TexMac
08-20-2007, 12:52 PM
Like for example, this one:
(http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/08/20/campaigns-communications-and-control/)
Use Openness as an Offensive Weapon. It’s no secret that I believe the benefits of openness outweigh the risks, particularly in campaign environments that are so dependent on a sense of grassroots energy and momentum. But risks still remain, and campaigns should have a back and forth familiarity with blogs, socnets, and the folkways of buzz in the Webosphere, if for no other reason than being able to spot opportunities to exploit an opponent’s weakness. There’s a reason why the netroots extols open platforms and uses profanity more than 1,000% more than conservatives (http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2007/02/seven-words-you-can-never-say-on.html), and yet it’s all press releases (http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/08/15/fdl-demands-apology-calls-on-collins-to-fire-dutson/) when a conservative blog makes an even remotely un-PC statement. They are exploiting open platforms they themselves embrace as a weapon. Other examples of this could include messing with the expectations of Ron Paul supporters (http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/07/18/ron-paul-will-place-second-at-ames/), and depressing Hillary Clinton’s web site traffic. (http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/07/03/stop-the-clinton-youtube-embargo/)
Remember that? Ron was going to win second in Ames? Here he is admitting that it was "messing" with you. Maybe he's trying to cover for being stupid or maybe he really was trying to falsely raise expectations.
The best defense against this stuff is to be cautious and verify everything before you believe it or use it in an argument. Even Jesse Benton, RP's communications director, fell prey to saying too much before the Ames poll and got slapped by these more vicious political operatives:
Also, Ron Paul finished fifth. His camp expected to finish in the top three. Here was his communications director: (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/121517.html)
“We expect to be in the top three,” Benton said. “We’ve got four staffers organizing and we’ve got a lot of web site RSVPs (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/events/iowa-straw-poll/) from volunteers.”
That’s disappointing. No rEVOLution.
http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/08/11/huckabee/ (scroll to bottom)
And these guys, Free Market News. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=13190) How many times have they been wrong? Always on the sunny, optimistic, unrealistic side? Isn't it time to take everything they say skeptically? Don't let these people play you for fools. In fact here's some good advice, and it doesn't just apply to Ruffini:
Attention Ron Paul Supporters: Patrick Ruffini is Not Your Friend! (http://www.blogpi.net/attention-ron-paul-supporters-patrick-ruffini-is-not-your-friend)
(http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/08/20/campaigns-communications-and-control/)
Use Openness as an Offensive Weapon. It’s no secret that I believe the benefits of openness outweigh the risks, particularly in campaign environments that are so dependent on a sense of grassroots energy and momentum. But risks still remain, and campaigns should have a back and forth familiarity with blogs, socnets, and the folkways of buzz in the Webosphere, if for no other reason than being able to spot opportunities to exploit an opponent’s weakness. There’s a reason why the netroots extols open platforms and uses profanity more than 1,000% more than conservatives (http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2007/02/seven-words-you-can-never-say-on.html), and yet it’s all press releases (http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/08/15/fdl-demands-apology-calls-on-collins-to-fire-dutson/) when a conservative blog makes an even remotely un-PC statement. They are exploiting open platforms they themselves embrace as a weapon. Other examples of this could include messing with the expectations of Ron Paul supporters (http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/07/18/ron-paul-will-place-second-at-ames/), and depressing Hillary Clinton’s web site traffic. (http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/07/03/stop-the-clinton-youtube-embargo/)
Remember that? Ron was going to win second in Ames? Here he is admitting that it was "messing" with you. Maybe he's trying to cover for being stupid or maybe he really was trying to falsely raise expectations.
The best defense against this stuff is to be cautious and verify everything before you believe it or use it in an argument. Even Jesse Benton, RP's communications director, fell prey to saying too much before the Ames poll and got slapped by these more vicious political operatives:
Also, Ron Paul finished fifth. His camp expected to finish in the top three. Here was his communications director: (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/121517.html)
“We expect to be in the top three,” Benton said. “We’ve got four staffers organizing and we’ve got a lot of web site RSVPs (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/events/iowa-straw-poll/) from volunteers.”
That’s disappointing. No rEVOLution.
http://www.patrickruffini.com/2007/08/11/huckabee/ (scroll to bottom)
And these guys, Free Market News. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=13190) How many times have they been wrong? Always on the sunny, optimistic, unrealistic side? Isn't it time to take everything they say skeptically? Don't let these people play you for fools. In fact here's some good advice, and it doesn't just apply to Ruffini:
Attention Ron Paul Supporters: Patrick Ruffini is Not Your Friend! (http://www.blogpi.net/attention-ron-paul-supporters-patrick-ruffini-is-not-your-friend)