A New Alliance - By Dr. Ron Paul (Chuck Baldwin For President!)

The press conference at the National Press Club had a precise purpose. campaignforlibertyIt was to expose, to as many people as possible, the gross deception of our presidential election process. It is controlled by the powerful elite to make sure that neither candidate of the two major parties will challenge the status quo. There is no real choice between the two major parties and their nominees, only the rhetoric varies. The amazingly long campaign is designed to make sure the real issues are ignored. The quotes I used at the press conference from insider Carroll Quigley and the League of Women voters strongly support this contention.
Calling together candidates from the liberal, conservative, libertarian and progressive constituencies, who are all opposed to this rigged process, was designed to alert the American people to the uselessness of continuing to support a process that a claims that one’s only choice is to choose the lesser of two evils and reject a principle vote that might challenge the status quo as a wasted vote.
I’ve thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the November election. I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.

hmmm the only problem with this is his WEBSITE that has a link called Buck for Chuck.

however going to read up on him.

he's having a money bomb drive to raise funds. there are many videos of him, and what he stands for, on youtube.

As I have sat here and listened
``to both sides``..of the slice
`` of members we have ..
I am back to wondering
``about the political strategy and the undecided
woman voters and..well that
old ``Spoiler`` effect... of further splitting the vote
( regardless of the electronic voting machine mess
we have yet to deal with and FIX..well ``eye mean`
correct.. ))))))))
Seems very very strange to me...

June 2008

Quote:

---

For someone who is no longer a candidate,
Paul spent quite a bit of money on his campaign
in the month of May,
$322,000 and not only does he not support McCain,
he does not recognize him as the nominee.

The latest polls show John McCain and Barack Obama
in statistical ties for the November election.
Each of them is going to need the support of as many
of their own party members as they can muster.
The Democrats are working hard on party unity.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are going
to begin campaigning together.
While this does not sit well with many
of the Clinton supporters,
especially since her name is not going to
be put into nomination at the convention
as is the custom for the first round of balloting.
They are aiming for a first round nomination and
a show of party unity right from the get go.

The situation is not the same on the Republican side.
With the McCain camp trying to make sure that
Ron Paul does not have a chance to be a speaker
and the Paul supporters still loyal to their candidate
he could very well be the spoiler.

---

William Poundstone,
Gaming the Vote:
Why Elections Aren’t Fair
(and What We Can Do About It) February 2008

In December 1947, Alfred Gödel,
a German logician who had fled Nazi Germany
for Princeton, New Jersey at the outbreak
of World War II, sat down to take
his U.S. citizenship exam,
accompanied by his good friend
and official witness, Albert Einstein.
After the judge complimented Gödel
on escaping Germany and its “evil dictator,”
he asked the famous logician whether he thought
a similar dictatorship could ever arise in the U.S.
“I know how that can happen!” remarked Gödel excitedly. Then, much to Einstein’s chagrin,
Gödel leapt into an explanation of how the
American voting system is deeply,
integrally flawed.

Though he is just one of many
characters in William Poundstone’s
Gaming the Vote:
Why Elections Aren’t Fair
(and What We Can Do About It),
Gödel’s claim forms the crux of the book,
a spirited history of voting in America.
In concise, uncluttered prose,
Poundstone explains why the “spoiler effect”
has caused at least five American
presidential elections to be won by
the second most popular candidate.
The “spoiler” is a minor candidate
who draws enough votes away from the
favored contender to turn the election
thereby splitting the votes that candidate
might have received......


Love to hear Harolds sincere thoughts and views
on this..

and that is based on a supposed 2 party system. we are not pound by a two party system. anyone can run for office. the powers that be try to keep it a two party system. thus any other person running is considered a spoiler. if all ran, as intended, and fairly, then it's anyone's game.

Quote:

---

then it's anyone's game.

---

You are right. It is a game, not serious to any voter,
as the voter isn't given the info to decide, most vote
on color, gender, parental issues, that have little to do
with running a country.

The founders expected the landowner to decide the issues
that related to the land, as agriculture was the main
business and land was the means of performance. Today's
business leaders are no longer connected to the land.
International corporations decide issues.

When the voters are tied to the land, so have to decide
what is best for land within our borders in opposition to
what is going on elsewhere, there is a patriotic duty and
responsibility to neighbors. The attention to the USA is
being ignored.

Thus, it is arguable as to whether the one-man-one-vote or
the electoral college is still valid. I say the one-man-
one-vote of citizens is more valuable that the opinions of
representatives who work for the international corporations.
Unfortunately, the career politicians decide who will be
their boss, instead of relegating him to a rubber stamp
with less power than themselves.