What I Want From Ron Paul In 2012: SPECIFICS

[Sola_Fide]

I don't want Ron to speak in generalities like he did in 2008. Generalities were fine in 2008 because there had to be a grand philosophical case against the idea of imperialism. I get that. 2012 is different.

What I want from Ron are SPECIFIC plans that detail how we are to get to smaller government.

-Don't just say "we need to come home", explain the exact number of bases we need to close in the exact number of countries and the exact amount of money that can save, and your exact plan to use the funds that we save in domestic affairs or a return to taxpayers. Put a NUMBER on the amount of troops you want to take out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the exact amount of money that will save.

-Don't just say "End the Fed", lay out an EXACT plan that would allow competing currencies and explain how that will save our purchasing power in the real world.

-"Don't just say "lower taxes", come out with a specific plan with a specific rate. Be it flat tax, fair tax, whatever. Be specific so people can talk about it.

-Don't just say "lower spending", be specific with what agencies and departments we should cut first.



Part of Rand's effectiveness in Kentucky was how exact and specific he was:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVorVi8gCJM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Rand was specific, exact...he went point by point. This was extremely effective. Sometimes even putting a specific plan into the public conversation is half the battle. This is what Ron Paul 2012 needs in my opinion.

[teacherone]

+ rep

this is important-- to be taken seriously you have to let stats roll off you tongue.

[eduardo89]

Thats a really good point and something I've thought of too. If he cant give specifics his ideas seem to abstract and unrealistic. It's an argument I've had with a lot of people I talk to about Ron. They like what they hear, but they just see it as rhetoric which has no way of being implemented and that makes Ron see like an unviable candidate. I wish he'd come out with a written platform with not just his ideas, but with plans, like Rand did with his budget cuts.

[Sola_Fide]

Yeah! It would be great to see Ron putting out REAL WORLD, SPECIFIC policy initiatives a month or two after he announces.

Put out a positive plan. Tell us what you want to do in a specific plan that we can debate.

Get the numbers out there in the realm of public conversation, like Rand is doing.

[eduardo89]

Yeah! It would be great to see Ron putting out REAL WORLD, SPECIFIC policy initiatives a month or two after he announces.

Get the numbers out there in the realm of public conversation, like Rand is doing.

Yeah a sort of "This is what I'd cut, this is how much, this is how"

[prmd142]

+1776 for this thread... someone needs to send a link to this thread to Ron Paul!

viva la liberty!

[TheTyke]

I very much agree! Give us a plan - the first steps anyhow.

Ron may have been trying this out with his "opt out of government" plan he floated at CPAC, but to be honest it still seemed a bit vague and took some figuring out. Hopefully they are trying things and will refine them in the final campaign?

This touches on a wider point even, that I'd been wondering. How do we find a simple, saleable way to broach the subject of competing currencies? When reviewers say he wants a gold standard, he doesn't correct them... just says the gold standard is better, leading many to believe that's what he's after. Even as one who had seriously followed Ron, it took me a while to determine his solution to the Fed. We need an appealing soundbyte, a catchy phrase, and a bill to go with it. (I mean this paragraph mostly for the movement in general - not the presidential campaign necessarily.)

[IDefendThePlatform]

A plan that gives a specific year for the phase out of social security would be awesome. Then older workers can see that they will be 'grandfathered in' and their ss checks won't ever be affected. Others can be told "The average 35 year old will save $70,000 over his career in ss tax. Invested at 5% that will result in a $200,000 nest egg at retirement" or whatever the numbers are.

[LibertyEagle]

Man, do I agree. No more of the "we could do" x or y. Specifics are needed. Concrete plans need to be developed and shown to the American public.

[LibertyEagle]

A plan that gives a specific year for the phase out of social security would be awesome. Then older workers can see that they will be 'grandfathered in' and their ss checks won't ever be affected. Others can be told "The average 35 year old will save $70,000 over his career in ss tax. Invested at 5% that will result in a $200,000 nest egg at retirement" or whatever the numbers are.

Good idea, but I sure think it is a mistake to lead the cuts with Social Security and Medicare. Before these are touched, the wars need to be stopped and foreign aid ended. Not to mention ending funding for the education and health care of the illegal aliens in our country. Then, a bevy of unconstitutional federal agencies, such as the Department of Education, should be disbanded and their functions returned to the states where they belong. Oh, and of course, immediately curtailing the free health care for the Congress and all their pretty little freebies.

If the American people saw all this happening, they would be much more understanding of changes to Social Security and Medicare.

[Eric21ND]

Precisely what I was thinking.

[rnestam]

Specifics on base closers would be "rad"...people always think of troops without body armor in the middle of Iraq when speaking of defense cuts...exact bases and money saved would be deadly...most can't even name 135 countries, never mind defending the fact we have bases there......should be a priority for real.

[pacelli]

If Ron wants to win, he'll change his strategy from the last campaign. If he wants to educate, he'll be dealing with generalities. Ron has asked for a lot of "convincing" dollars over the past few months, so this thread is important. He's going to need to be a convincing candidate or his fundraising will dry up.

[Matthew Zak]

I hope the ron paul people are paying attention.

[specsaregood]

..

[eduardo89]

A proposal as conservative (meaning small) as cutting our troop levels in Germany, Japan and South Korea in half would bring home 57,000 troops!! If we include also bringing just half of the rest of our troops in Europe we bring home close to 72,000 men and women!

I highly doubt if he brought up those numbers anyone would see it as a "crazy" proposal, it just doesn't make sense to maintain that many soldiers in countries that can defend themselves!

[sailingaway]

We definitely have to have 'next steps'. If he doesn't package them, WE have to from his speeches, and put out a flyer like the old 'he has never voted to raise taxes'. Something like: Ron Paul's plan to turn around the economy....and list steps. Then we can flood them everywhere so they are one of the first things people think of with him and they CAN'T say he's impractical with a straight face.

More, we could create a for cable commercial with them and run them on cable. High Tide runs were really not that expensive, he had just virtually suspended his campaign by the time it came out. If half the money spent on the blimp were spent on something like that, we could at least get his views out there in the less expensive cable markets, and then that would be added to the debate.

[kahless]

If Ron cannot do anything else I at least like to see him:

1. In one piece of legislation end not only the mandate, but Obamacare and the entire Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). (except for the CDC).

2. Eliminate the IRS and federal income tax.

If he can do more than that I want him to gut the federal government and elimination of all federal laws and departments not inline with the original Constitution. This means the end of the federal reserve.

Eliminate

- Department of State ($50 billion in savings)
- Department of Education ($47 billion in savings)
- Department of Housing and Urban Development ($48 billion in savings)
- Department of Commerce ($14 billion in savings)
- Department of Labor ($12 billion in savings)
- Department of Treasury, which includes the IRS ($12 billion in savings)
- Department of Health, HHS keep the CDC, eliminate all else. ($8 billion in savings)
- All other miscellaneous agencies ($200 billion in savings)

Reduce

- Department of Defense from $663 billion to $100 billion. DOD used for national defense only. Bases open and closed according to maintaining global national security in the event we are attacked.

Eliminate $2 trillion below in mandatory spending by transitioning all private solutions and privatization except for the disabled. Americans can opt-in or out accordingly with automatic payroll deductions to the private institution of choice.

Transition to be eliminated.

$695 billion – Social Security
$571 billion – Other mandatory programs
$453 billion – Medicare
$290 billion – Medicaid
$164 billion – Interest on National Debt

[eduardo89]

$571 billion – Other mandatory programs


What are these other "mandatory" programs?

[kahless]

What are these other "mandatory" programs?

I copy and pasted that from the 2010 Federal budget but did not pull the details out of their PDF. Regardless, cut it. :)

I am not a big fan of the federal government and do not believe much of it should exist.

[eduardo89]

I copy and pasted that from the 2010 Federal budget but did not pull the details out of their PDF. Regardless, cut it. :)

I am not a big fan of the federal government and do not believe much of it should exist.

I've seen it listed before, but I have no idea what other mandatory spending there is.


Edit: It could be federal worker pensions? Veterans Benefits?

[kahless]

I've seen it listed before, but I have no idea what other mandatory spending there is.


Edit: It could be federal worker pensions? Veterans Benefits?

I think the VA benefits and the disabled would probably be the few programs that would need to stick around. The rest of these programs would be transitioned to be eliminated which would be a very long time while not adding anyone new to them.

Americans could then opt-in or out of private charities with average Joe using automatic payroll deductions. The tax exempt charties would receive contributions from private enterprises and corporations would receive a tax deducation for donations. In fact you would have companies competing and advertising the amount they donated which provides them customer loyalty.

[specsaregood]

./

[kahless]

What do you mean by "the disabled"?

Those with severe physical and mental disabilities. The VA for example we would need since there will still be a military although somewhat of a reduced role. Most of these programs could be transitioned to private charities however the severely disabled I have my doubts that it could fully be successfully transitioned.

[specsaregood]

./

[kahless]

And it couldn't be pushed back to the states? Also, FWIW our current system discourages those that are disabled from gaining any employment, lest they lose their benefits. It is a system that keeps them poor and on the dole.

Good point. I still think in the case of the VA since it comes out of national defense would be something the federal government would still handle. I suppose the rest could be transitioned to the states. Not sure how well that would work with the least populated states considering much of the revenue comes out of the more densely populated states.

I think the goal would be to ensure that people that cannot take care of themselves that would bankrupt the national charities would still be taken care of. If the charities are part of the free markets, tax exempt and the interest on income and investments may succeed, a government safety net perhaps would only be as a last resort.

[eduardo89]

Veteran pensions and health benefits would probably have to stay on the federal government budget since soldiers are directly contracted by it.

Disability can be turned over to the states and private charities.

[freshjiva]

Great thread. I posted on this a while back on what I think would be a winning strategy.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?284864-5-Ideas-on-how-Ron-Paul-can-win-in-2012-Long-post

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.

[TonySutton]

“Soldiers generally win battles; generals get credit for them” ~ Napoleon Bonaparte

It is our job to make it happen!

[Sola_Fide]

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.

Good point Freshjiva....something I didn't even mention in my original post:

What if Ron made himself the go-to guy in 2012 for the point by point specific antithesis of Obamacare.

Think about it. Ron is the doctor himself, giving the specific way out of Obamacare. He wouldn't even have to mention foreign policy that much if he made himself the anti-Obamacare candidate.

[Romulus]

Ron needs to push the "Pay 10% to Opt Out of Everything Plan"

[Sola_Fide]

Ron needs to push the "Pay 10% to Opt Out of Everything Plan"

To me that is still not specific enough!

[eduardo89]

To me that is still not specific enough!

I agree. He needs to detail what will be cut, how much will be cut, and how it will be cut.

[teacherone]

To me that is still not specific enough!

it's also a stupid idea--makes no sense politically nor philosophically.

[Eric21ND]

I don't think the pay 10% and opt out is much of a winning strategy.

[kahless]

SOLUTION: Focus on the transition and not the end game.
..........
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.

This is great strategy. I was going to post a thread about this the other day. People panic if they only hear the end game and not the success of the replacement solution. For example instead of using the terms eliminate and defunding, discuss how the private solution would work, so that it is sold as seemless migration. Things like opt-in, opt-out and automatic payroll deduction. Simple things the average person can understand without panic that a the government solution is being eliminated.

[Romulus]

Yes, if he's lays out a clear Transition plan- people wont get spooked.

What do you all think of buying a half hour primetime infomercial?

Where he can identify problems and then give solutions?

[eduardo89]

Yes, if he's lays out a clear Transition plan- people wont get spooked.

What do you all think of buying a half hour primetime infomercial?

Where he can identify problems and then give solutions?


On all 4 major networks?

How much would that cost...?

[Sentinelrv]

Here is a reply I gave on the issue a couple days ago.


I've met a bunch of people that agreed with Ron about how things should be, but felt that he wasn't presenting practical solutions in how to transition us from the mess we're in now to a better scenario. It's good when Ron stresses in interviews that he doesn't want to throw people out on the streets, that there are better ways of transitioning out of our current economic situation. This is the reason why many people are scared of him or call him crazy. They think he would just end the federal reserve, the IRS, SS foodstamps, etc... overnight, when that's not the case at all.

[AuH20]

Ron needs to go Perot. DETAILS. DETAILS DETAILS.

[LisaNY]

Even without specifics, Ron is saying a helluva lot more than everyone else.

[Romulus]

On all 4 major networks?

How much would that cost...?

Probably just one would do fine.

[eduardo89]

Probably just one would do fine.

Oh I know, but how sweet would it be to buy Ron a half hour on all 4 major networks to do his own State of the Union type address :P

[acptulsa]

Ron needs to go Perot. DETAILS. DETAILS DETAILS.

I most specifically don't want him drawing his own pie charts.

[eduardo89]

I most specifically don't want him drawing his own pie charts.


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

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

I'd like to see the opt-out for Social Security launched.