I'm disappointed GOOOH didn't get further in 2008, but I am still convinced this is the right path. I was offered a refund, as promised, of my donation two months ago. There were no catches and reportedly only a couple of percent of the donors asked for their money back. I have not heard a single complaint, so I'm going to continue supporting these guys.

I don't know how long it will take to get the million supporters GOOOH needs, but I'm encouraged that the GOOOH team understands and remains focused on the mission. God knows the current batch of politicians only get worse each year.

Cool, looks like we were right. Not like that was a surprise, given the evidence.

Yes, Tim's exuberance is quite amazing. Anyone who had half of Tim's spirit could easily succeed in a buisness. If Tim is enjoying his work, that's great. This is a great project, and as long as Tim has enough resources to continue, he should. To put your whole spirit into a project, and to enjoy it, is one of the best feelings in life. I'm just worried about the money that is donated from other sources. Check out

http://goooh.com/ShowThread.aspx?ForumID=12&ID=807 for an example of what I'm worried about.

I hope that those who are financially insecure are not pressured to donate just so they can participate in the process. $100 is a lot of money to take from someone, especially if they don't have much free money to begin with. But if no one is being pressured to donate, then I have no problem with goooh.

It's not a matter of whether or not John's points should be refuted.  I think many, if not most, are valid points.  Besides, posting a refutation would probably go unnoticed since 1) a forum is not the best place to post lengthy works as they won't hold the attention of many readers and 2) would violate the forum's rules.

You also have valid points in starting smaller.  This is what we have right now.  This is something that has been in the works for quite some time and to restructure at this point might miss the November opportunity.  I think Tim's work is a starting point, which, if unsuccessful, will produce important data to restructure for the next run.  It might prove that starting smaller is the way to go.  I think it would be folly to restructure with only 9 months to go, and many who are part of this project would be disaffected if their district were excluded at this point and withdraw support.

I stand by my drowning statement.  I am a patriot.  I love this country.  I have no allegiance to those who run this government, but to this country.  I also believe it is still the greatest country in the world.  While I have compassion for the two nations cited, the comparison is invalid in that they have not enjoyed the quality of life, industrialization, technology, and prosperity that we as Americans have enjoyed.  We have been on a slow decline since the 60s.  Maybe drowning was an incorrect metaphor and "frog in the pot" is more appropriate, except that the latter is an inference of controlled decline.  The latter would also earn me a tin-foil hat so I will refrain from supporting that particular metaphor.

Those who never dreamed big, never achieved big things without trying.  I've heard it said that if you didn't fail the first time, you didn't try.  I, personally, have never had big aspirations and I still don't.  I do, however, have hope that my kids will.  I also pray they will have the opportunity to achieve great things.  It just seems, the way things are going, that might not be in the cards unless something is done.  Tim's plan may be flawed and November will be the test.  Tim put his whole life on hold for this.  He was blessed to be in a position to act on his aspirations while putting the rest of his life on hold. 

That kind of perseverence is inspiring and I wish I had the resources and courage to pursue such a big undertaking.  If you and John have have pursued your aspirations in life, I applaud you.  I've always wanted to start my own IT consulting firm, but have lacked the courage and resources.

The bottom line is the attempt.  Look at the American Revolution.  It started small.  It had less than 10% of the colonies' support.  As it progressed and some success was achieved, support grew.  While this attempt is to "win the war in a single battle", I think many lessons will be carried away from all this and applied to the next election cycle.  Nothing like this has been attempted before so why not start big and learn from the outcome?

Tim, Carl, I'm with you guys. I'm committed not because you can guarantee succees, but because I understand the vision and recognize the need. If there is a better plan out there, I wish John, Robert or whoever would tell me about it. A partisan third party is not going to defeat an entrenched party. Voting the incumbent out just replaces one bad choice with a different bad choice. I think you've nailed the fundamental problems and your strategy for attacking those problems is brilliant. I've wondered about the reasoning behind someone telling you that you are going to fail, but to each his own. I'm going to help make this succeed.

Robert: When you say run this process in one or two districts its clear you haven't thought through the fundraising or publicity aspects of the problem. The genius of GOOOH, as I see it, is that it is using the internet to rally all of America so that we can raise enough money nationally to compete with the billion dollar campaigns of the parties. If you try to target this to one or two districts you cannot raise enough money to compete; you are simply competing with the rules as the party as defined them, which, by the way, are designed so a third party has no chance. But, if you think that's the right approach, it seems that GOOOH is asking YOU to take the lead in your district and rally the number of people to make it happen.

GOOOH team: I've been calling talk radio stations at least once a day. I understand the Glen Beck show has heard of you. Perhaps everyone else should be calling them. He's on 9a.m. to noon M-F, EST. The number to call into the show is 888-727-2325. The email for the producer is stu@glennbeck.com.

I'm looking for some rational encouragement. I'm like John on this one; I'd love to see the process succeed, but I don't think it has a chance nationally. I was hoping that one of its supporters could help me and give me reason to believe in its success. I found nothing but blind faith and hope. I was looking for answers, not inspirational quotations.

But neither you nor Carl are able to produce any rational reasons why goooh will hold up in the face of the statistics, I'm just wasting my time here. And both of you are, as well; you two have convinced yourself so entirely of such an impossible project that ordinary discussion of the facts becomes meaningless and pointless.

Still, I'll be interested to see how this plays out, and whether you'll decide to go ahead and start the process for the 2008 elections. It would certainly be unfortunate if the donated money from perfectly well intentioned people just went to waste... but in the end, the decision is up to you.

I will follow your advice; if you do decide to go forward, I might occasionally check up on goooh and see what's happening, and how much money is being thrown away.

Robert, what possible value is there in trying to change your mind? You have made your point that you believe we will fail. Surely my time is better spent working to succeed than trying to change your mind-which I suspect is highly unlikely. We agree the odds are tremendously long, but I'm not sure what answers you are looking for. Do you expect us to say, "Gee, you and John are right, we never realy thought about whether or not this idea could work. We might as well quit." Sounds pretty silly, doesn't it?

Your and John's point is made, we heard you, and we're moving forward. Check back in three months then again two years later and then again two years later. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Tim:
Your optimism is quite good, but goooh has a very long way to go on the political level. Your hope for success is no replacement for the possibility of success.
"Nor will we remain the greatest country in the world by only pursuing those things whose success is guaranteed." Goooh's success is not just not guaranteed. The chance of it succeeding, even in one House seat, is less than 1%. If you are still intent on a national campaign, without a focus on one or two congressional districts, goooh will be quite easily overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of the opposing forces.
Carl:
"This country is that drowning kid..."
Eh, Tim just said that "we remain the greatest country in the world..." I wouldn't parallel that to drowning. A real drowning country would be Uganda and Kenya, for instance. Still, if you think the US is in an inexorable downward spiral, then the most efficent way to fix it is to start small and build up. Reaching for an impossible goal is useless. Your time would be better spent focusing on a single district, and then building up from there. No one can create a new national political party and win many seats in the House of Representitives after only a few months.
To continue your metaphor:
Even if this country is that drowning kid, we can't save it. We are a helpless toddler, strapped into a baby carrier we can't even get out of, watching, while two strong 20-year-olds (Dems and Rep's) are pushing the drowning country underwater.

And neither of you have even tried to refute any of John's points yet.

"Personally, I think that if goooh can't succeed, then it should not be attempted; the $10,000 or so put forth in the national campaign would just be wasted, and money shouldn't be used for a hopeless cause."

This is not a personal denigration, but a critique of that logic.  I want to see if I have this straight.  If you're kid is drowning and you're a weak swimmer, you won't try to save them?  Because it's a hopeless cause and can't succeed?

This country is that drowning kid...

Thanks Robert, buy it seems you and I may have very different perspectives on life. America did not become the greatest country in the word by only attempting things that we knew would be successful. Nor will we remain the greatest country in the world by only pursuing those things whose success is guaranteed.

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

"It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed." Theodore Roosevelt