Subject:
|
Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Sep 2001 14:53:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1205 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > The Republican party makes you sign no oath, and does not make you promise
> > that you support the R platform or that you aren't member of some other
> > party too.
> >
> > What would *prevent* a LP member from running as a republican? He can say
> > the same platform he always would have if he was running as an L.
>
> I agree that if an LP member agrees with the tenets of the platform on
> which he is running, then he's under no conflict. If, however, he's (an
> abstract "he" rather than Paul) biting his tongue on major issues with which
> he might disagree (like campaign finance reform, for instance), then I think
> he might be campaigning dishonestly.
Yes. But there is no requirement to agree with the GOP platform in order to
run as a GOP candidate. I haven't pored over Ron's speeches in the level of
detail to be able to tell if he bit his tongue or actually came out and said
"I don't support this and will work against it if elected". I would suspect
the latter though (with no proof either way short of doing the research).
> > If he has name recognition and can win the race, great.
>
> A la Howard Stern? 8^)
Ah, no. Howard Stern and his antics seriously damaged the NY LP. Served them
right for not having a rigorous convention delegate selection process, I
guess, but still. After getting the nomination and getting put on the ballot
at some effort and expense, he weenied out, way too late to do anything
about it.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
| (...) Hmm... I think I'm slipping back and forth between Paul's case(1), so you're most likely correct about his consistency. I was speaking more in the abstract, conjecturing a case in which Candidate X ran under another party by falsely professing (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
| (...) I agree that if an LP member agrees with the tenets of the platform on which he is running, then he's under no conflict. If, however, he's (an abstract "he" rather than Paul) biting his tongue on major issues with which he might disagree (like (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
49 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
