PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul Crossing the Chasm




Taco John
10-27-2007, 12:05 AM
I know that this should probably be posted in another forum. But I'm posting it in the grassroots forum because I believe everybody working at the grassroots level needs to understand this material and where we are in the progression that will lead us to election day victory.

I encourage you to share this article with your meet-up group leaders, so that they understand the differences in the audiences that we are trying to reach.




Ron Paul Crossing the Chasm
by Isaac Lopez

Getting the liberty message across the polling gap.

In the 90’s Geoffrey Moore wrote (and later revised) a book that immediately became the de-facto desk-side handbook for every marketer in the technology arena. The book, titled Crossing the Chasm, is a road map for marketers trying to navigate their way through the perilous waters of the silicon age with products that are not widely known, technology that is not widely accepted, and competing against ubiquitous incumbent technologies that are both safe and predictable (despite their shortcomings).

In Chasm, Moore unveils a paradigm in technology marketing, called the "chasm model," which illustrates the gap that a new technology must cross before gaining widespread acceptance in the market. This is particularly true with so-called "disruptive" technologies that promise innovation while threatening the established way of operation.

In the political sense, Ron Paul represents new technology, threatening to disrupt the status quo and revolutionize the system. Moore’s chasm model gives us a frame of reference to examine the gulf that exists between the innovative, risk-taking early adopters, and the pragmatic, risk-averse late adopters.

Innovators (The Technology Enthusiasts) – The first group to be sold on a new technology are the innovators (primarily because they are the ones cultivating it). These are your typical technology enthusiasts: the über-geeks who innovate, nurture and adopt technology because they believe in it and the promise that it holds. Every great inventor in history falls into this category (likewise, every great philosopher does too). In our political model, Ron Paul qualifies as an innovator, along with the vanguard of libertarian thought (Ludwig von Mises was an innovator). The innovators provide a foundation from which the new technology/idea can be launched. As Moore puts it in Chasm: "Enthusiasts are like kindling: They help start the fire."

Early Adopters (The Visionaries) – The next group aren’t the vanguards of the technology, but they quickly become just as important. The Early Adopters are the influential visionaries who recognize the technology for its potential to revolutionize the way business is done. In technology, Steve Jobs is a well-known example of an early adopter/visionary. Early adopters are dream oriented. They have a vision, and are looking at new technology to facilitate a "fundamental breakthrough" to fulfill that vision.

As Moore puts it, "Visionaries are that rare breed of people who have the insight to match an emerging technology to a strategic opportunity, the temperament to translate that insight into a high-visibility, high-risk project, and the charisma to get the rest of their organization to buy into that project." Visionaries aren’t interested in tinkering with the system – they want to spark a revolution in how it operates. They are highly motivated and will do what it takes to make their vision become a reality. In the political system, these are the activists. They’re forming groups, painting signs, donating money, reaching out, and doing everything they can to spread the message. The visionaries are most definitely going to vote in primaries. They're going to tell their friends. They're going to go to the ends of the earth to make their vision a reality. This is currently where the bulk of Ron Paul’s support is coming from. Without the visionaries, a technology/idea has no hope of crossing the chasm.

The Chasm (aka the gap) – The space between the Early Adopters (Visionaries) and the next group, the Early Majority (Pragmatists) is where the dreaded chasm lies. This is where the technology has to take a fundamental leap from being a "neat idea" to being "a practical solution." If the technology/idea does not take this leap, it fails. There are millions of technology products that have fallen into the chasm never to be heard from again.

It’s significant to fully appreciate the implications of a technology/idea attempting and failing to cross the chasm. The market does not forgive failure so easily. When a technology fails to cross the chasm, it is often marginalized into oblivion. When this happens, the visionary pool dries up, and it’s left to the enthusiasts to tend it until the market conditions are right to reintroduce it for another shot at the gap. Moore tells us that failure to communicate the "order-of-magnitude" leaps in benefits is a common reason for a technology/idea to fall flat.

Which leads us to:

The Early Majority (Pragmatists) – The Early Majority represent a significant bulk of the mass market. This type requires assurances that the technology is going to work out. They dislike unpredictability. They want to be able to set their watch by the product. These people are hard to win over, but are loyal as can be once they have been sold. It was said a hundred times when Bush was running for president: "I don't agree with him on everything, but at least with Bush, I know where he stands." It’s significant to note that by and large, they didn’t really know where he really stood, but instead they knew how he made them feel – which is much more important when dealing with pragmatists. Pragmatists want to feel safe. As such, they are largely motivated by fear.

What pragmatists are generally not, however, are activists. They'll pass along their recommendations as a word of mouth, but they're typically not going to go out of their way if they don't have to. This is not always the case. A pragmatist often becomes an evangelist, influencing others through word-of-mouth channels. The pragmatists have heavy influence over the next group in the model.

The Late Majority (Conservatives) – The late majority represents the most conservative group of the population, particularly in terms of risk aversion. They are traditionalists. They find something that they like and they stick with it. It’s comfortable. It works for them. They are the hardest to sell a new idea to, and usually a visionary isn’t who they will accept the idea from (they look more towards pragmatists for influence). They don't like new ideas, because new ideas bring change. They will only get involved with new technology/idea once it has matured and they start to feel significantly disconnected by not taking part in it (even then, they are hesitant).

Moore offers two keys to success for winning over the late majority: "The first is to have thoroughly thought through the ‘whole solution’ to a particular target end-user market’s needs, and to have provided for every element of that solution within the package… The other key is to have lined up a low-overhead distribution channel that can get this package to the target market effectively." Sage advice, indeed.

In this marketer’s estimation, the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, by and large, has the tools to cross the chasm; however, what it is currently lacking are highly visible visionaries who are recognizable by the pragmatist masses and can help propel the message across the gap. To put it bluntly, Ron Paul cannot be the lone voice for the movement in the media wilderness. At this point in time, the Ron Paul 2008 campaign would receive a tremendous benefit from visible visionaries who are firmly in his camp and can appeal to the political pragmatists who are currently finding solace in the status quo.

I believe the freedom movement should now be focusing their efforts in moving liberty-minded celebrities and luminaries (both national and local) to start aggressively speaking out on behalf of Dr. Paul and the message of freedom. At this juncture, these endorsements would go a long way towards providing the rocket fuel that would aid the polls further in moving in the right direction.

The pragmatists need the "political cover" of highly visible endorsements. These endorsements offer them a safety net that assures them that their support of Dr. Paul is safe and within the bounds of reason. The good news is that once they’re sold that Dr. Paul is the "safe choice," it’s unlikely that they will change their minds. The bad news, however, is that they’re hard to sell to, and without pragmatists the movement risks falling into the chasm where the "Dean Scream" is currently echoing off the walls.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lopez2.html

Cunningham
10-27-2007, 01:07 AM
I'm glad you posted that. It's great. The moderators should sticky that article. I think some of the people on here really lose sight of who we need to appeal to. We aren't going to win this by appealling to the cool kids, and pop culture isn't going to win the day. Most people are afraid of change because right now they know what they've got, it might not be much but they have it. Change could take that all away. We can't come to the vast majority of people with this radical, crazy, ra-ra guerilla tactic stuff. It only works on a certain minority and that minority is us. This article hits it perfect, now we have to figure out how to appeal to "them".

Taco John
10-27-2007, 01:09 AM
The grassroots campaign needs to evolve...

Cunningham
10-27-2007, 01:19 AM
No shit. Good job man. Two of my roomates and a few of my neighbors are talking about it right now in the other room. They're trying to convince me that if they managed to canvas neighborhoods dressed as Mickey Mouse or other soothing good natured cartoon characters they could convince all these late adopters to get on board. I told them it wouldn't go well but on the bright side the cops would have a harder time tazing you.

Cunningham
10-27-2007, 01:24 AM
The grassroots campaign needs to evolve...

You're right but it seems that suggestion only gets met with resistance on here. If there isn't a transition I think we'll start seeing diminishing returns soon.

work2win
10-27-2007, 02:22 AM
This article is saying essentially the same thing that was in that thread about the professional analysis of the campaign a while back. I makes complete sense if you look at the big picture. The people we are looking to attract from here on out are way different from who we got in the past. These new people are not ones to rock the boat.

Quite simply, we need to shift our image to win over the non-activists out there. This is not a drastic change, nor is it selling out. The image we want to create is presidential and mainstream with a hint of "different." The time for "google Ron Paul" is long gone, and "Ron Paul Revolution" should start taking a back-seat to "Ron Paul - President '08." Presidential candidate Ron Paul gets elected, cult leader Ron Paul doesn't.

Yes to:
-"Ron Paul - president 08" signs
-professional appearance and interactions
-confidence in the face of doubt and ridicule (quiet smug confidence makes people wonder!)
-focusing on Ron's mainstream positions (secure borders, limited govt., less taxes, etc.)

No to:
- "google Ron Paul" signs (RP Revolution has become a sort of campaign logo, so no need to eliminate, just use less)
-actions that look "cult-like." Maybe it's holding a rally in masks, or maybe it's just talking about RP too much at work/school. We want to look enthused and excited, but not crazy or obsessed!
-being pushy. Don't hammer people. Feed them information over time if necessary.
-focusing on the harder to understand positions like the federal reserve.

rs3515
10-27-2007, 02:41 AM
Having read Crossing the Chasm a number of years ago and experiencing it working with numerous corporations, I can attest to this phenomena being very real and true.

We are very much at the edge of the chasm in terms of the campaign. I most strongly noticed it during this week's financial contributions. So many people donated to meet the radio ad goal, and so many others are waiting for the big Nov. 5th donation. The expectation would be that newcomers would be donating in the interim to 'fill the gap'.

However we saw a significant slowdown ... a sign that those who are innovators and early adopters are already on board. I very much agree with work2win, there needs to be a slight shift of image to win over the non-activists. It won't always be easy, but I'm confident we can do so.

Additional emails to the editor, blog comments, voting on online polls, etc. are going to continue to have diminishing returns. The non-activists are not on the computer, they are at the grocery store, at church and doing yardwork down the street.

Corydoras
10-27-2007, 03:01 AM
Moore tells us that failure to communicate the "order-of-magnitude" leaps in benefits is a common reason for a technology/idea to fall flat.

I think this is the single most important sentence in this really excellent article.



by and large, they didn’t really know where he really stood, but instead they knew how he made them feel – which is much more important when dealing with pragmatists. Pragmatists want to feel safe. As such, they are largely motivated by fear.

They are not revolutionaries. And they won't respond to our endless discussions about the minutiae of policy.


Upshot, we have to be able to explain how people will benefit from Ron Paul without going too much into specifics. Yikes.

I guess this is where the "one of the 50 most effective members of Congress," ten-term congressman, military man, doctor, grandfather, churchgoer, ten-term congressman (again!) thing comes in?

I find it virtually impossible to get any sort of feel for what goes on in the mind of a Pragmatist-- getting across the chasm between me and them-- but I agree that they are absolutely vital and we MUST reach them.

This article is so good that it ought to be stickied for a while.

ConstitutionGal
10-27-2007, 03:17 AM
I think the gist of this is that we must change our focus and be SMART about it. I am finding that most anyone can be 'won over' by just figuring out which buttons to push. I they are in a profession that is being taken over by illegals - play the secure borders card. If they just barely making ends meet - play the Abolish the IRS card. If they are against the war, play the Just Come Home card. Anyway, it's been working VERY well for me and I find that I can find an issue that will resonate with most everyone and, once they get hooked about that one issue, they tend to come on board for the rest.

Energy
10-27-2007, 03:34 AM
This really deserves a sticky and couldn't have come at a more perfect time. Ron Paul - President '08 - I love it... it rattles in your brain.

We may need to shift ourselves to make further breakthroughs.

And I've been doing what ConstitutionGal just said: tailoring your approach to your audience, drawing them in and let Ron Paul do the rest. It has worked quite well.

Taco John
10-27-2007, 03:39 AM
Everybody needs to send this article to their meet-up group leaders and have them pass it on to their groups. This is really crucial stuff gearing into the NH campaign.

rs3515
10-27-2007, 08:45 AM
bump

walt
10-27-2007, 09:33 AM
none of those people in the chasm care about fundraising....

Primbs
10-27-2007, 09:48 AM
We should put this in a required reading list for Ron Paul activists.

me3
10-27-2007, 09:58 AM
I have to disagree with some of the sentiments expressed here.

The grassroots doesn't necessarily need to evolve as a herd. It needs more visionaries, to create new foundations and infrastructure to accommodate the more conservative, later adopters.

At it's root, the loose organization of the grassroots cannot become stuck in doing things the same way, but still provide the atmosphere for innovation and risk taking to occur.

This campaign in particular has been like few others. It's heavily driven by a creative and inspired grassroots. Rallying cries like Ron Paul Revolution, Legalize the Constitution resonate with a lot of people. It's important not to turn our backs on what has been successful this far, because I am not sure that this campaign would have been and will continue to be as effective if it adopts mainstreamed tactics and marketing.

Now I am not against evolution, but that evolution is already occurring to a certain degree. The grassroots has fed the campaign proper with the funding to compete and participate on more general platforms, to appeal via advertising (print, TV and radio) to the audience that may not be receptive to sign waving or money bombing.

Instead of interpreting the lack of donations outside the grassroots as a failure of the grassroots to evolve, it might be worthwhile to consider that the campaign has been very conservative and slow to begin it's marketing to the larger demographic. While there was $5 million in the bank, which is a wonderful thing to promote, that money could have been used, even a 1/2 million dollar portion to launch the radio advertising early. Now I'm not condemning the campaign proper, only pointing out that the grassroots cannot decide how the bulk of the money is being spent, and a lot of grassroots effort has helped raise it.

It's important for the grassroots to stay very active, to keep campaigning hard in a decentralized way so that the opportunity for more innovation can occur. Let the campaign proper handle reaching the masses with more conventional messages in a more conservative manner, as long as we continue to provide them the inspiration, feedback and funding to do so.

Yes, the polls are a needless waste of time. Yes, the blog commenting and endless obsession with negative media are a waste of time. But getting away from those things must be a process of innovation. We need to do a better job of promoting productive on and offline grassroots campaigning.

Just my thoughts.

rs3515
10-27-2007, 10:22 AM
none of those people in the chasm care about fundraising....

The people in the chasm? Or on the other side of the chasm? I don't think the people "in the chasm" are alive. :)

Brinck Slattery
10-27-2007, 10:30 AM
Fantastic article. If we are smart about the way the grassroots run, we can make this election go our way.

me3
10-27-2007, 10:35 AM
Fantastic article. If we are smart about the way the grassroots run, we can make this election go our way.
Yeah, but that is a contradiction of sorts. The grassroots is a bottom up organization. The only way to make it "smarter" is to provide innovation and inspiration. There can't be a global mandate to change grassroots strategy. That would subvert what makes a grassroots campaign, grassroots.

wwrpd.org is a nice grassroots initiative, but it isn't interactive.
ronpaulgraphs is a nice grassroots initiative but it also isn't really interactive.

A few more forums specific to serving certain needs, and maybe even another social networking system to compensate for shortcomings of MeetUp are things that could innovate and drive "smarter" grassroots activism.

rs3515
10-27-2007, 10:55 AM
The grassroots doesn't necessarily need to evolve as a herd. It needs more visionaries, to create new foundations and infrastructure to accommodate the more conservative, later adopters.

At it's root, the loose organization of the grassroots cannot become stuck in doing things the same way, but still provide the atmosphere for innovation and risk taking to occur.

You bring up some good points. Yes we shouldn't expect Steve Jobs to be an innovator and we shouldn't expect an innovator to be Steve Jobs. When I was alluding to the idea of an "image shift" in my earlier post, what I meant is what you said more effectively here than I did. All of us are facing new challenges to draw in more people, therefore visionaries need to step up to build more connections with pragmatists, and innovators need to evolve their tactics to a new level of sophistication.


This campaign in particular has been like few others. It's heavily driven by a creative and inspired grassroots. Rallying cries like Ron Paul Revolution, Legalize the Constitution resonate with a lot of people. It's important not to turn our backs on what has been successful this far, because I am not sure that this campaign would have been and will continue to be as effective if it adopts mainstreamed tactics and marketing.

I do agree with you, although the only question is how much additional effort do we put into something with diminishing returns? If we've already captured 90% of possible innovators, we might have to exert 3x as much energy just to capture another 5%.

Are there possibly ways innovators can use their creativity and talents toward helping us capture some on the other side of the chasm? I don't have an answer for this right now but I'm open-minded to hear what others have to say.


Instead of interpreting the lack of donations outside the grassroots as a failure of the grassroots to evolve, it might be worthwhile to consider that the campaign has been very conservative and slow to begin it's marketing to the larger demographic.

Yes I do agree with your point that the campaign made a conscious decision of when to start their broader marketing plan and that can have an impact on fundraising. In regards to the lack of donations, actually I wasn't considering it a failure of the grassroots at all. I was thinking of it more that all of us are standing at the edge of the chasm and saying, "ok, what do we do now? how do we get across there?" That's just a natural part of the process.


It's important for the grassroots to stay very active, to keep campaigning hard in a decentralized way so that the opportunity for more innovation can occur. Let the campaign proper handle reaching the masses with more conventional messages in a more conservative manner, as long as we continue to provide them the inspiration, feedback and funding to do so.

Yes, the polls are a needless waste of time. Yes, the blog commenting and endless obsession with negative media are a waste of time. But getting away from those things must be a process of innovation. We need to do a better job of promoting productive on and offline grassroots campaigning.

Just my thoughts.

One thing to consider as well is I think we're starting to naturally see amongst the grassroots supporters those who are more innovative thinkers and those who are more of the visionaries who can help to bridge the chasm. I'd like to see if we can brainstorm some ideas of how both groups can be working together toward connecting with pragmatists, maybe just in different ways.

Daveforliberty
10-27-2007, 10:56 AM
I do think we need to be careful when attempting to equate technology with politics 1:1. Technology is much less of an emotional entity than is politics.

That said, it would be interesting, if there are any historians out there, to see if we could chart the 1776 Revolution in the Crossing the Chasm model.

Finally, I absolutely agree we need to find (unfortunately) sound-bite sized ways to promote the "growth in benefits" of a Ron Paul presidency. Maybe something like a nationwide grassroots sign campaign with issues such as "Secure Our Borders Now. Ron Paul - President '08."

Taco John
10-27-2007, 10:58 AM
These are the kinds of efforts we need in order to better start reaching the pragmatists. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=29208) (clicky)

rs3515
10-27-2007, 11:07 AM
These are the kinds of efforts we need in order to better start reaching the pragmatists. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=29208) (clicky)

Yes, I do agree with you Taco John, but also trying to think about how we have innovators involved in such a process, when by nature they are creative forces that move in different directions getting from point A to B.

Here are a couple of ideas just to toss out as food for thought ...

* Innovators reaching through their networks on Facebook and MySpace to figure out who they know that might have parents/friends of influential individuals, and then routing that info to someone who can take it to the next level?

* I'm sure innovators know a handful of pragmatists (e.g., parents, others) that they may not want to talk to about Ron Paul, but they could reach out to a visionary to help make the connection in person?

Really just thinking out loud here ...

speciallyblend
10-27-2007, 11:11 AM
I want a link for a window sign,Ron Paul - President '08 for tinted ot regular car windows

Taco John
10-27-2007, 11:28 AM
Yes, I do agree with you Taco John, but also trying to think about how we have innovators involved in such a process, when by nature they are creative forces that move in different directions getting from point A to B.

Here are a couple of ideas just to toss out as food for thought ...

* Innovators reaching through their networks on Facebook and MySpace to figure out who they know that might have parents/friends of influential individuals, and then routing that info to someone who can take it to the next level?

* I'm sure innovators know a handful of pragmatists (e.g., parents, others) that they may not want to talk to about Ron Paul, but they could reach out to a visionary to help make the connection in person?

Really just thinking out loud here ...



Innovators in this model would include people like Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell. Per the article: "In our political model, Ron Paul qualifies as an innovator, along with the vanguard of libertarian thought (Ludwig von Mises was an innovator). The innovators provide a foundation from which the new technology/idea can be launched. As Moore puts it in Chasm: "Enthusiasts are like kindling: They help start the fire." '

They ignite the visionaries. It's the job of the visionaries to get the message across the gap. The best way to do that is to appeal to the pragmatists by providing "air cover" for them to believe that supporting Ron Paul is a safe and rational thing to do.

That's why at the end of the article, it indicates that we need more celbrities and luminaries speaking out. We shouldn't over complicate this message. We should keep doing what we're doing, but we should start taking our grass roots efforts to appeal to these celebrities to get active themselves.

Orat
10-27-2007, 11:42 AM
I want a link for a window sign,Ron Paul - President '08 for tinted ot regular car windows

http://ronpaulstuff.com/decals.html

Orat
10-27-2007, 11:44 AM
This article falls exactly in line with Operation Woodwork:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=26244

Please, please pass this plan along to your meetup groups. This has the potential to accomplish exactly what this article describes.

With regard to celebrities, try to avoid known liberal celebrity endorsements, such as Bill Maher. Don't go shouting that one from the rooftops until AFTER the primary. Such endorsements will have the opposite of the desired effect on Republicans.

But put Operation Woodwork into practice ASAP in your state and you're sure to have an impact. It's easy to do, and it is effective.

ronpaul4pres
10-27-2007, 12:06 PM
... they could convince all these late adopters to get on board...

Not to pick on you, but that's not the message of the article. The point was trying to get to the early majority.

That article is similar in structure to my post on fundraising (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28940). We need to clearly define where we are, where we need to be, and plan for how we get to our end goal.

In this case, there are 4 stages, and we're at stage 2 trying to get to stage 3. The article was clear: we need celebrity endorsements. I wonder, though, is there an equivalent to a celebrity endorsement?

me3
10-27-2007, 12:10 PM
In this case, there are 4 stages, and we're at stage 2 trying to get to stage 3. The article was clear: we need celebrity endorsements. I wonder, though, is there an equivalent to a celebrity endorsement?
Let's see what comes of Adam Curry's endorsement.

work2win
10-27-2007, 12:47 PM
Yeah, but that is a contradiction of sorts. The grassroots is a bottom up organization. The only way to make it "smarter" is to provide innovation and inspiration. There can't be a global mandate to change grassroots strategy.

There is no "global iniative," and never will be. If this analysis and strategy hits home with you, spread the word far and wide in the Ron Paul network. It's that simple. This is how the grassroots works, and it is exactly why I'm on here. I read that thread a few weeks ago and it really hit home, so I have been promoting the idea ever since.


Ask yourself: How can I promote Ron Paul so that he seems mainstream and popular with a hint of "different"?

Here's what I'm doing:

1. no more "google Ron Paul." This is 1st or 2nd quarter material. I am promoting Ron Paul with signs and stickers that say "Ron Paul - President '08" and I try to throw "Champion of the Constitution" out there whenever possible. I also display a few of his popular mainstream positions like "secure borders", "no IRS", and "limited government." The "Revolution" signs are probably alright, as long as they take a back seat to "RP - President 08." These might help convey the notion that this campaign is different as long as they aren't the main message.

2. Promoting Ron Paul with DIFFERENT sharp looking signs. Different signs appear to be different supporters. My goal is to put up three different styles of Ron Paul signs. Two professional, and one home-made. The home-made one will be as professional as I can make it look.

3. Making sure all the relatives and receptive friends have bumper stickers on their cars and yard-signs out front. Once again, more stickers and signs make RP look more mainstream!

4. Keeping things professional and confident at every turn. I make sure that I am not being pushy with the RP promoting, and when the ridicule starts I keep it calm and confident. If it looks like the audience is not going to be receptive to a counter-argument, or that it will just get out of hand, I won't say anything. It doesn't bother me, and they can see it. Spinning your wheels doesn't do any good. In addition, too much enthusiasm can spook fence-sitters...it simply weirds them out. Some of these people can also be the types that laugh at enthusiasm because they KNOW all politicians are corrupt. You want to play it careful and feed them information at just the right rate. Generating intrigue seems to work.

Cunningham
10-27-2007, 12:50 PM
Not to pick on you, but that's not the message of the article. The point was trying to get to the early majority.

That article is similar in structure to my post on fundraising (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28940). We need to clearly define where we are, where we need to be, and plan for how we get to our end goal.

In this case, there are 4 stages, and we're at stage 2 trying to get to stage 3. The article was clear: we need celebrity endorsements. I wonder, though, is there an equivalent to a celebrity endorsement?

I get it dude. Thanks. If you thought the mickey mouse costume for getting late adopters was what I took away from the article, it wasn't. Thank you for letting me know i wasn't getting it though, we gotta watch each others backs and all. :)

Daveforliberty
10-27-2007, 01:41 PM
Let's see what comes of Adam Curry's endorsement.

99.9% of the early majority would not have a freakin' clue who Adam Curry is, and if they knew, they wouldn't care.

Taco John
10-27-2007, 01:43 PM
Not to pick on you, but that's not the message of the article. The point was trying to get to the early majority.

That article is similar in structure to my post on fundraising (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28940). We need to clearly define where we are, where we need to be, and plan for how we get to our end goal.

In this case, there are 4 stages, and we're at stage 2 trying to get to stage 3. The article was clear: we need celebrity endorsements. I wonder, though, is there an equivalent to a celebrity endorsement?



Not only celebrity endorsements... But local luminaries as well. For instance, local business men. If you are a local businessman, you should be writing letters to the editor wearing your community status on your sleeve, and talking about what Ron Paul would do for your business, and the local community in general. Or trying to get onto a local talk show to talk about the local economy, and in that discussion presenting your opinion that electing Ron Paul would be a step in the right direction.

me3
10-27-2007, 01:44 PM
99.9% of the early majority would not have a freakin' clue who Adam Curry is, and if they knew, they wouldn't care.
I'm talking about the weight of his endorsement within his listenership.

Jive Dadson
10-27-2007, 03:40 PM
I agree that using only "grass rooty" materials is not enough. We should follow up with professional looking material.

"Google Ron Paul" was my brain child. I have helped a meetup group make maybe 100 stencil signs, many of which were Revolutions. But now I'm using professional looking signs from the campaign, and "West Coast Slim Jims" from the campaign. I do have some home-designed fliers, but I think they look slick, and everything on them is directly from the campaign web site.

ItsTime
10-27-2007, 06:31 PM
His weight is big. Dont let anyone else tell you its not. It reaches further than the 300k listeners he has in the USA.

and a bump


I'm talking about the weight of his endorsement within his listenership.

Channing
10-27-2007, 06:49 PM
I think we have to put some thought into this. Can anybody post some examples how the chasm was overcome in other situations?

Ninja Homer
10-28-2007, 08:54 AM
This is the most important part of the original post:
"...the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, by and large, has the tools to cross the chasm; however, what it is currently lacking are highly visible visionaries who are recognizable by the pragmatist masses and can help propel the message across the gap..."

We have several "highly visible visionaries" that appear to be supporting the Ron Paul campaign now.

We have Adam Curry, which grassroots reached out to, and I think everybody here knows how that is turning out, with Adam Curry actively supporting Ron Paul as kind of a super-grassroots-supporter.

Another one is Dr. Mercola of mercola.com, which is the most visited natural health site on the web, and his newsletter goes out to more than 1.2 million people.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=29210
I don't know if there has been any attempts from grassroots to reach out to Dr. Mercola yet, but there should be. With 1.2 million dedicated readers, he could do a lot for the campaign, and in turn, I think he would get a lot of Ron Paul supporters signing up for his newsletter.

Another one is Garrison Kieler of Prairie Home Companion fame, with a weekly audience of over 3.9 million, and it's mainly an older audience that we have trouble reaching.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28999
With Garrison Kieler, all we know is that he donated to the campaign. If there was some kind of effort to reach out to him, who knows what could happen. If he started talking about Ron Paul, he could suddenly get a large bump in his audience from a younger demographic, which I'm sure he has trouble getting.

When people like this come out in support of Ron Paul, they should be supported by us. Subscribe to Adam Curry's podcast, sign up for Dr. Mercola's newsletter, and if Garrison Kieler talks about Ron Paul, listen to and support his show.

If it can be demonstrated that "highly visible visionaries" who support Ron Paul can prosper by doing so, it will catch on, and we will see more of them.

So where do we find more "highly visible visionaries"? There are the well known billionaires, sports celebrities, rock stars, movie stars, and well known politicians. There are also people that may not be a household name that still have a big audience; leaders of industries, pastors/preachers/ministers, community leaders, and people well known locally. Some extra effort should be given to get these people in Ron Paul's camp... Maybe reach out to them with "care packages" with DVD's, 12-page pamphlets, and bumper stickers along with some incentive to make sure they look at the info.

me3
10-28-2007, 09:13 AM
I do agree with you, although the only question is how much additional effort do we put into something with diminishing returns? If we've already captured 90% of possible innovators, we might have to exert 3x as much energy just to capture another 5%.
With no base of fact, my opinion is that we may have captured 90% of possible innovators who have heard of Ron Paul, but I do not think that we have captured all 90% of possible innovators given that this candidate does not have a high level of name recognition.


Are there possibly ways innovators can use their creativity and talents toward helping us capture some on the other side of the chasm? I don't have an answer for this right now but I'm open-minded to hear what others have to say.
Channel that creative energy online and towards the media towards offline and on the ground. Retirement homes seems like a point of contact that is not being exploited. Local business and chambers of commerce. We can creatively, grassroots market to these groups.

Of course, we'll have to overcome some of our fear of anyone with commercial interests, as well as any bias we have towards the elderly. And it will take some level of spontaneous organization to affect a shift like this across for a large enough group of innovators to see the returns manifest.


Yes I do agree with your point that the campaign made a conscious decision of when to start their broader marketing plan and that can have an impact on fundraising. In regards to the lack of donations, actually I wasn't considering it a failure of the grassroots at all. I was thinking of it more that all of us are standing at the edge of the chasm and saying, "ok, what do we do now? how do we get across there?" That's just a natural part of the process.

For starters, I get the feeling that if everyone dug deep, contacted everyone they know, and petitioned all of the Ron Paul supporters they have met to contribute, the $12 million goal might seem achievable. The question is not as sophisticated as innovators leading the way, it's affecting a fundamental shift in the early adopters.

I do believe the money is very important, but am a little disappointed that HQ is relying so heavily on online donations.


One thing to consider as well is I think we're starting to naturally see amongst the grassroots supporters those who are more innovative thinkers and those who are more of the visionaries who can help to bridge the chasm. I'd like to see if we can brainstorm some ideas of how both groups can be working together toward connecting with pragmatists, maybe just in different ways.
What is missing for this to happen? A subforum? Mailing List? A different type of meeting site? Not to get all elitist, but in a large community, it is easy for the voices of the few to get drowned out. So the first step has to be networking amongst individuals who may not be completely like minded (hence, innovators) but have the same objective. To take the campaign across the chasm. A mix of people who are efficient communicators and those who take action might broaden the group enough to be pragmatic, but not compromise leadership.


His weight is big. Dont let anyone else tell you its not. It reaches further than the 300k listeners he has in the USA.
Right, but I am talking about getting 10,000 more voters from that base. Or 2,000 new donors. Tangible results of his endorsement. How much weight within his own listenership (which admittedly is large) will actually translate into action?

Orat
10-28-2007, 04:55 PM
I will say it again, while it will be great to have celebrity endorsements, there's something we can do that is so easy that we don't have to sit and discuss it, but rather can go straight out and start doing it right this minute - and that's calling our elected officials (both state and federal, and even county!) and asking them to endorse Ron Paul. Believe me, you probably have some fence sitters in your state who are wondering if they should "come out". A bunch of calls from their constituents will help encourage them. Then, once you have some endorsements, hold a media event where they publicly endorse Ron Paul and say a few words about him. Also have them send letters to their peers. This is what we are doing in Oklahoma and it is going to have an impact. Find out a grassroots group your reps are members of and go to one of their meetings. State reps are usually very approachable. Just strike up and ask them what they think of Ron Paul. If you find one who is onboard, set a lunch with him/her and go over a plan of action. See the full plan here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=26244

Pass this on to your meetups. This is a simple plan to put into action (at least the calling part). Just send a message to your meetups telling people to call their reps, and include the link given in the thread above that will easily get them the phone numbers to call.

TexMac
10-28-2007, 05:06 PM
Not only celebrity endorsements... But local luminaries as well. For instance, local business men. If you are a local businessman, you should be writing letters to the editor wearing your community status on your sleeve, and talking about what Ron Paul would do for your business, and the local community in general. Or trying to get onto a local talk show to talk about the local economy, and in that discussion presenting your opinion that electing Ron Paul would be a step in the right direction.

We need more like this:

Allenstown Selectman Endorses Ron Paul (http://nh2008.blogspot.com/2007/10/allenstown-selectman-endorses-ron-paul.html)

The Ron Paul Campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of Allenstown Selectman Tom Gilligan.

"I wholeheartedly support Dr. Ron Paul for President of the United States because he is our best hope for preserving the liberties that our state and country were founded on," said Mr. Gilligan. "As a student of the Constitution, Dr. Paul has strong positions on important issues that the other candidates won't even address—like habeas corpus, civil liberties, and the rule of law. And his voting record completely supports his stated views. There is no doubt that he is the man to bring back true conservative principles, and to restore America's reputation in the world."

Tom Gilligan is in his second term on the Select Board of Allenstown, where he and his family have lived since 2002. Mr. Gilligan is a Project Management Professional, serves on the Board of Directors of Compassionate Care ALS, and also as a leader in Troop 97 of the Boy Scouts of America.


Paul Announces NH Endorsement (http://nh2008.blogspot.com/2007/10/paul-announces-nh-endorsement.html)

From the Paul Campaign:

The Ron Paul Campaign proudly announced today the endorsement of Colebrook Selectman Larry Rappaport.

"After watching the debates and considering all the options," Mr. Rappaport said, "I can only whole-heartedly endorse Congressman Ron Paul. He says what he thinks, and he knows that our constitution-based government is supposed to serve the people—not large corporations. He does not believe that the U.S. can or should solve all of the world's problems."

Akus
10-28-2007, 05:18 PM
Moore offers two keys to success for winning over the late majority: "The first is In this marketer’s estimation, the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, by and large, has the tools to cross the chasm; however, what it is currently lacking are highly visible visionaries who are recognizable by the pragmatist masses and can help propel the message across the gap. To put it bluntly, Ron Paul cannot be the lone voice for the movement in the media wilderness. At this point in time, the Ron Paul 2008 campaign would receive a tremendous benefit from visible visionaries who are firmly in his camp and can appeal to the political pragmatists who are currently finding solace in the status quo.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lopez2.html

Anyone who has watched any news television knows that this particular paragraph is just not true. Bill Maher (now, he isn't news, but he is de-facto news reporter of sorts) said RP is his hero. Tucker constantly mentions Ron Paul in a positive light. Youtube around, there are plenty of influential people who have said very positive things about Ron Paul and not all of them are on The View.

Even Glenn Beck, who is trying to portray us the RP activists as clowns, is promoting Ron Paul but acting stupid supporting Rudy McRomney...

Taco John
10-29-2007, 12:36 AM
I think you're wrong. In fact, I think Tucker has done more damage to Paul than he has helped him. He brings him on the show, but he denigrates his movement at every turn, making Paul look fringe.

"Can we all stop pretending to like Ron Paul?" -Tucker on Maher's show

James R
10-29-2007, 12:44 AM
The pragmatists need the "political cover" of highly visible endorsements. These endorsements offer them a safety net that assures them that their support of Dr. Paul is safe and within the bounds of reason. The good news is that once they’re sold that Dr. Paul is the "safe choice," it’s unlikely that they will change their minds. The bad news, however, is that they’re hard to sell to, and without pragmatists the movement risks falling into the chasm where the "Dean Scream" is currently echoing off the walls.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lopez2.html

That is why each ad should include at least one quote from a famous person IMO. I'm working on a quote kit right now.

rs3515
10-29-2007, 11:26 PM
That's why at the end of the article, it indicates that we need more celbrities and luminaries speaking out. We shouldn't over complicate this message. We should keep doing what we're doing, but we should start taking our grass roots efforts to appeal to these celebrities to get active themselves.

Actually, the message is directly applicable to the grassroots effort. There are those who realized an innovation in politics was necessary right from the beginning of this campaign, and there are those who have joined the grassroots effort more recently who are visionaries.

Much like you said, we should take our grassroots efforts toward appealing to the celebrities. However, there are plenty of innovators among us who are fervent in their message but it wouldn't make sense for them to be communicating directly with those who are pragmatists or visionary luminaries.

My point is this ... we should be finding ways for everyone to contribute. Just responding to online polls and writing 200 comments on websites is not enough. Hence the suggestion for those who are innovators among us to reach out to their Facebook and MySpace friends to connect with those who are influential and potential RP supporters, or who's parents might be RP supporters. Never know who knows who ... and I don't think all that difficult to try.

It's all about networking.

Orat
10-30-2007, 01:43 AM
We already have two endorsements from state reps here in Oklahoma, and we have a couple more who are on the fence and we are leveraging Operation Woodwork to encourage them to fall on our side:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=26244

I strongly encourage EVERYONE to do the same. It is dirt simple: just tell your meetup members to call their reps (go to http://www.capitolconnect.com/oklahoma/ and type in your address [never mind that it says "oklahoma", this is the link you want to use]) and ask them to endorse Ron Paul. Read the plan, it will make a big difference in your state. If every state does this, we can have a huge impact.

FluxCapacitor
11-17-2007, 11:57 AM
It was nice to see Barry Goldwater Jr. officially endorse Ron Paul this week.

There are plenty of people who have never seen a graph or a chart that shows the federal budget and the national debt. As these people learn more about Ron Paul and his sense of fiscal responsibility, his message will resonate.

It's important to point out that as President, Paul would work with congress to build a consensus toward getting the runaway government spending under control. He's running for President, not dictator. He advocates reducing the power of the executive branch to a proper Constitutional level.