While most LP observers had their eyes firmly on Denver, the Ruwart campaign launched a new Web site, some time Saturday or Sunday (or later). Ruwart backers will no doubt be saddened by this reminder of what could have been.
Mary Ruwart launched new campaign site
May 27th, 2008 · 24 Comments
Filed Under: Libertarian Party
24 responses so far ↓
1 Mike Theodore // May 27, 2008 at 3:15 am
I saw this right after the nomination. So pretty…
The last one was crap. This one is all professional. Oh geez…
2 Robert Milnes // May 27, 2008 at 5:50 am
Yeah. Too bad.
3 Less Antman // May 27, 2008 at 5:53 am
At least she’s planning ahead this time. Only 3 years and 364 days to the nomination.
4 Robert Milnes // May 27, 2008 at 5:59 am
I called for Milnes/Ruwart months ago. But I heard she waited until she was sure Ron Paul was not in. & she ignored my attempts to communicate. I could have told her the fix was in against her; well actually against me but I tried to associate with her. & I tried to associate with the LP which brought my spiers onto it long ago. Sorry. But I tried to tell you all. Nobody listens to me especially the smartass bloggers. You think the gov’t/gop/cia/nsa is going to let me hook up with the LP & then the GP & come close to winning or actually win like Teddy Roosevelt? I’ll bet they are helping McKinney win the green nomination to lock that out of play also. You are no match for them, third party people.
5 Robert Milnes // May 27, 2008 at 6:03 am
Less Antman, cute. It will be obsolete by then. Maybe next time! This isn’t baseball!
6 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 8:47 am
Too bad this wasn’t unveiled sooner. It would have shown some professionalism on the part of team Ruwart and perhaps pulled a few extra delegates. Doubtful, but perhaps.
At least she is on the LNC now. It’s probably a better fit for her anyway.
7 Brooke // May 27, 2008 at 8:52 am
Gene–do you think you could possibly be any more condescending about Mary? Jerk….
8 Robert Milnes // May 27, 2008 at 9:13 am
gene, right. she can probably handle the lnc. but that president gig…I don’t know. Oh well, Bob & wayne got that. no matter.
9 Peter Orvetti // May 27, 2008 at 9:21 am
I’m guessing her campaign realized that if she won the nomination, they would immediately get a lot of web hits, including those from the media trying to find out about this “unknown” who defeated Bob Barr.
10 Steve Perkins // May 27, 2008 at 10:27 am
Yeah, this might have helped had it been launched weeks ago. There were a lot of “My heart’s with Mary, my brain’s with with Barr” type delegates on the convention floor… who lacked confidence that her camp could present a polished and professional-looking campaign for the Fall. This website is light-years beyond what she had up before.
A little unsolicited advice here, should Mary run in 2012 or anyone else try to fill that void. Drop the overemphasis on “hearts” and “love”. I know that it draws allusions to the Ron Paul logo, but it was probably a bit much. I was surprised at the number of WOMEN who were turned off by the heart signs and Mary’s constant references to her gender. The advantages that someone’s race or gender bring to the table are the kinds of things that should be hyped up by the candidate’s supporters (i.e. nomination speeches), rather than from the candidate’s mouth directly. A lot of women on the floor wanted to see a bit more gravitas… the heart signs and love references did not work the gender angle as effectively as you might think.
11 Peter Orvetti // May 27, 2008 at 10:35 am
I was for Ruwart. I hated her signs. (My wife seemed to like them, but mainly because she thought them funny.) I also thought the candidate herself should not have raised the gender issue. It is true, the LP could make use of a more diverse ticket — 10 out of 10 presidential nominees have been white males; seven of 10 VP nominees male and all 10 VP nominees white. But for the candidate to make the case herself just seemed crass. That’s what staff is for.
12 Brian Miller // May 27, 2008 at 10:35 am
This web site photo was featured in the montage shown during Ruwart’s nomination speeches — I watched it (in reverse) from behind the screen while waiting with Team Phillies to nominate George. It looks very professional and is the sort of presence Libertarians should be looking to develop for races at all levels.
13 Brian Miller // May 27, 2008 at 10:37 am
“I was for Ruwart. I hated her signs.”
A lot of gay Libertarians were chuckling a bit at the “Mary!” heart signs. “Oh, Mary!” is an archaic saying in the gay community that roughly translates to “oh, you drama queen!”
While I did caucus for Ruwart in the final votes, I must confess that I had to stifle some giggles when some of her more drama-flair supporters walked by with big “Mary!” buttons on their lapels.
14 LPiberty // May 27, 2008 at 11:19 am
Having Mary on the LNC is great news and I think a great number of Ruwart/Barr supporters would be happy with these results.
Still sore over VP. But maybe the People have made a fortunate choice.
15 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Brooke // May 27, 2008 at 8:52 am
Gene–do you think you could possibly be any more condescending about Mary? Jerk….
LOL
I have been called way worse than jerk, Brooke. I’ve had death threats come my way and had to take security measures because of my local political activity on behalf of liberty and the LP. Sorry you feel I am being condescending though because I really DO feel that being on the LNC is a better fit for Mary. I also DO believe that the wonderfully produced web site may have atracted a few more delegates who put a value on such things.
16 G.E. // May 27, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Gene – I wanted to say the same thing (it may have helped) but held back. I think it may have, for real. Especially if it could have been unveiled on Sunday, publicly. We lost by 48 votes. That means we needed to win over 25 people. That’s not a lot.
17 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 12:18 pm
LPiberty // May 27, 2008 at 11:19 am
Having Mary on the LNC is great news and I think a great number of Ruwart/Barr supporters would be happy with these results.
Still sore over VP. But maybe the People have made a fortunate choice.
Agreed about Mary! From what I hear, she is already off to a great start on the LNC.
Honestly, I wanted Kubby for VP, but alas, it was not to be. I think people’s emotions got the best of them and when they walked out, they denied Kubby a sifficient number of votes that could have propelled him onto the ticket…at least that is what I am hearing from multiple sources. If that’s the case, it’s a damn shame.
18 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 12:22 pm
G.E.: there is a BIG lesson in tactics and planning for the purist faction that they should take to heart on this entire episode.
Philosophically, I am about as radical as they come, but when it comes to actual nitty-gritty politics, it should be all business and maximizing your support. : )
19 Peter Orvetti // May 27, 2008 at 12:25 pm
How many people actually did not vote on the VP ballots, as opposed to the presidential ones? Given Kubby’s gentlemanly assertion that “this is not 1983,” it would be an ironic shame if he lost due to a small boycott by his natural supporters.
20 G.E. // May 27, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Peter – He probably did lose because of people leaving the convention hall. There were far fewer votes for VP than for president. The margin was small enough that it probably would have made the difference. However, I think just as many people walked out because they were tired as because they were angry.
21 Peter Orvetti // May 27, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Yes, it was a long day. I got tired just watching the thing at home in my air-conditioned living room on my comfy sofa.
22 Austin Cassidy // May 27, 2008 at 1:22 pm
G.E. is right. The Ruwart website might have actually made the different, if you can believe it.
Why in the world did they hold it back?
23 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 2:49 pm
The radical faction could have organized the delagates for a Kubby VP slot if they had utilized one simple (and free) tool:
Twitter.
One message sent to those who were signed up for twitter would have rallied the delegates when it mattered most.
24 Gene Trosper // May 27, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Austin: why did they hold it back? Overconfidence.
Leave a Comment