Thread: What is Ron Paul's end game?

What is Ron Paul's end game?

Ron Paul may not win the Republican 2012 nomination. But Ron Paul may have enough delegates to get libertarian issues on the GOP platform.

By David Grant, DCDecoder / January 17, 2012

Ron Paul may not go rogue because of the aspirations of his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) But that doesn’t mean he’s going to bow out of the presidential race quietly.

Last week, Decoder noted BuzzFeed’s piece explaining why Rand Paul’s political ambitions inside the GOP will make it unlikely for Ron to mount an independent presidential bid.

However, an excellent piece from Sam Stein at The Huffington Post underscores Paul’s extensive organizational capabilities and his drive to capture as many GOP delegates as possible. With those delegates, Paul will be able to push his libertarian views into the party discussion at the national convention. If that’s the story, it lines up well with BuzzFeed’s reporting suggesting that Paul père’s run this year is helping bring libertarianism into the GOP mainstream for Paul fils to mount a presidential campaign in several years’ time.

Back to the delegates. Take this “for instance” from Stein’s piece (with emphasis from Decoder):

Puerto Rico will award 23 delegates when its citizens caucus on March 18. New Hampshire, punished for moving its election into early January, will award only 12. On Tuesday, roughly 245,000 people voted in the Granite State’s primary. During the 2008 cycle, Puerto Rico’s caucus resulted in a total vote count of 208.

With that many delegates at risk over that few votes, it would stand to reason that the current GOP field would be making manic maneuvers to shore up support in Puerto Rico. But so far, only one candidate seems to be doing much, if anything: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

According to his campaign chairman, Jesse Benton, Paul has a coordinator in Puerto Rico. The campaign has a “Hispanic for Ron Paul” team that prominently features a Puerto Rican business-leader. A non-affiliated group, Puerto Rico for Ron Paul, has also been disseminating caucus-related information.

That the Texas Republican is investing any resources at all in Puerto Rico may strike some as wasteful. Few political observers take Paul seriously as a potential nominee, even after he scored a second-place finish in the New Hampshire primary. Primaries, after all, are won through momentum: a few early victories beget others, which, in turn, beget more donors, endorsements, excitement, and ultimately more victories.

The Paul campaign does not subscribe to that theory.

“Ours is a delegate strategy,” said Benton. “We want to win the 1,100 delegates. If [former Massachusetts Gov.]Mitt Romney has secured 1,150 delegates, then it is game over. But we are going to contest that until the very end, and again we have a goal. We wouldn’t be doing this if we didn’t think we can win 1,150 delegates.”

Who is Paul looking to for inspiration? It might surprise you: President Obama’s primary run. Here’s Stein:

It’s the Money Ball of campaign strategies and it’s rooted in, of all places, Obama’s 2008 campaign.

“You try to look at what models have worked in the past and Obama’s model worked,” said Benton. “Now we have different ideas about where we would like to take the country, but he ran a brilliant campaign. He unleashed his grassroots to work hard, get involved in their communities, and really fight for some principles and that’s what we are trying to do too.”

And the endgame?

“Let’s say they clean up in the caucus states,” the source said. “Let’s say they control 20 votes out of 100 in those committees, then they can force votes on those issues. They can make a motion on the floor to amend the agenda, to amend the platform … They could force certain issues to be voted on. They could force the convention to consider certain questions and force the human beings on the committees to address certain things. How about a more robust version of the ‘audit the Fed’ platform? All of a sudden you will get recorded votes on those issues.”

Like your politics unscrambled? Check out DC Decoder

What is Ron Paul's end game? - CSMonitor.com

He may not win the nom. but he will definitely be "Heard" and when he talks to the other candidates on stage, they shut up and listen like they're being scolded by they're dad's.

Originally Posted by stevetheroofer

. . when he talks to the other candidates on stage, they shut up and listen like they're being scolded by they're dad's.

He's so old that if they don't pretend to show respect they won't get the senior vote.

Ron Paul is the last hope this nation has, before the abyss.

His stance on immigration is spot on. Go hard after the employers, everyone of them and they will up and leave.

Give me Liberty, or give me Death!

Originally Posted by Floorguy

Ron Paul is the last hope this nation has, before the abyss.

His stance on immigration is spot on . . .

Ron Paul on Immigration

Give illegals limbo status: a green card with an asterisk. (Apr 2011) . . .

Sending 12M illegals home won't & shouldn't happen. (Apr 2011) . . .

Those who attack bilingualism are jealous & feel inferior. (Dec 2007) . . .

No amnesty, but border fence isn’t so important. (Jun 2007) . . .

Ron Paul on the Issues

http://www.alipac.us/threads/247442-...-Stances/page2

Originally Posted by Floorguy

Ron Paul is the last hope this nation has, before the abyss.

His stance on immigration is spot on. Go hard after the employers, everyone of them and they will up and leave.

Give me Liberty, or give me Death!

He voted "NO" on E-verify

I would say his end game is trying to end the corruption in our government,get our Country back on the right footing with less government intrusion, stop giving illegals the free services they are getting that we tax payers pay for, and become more fiscal responsible for starters.

Read the Bill: HR 2885, E-Verify
September 16, 2011 · Posted in News






2 Votes

By Paul Henry

Retired Public Safety.com



In the past, I have reviewed entire bills to determine issues with them. This is of course time-consuming and not many bother reading the rather voluminous assessments.

I heard that Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) uses a system where he or his staff reads a bill until they fond one unconstitutional item, and then stop reading and simply vote no. Seemed like a good idea (he’s actually got several, stay tuned), so I thought I’d give that a try for HR 2885, the ”Legal Workforce Act”.

Here’s a link to this 64 page bill in PDF format.

http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/112hr2885.pdf

The very first paragraph says this:

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make mandatory and permanent requirements relating to use of an electronic employment eligibility verification system, and for other purposes.

That was quick. Congress has zero authority to regulate employment under Article 1 Section 8.

That’s not the actual law, though, just a summary, so let’s see if there is a particular text reference.

One thing I need to point out are the “usual suspects” in the co-sponsors here that are anti-liberty. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and his co-sponsors include:

Rep. Peter King [R, NY-3] a vocal proponent of REAL ID,

Rep. Jerry Lewis [R, CA-41], the Representative that sponsored HR 1268 in 2005, to which REAL ID was attached

Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R, WI-5], the sponsor of the original REAL ID bill

I see some people I normally respect there, such as Rep. Allen West [R, FL-22], and to them I say “Those willing to sacrifice liberty for temporary security are deserving of neither.”

Back to the bill-

(d) EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION SYSTEM.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Patterned on the employment eligibility confirmation system established under section 404 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C 1324a note), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish and administer a verification system through which the Secretary (or a designee of the Secretary, which may be a nongovernmental entity)—
(A) responds to inquiries made by persons at any time through a toll-free telephone line and other toll-free electronic media concerning an individual’s identity and whether the individual is authorized to be employed; and
(B) maintains records of the inquiries that were made, of verifications provided (or not provided), and of the codes provided to inquirers as evidence of their compliance with their obligations under this section.

That’s all we need. In addition to the federal government having the say-so on your employment via this unconstitutional “verification system”, there is a very real possibility this system will be administered by a non-governmental entity- see (1) above. Of course, whoever administers it will have access to a wealth of personal information, such as names and Social Security Numbers (SSN).

Doing a keyword search, the phrase “Secretary of Homeland Security” is mentioned 7 times. The word “Secretary” is mentioned 56 times, nearly once per page. One of my issues with REAL ID is that in the stated purposes, it gives unlimited power to theunelected DHS Secretary as to when a “federal identification” (we call them a driver’s license) can be required. This is something you’ll not hear from the people that promote REAL ID- they stop after the first three things: entry into federal buildings, flight on federally-regulated aircraft, and entry into nuclear power plants.

This bill is an easy one. Just vote NO. If we want to do something about illegal immigration, it is necessary to stay within the boundaries (no pun intended) of the Constitution. What this means is that Congress / the central government must provide border security and remove those found to be here illegally. If there is an issue with someone’s employment, under the 10th Amendment, this is possibly a state issue1. If the central government refuses to perform their functions, then the state must pass a law making it illegal to be here and then utilize an expedited system to remove illegal aliens, while protecting the rights of citizens. Citizens should not be required to prove citizenship unless there is cause to do so- i.e. to believe they are not a citizen. There’s a historical example of this. In the Book of Acts 22 starting in verse 25, Paul the Apostle was about to be beaten. He asked if it was lawful to beat a Roman citizen that had not been condemned. It wasn’t, so he was not beaten.

It’s been stated the illegal immigration problem costs the state over $5 billion a year. We could remove a great many illegal aliens for half that amount.

So there’s a review of the bill, why the vote should be NO, a statement of the issue, and a solution.

1 I do not grant that the state has the authority to give approval for employment, but since it is not an enumerated power under Article 1 Section 8, Congress most certainly does not have this authority.



Read the Bill: HR 2885, E-Verify : Liberty Underground