RON PAUL ON BALLOT IN MONTANA AND LOUISIANA! LET'S CARRY THOSE STATES!!!!!

Posted September 6th, 2008 by DC

This is news to me, maybe some of you knew. But I think it's exciting. If Barr could also keep Barack McCain off the ballot in Texas, November could start to get interesting.

Here's the link:

http://www.lewrockwell.co...

Bookmark/Search this post with:

output

don't split the vote

On September 6th, 2008 The_Producer says:

We didn't spend the last year and a half working on building this movement to fracture right when we started. If we split our vote we will be irrelevant this year and maybe forever. Ron Paul is not running for President anymore. If he is on the ballot it is because the Repubs and Dems WILL BENEFIT! Don't you understand this? They want us to all split up and some write in Paul, some vote for Baldwin, some vote for Barr, and some don't vote at all. This is what our enemies WANT! The more Paul supporters they get to vote for him this fall, the less effective our movement was.

This is not about principle, it's not about policy, it's about politics. If we divide the vote we will be destroyed in this election and many people will be dejected and leave and not come back. Only with the energy that would be created by a strong Libertarian vote in one location, will we make a difference in history and have a groundwork laid for the future.

DO NOT SPLIT THE VOTE! Put it where it will matter. Vote Libertarian where your vote will be counted and where a true mathematical chance of victory.

Nope

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

LP has NO chance to win in Montana. Ron Paul does. Same with Louisiana. Those states should united behind Ron Paul.

______________________________________________________
Don't waste time with frauds Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr - join the Campaign For Liberty! http://www.campaignforlib... The Constitution is more important than voting for the evil of 4 lessers

lies

On September 6th, 2008 The_Producer says:

Voting for Ron Paul would be unproductive to us. It does nothing to advance the movement. More votes for the Libertarians means that we have MORE ballot access next time. Do you understand? If you vote for Paul it's wasted and garners us no political advancement.

The higher the vote percentage for the Libertarians means the less money and time has to be spent on ballot access in 2 years. Is this something you can understand?

i just want to say- I LOVE YOU PEOPLE!!

On September 6th, 2008 freespeech says:

after reading the replies on this thread, it is obvious to me that noone here has given up!! thank you all.
~peace

Never Give Up, Never Surrender

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

Chuck Baldwin

On September 6th, 2008 Khomar says:

I also asked this on the other "Montana" thread, but what about Chuck Baldwin? He is the Constitution Party's nominee. Is the Montana Constitution Party not associated with the national party? Has Chuck Baldwin dropped out of the race? (I have not heard any word on that one. To my knowledge, he is still actively campaigning.)

No, It's Not Affiliated

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

They split over abortion some time ago. I can't imagine Chuck Baldwin having any objection to RP getting the nod in that state.

bump

On September 6th, 2008 legalizeliberty says:

for Liberty!

http://www.flickr.com/pho...

Bump.

On September 6th, 2008 Wesdt says:

I bump everything which moves the movement forward.

This may have been the plan from the beginning...

On September 6th, 2008 Bob-45 says:

once Dr. Paul realized his spontaneous grassroots support.

o Run insipid campaign ads and accept no grassroots input (forcing us to work together than with the campaign)

o Taking unfair punishment from the media, fellow Republican candidates and the RNC (letting these people discredit themselves in the eyes of the grassroots and general public)

o Positioning your friends as surrogate third party candidates (Barr and Baldwin) to "keep the bench warm" until you are ready to play hardball

o Creating a "dummy corporation," the Campaign for Liberty, that serves a double purpose; provides a PAC for supporting other like-minded candidates and provides you (Dr. Paul) a forum to run for president, without "actively campaigning" on a third party ticket.

If this is indeed the case, Dr. Paul is springing a brilliant trap for the NWO.

If I am wrong, so be it. If I am right, don't worry about me revealing any secrets. If I can figure it out, so can the NWO. Check and Mate.

Dr. Paul does not operate in

On September 6th, 2008 duff says:

Dr. Paul does not operate in darkness; he is the light.

I Guess We Should All Just Hang Ourselves Then

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

Who said it?

On September 6th, 2008 ThermopolisWarr... says:

We must hang together,
or most assuredly,
we will hang separately.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

Ben Franklin

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

WELL,

On September 5th, 2008 speculor says:

Paul will not be actively campaigning on the ticket, so no money spent. I can understand LA, where Chuck Baldwin would have been on the ballot as an independent candidate, but not so much Montana, where Paul fared well in the primaries with a very uninspiring VP candidate, in opposition to Barry Goldwater Jr in LA. (I always thought the CP does not like Goldwater...one can PROOF this statement). Barr is already in Montana and it is an important libertarian state, one of the states Barr would be concentrating on. Why would they have Ron Paul as candidate in competition to Bob Barr. Note that Ron Paul encouraged Bob Barr to run!

Montana

On September 6th, 2008 Shawn4Liberty says:

Paul did get over 20% in the primary here in MT without a VP announcement at all. As a precinct captain my precinct had a 20 vote difference between McSame and Dr. Paul.
This will be different it is to send a message we in Montana know we don't effect the national election, but we can send a message.
As we learned during the political training session of the rally, WE CAN CAUSE THEM PAIN
They don't respect you politically until they fear you politically, We can gain respect by taking a state, my state MONTANA

Barr Will Back Down

On September 6th, 2008 Prof de la Paz says:

For all our talk of supporting Dr Paul and being strict Constitutionalists, why don’t we read the Constitution and realize that Dr Paul can be elected President without appearing on a single State ballot?

I wish more people had a clue

On September 6th, 2008 alaskaron says:

because you are of course RIGHT. But no one understands the electoral system because no one learns the Constitution anymore.

I have argued this since Super Tuesday and Mitt dropping out, and killing our hopes for the brokered convention.

If even 15% of the population had a clue about what the Constitution says, there's no way DC could get away with half the crap they do.

That Is True

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

But being on the ballot helps!

Ron Paul Gave The Go-Ahead

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

Imo, he'd be the only guy with a realistic shot at taking the state. The other two would simply be spoilers. Not many voters in Montana; it's do-able.

Why

On September 6th, 2008 speculor says:

then not with Barry Goldwater Jr. as VP? Or someone else? ask Gary Johnson etc.We all know that Michael Peroutka was the CP candidate in 2004

I Think Barry'd Have To Approve It

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

And the main thing is the guy at the top. Ron Paul can take Montana with the right organization, and a little money.

I see

On September 6th, 2008 speculor says:

Can't they get a well known person in Montana state as VP candidate? This would make the most sense. Then the VP can do the campaigning, as Ron Paul will not be able to. I read in LA Barry Goldwater said he would even do some campaigning (for fun). So get a dynamic local candidate in Montana as VP and he can do campaigning. Or why don't they get Mary Starret as VP candidate? She is a woman, has experience running in Oregon for the governor race and Oregon is not so far from Montana. She is good with communication also and of course CP member.
Get Mary Starret as VP. It will also provide more excitement to the ticket and attract female voters. Starret was in name as VP candidate for Chuck Baldwin and I think she would have been better than Darrel Castle. She is relatively young, attractive, energetic and dynamic.

Yes, She'd Be Good, I Think

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

If Barry would do some campaigning that would be great. I didn't realize he said he would.

Man, that would be something!

B.O. InSane on Tx ballot or not?

On September 5th, 2008 fanofwalt says:

I thought I had heard somewhere recently that neither B.O. nor InSane had registered in time to be on the TX ballot for November, and that the only candidate who had registered in time was Barr (not even Paul?).

Can anyone confirm/dispel that info?

I think I hear Frank Zappa singing...Goin' to Montana soon... ;)

From the Barr website

On September 6th, 2008 IMissLiberty says:

Today, I’m sitting here in Atlanta nervously awaiting word from a trial that is taking place today to kick Bob Barr off of the ballot in the state of Pennsylvania.

Although we did everything correct to get on the ballot in Pennsylvania and compete in the election against John McCain and Barack Obama, an operative for John McCain, Victor Stabile, decided that he didn’t “like to see anything taint that process.”

. . .

While losing sleep over of the case filed against us in Pennsylvania, I’ve been on pins-and-needles waiting all week to hear the outcome of our case in West Virginia.

We are asking the West Virginia Secretary of State to count and accept the 23,000 signatures that we turned in several days past the early deadline of August 1st - nearly a month before the Republicans and Democrats would even officially nominate their candidates.

I can’t fully express to you the frustration that I feel right now.

Let me explain.

Last night, I received a response from the Texas Secretary of State’s office to my request for the certification papers submitted by the Texas Republicans and Democrats that would place Barack Obama, John McCain and their running mates on the ballot.

Their certification papers were due to the state on August 26th at 5 pm.

The law is explicit on the matter. The names of the candidates for president and vice president are due by the deadline.

After reviewing the documents, it is clear that both the Republican and Democrat presidential tickets missed the deadlines and, according to Texas state law, should not be on the ballot in Texas.

If you want to see for yourself and download the documents, click here.

Regardless of McCain and Obama’s failure to meet the statutory deadline, the Texas Secretary of State seems poised to certify the ballot with their names on it. They’ve even updated their official candidate listing to include McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden after we first made this public (and John McCain announced Palin as his running mate).

While Republicans and Democrats look to easily slide by in Texas regardless of the law, in both West Virginia and Maine, we are facing an opposite set of circumstances.

I’ve told you about West Virginia but we are also going through this similar battle in the state of Maine.

In Maine, a contractor for the Libertarian Party was in the process of turning in signatures and we’ve been told that the Secretary of State actually sent a letter to town clerks instructing them not to accept the petitions during what historically has been a grace period beyond the early deadline.

It’s no surprise to us that this is happening but it’s still not easy to accept.

It’s been clear that if you are running for office as a Republican or a Democrat, you are somehow above the law.

If you are a Libertarian or independent, you not only have to abide by the letter of the law but you have to be prepared when the law is twisted and turned to be used against you.

When I brought this up last week, I said that we would be taking a stand in Texas.

We’re doing that and now I ask you to stand with us.

Last night, our campaign manager, Russell Verney, submitted a very clear letter to the Texas Secretary of State.

In the letter, Russ stated:

The Democratic Party, and Mr. Obama and the Republican Party and Mr. McCain blatantly ignored the Texas statutory deadline.

Therefore, the Libertarian candidate for president, Bob Barr, as represented by his principal campaign committee, Bob Barr 2008, demands that your office keep the names of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain and Sarah Palin off the Texas general election ballot.

Failure of the Secretary of State to comply with Texas law will result in serious legal consequences.

In the event that the Secretary of State’s office in Texas does not comply with its own law, we are prepared to file suit, however this battle will just be the beginning.

On top of the additional and large legal expenses that we are likely to incur, we are going to have to divert campaign resources to deal with the media that is just starting to carry this story . . . but not in a positive manner.

Here’s the New York Times this morning painting Bob Barr as a troublemaker, interfering with the election and even the economy:

What would happen if Mr. Barr prevailed? It is very hard to see how Senator McCain could get 270 electoral votes without getting the 34 from Texas. Could we end up with a messier election than we had in 2000?

Would the Supreme Court again get to pick the man who will pick the court’s members? Would all this thoroughly alarm foreign investors, whose sales could damage stock and bond prices while the fight was on?

No, it won’t happen. At least we can hope it won’t.

It is a matter of principle that we make this stand. It will not be easy and it may not be pleasant but it must be done.

Please join us today by supporting the Barr campaign with a donation of $50, $100, $25 or more.

I appreciate all that you do.
___________________________

Note that Barr could be the only candidate on the Texas ballot if they win the case, although it is more likely the courts will side with the rights of voters, and one hopes, issue a decision that can be applied to PA and West Virginia - in other words, they'll say that these technicalities can't be used to deprive voters of a choice in the absence of any real reason why there must be a certain deadline. Since they have one deadline for the dominant parties, and a shorter one for the alternate parties, alternate parties would win if the LP loses the TX case. - You can see the documents filed at BobBarr2008.com

It is these kinds of shenanigans that Ron Paul keeps referring to when he says how hard it is to run as an alternate party. This is where the money goes--trying to buy justice.

IMissLiberty

I Think the song was Moving

On September 6th, 2008 Shawn4Liberty says:

I Think the song was Moving to Montana soon LOL

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

Keep having fun in the movement.

You Know Mr. Zappa Would Be Supporting Ron Paul

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

Yes, as far as I know that's still the case. The Texas establishment will probably find a way to ignore the law and put them both on the ballot anyway.

_____________________________________________________
Don't waste time with frauds Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr - join the Campaign For Liberty! http://www.campaignforlib... The Constitution is more important than voting for the evil of 4 lessers

That would be awesome!

On September 5th, 2008 rtcrown says:

That would be awesome!

Yes

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

It sure would

I May Move

On September 5th, 2008 liveFreedom says:

To Montanna or Louisianna, just so I can vote for Dr. Paul AGAIN!!!

Hope is on it's way!!

-LF

It Sure Is Tempting

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

And yes, hope is on the way!

Awesome idea

On September 5th, 2008 tog2476 says:

www.dvds4delegates.com the newest and possibly the greatest weapon the Revolution now possesses.

do we need to do anything to help this happen, if we don't live in Montana?

I don't know, I think it may

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

I don't know, I think it may develop that a grassroots campaign there starts accepting donations. Wouldn't that be great? I'll kick in some more bucks for sure!

Another link

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

http://www.ballot-access....

Can you share link on O'Cain

On September 5th, 2008 BeaReady says:

Can you share link on O'Cain being kept off ballot in TX?

2008 November General Election Candidates - Texas
http://www.sos.state.tx.u...

Here's Something From the Barr website

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

http://campaign.blog.bobb...

It was also mentioned on Drudge's site.

I'll Try And Find One

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

I haven't heard anything in the past week or so. I'll see if anything's current.

I still have a bunch of "Ron

On September 5th, 2008 john2k says:

I still have a bunch of "Ron Paul 2008" bumper stickers left. I wonder if these would be useful to the grassroots in Montana and/or Louisiana. I probably have 500 to 800 bumper stickers left...

Yes stickers

On September 5th, 2008 Shawn4Liberty says:

I am in Montana if you will contact me, We will use all the stickers or signs anyone has left. I am glad I didn't send my signs to MN.
The Rally was great and this has got me so excited.
This is a way of sending a message to the PTB, we in MT reject your chosen candidates

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater

Would you like

On September 6th, 2008 Down80 says:

Slim Jims and Ron Paul DVD's too? I have a good amount of both.

WTF!

On September 5th, 2008 GalacticWacko says:

RP should say yes to all that! Be on the ballot in a bunch of states under different parties... LMAO that would be GREAT! We could win Idaho or Wyoming or Wisconsin or North Dakota or something. ALL WE NEED IS ONE STATE TO MAKE AN IMPACT!!!! How great would that be to see the map on Election Day and Wolf Blitzer HAS TO SAY, "Looks like RON PAUL will win North Dakota!!" They would probably just black out tha state and wait for official results until the year 2013!

Does my burka make my butt look fatwa?

WE NEED IS ONE STATE TO MAKE AN IMPACT!!!!

On September 6th, 2008 Shawn4Liberty says:

That one state can be here in Montana.
If you can help, contact me.
My wife is disappointed, she thought after the Rally she was getting her husband back, but now I have a lot of work to do to win our state for Dr. Ron Paul and for liberty.

Are You A Montan-i-an?

On September 6th, 2008 DC says:

Hey, I live in NYC, but when things get settled I'll kick in some bucks. Can't help in any other way, I don't think. Maybe call some voters as we get close.

He Already Said Yes To Montana

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

That's a winnable state imo. Interesting developments!

Yea this is great, all of us should

On September 5th, 2008 bigmikedude says:

go to Montana and get a Montana License and rent one apartment that we all can use as an address. ROFL

He he hehe he good thing U don't suggest we all live there lol

On September 5th, 2008 cyndezu says:

We're all 'DAVE' http://digg.com/political...

In All Seriousness

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

It's a sparsely populated state with a very strong liberty movement. A little money, and some real organization could go a long way.
______________________________________________________
Don't waste time with frauds Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr - join the Campaign For Liberty! http://www.campaignforlib... The Constitution is more important than voting for the evil of 4 lessers

lets do it.

On September 5th, 2008 h1ckman says:

E Pluribus Unum...

.....Out of many, one.

Okay!

On September 5th, 2008 DC says:

RON PAUL ON BALLOT IN MONTANA AND LOUISIANA! LET'S CARRY THOSE STATES!!!!!

Comment viewing options

Navigation

User login

Active Forum Topics

Recent comments

Recent blog posts

Who's online

Online users