Since interweb blogs and message boards have become the new hotbeds for the free exchange of political ideas and speech, I thought this would be the perfect place for all of we Ron Paul fans to gather and exchange ideas for building effective and concise postings for the various fora we visit.

How might his strengths be framed for the given audience?

How might his perceived weakness be reframed?

Having trouble coming up with lucid answers for difficult questions?

Any ideas for working around party faithful "moderates" or neocons who will do anything to smear Dr. Paul and/or troll your postings?

Post them here.

Come one, come all!!

I remember early in the internet boom when Libertarians won a lot of internet polls. It seems there are the same amount of Libertarians online now as there were then.

There's just fifty times as much of everyone else. Some clear non-confrontational sales pitches might do well. So much Lib posting is so doctrinaire and divisive I don't see how they're going to lure anyone in. They're even driving each other out.

This is a great idea Tom. Thanks for the pm my friend. It is late here. I will read this over again tomorrow, and post some suggestions.

I think it is good for all of us to get focused on this issue, and do all we can to properly counter those that seek to cause damage when there isn't any reason to do such to begin with.

A Libertarian forum?

Can Conservatives play too???

Well you're all welcome to any online help we can offer in the way of web space or bandwidth.

Sweet! Thanx Art.

As I've said before. Members can have their own forums or subtopics to moderate for the asking. This one is Servo's to do as he pleases, including make rules and appoint moderators.




Thank Servo, he's the one who has taken on the added responsibility. I'm here rain or shine regardless.

How might his strengths be framed for the given audience?

For "conservatives": Votes against all pork. Votes against all forms of wasteful spending. Will never vote for new taxes and always votes for tax cuts. Is opposed to all forms of wealth redistribution. Opposes federal red-tape and control over education. Supports minimalizing the power of the federal government, whether its executive, judicial, or legilative. Is pro-life and has introduced atleast 1 bill that would allow states to set their own laws. Huge supporter of the second amendment and is opposed to any restrictions on firearms.


For "liberals": Has voted against both wars. Has voted against the Patriot Act in whatever form it rears its ugly head. Has voted against all Republican spending bills. Supports a right to privacy. Has never voted for federal control over abortion. Opposes corporate welfare and it's involvement in our political system. Voted against No Child Left Behind. Opposes the federal laws against medical marijuana.

For "moderates" sick of the status quo: Has voted against his own party numerous times. Has worked with Democrats on many different bills.



How might his perceived weakness be reframed?

Weaknesses:

1. Who the hell is Ron Paul?
'
a. A US House representative from Texas.
b. The only current Presidential candidate who takes his oath to the US Constitution seriously.
c. The only candidate in the GOP primary who has opposed the Iraq war before it was popular to do so.


2. Is Ron Paul that crazy libertarian whack-job anarchist who thinks Bush is a reptilian?

No. He's a Republican from the state of Texas who supports minimizing the roll of the federal government in our every day lives. He is not an anarchist. He is a libertarian. He probably is crazy because I don't think I could put an ® next to my name on a ballot.


3. He has no chance...

And the Tigers had no chance of making it to the World Series last year.


4. Why does Ron Paul hate America?

Doesn't every person who opposes the war, and voted against a ban on flag burning hate America?



Having trouble coming up with lucid answers for difficult questions?

I always have this problem.



Any ideas for working around party faithful "moderates" or neocons who will do anything to smear Dr. Paul and/or troll your postings?

Ignore them at all costs is the best answer, but that is impossible. Just always play the nice guy not the a-hole who is angry even if you are. Put up any facts to refute and demand facts of those smearing.

That's all I got for now. I would like to see some more suggestions from others...

Well, Dr. Paul has the atvantage of running within the republican party this time around. His being free from the constraints of the perception of third-party status should be a great atvantage. And since looking over that link I got to the Wonkette site, and the mostly positive response he got, I figgered thare're a lot of inroads that can be made with the lefties too.


Well, post those sticking points here and let your homies help you with the answers!

But they lost, badly. It's great that some people have a standard-bearer that agrees with them on almost everything, but how can he "win the big one" ?

Being true to your dogma is all well and good, but how do you win votes (a LOT) without changing positions?

Curse moderates if you must, but you need some votes outside of true believers.



Fine, so how do you get democrats to pay you back and lay some votes on you?

Hey Tom,

Good idea. Thanks for the invite.

Support from a large variety of different opinions. The Tigers won. They didn't "win" but they won...



Well he appeals to a majority of people on what I believe are a majority of issues, and he has the voting record to back it up.



The democrats are a bunch of lying socialists. The only way they lay some votes on you is if the lobbyists tell them to. But in all honesty I believe Ron Paul has appeal to the "middle".

It seems to me that neo-cons will prove a greater challenge than lefties, even with him running under the R...

Maybe there's a bigger market for someone else other than Senator Weathervane in the race than the punditocracy wants to admit.


Well, I extended the invites to get even more good ideas. So, think-tank away!

I heard Al Gore supporters say almost the same thing, but he ain't C-in-C.



Calling the Dems lying socialists isn't going to win a lot of votes. (even if it's the truth)

I agree that the majority probably agrees to some degree with Paul on many issues, but I doubt they agree enough to abandon their main issues that are in agreement with major parties. Reps will still want government to stop abortion and fight drugs, and even moderate dems want their social programs at a level Libertarians would never accept.

My first suggestion would be to be VERY careful about loaded language. A good salesman avoids turnoffs first.

Then to worry about the positive sales pitch....

The wind aims the weathervane, not vice-versa. I'm not sure a cat herder will be able to herd enough electoral votes to win without being some degree of a weathervane. Lead or drag? Voters can be lead some, but they aren't going to be dragged.

Check out the responses to the news of his candidacy on this left-leaning blog: http://wonkette.com/politics/ron-paul/save...dent-228158.php

Seems that someone who stands by their principles may have a broader appeal than it appears on the surface.

Good than they can relate



You think I would go up to a democrat and say "you bunch of lying socialists, vote for Ron Paul or die"?

I also think the most important issue is the War in Iraq, and the Democrats aren't delivering on the issue they won on. They are extremely weak there and I think it is an issue he needs to put up front. They may abandon social programs (it's not like they'd dissapear the day he was sworn in as POTUS) to elect someone who actually opposes an illegal war.

Now there's the kind of counter-point this thread is about.

Mark that one down, folx!

The war was already voted on. If you wanted to stop it the time was before troops were on the ground in the middle of Baghdad.



There've been worse slogans.

They can now stand on principle and vote against the funding, but I guarantee to you right now that none of the mainstream Presidential candidates D or R who are currently in congress will vote "against the troops".



Slogans are for the birds.

Hey, that would make a pretty good slogan.



Probably not, especially if they voted for the resolution granting the president authority in the first place.

Wow. Maybe people are actually getting sick of all the pretenders... 'bout time.




Good points. (I have some issues with the war) but I believe the left would greatly admire Dr. Paul's stance, and his recent efforts to prevent conflict with Iran.

Another point as far as social programs go, while he doesn't agree with them, he puts his money where his mouth his. Offering to pay for medals by chipping in his own money as has been mentioned, as well as treating some of his patients free of charge rather than accepting medicaid/medicare.* Now, THAT is principled.

* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...70800966_2.html

The left often complains that those who don't agree with fedgov social programs are harsh, and they ask, "If you succeed in ending the program, what will you do to help those in need?" Dr. Paul's actions in this regard speak volumes.

Welcome aboard Lady Justice. Feel free to post anywhere and ask if you have any questions. There is usually somebody around to help out, and most are willing regardless of politics. One big dysfunctional family.

As for the left, they know it takes a gun to their head to make them generous, so they give the gubment the job of holding the gun.

Yes indeed.


As for Ron Paul, as a sitting Congressman and Republican he is the first credible presidential candidate that you guys have had, so I think your efforts to promote his candidacy are great.

I don't think he can win the Republican primaries, but at least you will have a chance to put some votes up on the scoreboard of national politics.

Thanks for the welcome, guys.

I was excited to learn Paul was going to run.

I'm not giving up on his chances yet, seeing that so many people are disgusted with the status quo.

Wouldn't you love to see him debate the stuffed shirts from both parties? I know I would.

The stupid debate committee is designed to keep anyone but the two majors out. You have to be at their threshold to get into a debate, and you can't get to the threshold without the national exposure a debate allows. Between that and McCain-Feingold the incumbents and the party anointed are the only ones that have a shot at national office.

Once again I have to put forth my political royal rumble plan. At least 8 to start and poll after each debate, dropping the bottom two for the first two, then one, and have three for any debates after that.


If you have any questions PM me any time. All are welcome. Few rules, and only a minor bit of language filtering outside of Servo's domain. Here, he rules, outside, chaos reigns.

Glad to have you.

Questions, comments? nominees for the debates beside Paul and a couple D/Rs?

I don't get what "poll" or debate you are talking about.

http://www.debates.org/

These are the current presidential debate masters.

http://www.debates.org/pages/his_2004.html

Note only two participants in the last debate. Same thing going back to 1992.


By design. I'd say that stifles democracy.

One perceived weakness is voting against defense funding and is typically described as "Ron Paul doesn't support the troops and refuses to fund them."

Here is a link to what he really said about the latest defense appropriations bill:

http://www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.ph...e=&contain=

To summarize, he believes there's a lot of fat included and very little money that will actually benefit the troops.

If we're going to play MYOB geopolitics we're not likely to need our military unless somebody is fool enough to attack us on our soil. Of course military spending isn't just to "benefit the troops" in a direct manner, but to provide for the common defense.

I'd like to hear more on Paul's views on defense, and not just spending.

http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=BC031929

REPRESENTATIVE RONALD E. 'RON' PAUL REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO PROVIDE ANY
RESPONSES TO CITIZENS ON ISSUES THROUGH THE 2006
NATIONAL POLITICAL AWARENESS TEST WHEN ASKED TO DO SO BY

Key national leaders of both major parties including:
John McCain, Republican Senator
Geraldine Ferraro, Former Democratic Congresswoman
Michael Dukakis, Former Democratic Governor
Bill Frenzel, Former Republican Congressman
Richard Kimball, Project Vote Smart President

Over 100 news organizations throughout the nation also urged their candidates to supply their issue positions through the National Political Awareness Test.

Tom,

I believe the bottom line question the supporters of Ron Paul need to address and answer is: how do they gain a majority of American Voters to support Ron Paul during election time.

Before this question can be answered, one must be able to identify a significant goal which a majority of voters consider is a worthy one and one important enough for them to work toward accomplishing.

Since we live in a constitutionally limited Republican Form of Government [see Art. 4, Sec. 4 U.S. Constitution] and are ruled by written constitutions, state and federal, I believe I have identified a common factor responsible for the complaints of a significant number of single interest voters ___ folks in government violating the most fundamental rule of Constitution law which is, a sworn duty to carry out the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was adopted, as they are documented from the historical record during which time our Constitution was framed and ratified!

The irrefutable fact is, there are those who support and defend our written Constitution [the intentions and beliefs under which it was agreed to], and, there are those on the left and right who work to subjugate our written Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agreed to, and, this subjugation has created a very subtle dividing line in politics that spans across the extreme left wing and extreme right wing who vote during America’s elections.


I believe that a political movement with a fundamental goal to compel folks in government abide by our Constitution, that is, abide by the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, would have very wide appeal and cuts across political party lines. Who are potential participants in such a movement? The list appears to be very, very long and includes a number of single interest voters, e.g.: those who support and defend the right to keep and bear arms; those who support the federal government protecting our borders from invasion; those who were outraged over the Kelo decision and the SCOTUS subjugating the intentions for which eminent domain power is granted to government; those who believe the Americans With Disability Act is a usurpation of federal power and nothing more than a clever “lawyers full employment act”; those who believe Congress and not an un-elected majority on a NAFTA panel, the majority of who may be foreigners, are delegated the power to regulate America’s commerce with foreign nation. This of course covers the NAFTA, WTO, CAFTA, and other un-constitutional creations by which America’s commerce is no longer regulated by the people’s elected representatives. And, let us not forget all those who believe that Roe vs. Wade was an outright usurpation of state authority by the federal government and that the abortion issue is one retained by the people of the various states via the Tenth Amendment and also includes the No Child left Behind Act which is another federal power grab with a dangerous intention by the existing leadership of the Republican and Democrat parties intended by them to be used to control the minds of each succeeding generation’s children, teaching them to be good little tax slaves and subservient to the federal establishment in Washington . And, let us include all those who see the American Civil Liberties Union for what it really is…a domestic enemy of our Constitutionally limited Republican Form of Government which seeks to subjugate the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was adopted! Like I correctly said, the list is very, very long!

A solution to our misery can start right here, right now, by organizing a movement to create the largest demonstration on Capitol Hill in our nation’s history___ a demonstration to demand our federal government abide by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was adopted as they may be documented from the words of those who framed and ratified our written Constitution which can be documented from historical records, and, the primary speaker could be candidate Ron Paul!

NOTE: documenting the intentions of our Constitution from the historical record slams the door shut on and smokes out all those [left and right] who would attempt to peddle their own personal agenda by making the Constitution mean whatever they want it to mean!

Now, how do we start such a movement, a political movement to support and defend our written Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, or, is it that we are happy to appease ourselves by engaging in table talk and consider talk our contribution in taking back our Country? Would you participate? Would anyone here participate? Any suggestions?

If the defenders of our country and our constitutional system want to make a difference, they must do so before the overwhelming voting public has been made dependant upon government for its subsistence, and they must take quick action to identify themselves as a powerful political force in America with a clearly defined objective which draws significant public support. I believe I have identified a clearly defined objective which all freedom loving people would have an interest in seeing accomplished ___ compelling our public servants, our hired employees, to abide by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was adopted as they may be documented from the words of those who framed and ratified our written Constitution, which can be documented from historical records!


Sincerely,

JWK



The servant has become the master over those who created a servant and the new servant pays tribute by taxation to a gangster government which ignores our most basic laws…our constitutions, state and federal.

A party full of single issue voters isn't going to be easy to build from scratch. The two majors already have taken positions to pick up most single issues.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_cat...can_id=BC031929

I spent some time on project Vote Smart. I'll be damned if I can figure out how Paul can get 100 ratings from the John Birch society and 30-60 from liberal groups.

On Iraq it's no surprise he gets 100 from Arab groups and not much from Jewish groups.

Nada from Arts groups.

I think it shows exactly who the NRA is when the gave Paul a B.

They've become a self-interested entity out to promote themselves. Surprised? It's not like politicians are pure as driven snow either.

First, I want to thank Tom for inviting me into this discussion. I appreciate it greatly, sir!

Secondly, it's good to see some other familiar "faces" here. I know from past discussions that you folks are of the highest caliber.

In reflecting on this thread, I believe it raises more questions than it provides answers for. I have thought all along that a person like Ron Paul is going to have to run the majority of his campaign on a "grass roots" level. I have been sharing a lot of Dr. Paul's writings on a couple of other forums that I visit. If people will take the time to read his writing, they generally take notice. I have had a number of folks tell me they would support Dr. Paul, even though they are the "typical" Republican voter. Now, I do realize that saying you will support him, and actually supporting him are two different things, however, I think that it illustrates that a lot of folks like what they see when they really take a look at Dr. Paul.

The biggest hurdle he faces, IMO, is name recognition. Getting the name out, getting his message out, and getting his voting record out will need to be the primary focus of his campaign. If he can maneuver his way into a debate or two with some of the potential "front runners" from either party, he will shine.

Without national name recognition you have nothing. It might make more sense to get the name out first, then worry more about the message. IOW, hire some marketing people and work on exposure of the product. I know it sounds beneath the dignity of Libertarians, but part of their problem is they're so busy clinging to positions rather than playing the political game as it is played in the US.

If you have to show up on Letterman making balloon animals and wearing an arrow through your head it might be a reasonable sacrifice to make IF YOU REALLY WANT TO GET ELECTED.

Welcome aboard, feel free to spread you message around. Everyone is welcome to post on any subject throughout our many topics.

It can't be too expensive to run local cable television ads in New Hampshire and Iowa. I think he should start pushing advertising there as soon as possible.

It's never too early just to get the name recognition up. High name recognition now could lead to more donations later.

At some point it's impossible to win without money. You have to be realistic now if you want to get out your message later.

Good. Very good.

However, bring up constitutional constructionism with most people and they'll either look at you like you have two heads or they'll give you that "living rules" junk they learned in gubmint schools.

What I'm aiming for here are ways of conveying to the average Joe, in ways that most people can relate to, what originalist liberty and limited gubmint have in it for them. We already know what's in it for us.

This is not to say that we need to join in with the demopublicraticans in the sound byte and sloganeering constests, but to come up with good ways to write about a great candidate, in ways that appeal to the given audience we're addressing. This shouldn't be too terribly tough since freedom has something in it for everyone.

And thanks for stopping by.

I think the name recognition thing is vastly overrated. Who outside their respective states had ever heard of Carter or Clinton?

If Dr. Paul gets the reputation for being not only different from the other party, but also markedly different from others in his own party, in ways that meet with their criteria, people will learn and remember his name.

"Dr. No" is good enough for me!

Great article. Dr. Paul also understands that the state and local governments have the right to fund these social programs as allowed by the 10th Amendment. I really fail to see the problem with state or local governments or even private charities running these services. For one thing, we don't have a bureacrat sitting 2000 miles away making decisions for us. The Federal Government is supposed to be one of limited power and that's the rule.

It's a bit late to get out from underneath SS and Medicare. They knew what they were doing when they tailored a program to give one generation a free check, and subsequent generations got hooked into the same pay now, demand later plan. Bush barely tested the third rail of politics and gave up, and he had the nominal support of his party. Paul is likely to have less support from a party. How is he going to sell anything by himself?

I made these in MS paint if it isn't obvious

I would do so.

Is that an official slogan, or just a generic? I see his website is still under construction.

I like the bumper sticker proportions best.

Do we get any choices on the words underneath? i'm thinking peace and principle is a bit worn. Peace didn't work for Chamberlain, and principle hasn't worked for anyone in politics. Liberty as well, but at least it fits.

Ron Paul and Walter Jones on Iran.

http://recap.fednet.net/archive/Buildasx.a...=&sExpire=1