indeed

Gosh,

He puts Obama's often 'touted' grassroots enthusiasm into shame...

You seem to have forgotten Obama raised over 2.5 million in the first week of the 4th Quarter.  

While I do agree that his outreach into other communities has been truly impressive and something we ought to learn from there are some things that you simply cannot do on these platforms.

One thing which Obama is doing which it would be difficult to do on some other platform (though with facebook applications it could change...) is decentralized phone banking. If you go to Obama's action center, it seems that he is doing a good job of working to get that online support to translate into real actions.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/a ctioncenter/

Ron Paul for President!  (running on a 3rd party!)

3.5 million from 22,000 donors?  Thats $159.09 per donor?

Wow... a well-funded 3rd party... interesting.

Even more interesting...

I am fairly convinced that Paul may actually, ala Pat Buchannan, win NH- which we should root for, because its gonna kill Guiliani, especially if he's 3rd (or 4th- behind Paul???) in IA.

Whether it produces a surge in NH, or encourages a third-party bid (and we shouldn't forget he has the Libertarian Party ballot-line for the asking) there is definitely no bad news for Dems in this -- except in knowing that a lot of people will give money to a crazy person. My question is, what will he spend it on? Will he just blitz NH, or will he start playing in other states, and which ones? While it's true that NH is a natural state for him, he's a plain-talking Texan who could play well in all kinds of red states. My concern is that his campaign just doesn't have the architecture to spend this money effectively, or even at all. He's got to start hiring field staff in the early states, making ad buys, producing the ads -- and he might want to spend a bit more producing the next ones, especially on the actors.

I spent September in New Hampshire and the only political signs I saw were for Ron Paul. I have to say I was up around the White Mountains. IT is pretty rural and libertarian up there. I think he will surprise some people.

One thing I'm wondering about Paul ... the early Internet communities were fairly conservative and really libertarian, so some of the most mature communities fit that profile. How much does that play into Paul's success here? I have to imagine that some old school listserv-type communities are humming with pro-Paul action.

Lessons from the Ron Paul campaign (regardless of your politics):

1. When you see injustice, speak out against it -- don't waffle.  Ron Paul has spoken out strongly against the war, and against the various Bush Administration violations of civil liberties.  His American Freedom Agenda Act certainly doesn't mince words.

2. Stick to your principles.  Even if people don't agree with you across the board, they will respect and trust you more if they know you won't shift positions with the next poll.  This is how Ron Paul attracts liberal supporters despite his strong pro-life position, and libertarians despite his anti-illegal immigration position.

3. Set big goals.  Ron Paul had raised $5 million in the third quarter, but he set the third quarter goal at $12 million.  It seemed outlandish, even to his supporters, but they are well over halfway there, with 8 weeks to go.

4. Don't try to control everything.  Give your grassroots supporter a free enough rein to come up with creative ideas on their own.  Just be sure to let them know when they cross the line.

Look beyond his opposition to the war and fascism. He opposes all social programs (even the dept. of education) and anything else that is there for the benefit, the safety and the protection of We The People and The Commons!

ron paul is a LIBERTARIAN and if you do not understand what libertarians stand for then PLEASE... everybody... PLEASE find out!

They like to say they stand for the constitution but that is not true. They fuck with us in THEIR interpretation of OUR Constitution as much as the neo-cons do.

Progressive Blue

kevin22262:  I suggest calming down before disseminating angry rants. Ron Paul doesn't hate anyone.  1st and foremost, I must confess that I am a former Democrat that converted to the Libertarian Party within the last 3 years.  Particularly at the federal level, I dislike both parties.  At local and state levels, it's a mixed bag.  Anyhow....  

Ron Paul would like to shrink down or eliminate several FEDERAL departments that have been setup but don't accomplish anything.  They mostly give a job to bureaucrats and little else.  Since the Federal Dept of Education has expanded a great deal over the last few decades, test scores are at best flat across the country compared to before the FDE was created.  Same goes for a good deal of Federal departments.  They sound like they just must do some good. Why else create them, right?  They are created with good intentions, but good intentions don't create results by themselves.  Like a good deal of government institutions, they get little to nothing accomplished, expensively.

  Remember a president is but one branch of the govt.  Ron Paul's major role would be in preventing the federal govt from growing ever larger and larger.  Getting rid of some bureaucracy.  The constant expansion of govt harms us when claiming to help.    

 None of us, regardless of party affiliation want a country that is bankrupted simply because of the aging of its citizens.  Yet that is the track we are on with entitlement spending (Social Security and Medicare).  Young people are aware that they'll likely never see a dime of the money they are putting into those 2 programs.  Ron Paul has specifically stated that he'd like to see a transition period with those 2 programs.  Bring home out troops from around the world (why do we keep 65,000 in Germany to this day?).  Shrinking the size of that along with other spending cuts (hello bridges to nowhere) would allow us to make sure people dependent on SS and MCare are taken care of.  In the meantime, create a way for younger people to opt out of those if they would like to.  At the very least, have SOME control over where their own money is going.

 Regarding education, I believe an interview I watched with Ron Paul had him saying he'd like to see more school vouchers and/or education tax credits.  Voucher school programs have proven to be overall more successful than regular public schools in the US.  Know where else they have done fantastically?  Sweden.  I believe a few other Nordic nations are heading towards school vouchers too.  Every Democrat should be for vouchers and education tax credits.  It allows parents to choose where their kids get educated, instead of the monopolized system based on where one lives.  School vouchers would do a great deal towards helping minorities gain a good education.

Want to see what Libertarians are really like?  Go to the Cato Institute:  www.cato.org
They have podcasts, articles, videos.