Peter Schiff Moneybomb Day

There is exactly ZERO chance (0.00 / 0)

Cts Republican Leadership or primary voting membership will ever give the nomination to Schiff. If the fools being seperated from their money don't get a promise from Schiff to run as a Independent they're just proving they're not as smart with finances as they profess they are.  

---

by: ctkeith @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 11:44:36 AM UTC

Ron Paul redux, eh? (0.00 / 0)

A lot of money, not much support.

That's probably true, though Schiff will get a higher percentage of votes than Paul. And if he were to gain any support running as an Independent that would certainly throw a wrench into things, as it's those disgruntled voters who will ultimately decide the election. One supposes the Republicans will need all their horses lined in a single direction to beat a weakened Chris Dodd, if they can.

---

by: Scarce @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 13:31:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lowell Weicker and Joe Lieberman (0.00 / 0)

Proved you can win in Ct without either Parties support.

My point is that Schiff is just seperating some fools from their money if the don't demand a pledge he'll run with or without the Republican Party endorsemet.

---

by: ctkeith @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 14:10:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lieberman had the de facto support of the Republican Party (0.00 / 0)

That he didn't have the (R) beside his name on the ballot was almost meaningless.

And the thing Rob Simmons fears most is a serious republican primary which would eat up a lot of his money, money that might not be easily replaced. Meanwhile Chris Dodd will be blanketing the airwaves nonstop with a huge cash advantage.

---

by: Scarce @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 14:24:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Plus (0.00 / 0)

... there won't be a lot of people giving to multiple candidates. The large field will depress Simmons', Caligiuri's, and Foley's ability to build a warchest over the next 13 months.  

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

---

by: mattw @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 14:36:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If he's serious about winning (0.00 / 0)

... he could do a lot to secure the Republican nomination by locking up the Libertarian nomination in advance of the 2010 primary.  

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

---

by: mattw @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 14:37:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You know what, though? (0.00 / 0)

I find Schiff's politics impractical and foolish, but the part of me that loves civic involvement thinks it's great that he could raise that much money from small donors across the country who believe in his candidacy.

I agree that he has little chance of winning the Republican nomination, but I think it'd be great if he ran as an independent who could siphon votes from Simmons or Foley.

I think what will be most interesting about the GOP primary will be seeing the extent to which these relatively socially moderate Republicans (Foley and Simmons) attempt to please the wing nut base. I really want to see Foley be asked about Sotomayor and Obama's citizenship on the record.

---

by: OGDem @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 18:03:01 PM UTC

"socially moderate" vs "wing nut" Republicans (and how they relate to progressives) (0.00 / 0)

Listening to the collective image invoked by forums such as this one I sometimes wonder if everyone in the room is reading off the same simplistic caricature of the Liberty movement.

Peter Schiff represents a small government, non-interventionist, pro-Liberty wing of the Republican party.  The core activist base of this movement is comprised of anti-war, socially liberal, fiscal conservatives.  This admittedly makes them the odd man out in the current two party system; maybe only ten percent of the current electorate is openly sympathetic to the movement.

So we're quite aware of our need for political allies if we hope to see some positive results.  Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, and the rest are not retarded, foolish wing-nuts (whatever that is).  If you stop the invective and ad hominem commentary you may find you have more in common with them than you might think (gasp!)

1.  Think Local.  If you believe in local empowerment and decentralization of power then you have something in common with the "wing-nuts".

2.  No empire.  If you think military bases in 130 countries and hundreds of billions of year spent supporting overseas deployments is absurd then you have something in common with the "wing-nuts'.

3. If you think warrantless wiretapping is a bad thing and calling it the "Patriot Act" is simply insulting then you have something in common with the "wing-nuts".

4. If you think using Orwellian speech like "enhanced interrogation techniques" is just propaganda to hide torture then you have something in common with the "wing-nuts".

5. If you think that having over a million people in prison because of a failed "War on Drugs" is the wrong way to deal with addiction then you have something in common with the "wing-nuts".

Admittedly, we vehemently disagree with each other over whether we should have a centralized, socialized health care system.   There will be a great deal (often loud) disagreement on that.  

But when you are looking for allies on items related to liberty you'll find that the "wing-nuts" will be your friends.  The war-mongering "social moderates" (as you call them) will be questioning your patriotism.

---

by: Dan Hansen @ Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 02:27:15 AM UTC

Dan (4.00 / 1)

I've watched Peter Schiff on TVwell over 100 times and not once did I here a Peep out of him on bullet point 2,3,4 or 5.

I think Schiff is like a broken clock.If you cry "the sky is falling" long enough eventually you'll find yourself in a stormy day.

As proof of him not being the Financialm wizard some are making him out to be I suggest you speak to anyone who followed his investment advise over the last year because they are down over 60%.

Peter Schiff doesn't today and never has represented anyones interests but his own.The only thing the Moneybomb proved was the old saying "a fool and his money are soon parted"

---

by: ctkeith @ Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 12:56:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dan, think you misunderstood (0.00 / 0)

I don't think principled, consistent libertarians are "wing nuts" - I'm referring to the right-wing base of the Republican Party, the sorts of people yelling at congressmen to "get their government hands off my Medicare" and questioning the citizenship of the sitting President of the United States.

I think there's a lot to be admired in the libertarian philosophy, and while I vehemently disagree with a lot of the central tenets, I wasn't referring to libertarians as "wing nuts." You guys are just a little nuts ;)

---

by: OGDem @ Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 18:35:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]