Stacking the primary deck... A plan for victory

[foofighter20x]

Technically, we came in third at Iowa. The campaigns of Brownback and Tancredo won't last long if their 3Q numbers aren't up there. My feel is that they won't be. The will limp all the way to Iowa, but after that, they'll be gone.

So, how do we capitalize on that, for all intents and purposes, third place finish?

Stay focused on the early primary-event states! And not just Iowa and NH, but also South Carolina and Nevada. I'm not trying to knock Michigan or Florida, but they fact that they moved their primaries up will cost them big and dearly on delegates (they currently stand to lose half of their delegation due to it).

Hate to call for centralization (maybe coordination would be a better word), but I think that if we geographically focused ourselves on our nearest primary neighbor and funneled maybe 10% of our local efforts and funds into Iowa, NH, SC, and Nevada MeetUps, that we would stand to do much better than any of us expect right now.

The media payoff from early wins would only help the small reduction in spending in the later states as basically getting our Ron Paul avalanche started.


Thoughts?

[Paul4Prez]

Here's the early primary schedule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)_presidential_prim aries,_2008

We also need to learn what the rules are for each state. In some, it is winner-take-all, or winner-take-all by district. Those mean you have to spend a lot more money, and if you don't win, it's wasted. Other states divide delegates proportionately, and would be a better investment.

More info here:

http://www.primarilypaul.com/ron-paul-in-the-primaries/

Don't discount Florida and Michigan, though. Even if they are penalized half their delegates, it will still be more than NH and IA.

[stevedasbach]

Early primaries are VERY important. However, we also need to boost Ron Paul's national poll numbers, and we have to raise a lot of money. Like it or not, people invest more time, energy, and money in local efforts (where they can see results) than they will in distant locations.

[foofighter20x]

Early primaries are VERY important. However, we also need to boost Ron Paul's national poll numbers, and we have to raise a lot of money. Like it or not, people invest more time, energy, and money in local efforts (where they can see results) than they will in distant locations.

Hence the suggestion of only 10% of that local effort to the early states. ;)

[Johnnybags]

Anyone think Ron should pull Sanford as VP prior to primary if he is interested? I know Fred played the NH VP game to get votes? Just so happens Sanford is somewhat like minded? Could be a political coup.

[MsDoodahs]

How popular is Sanford?

Can he deliver the state to RP?

[RevolutionSD]

California is pretty early on too, and I think RP can take California. I don't see any support building for any of the other GOP candidates here yet. I've seen a few Obama stickers but the only other candidate I see signs of is Ron Paul.

[Publius]

The parties only use the lose of delegates as threats to keep the states in line. They 'll eventually cave before the convention, always happens. Typically Michigan gets lots of Dems crossing over too so don't count them out. McCain won there in 2000 despite Bush being heavily favored choice of the party.

[Joe Knows]

The parties only use the lose of delegates as threats to keep the states in line. They 'll eventually cave before the convention, always happens. Typically Michigan gets lots of Dems crossing over too so don't count them out. McCain won there in 2000 despite Bush being heavily favored choice of the party.

I think that the Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party lobbied the legislature to change the cross over. I don't think Democrats are allowed to vote this cycle in the Republican primary. I think that he changed that to hurt Dr. Paul. The Chairman is Saul Anuzis who said Dr. Paul should not be allowed in the debates because of his viewpoint on the war.

[erowe1]

I think that the Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party lobbied the legislature to change the cross over. I don't think Democrats are allowed to vote this cycle in the Republican primary. I think that he changed that to hurt Dr. Paul. The Chairman is Saul Anuzis who said Dr. Paul should not be allowed in the debates because of his viewpoint on the war.

That's not true. You're right that there was talk off ending the open primary rule in Michigan. But it didn't go through. AFAIK, Dems and independents can still vote in Michigan's Republican primary.

However, an unfortunate rule that did go through (and I'm not sure if this is old or new) is that Michigan is a winner-take-all primary.

[Joe Knows]

That's not true. You're right that there was talk off ending the open primary rule in Michigan. But it didn't go through. AFAIK, Dems and independents can still vote in Michigan's Republican primary.

However, an unfortunate rule that did go through (and I'm not sure if this is old or new) is that Michigan is a winner-take-all primary.

That is good to know. I was under the impression that the Democrats were going to do a caucus on a different day instead of a primary and as such would not be allowed to vote Republican since that might possibly allow them to vote twice. Glad to know it is still open.

[Slugg]

Technically, we came in third at Iowa. The campaigns of Brownback and Tancredo won't last long if their 3Q numbers aren't up there. My feel is that they won't be. The will limp all the way to Iowa, but after that, they'll be gone.

So, how do we capitalize on that, for all intents and purposes, third place finish?

Stay focused on the early primary-event states! And not just Iowa and NH, but also South Carolina and Nevada. I'm not trying to knock Michigan or Florida, but they fact that they moved their primaries up will cost them big and dearly on delegates (they currently stand to lose half of their delegation due to it).

Hate to call for centralization (maybe coordination would be a better word), but I think that if we geographically focused ourselves on our nearest primary neighbor and funneled maybe 10% of our local efforts and funds into Iowa, NH, SC, and Nevada MeetUps, that we would stand to do much better than any of us expect right now.

The media payoff from early wins would only help the small reduction in spending in the later states as basically getting our Ron Paul avalanche started.


Thoughts?

I think you're right, and with the Television ads being made and some radio ads being made; we can hit those areas pretty hard for pennies.

[AgentPaul001]

Hopefully my state North Carolina moves its primary up to Super Tuesday, chances are we will know by then who will represent the party (although with so many neocon bobbleheads its not a sure thing), the state overall is fairly Libertarian minded and opposition to the war within the Republican party is fairly great. 69 Delagates is nothing to scoff at.

Anyways, I guess the main efforts of the campaign will center on New Hampshire, always a very Libertarian minded state , South Carolina as well. I'm not sure how well Paul will do in a big state like Florida. He could also shine in Wyoming and Maine.

Hopefully we'll see some big numbers this quarter (Over $5 Million the warchest would be great), that can really help proprel the campaign forward.

[foofighter20x]

I guess the best summary for what I'm trying to say is that we need to invest in the early primary pressure points. There will be windfall media benefits if we can win at least 3 of the first five.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Texas isnt even untill March 4. Will it already be over by the time my state votes?

[foofighter20x]

Dunno... Depends on who enters the race in the next 5 months.

[walt]

we need a list of each state and the deadline to register and to declare Rebuplican - only then can we build an intelligent strategy.

[Badger Paul]

Wyoming is the first to go on Jan. 5 and its one we should have our primary (sic) focus on.

[Johnnybags]

How popular is Sanford?

Can he deliver the state to RP?

Which does not happen very often there, obviously a Paul bump would increase the margin I believe. However, I have seen the Ghoul stump for him in the past? Since Fred took a NH guy for a bump, I think Rudy will be looking for Sanford? I think Ron needs to make a move soon.

[Geronimo]

According to this article (http://www.thought-criminal.org/2007/08/15/cfr-stacks-the-deck-with-both-democrat-and-republican-presidential-candidates), the CFR already has stacked the primary deck.

[Paul4Prez]

California is pretty early on too, and I think RP can take California. I don't see any support building for any of the other GOP candidates here yet. I've seen a few Obama stickers but the only other candidate I see signs of is Ron Paul.

I think Ron Paul could do well here in California -- illegal immigration is a huge issue, people are more anti-war, and the Republicans tend to be more tolerant than in some other states. But not many people seem to know about Ron Paul yet....

I have also seen only Ron Paul and Obama bumper stickers...

[Bradley in DC]

I think that the Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party lobbied the legislature to change the cross over. I don't think Democrats are allowed to vote this cycle in the Republican primary. I think that he changed that to hurt Dr. Paul. The Chairman is Saul Anuzis who said Dr. Paul should not be allowed in the debates because of his viewpoint on the war.

Joe, some states (Ohio, my homestate) allow "modified closed" primaries where independents can vote in partisan primaries. Actually, Ohio's is "modified open" where independents, and under some circumstances Democrats, can vote in Republican primaries. Do you know if independents can vote in Michigan for Dr. Paul?

[bygone]

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c28/chantalemo/2af480fe50128bd2ec33bde5de69cacd.gif

[klamath]

NH is real important because it is the first primary I think still. I know so many people that aren't considering RP because he can't win. How many times have we heard "Barely showing in the polls" and all the other news stories about how RP can't win? They have been so adamant and harped so hard and long about this that a win in NH will have far greater impact than it normally does. Not only will there be stories about him being the front runner but stories about how the polls and pundants were wrong. The voters that we have been talking to that say RP can't win will be so mistrustful of the polls and pundants that it will give RP an even bigger boost for even if the polls in the following states show him losing no one will now trust them and the talk will be about how somthing totally unusual in elections is going on.

However a loss in NH will reinforce everything they have said and it will be all over. If he can't win in NH there is no way he will have the money and support in the following states to pull off an upset.

[Matt Collins]

NH is real important "Moreover, the winner in New Hampshire has not always gone to win his party's nomination, as demonstrated by Republicans John McCain in 2000 and Pat Buchanan in 1996."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_primary

[klamath]

"Moreover, the winner in New Hampshire has not always gone to win his party's nomination, as demonstrated by Republicans John McCain in 2000 and Pat Buchanan in 1996."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_primary

This is true as the following states tend to back the tried and true candidates that don't rock the boat too much and this is another reason why it is so important that RP win in this state with the most in common with his ideas. Nevada moving up its primary could be a good thing as there is a wild side there too.

[Paul4Prez]

Looks like the Wyoming nominating conventions are on JANUARY 5th.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070927/ap_on_el_pr/wyoming_republicans_2;_ylt=AjBP56lzONLkDujMc9DFrLz kbeRF

How are we doing there?

Anyone spreading the word?

A Ron Paul victory in the very first contest would sure get the ball rolling.....