Pat Buchanan's biggest failing as a national politician was failing to organize "Buchananites" in the 50 states as he traveled around the country as a presidential candidate in 1992, 1996 and 2000. There should have been Buchanan followers running for office at every level, as Republicans, independents, and various third party candidates. But Buchanan never encouraged this in the least, which I have always found inexcusable (and the more cynical-minded may suspect other motives).
The more "Baldwinites" are politically active in their communities, the more clout Baldwin will eventually have nationally, because his financial base is currently miniscule compared to the Republicrats. We're already seeing this taking place with the "Ron Paul Revolution," which is a major reason for the tea partyphenomenon and other anti-establishment movements taking place. It's all quite encouraging; the one thing I don't want to see right now is someone from the establishment (like a Buchanan or Perot) seemingly "rise up" and be annointed as the "leader" of current populist sentiment. Good old American independent-mindednessand productive fragmentism and localism is the way to go, and that's what we're seeing right now, just not enough yet.Edited by: Don Wassall
The more "Baldwinites" are politically active in their communities, the more clout Baldwin will eventually have nationally, because his financial base is currently miniscule compared to the Republicrats. We're already seeing this taking place with the "Ron Paul Revolution," which is a major reason for the tea partyphenomenon and other anti-establishment movements taking place. It's all quite encouraging; the one thing I don't want to see right now is someone from the establishment (like a Buchanan or Perot) seemingly "rise up" and be annointed as the "leader" of current populist sentiment. Good old American independent-mindednessand productive fragmentism and localism is the way to go, and that's what we're seeing right now, just not enough yet.Edited by: Don Wassall
