrong it must be illegal, but if that doesn't actually reduce abortions, and causes serious harm to women who find themselves making such a hard decision, that how is it "right"? Especially when the fight causes so much hate (again, while doing nothing to alleviate the "problem").

Listen to what other people are concerned about. Listen to what freedoms they want. If you are thinking you know what is best for other people, then your aren't treating them with the individual respect that "Liberty" requires.

Sure, people don't have the right to the freedom to steal, but find out why they are stealing, and maybe the may just be trying to survive.

Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian...doesn't matter. They are all just people trying to figure out how to take care of their needs.

Think of it this way.

Democrats prioritize taking care of workers and the poor.
Republicans prioritize limiting government regulation and taxes.
Greens prioritize taking care of the environment,
and Libertarians prioritize personal freedom.

None of those things need to conflict with each other.

When we fall into the game of having to demonize each other, we then force onto ourselves these false philosophies:

* (GOP) Welfare actually hurts the Poor (again, look into Basic Income, much better than current system),
* (Dems) Taxes are Good and our Responsibility as Citizens (again, look into Public Banking),
* (Greens) The Rich are Evil!!! (who cares as long as everyone is taken care of and the environment isn't getting destroyed, let the rich kids have their toys)
* (libertarians) Government is Evil!!! (then so must be people...which conflicts with the "individualism" philosophy).

Once we simply value each others' priorities, and start to work together to figure out how to make our society and government function in respect to them all, then we will find the "more perfect union" and a Government that actually represents the people, and not just the 51% in charge at the time.

Jack Wagner

I don't know.

I've found that, for the most part, it's easier to talk to and sway even hardcore neocons than it is most liberals.

And honestly? I think it's because, in the end, we have more common ground ideologically, even if they fail horribly at putting it into practice.

Hear me out, now. Almost all of the worst infringements on freedom that gain the support of neocons do so by saying that they're protecting us. When you ask a neocon what's being protected, almost without fail the answer is "freedom." Right there is common ground - the idea that freedom is valuable. The next step is to simply agree that freedom must be protected, and gently point out that these "protections" are destroying freedom.

You would be -astounded- at how well this works. Gay marriage? It's easy enough for me, being a Christian, as I can reply that marriage is a church issue. Marijuana? Point out how the war on drugs is being used to violate every right imaginable - and how costly it is.

See, there are two points of key common ground that (GENERALLY) we share with conservatives and neocons, and don't with liberals. Specifically, we believe that we have rights from a source (God, nature, whatever) beyond and above government, and that fiscal responsibility and low taxes are absolute musts. Opposition to a nanny state is just a bonus. It's also shockingly easy to convince the vast majority of how bad an idea foreign intervention is, again by using ideological common ground.

Liberals don't share that common ground. They may blather about "freedom," but look real close and you'll find they mean "freedumb." They'll talk about gay "rights," but what they mean is that everyone, even - especially - the religious, must be forced by government to accept it. They'll talk about pot legalization... and that's about the only place they're consistent. Fiscal responsibility and low taxes? Naw, TAX THE RICH MOAR! Non-interventionism? All over it until EVERY WAR IN THE PAST FREAKING CENTURY.

Why is this? It's because we share almost no ideological common ground. Your average neocon, regardless of what their favored politicians actually do, will see the government as a dangerous, possibly hostile entity that's there to protect the country. Your average liberal, however, sees the government as a benevolent... THING that bestows gifts and equality upon the masses, while keeping those evil rich people and the evil market in check.

LittleWing's picture

Ron Paul-Working With Coalitions

If Wars Can Be Started by Lies, They Can Be Stopped By Truth.

I think it is about controlling the narrative.

right now, the liberty movement and liberty candidates are being lumped in with the tea partiers and being portrayed by the main stream media as a bunch of crazies, usually without any supporting facts.

if the liberty movement could point out the blatant fallacy of the aforementioned narrative and explain the freedom and opportunity afforded from free markets, non-violence, and less government, then the liberty movement would be much better off.

there are more people identifying as independent than identify as either major party. the liberty movement could easily scoop up the support of most independents by crafting the message into one that is easily understood, appeals to the individual, and points out how extreme the two entrenched parties are.

That's a nice sentiment but

no one courted me. Liberty and freedom are things that you seek. If they have to seek you then there is a problem with you. So to speak.

I don't ask people whether they are Democrat or Republican when trying to push liberty. It just so happens that the message is closer to true Conservatism than it is to true Liberalism.

Also you have to remember that as long as there is a Democrat president then any message of opposition will be met more harshly by a democrat. If the tables were turned it would be the same.

There is a reason that Paul ran as Republican and I agree with him. But like you say it is best not to even mention party if possible. But when campaigning for Paul it was unavoidable. :-)

Good thread

George, and a few thoughts to give consideration to.
Shame it got hijacked though; you may want to change the title to:
(((GrrAnger's))) GOP 'word salad' promo. :-).

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

I tend to approach

People in political discussion rather humbly, so I can find an area where people will tend to relate no matter what and work from there.

However, I absolutely notice that there is a tendency within people who lean progressive/ liberal and having complete economic ignorance. I think it's a big part of why they believe in the things they do, is mainly because they lack a basic understanding of what money is and where it comes from. they tend to not understand how markets work in the slightest.

Most of the time when I try and educate/inform them of concepts that they are just dead wrong on it's met with emotional outrage and they just refuse to believe sound logic and reason. My goal is to always try and break those barriers down on people to bring them to the light, but as Plato's " Allegory of the. Cave", I can only show them the path to the truth it's up to them to will themselves towards it. And this is why I think there tends to be a true political dichotomy; not between statists and anarchists, but rather between Rational people and emotional ones.


This is an interesting post, I mean it's completely redundant and we hear it all the time and that's what makes it interesting. We all know this. The people that bash liberals are not going to stop because you kindly ask them to. They don't feel the need to be kind so a call to empathy ain't gonna work. Those that don't bash them, well... they won't. soooo... what just happened here?

I try to point out intellectual dishonesty of all forms.

This means I criticize both Republican and Democratic ideology/actions equally. This doesn't necessarily win me tons of friends, but I have been able to convert disgruntled people from both sides doing so.

Liberty is palatable to almost everyone. You just have to serve it in such a way that others don't discount your idea's before they have a chance to think. Conversely, I have found that offensiveness has never won anyone over to the side of liberty.

"I feel like many of us do a

"I feel like many of us do a lot of Democrat bashing"

Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade.

I agree

But we just have to be careful not to do it like a bunch of elitist turds.

Not my experience

We just have to be REAL. People will accuse others of all kinds of things to push them back. People will call others names to stop them from going forward. I see it in the GOP.. it's why there's this "go along to get along.". the "What if they don't like me?"

Let it be their problem. When you come from a genuine place, don't fear others.. know they will try to stop you (the devil never rests). Just do your best and stand tall.

Just this past week.. I made a passionate stand, and while there are those on my committee that were put off by my stand, embarrassed, ashamed, giving me dirty looks... in the end. Others stood up and were heard. One man stood up pointed at me and said, "That lady is REAL and is telling a truth and this is why I'm here, to do something besides being told what to do!"

Several people made a point to give me their cards, introduced themselves to me, tell me "Right on!". At dinner, those who were "ashamed" of me sat in the back and I was in the front with the elite, because people who are active and doing things LIKE action. The like REAL. They like courage.. they want to absorb it.

So, no fear. Just be you. Be REAL.


Being your real self is being evil, then, stop being evil! Ha. I agree with you Granger and it doesn't sound like you disagree with me really, my point is be a good person etc.

Great point The Baptist

Right on! I didn't disagree with you. I elaborated. I see too many good people do nothing while the restless devils never stop.


Thank you. I love you. I admire you and I appreciate your being in my life because I have a lot to learn from you.

With just a few words you nailed it! Gosh how that makes my heart sing! THANK YOU!!!

Thank you Granger. I wonder

Thank you Granger. I wonder why you were down voted? Seems you cannot win here.


What really gets me about this kind of MEDDLING (and that goes for so called Blue Republicans), is many people take THEIR PARTY very seriously.. these folks climb the ranks and act as gatekeepers.. they monitor the news, read blogs like this.. they clip articles.. let me put it to you this way.. we are being watched, and suggestions like this are what HURTS those who came into the GOP because Ron Paul insisted THE GOP.

Just this last Saturday, at a district meeting, those who came in for Ron Paul are singled out and we are being attacked because of this kind of effort.


So it's posts like this that get me, first.. this is what the Neos did Neo liberals took the Democratic Party and Neocons took the GOP, and they guttted the GOP, hook and crook. They continue their WAR ON US, and threads like this is their ammo.

Thanks for giving Pribus and his watchers ammo to use against us at conventions, committees and meetings. I'm at the point, I'm thinking that posts like this are by, of and for the establishment.

Is that you Pribus? This is the klind of predetor crap they employ.

calling a spade a spade and calling bullshit...


"because Ron Paul insisted THE GOP."

Bullshit. Bullllllll Shit. Ron Paul did not "insist THE GOP". He embraced & encouraged support from whence it came; wherever that may have been. Still does. It's necessary.

I am a Republican thoroughly disgusted with "my party". That's essentially WHY I am continuing to participate by again becoming a delegate - so that I can help hold the ground we have gained by Liberty loving grassroots participation, as well as by encouraging the LOVE of Liberty wherever I am.

The problem as I see it, with not only the Republican party but the Democrat party as well... They have both been co-opted by Fascists. Both of them. Bought and Paid for. True Democrats have to be just as disgusted as True Republicans. I wish there were two different parties - one to restrain the other. That is what keeps government in check.

Think how far the 'Democratic Party' has strayed from "Ask not what your country can do for you.....". Easy to see, isn't it? The Republican Party - GOP - has strayed just. as. far..

'Grassroots' does not mean 'lawn mower'. Roots FEED. Nourishment or poison... they feed. There is plenty of poisoning going on in and out of the GOP. My role is to help nourish the love of Liberty among those who have taken up some of the poison, with ideas & Love.

I didn't downvote your comment, because I think it is important to have these discussions. Not that I didn't want to.....

YES he did

And when he was done campaigning he said, "Do what you want", because it was OBVIOUS the cowards among us didn't have what it takes to get in the GOP arena and FIGHT for Ron, for Liberty, for Freedom, for anything but BS like anarchy (LOL talk about a bad joke).

We've got our hands full in the GOP and I could careless what the party of dissappointment and delusion is doing (besides the RPRINOs infringing on our mission and making our job even harder by giving the Neos fodder to attack us).

Politics is BUSINESS.. as a treasurer, everything we do is reported to the IRS through the SOS and county.

So many who came into the GOP don't understand how the GOP operates as a business, Roberts Rules of Order, and some RPRepubs tell me, they don't need to know.. well how well does that work at a convention? It doesn't.

Many want to be chairs, but they don't know how to be secretary, treasurer, run a sub committee, be accountable. They are unwilling to make aliences with tea party or religious right, and see the GOP as the enemy. YES, the GOP has BIG HUGE WHOPPING problems, and refusing to undertstand what they are and how to solve them is not helping us.

Words such as "infiltration" is not making our jobs easier. It is making us targets. Talking about going into the Democratic party is NOT gaining any respect, or trust for us in the GOP.

Your role may be to "nurish", but my role is BUSINESS, ACCOUNTABILITY, DESPENDABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, INTEGRITY and Restoring the Republic to constitutional government and bill of rights.

If you had a delegate seat and didn't cast your vote for...

Ron Paul, that makes you the coward. Voting for Romney to keep your seat was/is a coward's way out. What is the point of fighting if you're just going to give in when it counts?

If you lose your seat, fight for it again. Going along to get along is a foolish game.

Are you going to vote for Christie in 2016 to keep your seat to fight the good fight?

I don't think so

It would have been easy to say SCREW THIS FIGHT, dump the whole lot, write in Ron Paul, not give a crap and move on. It was much harder to suck it up. I had forty people I personally know, friends, people who I do business with, people who said, I WANT A RON PAUL REPUBLICAN REPRESENTING ME.. For me to guit.. then my community sees me as a quitter. And how good does that do the future of the rEVOLution? If I did what you suggest, my committee would still be pulling the same old same old. Instead, I have gotten 4 Ron Paul Republicans APPOINTED. Now we are the majority.

Fighting for that seat took me over a year of meetings, having my car keyed, collecting signatures, qualifying for ballot access, signing forms in the Clinty clerks office.. and you think after quitting the same people would back me again? I don't.

Going along to get along would be guitting so people like you who I don't know would like me. As is it, people like you don't like me, and the GOP would love to get rid of me.. so it's not an easy place to be.. but I'm happy to be shaking the GOP up and for that, it's been worth it to me.

I have no idea who I will vote for.. It's no longer about me keeping my seat, because now I'm the second most powerful Republican in the county. It's about me taking the district. And yeah.. why not.. we are winning.. it will take a few election cycles.. I don't know if Rand will run.. I don't want him to risk his Senate seat, and we need more Liberty candidates.. many are still young.. I'm helping two campaigns.. raising funds for them, getting signatures..

As these older guys retire and guit because of people like me standing up to them.. This past week.. the GOP wished I would shut up and sit down. Not going to happen. Someone needs to back the Libertarian Republicans, and that's my job. We are winning.. first days are the hardest days.. by 2020 GOP will be far more libertarian.. and it will be because people like me stayed in and fought. Believe me, the GOP wish I would bail.

The fact the hate it that I'm there makes my day.


The GOP needs to dump Neocons, adopt Constitutional, conservative principles and court conservative voters. This post is EXACTLY the type of sentiment from Libertarians, largely viewed as soft-Marxists (Perception is more important than whatever Truth one may espouse.) by much of the Right, that led conservative voters to shun Ron Paul, who was inaccurately and unjustly associated with the Libertarian party by the old media.

Every idea Ron Paul has ever championed has always...

been championed by Libertarians. To say that Dr. Paul is not libertarian and some how all of his ideas are Republican is just not so. If you want to change the Republican party to be the Libertarian party with a different label, then Libertarians support you.

At least you woke up no matter how much you want to deny you're embracing Libertarian ideology as we've always espoused. Awake Republicans want to get rid of Neo-cons within their party and Libertarians want to get rid of anarchist within ours.

Yes, Some of RP'S Philosopy Parallels That of Libertarians.

However, Ron Paul does not champion every Libertarian principle and he is not a Libertarian. He is a Republican who has some core principles, based on Constitutional conservative views, which are common to the Libertarian party.

The "court the Democrats" idea is what has gotten the GOP into it's current "no-can-win" state of being. The GOP, since, at least, the nineteen-sixties, has been attempting to "win the Black vote" or "win the Hispanic vote", "reaching across the aisles" and caving, or compromising, on issues under the pretense of "bipartisanship" efforts to make itself more palatable to "conservative leaning Democrats" and minority voters who, when votes count, invariably vote en bloc for Democratic candidates. In doing this, the GOP has alienated the conservative base of voters which was successfully rallied by Ronald Reagan, to win by landslide margins, but which now stays home on election day, refusing to cast votes for Constitutionally weak candidates.

The GOP needs to cast out the "Progressives", let them go back to the Democratic party, and adopt a Constitutional conservative ideology to win.