PDA

View Full Version : 5 Ideas on how Ron Paul can win in 2012 [Long post]




freshjiva
03-25-2011, 11:09 AM
I know I will draw some heat from this board on my thoughts, but I will share them to get a discussion going.

1) In my opinion, if Ron Paul centers his (potential) 2012 bid for the GOP nomination on things that negatively affect entitlements, he will lose. Millions of people are simply too dependent on the system and will not vote for a candidate who wants austerity in entitlements.

SOLUTION: Focus on the transition and not the end game. Ideas in this area include initiatives to introduce market forces into healthcare and education. Stress the need for FDA reform, and sending Education back to the States. Stress a plan to transition Social Security to make it solvent and sustainable going forward. Stress the fact that he does NOT plan on throwing the elderly and the poor out on the streets, but to provide a clear path towards getting the system solvent and by enabling the youth of America to be more self-reliant so that they never become dependent on the system.

Give specifics. The clearer the plan he presents, the more the Electorate will support you.

AVOID: "Conspiratorial" theories like the destruction of civil liberties by a sinister State. Yes, we all within the Liberty movement understand that this is the truth and not a conspiracy, but we need to sell this message to the public at large, not just to those of us who already are aware of it.

2) Foreign policy. Folks in the Liberty movement are often characterized as being "anti-American" or genuinely critical of America as a nation. This only ostracizes us from the GOP base. To us, its not the case at all, because we all admire the Constitution and the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin, but we need to understand why we don't appeal to the GOP Electorate, and adjust accordingly.

The Tea Party is indeed marginally different from the hardcore Neoconservatives in foreign policy. They're much less hawkish, and I think most of the GOP Electorate does not wish to engage in new wars and would like to see our roles in the Middle East wind down.

Run wild with this. Stress his consistency in his position to end the wars and bring our troops home, but at the same time, acknowledge that there is a dangerous threat of fundamentalism that is fundamentally anti-liberty. Nothing wrong with saying that, because its the truth. Osama bin Laden isn't exactly a bastion of freedom, and neither was Saddam Hussein and Qaddafi, but Ron Paul can actually twist the tone of the discussion here. Instead of criticizing American foreign policy, turn the tables and say, "We have fought hard to preserve and promote freedom and democracy, and look at the result? The world spews nothing but hatred for America, and has the audacity to label *us* as the oppressor. People in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya have shown no appreciation for our efforts, and we've lost thousands of our servicemen in battle, with no end in sight. We cannot uproot ignorance, no matter how great our military might. It's time we brought our troops home."

Completely different tone, yes, but the end result is the same: ending the wars and bringing our troops home.

Also, focus on supporting Israel. Yes, we hate the Israel worship, but let's face it, we must if we want to win. Instead of presenting our ideas of nonintervention in a negative way with respect to Israel, Ron needs to come out in full force and say things like "Israel and the United States share a long standing friendship, and I intend on doing nothing but honoring this relationship. I fully support Israel's decisions to defend herself, and as President, will never hinder their efforts to secure their nation." Talking like this appeals to the GOP base and at the same time does not violate our principle of nonintervention.

Attack foreign aid by using the same description he used at his CPAC speech: "Foreign aid is taking money from poor people of rich countries and giving it to rich people of poor countries." Attack the very basis of foreign aid by saying, "If we as conservatives do not believe in welfare and wealth redistribution, foreign aid should also be off our Republican platform as it once was. Foreign aid is nothing more than welfare for puppet dictators and corrupt governments."

Focus how ending the wars, bringing our troops home, and ending foreign aid would save $500 billion a year in federal spending, which would alone balance our budget over 4 years even if we kept all other entitlements untouched. This will resonate with the Electorate.

3) Attack Obamacare. This should be easy, but we know Ron Paul is not a politician, so he's not one to play political hardball and oppose or endorse something just because its politically advantageous, but stress the unconstitutionality of the mandate. Stress how he has been consistent in identifying bills that appear to be "regulatory" but in fact prop up the corporations.

Attack, attack, attack Obamacare. In fact, be bold with it and say it would be the first thing on his agenda as President: to repeal Obamacare. Focus on specifics on what he'd do in place of Obamacare. Focus on how he'd introduce market forces into medicine and encourage competition. Attack the FDA. This is popular among the GOP base.

4) Federal Reserve transparency. Although ending the Fed is our ideal, focus the campaign on Federal Reserve transparency. Continue what you have been doing here, alerting the People about the Fed's central role in our out of control inflation. It is popular to criticize spending, so here's your chance to do it: stress how the Fed can and has been monetizing our federal debt from this fiscally irresponsible Obama Administration. Continue to educate the people about the Fed's central role in debasing our currency, and how its the enemy of the middle class by debasing the purchasing power of savings.

Stress the importance of gold/silver as historical mediums of exchange that do not lose value. Stress competition in currency as an immediate solution, not ending the Fed entirely.

5) Spend all remaining energies on Pro-Growth Initiatives.

Yes, while it seems fiscal austerity is the hot topic, I think that when push comes to shove, the American Electorate is not willing to part ways with their entitlements. It is political suicide to advocate cutting social security, Medicare/Medicaid, and welfare programs. As much as the true libertarian would do away with all these, do not advocate abolition.

Instead, focus on how to create jobs and grow the private sector with the following 3 things:

a) Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts! No one (or very few) are talking about tax cuts right now. All the GOP talking heads are talking about austerity, and they don't even name specifics of what they want to cut. Put aside spending cuts, and become synonomous with tax cuts! Nothing is more pro-growth than tax cuts. Also, complete abolition of income taxes is not a palatable solution, either. Talk about cutting taxes (but not eliminating) ACROSS the board: personal, corporate, and capital gains taxes.

b) Simplify the tax code. Present specifics on what honest, immediate simplifications can be made to the United States Tax Code. Perhaps be bold here and introduce a Flat/Fair Tax substitute to income taxes, and campaign on allowing the People to decide which they'd prefer.

b) Repeal excess regulations. Focus on repealing certain parts of Sarbanes-Oxley, Dodd-Frank, Obamacare, EPA, and FDA. Focus on reducing prohibitive and/or coercive regulations that make economic growth virtually impossible.




So there we have it. Foreign policy, Federal Reserve, Obamacare, and Pro-growth policies are the winning combination of campaign themes. I know, we are all dedicated to the Constitution and want to ideally do away with ALL welfare, warfare, taxation, fiat currency, and State surveillance, and replace them with a true free market, no taxes, and sound money, but we have to understand one thing: people cannot stomach such a dramatic change. That is why my solution to win is to focus on the transition, and not the endgame. This is how Rand Paul won in Kentucky, and is how Ron Paul can sweep the GOP nomination if he does the same.

nayjevin
03-25-2011, 01:10 PM
Good post. Reminds me of this:

My Plan For A Freedom President by Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul647.html


Since my 2008 campaign for the presidency I have often been asked, “How would a constitutionalist president go about dismantling the welfare-warfare state and restoring a constitutional republic?” This is a very important question, because without a clear road map and set of priorities, such a president runs the risk of having his pro-freedom agenda stymied by the various vested interests that benefit from big government.

Of course, just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency. While our goal is to reduce the size of the state as quickly as possible, we should always make sure our immediate proposals minimize social disruption and human suffering. Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare. Instead, we would want to give individuals who have come to rely on the state time to prepare for the day when responsibility for providing aide is returned to those organizations best able to administer compassionate and effective help — churches and private charities.

Now, this need for a transition period does not apply to all types of welfare. For example, I would have no problem defunding corporate welfare programs, such as the Export-Import Bank or the TARP bank bailouts, right away. I find it difficult to muster much sympathy for the CEO's of Lockheed Martin and Goldman Sachs.

No matter what the president wants to do, most major changes in government programs would require legislation to be passed by Congress. Obviously, the election of a constitutionalist president would signal that our ideas had been accepted by a majority of the American public and would probably lead to the election of several pro-freedom congressmen and senators. Furthermore, some senators and representatives would become “born again” constitutionalists out of a sense of self-preservation. Yet there would still be a fair number of politicians who would try to obstruct our freedom agenda. Thus, even if a president wanted to eliminate every unconstitutional program in one fell swoop, he would be very unlikely to obtain the necessary support in Congress.

Yet a pro-freedom president and his legislative allies could make tremendous progress simply by changing the terms of the negotiations that go on in Washington regarding the size and scope of government. Today, negotiations over legislation tend to occur between those who want a 100 percent increase in federal spending and those who want a 50 percent increase. Their compromise is a 75 percent increase. With a president serious about following the Constitution, backed by a substantial block of sympathetic representatives in Congress, negotiations on outlays would be between those who want to keep funding the government programs and those who want to eliminate them outright — thus a compromise would be a 50 percent decrease in spending!

and this:

Ron Paul Transition Plan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3iK6Hy6xMA

Galileo Galilei
03-25-2011, 01:39 PM
Here's my list of reason why Ron will do better this time than last time, in order of importance:

1) the rise of facebook (and twitter)

2) Ron Paul now has a PAC, actually two of them

3) YAL

4) chartered jet allows for more campaign stops

5) Ron has a book out and a new one in April

6) people 14-17 last time can vote this time

7) Ron has $5 to $8 million left over from last campaign

8) Ron appears to be tweaking his rhetoric to make it sound "safer" to mainstream voters

9) there are tons more anti-war republicans compared to last time

10) Rand can help run a competent campaign, last time the campaign leaders were not ready for the sudden success

11) this time Ron has a domestic agenda for TV debates, the audit of the Fed

12) Ron now has a more authoritative position in the government, sub-committee chair rather than minority party loner

nayjevin
04-03-2011, 05:40 AM
2012 strategy ideas bump

goopc
04-03-2011, 06:57 AM
#1: Convince the Tea Party to oppose the warfare state. If the Tea Party can end their neo-con streak, then Ron Paul will win the Republican primary hands down. Until Tea Party Republicans stop thinking that he's a kook for not wanting to bomb every Muslim country, they will keep supporting Allen West and other shills, making a primary win for Paul very difficult.

Knightskye
04-03-2011, 11:14 AM
http://whipitoutcomedy.com/files/2009/09/unbranded-just-for-men-shampoo-in-hair-colour-natural-medium-brown.jpg

thehighwaymanq
04-03-2011, 11:24 AM
Here's my list of reason why Ron will do better this time than last time, in order of importance:

1) the rise of facebook (and twitter)

We had a thread a few months back about each State's Facebook group- does anybody know where that is? We need to get all those groups going and start inviting people. Also, everyone of us should have a twitter. It takes two minutes- go sign up!


2) Ron Paul now has a PAC, actually two of them I can't wait for the grassroots brainstorming of our Money-Bombs, I think we can do 10 mil in a day this go around.


3) YAL THIS is HUGE!!!!! YAL and SFL will be the make or break part of the campaign this year, we need to support all our local youth organizations. Also, get in contact with your meet up groups soon! We need to start mobilizing those again.


4) chartered jet allows for more campaign stops Love this idea! We need him all over the place.


5) Ron has a book out and a new one in April We need to push this book to the top of all the book lists, pre-order it now!


6) people 14-17 last time can vote this time This is why im so excited. I can finally vote! From what I see in my high school, Liberty is getting more popular everyday. Young people LOVE this message. This, just like YAL and SFL, is the kicker!


7) Ron has $5 to $8 million left over from last campaign
3 million first quarter :)


8) Ron appears to be tweaking his rhetoric to make it sound "safer" to mainstream voters We need to have a safer, more rational campaign focused at hitting the dumbed down masses, while not sacrificing the message.


9) there are tons more anti-war republicans compared to last time Non-intervention, not isolationism, is the name of the game!


10) Rand can help run a competent campaign, last time the campaign leaders were not ready for the sudden success Rand, Tom Woods, Judge Nap, Amash, and all the other big guns of the movement need to be ready for a liberty explosion!


11) this time Ron has a domestic agenda for TV debates, the audit of the Fed May 5, first debate!


12) Ron now has a more authoritative position in the government, sub-committee chair rather than minority party loner The second part of the Revolution is coming! He has much better name recognition as well.

Overall, great list though! Thanks you!

Lothario
04-03-2011, 12:26 PM
Great thread!

thehighwaymanq
04-03-2011, 01:51 PM
BUMP for ideas!

TNforPaul45
04-03-2011, 02:04 PM
Fresh, that is a very thought provoking post. I would add to your list, only, that Ron should find a way to be disgruntled but in a positive, happy way. The mass of the american voting populace is drawn like metal to a magnet, to a candidate who is positive, happy, uplifting, and makes them feel good. Now, the Liberty movement shy's away from such behavior on the political scene, because we have seen it applied by politicians in the past who had no intentions of carrying through with the activities they told you about with a smile on their face. We are intellectually disgusted with politicians who smile and make you feel good but who have no intention of doing what is good for you.

Ron Paul's biggest hampering factor is that he comes across as a grumpy old man to most voters. He doesn't make them feel good. That's why Reagan was said to be a "great communicator" because he smiled, lightened the air, and people opened up and listened, instead of bristling to negativity. This is what worked for Clinton as well.

The BIG difference here, is that we would be coming at this formula from the opposite direction. We KNOW that Paul will carry through with what he says he will do. We KNOW that he has the substance to back up the character. But now we just need to add that layer of emotional voting desires on the part of Joe Q Voter, make them feel good about the direction that Ron will take us in, and we can have a MASS migration to the Liberty Platform.

Of course, this is not all of the formula that turned voters off to Ron the last time (I'm talking about GOP voters) But this is a powerful part of it. Progressives and Neo-Cons are emotional voters. They vote for what makes them feel good. Their emotions are loosely based on facts and value judgements, but these are heavily extracted with emotions. Tapping into those emotions is key.

As I've said before, We in the Liberty movement let the Facts --> Emotions, in other words, we get upset at the economic, domestic, and foreign damage the other two parties have done. The average voter, though, allows emotions first, then extrapolates value judgements and "reasoning" from that. Lets turn the Arrow around, shall we?

Michigan11
04-03-2011, 02:32 PM
In my opinion, Ron if he is running, will need to run this campaign like the establishment runs theirs. We need to follow suit, and get into our local republican meetings, and organize as well on the outside to bring in the discouraged voters. We need to do two parts here, and Ron needs to do his.

Along with this presidential race, we also need to focus it on the bigger picture, which is the US house and senate seats, as well as the state legislative.

This is how we will grow this movement much bigger during the non-presidential elections, and the way to victory.

Dave Aiello
04-03-2011, 04:22 PM
http://whipitoutcomedy.com/files/2009/09/unbranded-just-for-men-shampoo-in-hair-colour-natural-medium-brown.jpg

Hilarious! This + a face lift. He could get a new, more youthful look - but unfortunately, his real age is public knowledge, as his birth certificate does exist.