The New Hampshire Gamble:

[ronpaulyourmom]

There's been a lot of concern about NH moving up its primary. My question for you is, would it help or hurt us?

- If we can manage a 2nd place showing in NH on December 11th or thereabouts, we'd get massive press coverage and legitimacy for over three weeks leading up the Iowa. It'd be the hill we need to turn our snowball into an avalanche.
- If we cannot post a top three finish in mid-December, Ron Paul would get thrashed by the media and it would be a disaster.
- If we post a top 2 finish in January, we don't know what the implications will be on the states that follow, especially if we miss the top 3 in Iowa.

So what do you think, would we be wise to gamble on NH in December, or should we hope for a 2008 schedule and hope that slow and steady will win the race?

[LibertyEagle]

We have no say-so in what they do. What we CAN do is work like hell to get the word out to each and every person who lives in New Hampshire.

[xcalybur]

I think a December NH Primary would help us a lot. I think we have a large support base in NH and not much in Iowa and other states. If we win NH or come in the top 3, it will have a huge push effect on the other states just in time for the primaries. If we don't then our weak support in Iowa and other states could show and could snow ball over the states will would have done well, like NH.

[theseus51]

I would be all for an early December 11 primary.

Say we do well, we have weeks of media coverage. If we do poorly, it won't matter cause if we can't do well in New Hampshire (our best state) we can't really do well anywhere, well, maybe Nevada.

Compare that to a later January primary.

If we do well, we get a couple days of coverage, but I'd rather have weeks. If we do poorly, same as above.

[Adamsa]

I think Thompson, Romney and Giuliani look worse with each day and Ron better, more time is always preferred.

[mavtek]

I think depending on when it was in December it could help us, but we need to triple our efforts prior to that time. I'm hoping for December 18th if they are going to do it. The biggest problem is going to be Iowa, which honestly I see no way in hell us winning that backward state trust me I called hundreds of people up there. (sorry no offense to people from Iowa, but hey) If we can win New Hampshire we can place in Iowa, if we win in New Hampshire and it's on the same day as Iowa we won't place in Iowa.

Win NH, place in Iowa, win in Michigan, Florida, SC, Nevada, California...........

We need to triple our efforts though!

The key still is winning in New Hampshire.

[kylejack]

I'd say it would hurt us, especially if it motivates other states to act. But we'll roll with it.

Not going to happen, though. Early January.

[Taco John]

Here's the Republican Debate Schedule leading into December:

October 21, 2007 Orlando, Florida - 7 PM FOX News
November 6, 2007 Ames, Iowa - MSNBC
November 28, 2007 St Petersburg, Florida - CNN, with YouTube and Google



After that its:
January 5, 2008 Johnson County, Iowa - Iowa Public Television
January 10, 2008 Myrtle Beach, South Carolina FOX News
January 30, 2oo8 Los Angeles, California - CNN

[Taco John]

I think depending on when it was in December it could help us, but we need to triple our efforts prior to that time. I'm hoping for December 18th if they are going to do it. The biggest problem is going to be Iowa, which honestly I see no way in hell us winning that backward state trust me I called hundreds of people up there. (sorry no offense to people from Iowa, but hey) If we can win New Hampshire we can place in Iowa, if we win in New Hampshire and it's on the same day as Iowa we won't place in Iowa.

Win NH, place in Iowa, win in Michigan, Florida, SC, Nevada, California...........

We need to triple our efforts though!

The key still is winning in New Hampshire.




What do they say? I know some Iowans, and they seem to be pretty fixated on getting as many soldiers killed chasing down a dream of honor in Iraq. Is that what you're running into?

[brumans]

WE NEED to WIN New Hampshire

[Adamsa]

WE NEED to WIN New Hampshire

If not 2nd, without either of these it is going to be VERY HARD.

[Taco John]

I think a third place finish would do a lot for us too... Not nearly as much as a first or second, but it would get the gums a-flappin'.

[Tratzman]

I think a December NH Primary would help us a lot. I think we have a large support base in NH and not much in Iowa and other states. If we win NH or come in the top 3, it will have a huge push effect on the other states just in time for the primaries. If we don't then our weak support in Iowa and other states could show and could snow ball over the states will would have done well, like NH.

That's a good point. I think winning New Hampshire may be possible right now even.

[michaelwise]

The national campaign won't have to waste as much time worrying about NH, and I think Ron will do well there. I really would like to see NH go first, like it always has. It will also give us national results and credibility sooner.

[RTsquared]

If I understand correctly, a December primary would kill us.

That means that all of Frudy McRomney's maxed-out donors could donate ANOTHER $2300 to the campaign for the primaries.

I'll happily be incorrect, but...

[theseus51]

If I understand correctly, a December primary would kill us.

That means that all of Frudy McRomney's maxed-out donors could donate ANOTHER $2300 to the campaign for the primaries.

I'll happily be incorrect, but...

The donation max is per election cycle, not per year.

[jd603]

According to ronpaulgraphs.com NH has the highest RP donations per capita than any other state in all of central and eastern United States.

MY CAMPAIGNING UP HERE IS WORKING! HEHE :o

[RTsquared]

The donation max is per election cycle, not per year.

Then it's not the complete disaster it appeared to be...

I still think January is better for the Paul campaign, but it's not quite as certain now.

[jd603]

Oh and earlier primary hurts us, no doubt, less time to introduce confused democrats and brainwashed republicans about the issues and about Ron.

I wonder WHY they are doing it in the first place, time for a conspiracy theory, to make money more a factor to help establishment candidates and hurt Ron's chances?

Keep in mind it wasn't NH that started moving things back, we only did it so we could keep first in the nation status, but its stupid anyone moved things back at all IMO.

[theseus51]

Oh and earlier primary hurts us, no doubt, less time to introduce confused democrats and brainwashed republicans about the issues and about Ron.

I wonder WHY they are doing it in the first place, time for a conspiracy theory, to make money more a factor to help establishment candidates and hurt Ron's chances?

Keep in mind it wasn't NH that started moving things back, we only did it so we could keep first in the nation status, but its stupid anyone moved things back at all IMO.

Well, I think it helps to have an earlier primary, as posted earlier.

I really, really doubt it has anything to do with Ron Paul. NH is trying to keep their "first in the nation" primary relevant. I mean it would reduce the importance of their primary to have it in early January, but 3 other states having their primary a week or so later.

They want to have it in early December, to really shape the race. To let everyone analyze their state's results for weeks. That way they can stay relevant, and important. If you have your primary 2 days before Iowa and like a week before Wyoming and Michigan and whoever, NH won't get to affect the race as much.

[jd603]

I don't think it helps. Ron Paul's campaign and support grows week to week , chopping off some additional weeks is bad news IMO. However I will say that it is not all that damaging, I just can't go so far as to call it a positive thing, although RP is big in NH , I know that from experience.

I read an article saying that central NH and northward is almost all Ron Paul in the GOP polling. It's the Southern part of the state that really starts to change, luckily I live in Southern, NH and can spread the word. Although I have spread it up North too.

Don't take this as permission to slack but i think we're on pace to win the primary in NH.




Well, I think it helps to have an earlier primary, as posted earlier.

I really, really doubt it has anything to do with Ron Paul. NH is trying to keep their "first in the nation" primary relevant. I mean it would reduce the importance of their primary to have it in early January, but 3 other states having their primary a week or so later.

They want to have it in early December, to really shape the race. To let everyone analyze their state's results for weeks. That way they can stay relevant, and important. If you have your primary 2 days before Iowa and like a week before Wyoming and Michigan and whoever, NH won't get to affect the race as much.

[specsaregood]

I'm an optimistic person, but I don't see winning NH as doing all that much for us.
It didn't help Buchanan and it didn't help McCain.

The media will just spin it as a "libertarian minded state", that doesn't really represent the U.S.

Every candidate is campaigning for NH and IA. That is a lot of competition. I think our strength is that we have been running a national level campaign via the meetup groups.

I'd rather see more work in NV, SC, MI, FL, etc. But I am just a keyboard pundit, feel free to dismiss my thoughts.

[jd603]

Winning NH is big IMO, every media outlet will report it, everyone, and they can spin it all they want, people are going to look into RP more if they haven't already.

You're also right though, it's not the end of the world if he doesn't win, I just think NH shouldn't be written-off although I live here so maybe I am biased. :)



I'm an optimistic person, but I don't see winning NH as doing all that much for us.
It didn't help Buchanan and it didn't help McCain.

The media will just spin it as a "libertarian minded state", that doesn't really represent the U.S.

Every candidate is campaigning for NH and IA. That is a lot of competition. I think our strength is that we have been running a national level campaign via the meetup groups.

I'd rather see more work in NV, SC, MI, FL, etc. But I am just a keyboard pundit, feel free to dismiss my thoughts.

[davidkachel]

From what I understand, it is difficult to see any billboards, street signs, or building names in New Hampshire for all the Ron Paul signs plastered everywhere. This wasn't done by elves! (At least I don't think so.) RP has a strong shot in NH and I wouldn't give too much credence to the polls. I think Giuliani, Rhomney and that actor guy are going to have to change their underwear the morning after the NH primary.
A huge help will be RP's appearance on Jay Leno at the end of this month. If we can get one or two more significant events like this prior to the primary I believe we can expect to do VERY well in NH.

Personally I am kinda hoping he doesn't win New Hampshire! 'Cause then I'd have to go to NH and kiss every Ron Paul supporter there. That would take a really long time and some of those guys are really UGLY!

[jgmaynard]

I also see the campaign growing every day here. I think people need to see the campaign running serious-time ads to prove they can win and we need Ron to hit lots and lots of small places around NH, meeting people and shaking hands. That's the way elections are won here.
Typical example - I was at my small-town store the other day and politics (as usual) was the discssion in the store. We got onto the Presidential race, and I brought up Ron. Everyone at the store wanted to know "Yeah, you say you support him, but have you MET him yet?" Really, this is grassroots politics here.

[jd603]

Hello sir. I am near Nashua, let me know if you want some free Ron Paul yard signs, I think I am a little over-stocked. I can spare 10 to 15 double-sided signs.



I also see the campaign growing every day here. I think people need to see the campaign running serious-time ads to prove they can win and we need Ron to hit lots and lots of small places around NH, meeting people and shaking hands. That's the way elections are won here.
Typical example - I was at my small-town store the other day and politics (as usual) was the discssion in the store. We got onto the Presidential race, and I brought up Ron. Everyone at the store wanted to know "Yeah, you say you support him, but have you MET him yet?" Really, this is grassroots politics here.

[jgmaynard]

Hello sir. I am near Nashua, let me know if you want some free Ron Paul yard signs

Sir?!?!?!? Who the heck is here???? LOL.

Actually, I'm quite close to you - Temple. But, I already have one of those big huge signs on my yard. ;)

JM

[klamath]

We have to win not place, not anything else in NH! The media will try and spin it that it is a libertarian state but all eyes and media will be on RP to see if he can carry it through to Iowa and SC. Not winning NH, we are done! Don't anybody get complacent about NH! Iowa is a cacus for the party faithful and we all know what the party faithful are about. Nevada is our next likely state.

[paulitics]

I also see the campaign growing every day here. I think people need to see the campaign running serious-time ads to prove they can win and we need Ron to hit lots and lots of small places around NH, meeting people and shaking hands. That's the way elections are won here.
Typical example - I was at my small-town store the other day and politics (as usual) was the discssion in the store. We got onto the Presidential race, and I brought up Ron. Everyone at the store wanted to know "Yeah, you say you support him, but have you MET him yet?" Really, this is grassroots politics here.

yep. You really have to work locally in NH and Iowa and work it like its a completely seperate election, almost like if you were running for governor of the state.

If you win or smash expectations, you pass go. If you don't, you better hope you have the establishment behind you. ANd we all know how much the establishment loves RP.