PDA

View Full Version : What Ron Paul needs to do to become a legit candidate...




swatmc
05-15-2007, 09:13 PM
Feel free to post your own thoughts.

These are just mine.

-Needs to improve speaking skills. What he is saying is excellent, but the way he is saying it is sub par. Easy fix... practice makes perfect.

-Remind people how it could be argued that Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate on the ticket. And also that he can appeal to both Republicans and Democrats. Something most of the other candidates can't do.

qednick
05-15-2007, 09:26 PM
Although I kind of agree with you I do think the way he comes across is more genuine. The others come across as actors.

swatmc
05-15-2007, 09:30 PM
Maybe. I'll give that to you.

But he can still come across as genuine without the "uhs"

It would only improve his standings if he could be a little more disciplined.

He did have some strong speaking moments though. He just needs to hone some of his skills.

ronpaulitician
05-15-2007, 09:31 PM
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Because of Rudy "9/11! 9/11!" Giuliani's "Are you saying we invited 9/11?" inference, Dr. Paul should use the opportunity to take hold of his non-intervention foreign policy views and whack his opponents around with it for a couple of rounds.

Melchior
05-15-2007, 09:35 PM
I think he doesn't do well with confrontation. Before any of the debates he was on a neocon radio show and he was pretty meek. He was meek on Bill Maher too.

When they attacked him tonight his voice was shaking by the last answer.

I like Ron Paul and his pure libertarian principles, but he needs to toughen up if we don't want him eaten alive in the political machine.

amonasro
05-15-2007, 09:35 PM
well it's good that his speaking is on par if not better than MOST of the candidates. Romney wins the speaking award of the night, but other than that I couldn't follow his response.

These guys know how to spin words I tell ya... Two sentences into their responses I forgot what the question was. At least Ron can form a coherent question and stick to his beliefs.

qednick
05-15-2007, 09:39 PM
I think it those qualities that make people realize it's not all spin and that's what makes him look genuine. Romney may be a good speaker but only bullshit comes out of his mouth. :eek:

Hancock1776
05-15-2007, 09:46 PM
I posted about that confrontation. (http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/DEBATE_Rudy_thinks_Interventionism_Has_No_Conseque nces)

Rudy is a Bush clone and I don't see how he thinks that will win him an election.

Brandybuck
05-15-2007, 09:50 PM
Looking at reactions from other sites around the web, I think Ron Paul needs to come out with an explanation of his blowback statement. The word on the net is that RP blamed 9/11 on the Iraq no-fly zone. An explanation won't correct that misinformation, but it's better than letting the lies go unanswered.

swatmc
05-15-2007, 09:52 PM
I think that the problem with Guliani during that whole mini-debate is that he thinks there are no consequences to American policy.

Ron Paul was very smart to bring up Vietnam. 60,000 Americans died in Vietnam. Today? We are trading with them.

Diplomacy people.

jimvkruse
05-15-2007, 10:06 PM
When Paul is asked questions about why he's the only one in the GOP running for president who's anti-war, he should mention how all the other candidates are whores for the main reasons we do what we do in foreign policy: Israel, oil, and defense contractors. Pointing out the wisdom and common sense of a non-interventionist foreign policy is all well and good, but he's gotta pound them into the ground with full force. Don't half-ass it.

swatmc
05-15-2007, 10:33 PM
I agree with that.

jimmyjamsslo
05-15-2007, 10:43 PM
One might add that he should have a more focused description that delineates the essence of the salient issues on his website. Some people need to have their hands held when it comes to assimilating new information such as the core ideas of his campaign. Someone could also suggest to Mr. Paul that he take deep breaths before he answers in the debates. That always helped me when I was performing in front of an audience. Nevertheless, he comes off in a more down-home fashion, people are getting wise to the slick snake-oil salesman mentality...


Jimmy

WhiteWhaleHolyGrail
05-15-2007, 10:46 PM
I think he's got to emphasize he is for State government power. When he talks about eliminating Federal departments I think people get the impression that they won't get services or security. When he made the point of eliminating the beaureacratic Homeland Security people's heads exploded.

amonasro
05-15-2007, 11:07 PM
When he made the point of eliminating the beaureacratic Homeland Security people's heads exploded.

When he talks everyone's head explodes. I know mine splattered all over the living room after my media-controlled helmet stopped functioning :D

WhiteWhaleHolyGrail
05-15-2007, 11:11 PM
When he talks everyone's head explodes. I know mine splattered all over the living room after my media-controlled helmet stopped functioning :D

:D

Dr. Paul was also the only candidate who brought up Osama bin Laden. It seemed like he is in favor of increasing efforts to go after bin Laden. I'd be interested to hear him more on that.

NMCB3
05-15-2007, 11:21 PM
Ron Paul spoke the truth tonight, just like he always does. The other candidates seemed shocked at his statement about the causes of 911. The truth is, they have been listening to him say these things week in and week out in Congress for years. Their shock was just a show to try and beat up on him to look tough, and pander to the war-mongering base.

Today on Cavuto Ron Paul was saying the same things and Cavuto said; "if you say half of what you said to me tonight at the debate, there is going to be fireworks." I did not think much about it at the time, but now I think the FOX NEWS guys were kind of in on it, and maybe even Gulianni. Its a great way to marginalize Ron, while making themselves look like big shots, and shifting focus from an obviously disastrous foreign policy. Even his "friend" Tancredo could not resist taking a shot.

It may backfire, as now Ron is going to get much more exposure than ever. He needs to make it count, getting into specifics about the issues; being more forceful in his opinions; pointing out the flaws in their records; he needs to get aggressive.

axiomata
05-15-2007, 11:26 PM
Every time Paul mentions that the major reason for the 9/11 attacks is our interventionist policies, he should make it clear that the 9/11 attacks were not justified by our policies. And that our response to those attacks (the forgotted war in Afghanistan) is justfied. The average voter won't understand that distinction unless it is repeatly pounded over their head.

vertesc
05-15-2007, 11:30 PM
I disagree. I worked on a political campaign in Canada a few years back, with an honest candidate not unlike Paul. He had a flawless record of keeping his promises, and he told it the way it was, no matter how unpopular that was with the vested interests. And - here's the best part - he refused to engage in any mudslinging. Lots of people said it would be the death of him, especially in an election against candidates who did everything from pay homeless people to vote for them to throwing bricks at regional offices. You could bet that they were mudslinging.

But he won. By a landslide. Two terms running.

I believe that honest politics that sticks to the issues can win in an election. Ron can win without stooping to the level of cheap politics.

aravoth
05-15-2007, 11:32 PM
I disagree. I worked on a political campaign in Canada a few years back, with an honest candidate not unlike Paul. He had a flawless record of keeping his promises, and he told it the way it was, no matter how unpopular that was with the vested interests. And - here's the best part - he refused to engage in any mudslinging. Lots of people said it would be the death of him, especially in an election against candidates who did everything from pay homeless people to vote for them to throwing bricks at regional offices. You could bet that they were mudslinging.

But he won. By a landslide. Two terms running.

I believe that honest politics that sticks to the issues can win in an election. Ron can win without stooping to the level of cheap politics.

indeed

JoshLowry
05-15-2007, 11:34 PM
I disagree. I worked on a political campaign in Canada a few years back, with an honest candidate not unlike Paul. He had a flawless record of keeping his promises, and he told it the way it was, no matter how unpopular that was with the vested interests. And - here's the best part - he refused to engage in any mudslinging. Lots of people said it would be the death of him, especially in an election against candidates who did everything from pay homeless people to vote for them to throwing bricks at regional offices. You could bet that they were mudslinging.

But he won. By a landslide. Two terms running.

I believe that honest politics that sticks to the issues can win in an election. Ron can win without stooping to the level of cheap politics.

We the people are going to have to work our asses off. I think chances like this only come every so often to prevent us from drifting into a downward spiral.

Organize and demonstrate. It doesn't matter what he does on TV if we reach enough people on our own. We know he is honest, we just have to tell others about him. I am going to bust my butt. I hope everyone else will too.

NMCB3
05-15-2007, 11:45 PM
I disagree. I worked on a political campaign in Canada a few years back, with an honest candidate not unlike Paul. He had a flawless record of keeping his promises, and he told it the way it was, no matter how unpopular that was with the vested interests. And - here's the best part - he refused to engage in any mudslinging. Lots of people said it would be the death of him, especially in an election against candidates who did everything from pay homeless people to vote for them to throwing bricks at regional offices. You could bet that they were mudslinging.

But he won. By a landslide. Two terms running.

I believe that honest politics that sticks to the issues can win in an election. Ron can win without stooping to the level of cheap politics. I was in no way shape or form advocating mudslinging. Telling the truth is not mudslinging. He needs to point out the specific differences between him and the others. Their own records will sink them.

PauliticsPolitics
02-08-2008, 02:59 AM
"blast from the past" still applies based on current threads...