Why are we so worried about Trey's ad?

[paulaholic]

Really, this attack ad is no worse than any other attack ad I have seen. From the panicked tone of Ron Paul's email, I was afraid it implicated Rand in a scandal or called his integrity into question. But it doesn't worry me, Rand will be fine.

[TruthisTreason]

There is a third party funneling unlimited "soft money" against Rand!

That pisses some of us off!

[Fozz]

You need to understand what swiftboating is all about. This ad attacks Rand, without Trey being responsible for it. Not only was it very well done, but hundreds of thousands of dollars are being spent on it to show up on air, and people WILL see it, and many WILL believe it.

This ad, along with McConnell's and Hal's endorsements, will give Trey a huge boost, and then make it easier for him to cheat the election if he comes close to Rand.

[Jeremy]

They have virtually unlimited funds.

[obijuan]

Really, this attack ad is no worse than any other attack ad I have seen. From the panicked tone of Ron Paul's email, I was afraid it implicated Rand in a scandal or called his integrity into question. But it doesn't worry me, Rand will be fine.

It's the size of the buy...

I have no source for this, but I recall overhearing that when Trey basically "went dark" for a week, Rand had $200k in airtime that week. (This was during the spring break bus trip.) So if this group drops a million dollars (like Ron Paul's email says they did last time they got involved), they'll run five weeks' worth of ads over two weeks. That's in addition to the Grayson campaign's ads. That is scary stuff.

[SilentBull]

How sad is it that this is how elections are won? By deceiving morons that have no business voting anyway, if they can't research the candidates themselves. The voters are worthless, mindless morons. That is my conclusion.

[Kotin]

Research these people.. If you knew who they were you wouldn't be asking this.

[pacelli]

Really, this attack ad is no worse than any other attack ad I have seen. From the panicked tone of Ron Paul's email, I was afraid it implicated Rand in a scandal or called his integrity into question. But it doesn't worry me, Rand will be fine.

The reason some people are worried about Trey's ad is because one of Ron Paul's ghostwriters sent out an email in Ron's name that was completely out of sort with Ron's vocabulary patterns. Panicked email from Ron's ghostwriter = panicked donors.

An excellent motivational strategy.

[runningdiz]

The reason some people are worried about Trey's ad is because one of Ron Paul's ghostwriters sent out an email in Ron's name that was completely out of sort with Ron's vocabulary patterns. Panicked email from Ron's ghostwriter = panicked donors.

An excellent motivational strategy.


LOL. People were worried last night when the ad surfaced but an email from Ron always lights a fire under donors!

[Fozz]

The reason some people are worried about Trey's ad is because one of Ron Paul's ghostwriters sent out an email in Ron's name that was completely out of sort with Ron's vocabulary patterns. Panicked email from Ron's ghostwriter = panicked donors.

An excellent motivational strategy.
No, it is because these ads will be funded by possibly millions of dollars, on top of what Treyson is spending, and it could decimate Paul's 15% lead in the polls.

This is a very serious issue. Undecided voters are the key audience and they will see these ads.

[Fozz]

LOL. People were worried last night when the ad surfaced but an email from Ron always lights a fire under donors!

Sure, but 28K versus hundreds of thousands is no contest.

[runningdiz]

No, it is because these ads will be funded by possibly millions of dollars, on top of what Treyson is spending, and it could decimate Paul's 15% lead in the polls.

This is a very serious issue. Undecided voters are the key audience and they will see these ads.

yup. the question that should have been asked here is why wouldn't a Rand Paul supporter be worried about these ads?

[Matt Collins]

two reasons:


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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt



.

[Matt Collins]

How sad is it that this is how elections are won? By deceiving morons that have no business voting anyway, if they can't research the candidates themselves. The voters are worthless, mindless morons. That is my conclusion.
Why do you think the government has run amok for all these decades :rolleyes:

[anaconda]

Really, this attack ad is no worse than any other attack ad I have seen. From the panicked tone of Ron Paul's email, I was afraid it implicated Rand in a scandal or called his integrity into question. But it doesn't worry me, Rand will be fine.


Agreed. That ad was really weak. And, what was with the message at the end to "call Rand Paul" with a phone number listed??? Rather than saying what a wonderful guy Trey Grayson is??:confused:

[runningdiz]

Agreed. That ad was really weak. And, what was with the message at the end to "call Rand Paul" with a phone number listed??? Rather than saying what a wonderful guy Trey Grayson is??:confused:

Legally they cant show support for Grayson so that is why he is not mentioned.

[Lord Xar]

Really, this attack ad is no worse than any other attack ad I have seen. From the panicked tone of Ron Paul's email, I was afraid it implicated Rand in a scandal or called his integrity into question. But it doesn't worry me, Rand will be fine.

You are looking at this ad, and its impact from a position of a knowledgeable voter who knows Rands positions and what Trey is up to.

Now, throw that all out - and look at it from the following:

1. A voter who gets most of their info from the T.V/newspapers
2. A voter who relies on his pals to direct him, and where are his pals getting the info: see #1.
3. Sublimal messaging.
a. You are aware of what the message is trying to do, so you can block against it.
b. If you are not aware of the motive behind the message, then the message has value - be it negative.

The problem is, if you are "on the fence" or just a lazy voter - days and days and days of "coo coo, coo coo.. will weigh on you".

Now, I agree that the ad is baseless. And I also concede that I am not a zombie voter so I do not truly know what the impact of the commercial will be. Perhaps, kentuckians are wise to Trey's games and this is just static in the background. Perhaps kentuckians can chime in.

[devil21]

This shows why the recent SCOTUS decision to allow corporations unlimited participation in elections is a terrible development for fair elections. Just wait until it's GE and JPM running ads against non-status quo candidates.

Btw the ad doesn't scare me much. Grayson's been running this kind of nonsense the whole time. The ad buy itself is what's concerning. I don't think it will matter though.

[John Taylor]

This shows why the recent SCOTUS decision to allow corporations unlimited participation in elections is a terrible development for fair elections. Just wait until it's GE and JPM running ads against non-status quo candidates.

Btw the ad doesn't scare me much. Grayson's been running this kind of nonsense the whole time. The ad buy itself is what's concerning. I don't think it will matter though.

-1776.

Corporations are nothing but voluntary associations joined together for a mutually beneficial business end, nothing more. Their individual constitent members are people who have the right to free speech individually, as well as in a group.

[specsaregood]

Just wait until it's GE and JPM running ads against non-status quo candidates.

How do we know it isn't? :)
This is a bunch of Karl Rove's friends isn't it.....

[sailingaway]

Agreed. That ad was really weak. And, what was with the message at the end to "call Rand Paul" with a phone number listed??? Rather than saying what a wonderful guy Trey Grayson is??:confused:

I really doubt Ron Paul himself actually writes these emails, it isn't his tone, at all. But I think the concern is what using this particular entity for ads means in terms of pulling out all stops to kneecap Rand.

[devil21]

:rolleyes:
-1776.

Corporations are nothing but voluntary associations joined together for a mutually beneficial business end, nothing more. Their individual constitent members are people who have the right to free speech individually, as well as in a group.

True to form today, eh John? I would agree with you if it was the individual employees and officers of the corporation contributing their own money to buy the ads. We know that's not how it works. But hey keep up the good fight for more corporate control of our elections. It's working great so far!

(Add your donation info to the Pony Up thread today and Ill take you out of my sig)

[cmasslibertarian]

This shows why the recent SCOTUS decision to allow corporations unlimited participation in elections is a terrible development for fair elections. Just wait until it's GE and JPM running ads against non-status quo candidates.

Btw the ad doesn't scare me much. Grayson's been running this kind of nonsense the whole time. The ad buy itself is what's concerning. I don't think it will matter though.

They would have been able to do this before the recent decision. My understanding was that they wouldn't have to do the whole "call Rand Paul and tell him to stop hating America" thing. I thought they could explicitly advocate the election or defeat of candidates now.

[erowe1]

I would agree with you if it was the individual employees and officers owners of the corporation contributing their own money to buy the ads

There. Fixed it for you.

If I want to engage in some enterprise that involves my pooling resources with other people and contractually delegating decisions about how to use those resources to some board of other people, that's my right.

[erowe1]

This shows why the recent SCOTUS decision to allow corporations unlimited participation in elections is a terrible development for fair elections.

No it doesn't show that at all. Swiftboating started happening before that decision. If anything, it's a result of the creation of 527 organizations, which IIRC is part of McCain-Feingold itself.

[John Taylor]

:rolleyes:

True to form today, eh John? I would agree with you if it was the individual employees and officers of the corporation contributing their own money to buy the ads. We know that's not how it works. But hey keep up the good fight for more corporate control of our elections. It's working great so far!

(Add your donation info to the Pony Up thread today and Ill take you out of my sig)

Why should the individual employees and officers money be spent, it is the SHAREHOLDER'S MONEY which is at stake, not the management.

As for the donations, I don't need your approval or encouragement to support a constitutionalist who understands government's oppression and manipulation of business and enterprise everywhere, but thanks.

[devil21]

As for the donations, I don't need your approval or encouragement to support a constitutionalist who understands government's oppression and manipulation of business and enterprise everywhere, but thanks.

Duly noted and your response is not unexpected but I am a man of my word and I saw your post in the Pony Up thread.

[sailingaway]

:rolleyes:

True to form today, eh John? I would agree with you if it was the individual employees and officers of the corporation contributing their own money to buy the ads. We know that's not how it works. But hey keep up the good fight for more corporate control of our elections. It's working great so far!

(Add your donation info to the Pony Up thread today and Ill take you out of my sig)

The issue isn't freedom of speech, the issue is corporations being seen as 'persons' other than to preserve their shareholder property rights, at all. People don't delegate their free speech rights to corporations except in VERY unusual circumstances where the corporation is created expressly for that purpose. the corporate personhood idea creates a ton of problems, and this is one.