The Ron Paul Debate Day Moneybomb has raised just over $1 million, a very substantial achievement. The initial goal was $2 million. One thing that would help fundraising substantially is some kind of indication that the money will be better spent this time. Many people went into considerable debt last time in order to max out to the campaign, only to see amateurish TV ads, squandered opportunities, legions of unreturned phone calls, and so on. These good people deserve better. Will things be different this time? Will the personnel change, in light of the 2008 campaign’s problems, or will we see the same names again? Will there be the kind of debate rehearsal and coaching that goes on in other campaigns? This kind of information would go a long way toward reassuring the grassroots that the official campaign is a good place to send their money.
I totally agree. There were a ton of experts who were willing to volunteer their time. They were ignored. This time, the campaign needs some professional management – someone who knows how to recognize and utilize top quality resources. It is a management problem, not a problem of ill will.
I’ve read where Ron Paul has said that he’s been advised to change his way of expressing himself in hopes of avoiding some controversies, and that he has decided not to do so. In some respects I agree with that. One of the appealing things about Ron Paul is that he does not sound so terribly scripted like other candidates. At the same time, however, I wish that RP would focus less on his general philosophy and more on what he would actually do. He needs to convey his priorities because, once elected, he’s not going to be able to everything. I recall one interview where the host asked him what was the first thing he would do. His response was so rambling that I’ve forgotten it. I know that he’s not going to abolish social security and medicare, but many of his speeches suggest exactly that. This could leave him embroiled in unnecessary controversies. The more successful he becomes, the more he is going to be pinned down to address the details of his plans. So I think it is less a matter of changing vocabulary as it is a matter of focusing his responses more specifically to the questions asked by giving more concrete, less philosophical answers. Ultimately what matters is not what he believes but what he will do. If he’s really interested in winning, and not just running an educational campaign, that is what he will have to do.
Not that you’re saying I have, but I myself have never advocated having him water down his message. He would never do it, and he shouldn’t. That’s different from saying that there are ways to package certain specific issues within the overall message in ways more likely to reach GOP primary voters.
You’ve nailed it. Although the difference between Dr. Paul and most other candidates is his philosophical underpinnings, it is the concrete answers that win voters.
I wish Dr. paul would act more like a Physician. He didn’t give his patients philosophical advice did he? No. Thoughtful practical steps to improve their health. That’s exactly what this country needs and is yearning for.
Who ya gonna call? Dr. Paul!
You’ve nailed it. Although the difference between Dr. Paul and most other candidates is his philosophical underpinnings, it is the concrete answers that win voters.
I wish Dr. paul would act more like a Physician. He didn’t give his patients philosophical advice did he? No. Thoughtful practical steps to improve their health. That’s exactly what this country needs and is yearning for.
Who ya gonna call? Dr. Paul!
Both videos are great! The animated one is fantabulous!!! It would be nice to see both on all networks.
Dr. Paul needs a simple, populace message to draw in ALL Americans. End The FED is great, but most people don’t get that. Small town USA love the military. So Dr. Paul should capitalize on this. So how about–BRING THEM HOME! GIVE THEM A LOAN.
Instead of taxing the rich–have them loan money to all vets coming home. These LOANS would be given to start up small businesses or to buy houses. Gates, Buffet, Trump (private business men) could manage the specifics.
Rather than emphasizing one or another group, his motto Freedom Brings People Together and Freedom Is Popular can be emphasized to show diverse support from all types of Americans; certainly the stable middle class, but certainly the leading-edge youth, minorities, etc. It is a rare politician who can appeal across the political and cultural spectrum with a positive message; the others have negatives — fear, mistrust of free people. It needs to be reversed: mistrust of government, trust of neighbors and all contributing people of society.
I couldn’t agree more with this blog post. Debate rehearsal and coaching is an absolute must. Dr. Paul often gets visibly and audibly jumbled up when answering questions and speaks about tangential things in interviews. He does better at debates than he does in news interviews, but coaching would be invaluable to his performance at debates. The keys are to be concise, provide statistics, historical and verifiable facts, and deliver his PLAN (not just his position) with articulate brevity. I have proposed that Dr. Paul create and promote his “way ahead” on the key issues in this election: the economy, the debt, the deficit, the wars, entitlement reform, health care and civil liberty. For example, the news and recent developments with unconstitutional searches and seizures are providing Dr. Paul with all the fodder necessary to clearly present the case against the USA PATRIOT Act, but he must do so with specifics, statistics, a historical and philosophical perspective, and most importantly, his alternative. We have to make our suggestions known, and one way we can do it is to call his campaign office at 1-800-RON-PAUL (766-7285).
As an example of what I stated below…
Dr. Paul, you support abolishing the USA PATRIOT Act, despite the threat of terrorism in the US. Why?
Through the PATRIOT Act federal agencies and police circumvent the 4th amendment, search Americans, their homes and personal effects without a warrant by drafting a National Security Letter. There’s no judicial oversight. This hearkens back to the British Writs of Assistance where British soldiers could search a home or business without just cause, and John Adams said displeasure with these writs gave birth to the American Revolution. In 2009, police and federal agencies performed 2,000 of the “Sneak and Peek” searches authorized by the PATRIOT Act, but 77% of these searches were performed for drug cases, not suspected terrorism. I’m sorry, but wasn’t the justification for the USA PATRIOT Act to prevent terrorism? This act opened the doorway to “legally” eliminate liberty., and has put the American people in danger. In May of this year, a Marine was killed by SWAT performing a “Sneak and Peek” search, and he had committed no crime. The duty of the President is to defend the Constitution and protect liberty; not disregard our Constitution and promote a police state through fear mongering. I would restore and protect liberty by abolishing the PATRIOT Act.
get as many people as possible on a master list for money bombs. if yu raise 10,000,000 yeast time then that will give a big enough endorsement of its own and people will respond.
We need to target the people who vote in the primaries. that is where we will win and we must have enough votes so that it is impossible to right the vote. find out who these people are. Also, seriously, get 100,000 people on the money bomb lists!