- This topic has 70 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
afx114.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 1, 2009 at 4:56 PM #358464March 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM #358111
patientrenter
Participant[quote=mike92104]It’s time to start a PAC to rid us of Frank, Dodd, and Schumer. Since we can’t vote them out, maybe we can help fund someone who can beat them.[/quote]
For every $1 that PAC receives, $1,000 would go to funds to re-elect these folks. People who believe in the kind of governmental financial probity that Ron Paul advocates are a (small) minority in the USA. Most people want a government that will bail them out when they are hurting, regardless of the bigger consequences.
March 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM #358412Participant[quote=mike92104]It’s time to start a PAC to rid us of Frank, Dodd, and Schumer. Since we can’t vote them out, maybe we can help fund someone who can beat them.[/quote]
For every $1 that PAC receives, $1,000 would go to funds to re-elect these folks. People who believe in the kind of governmental financial probity that Ron Paul advocates are a (small) minority in the USA. Most people want a government that will bail them out when they are hurting, regardless of the bigger consequences.
March 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM #358553Participant[quote=mike92104]It’s time to start a PAC to rid us of Frank, Dodd, and Schumer. Since we can’t vote them out, maybe we can help fund someone who can beat them.[/quote]
For every $1 that PAC receives, $1,000 would go to funds to re-elect these folks. People who believe in the kind of governmental financial probity that Ron Paul advocates are a (small) minority in the USA. Most people want a government that will bail them out when they are hurting, regardless of the bigger consequences.
March 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM #358586Participant[quote=mike92104]It’s time to start a PAC to rid us of Frank, Dodd, and Schumer. Since we can’t vote them out, maybe we can help fund someone who can beat them.[/quote]
For every $1 that PAC receives, $1,000 would go to funds to re-elect these folks. People who believe in the kind of governmental financial probity that Ron Paul advocates are a (small) minority in the USA. Most people want a government that will bail them out when they are hurting, regardless of the bigger consequences.
March 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM #358689Participant[quote=mike92104]It’s time to start a PAC to rid us of Frank, Dodd, and Schumer. Since we can’t vote them out, maybe we can help fund someone who can beat them.[/quote]
For every $1 that PAC receives, $1,000 would go to funds to re-elect these folks. People who believe in the kind of governmental financial probity that Ron Paul advocates are a (small) minority in the USA. Most people want a government that will bail them out when they are hurting, regardless of the bigger consequences.
March 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM #358161mike92104
ParticipantI would want all the PAC money going to advertising to point out all the money those crooks received from the banks before the crises occurred. A relentless attack with that tactic might work. Like our version of the “swift boat ad”. At that point who cares how much money they have.
Also, I think the PAC should single one of them out at a time. A “divide and conquer” strategy.
March 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM #358462ParticipantI would want all the PAC money going to advertising to point out all the money those crooks received from the banks before the crises occurred. A relentless attack with that tactic might work. Like our version of the “swift boat ad”. At that point who cares how much money they have.
Also, I think the PAC should single one of them out at a time. A “divide and conquer” strategy.
March 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM #358601ParticipantI would want all the PAC money going to advertising to point out all the money those crooks received from the banks before the crises occurred. A relentless attack with that tactic might work. Like our version of the “swift boat ad”. At that point who cares how much money they have.
Also, I think the PAC should single one of them out at a time. A “divide and conquer” strategy.
March 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM #358637ParticipantI would want all the PAC money going to advertising to point out all the money those crooks received from the banks before the crises occurred. A relentless attack with that tactic might work. Like our version of the “swift boat ad”. At that point who cares how much money they have.
Also, I think the PAC should single one of them out at a time. A “divide and conquer” strategy.
March 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM #358739ParticipantI would want all the PAC money going to advertising to point out all the money those crooks received from the banks before the crises occurred. A relentless attack with that tactic might work. Like our version of the “swift boat ad”. At that point who cares how much money they have.
Also, I think the PAC should single one of them out at a time. A “divide and conquer” strategy.
March 2, 2009 at 8:56 AM #358356SanDiegoDave
Participant2010 could be the Libertarian Party’s big chance to oust 1 or 2 incumbent House members. If they target wisely and fund the campaign well. People are fed up with both major parties.
March 2, 2009 at 8:56 AM #358657Participant2010 could be the Libertarian Party’s big chance to oust 1 or 2 incumbent House members. If they target wisely and fund the campaign well. People are fed up with both major parties.
March 2, 2009 at 8:56 AM #358797Participant2010 could be the Libertarian Party’s big chance to oust 1 or 2 incumbent House members. If they target wisely and fund the campaign well. People are fed up with both major parties.
March 2, 2009 at 8:56 AM #358832Participant2010 could be the Libertarian Party’s big chance to oust 1 or 2 incumbent House members. If they target wisely and fund the campaign well. People are fed up with both major parties.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.