PDA

View Full Version : Dr. Paul will win the primary when Republican voters know he will WAGE WAR...




raystone
07-18-2011, 10:44 AM
.... by following the Constitution and asking Congress to declare war when necessary.

When Republican voters know he will send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

When Republican voters know that the troops donated more to Paul than any other candidate.

In other words, when enough GOP voters understand Ron Paul will go to war, and he is not an isolationist.

Contrary as it sounds, those are the ads that should be running now.

specsaregood
07-18-2011, 11:01 AM
And what do you base these claims off of?

Sola_Fide
07-18-2011, 11:03 AM
I agree. If Ron triangulated on the war issue it would throw a wrench into the entire race. If red meat GOP voters were assured that Ron would wage war when necessary, it would change some minds.

Romulus
07-18-2011, 11:09 AM
He has said it before, but I don't he's going to pander like that. The good Dr knows the biggest enemy out there is ourselves.

Elwar
07-18-2011, 11:11 AM
Ron Paul does not need to appease the pro-war Republicans. The formerly pro-war Republicans are starting to appease Ron Paul.

JamesButabi
07-18-2011, 11:13 AM
He has said it before, but I don't he's going to pander like that. The good Dr knows the biggest enemy out there is ourselves.

Its not pandering if its his actual position. Its just countering the rhetoric. Right now the rhetoric is Ron Paul is isolationist and weak on national defense. Yes we all know thats not true, but does the average voter?

raystone
07-19-2011, 07:54 AM
And what do you base these claims off of?

When you speak with the average GOP voter, they will tell you Ron Paul is in their top 3 choices for primary candidate, and would be #1 but for his foreign policy. Because he's an isolationist. Because "if Ron Paul was President when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, we'd all be speaking German now."

He will not get the needed votes as long as this is the majority viewpoint.

wgadget
07-19-2011, 07:58 AM
.... by following the Constitution and asking Congress to declare war when necessary.

When Republican voters know he will send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

When Republican voters know that the troops donated more to Paul than any other candidate.

In other words, when enough GOP voters understand Ron Paul will go to war, and he is not an isolationist.

Contrary as it sounds, those are the ads that should be running now.

I think you have a very strong point. My best friend, who voted for RP last time, says he "unelectable" because of his "whiny demeanor," that makes him appear unpresidential. My husband says the same thing and he also vote for RP. It's annoying to hear, but I hear it all the time.

A firm stance on how he would act as commander-in-chief could avert some of that opinion.

wgadget
07-19-2011, 07:58 AM
.... by following the Constitution and asking Congress to declare war when necessary.

When Republican voters know he will send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

When Republican voters know that the troops donated more to Paul than any other candidate.

In other words, when enough GOP voters understand Ron Paul will go to war, and he is not an isolationist.

Contrary as it sounds, those are the ads that should be running now.

I think you have a very strong point. My best friend, who voted for RP last time, says he is "unelectable" because of his "whiny voice," that makes him appear unpresidential. My husband says the same thing and he also vote for RP. It's annoying to hear, but I hear it all the time.

A firm stance on how he would act as commander-in-chief could avert some of that opinion.

JohnGalt23g
07-19-2011, 08:10 AM
RP should be prepared to let the GOP electorate know that he will wage war only when instructed to do so by the US Congress, fulfilling his duty as C-in-C.

speciallyblend
07-19-2011, 08:42 AM
he is doing fine waging war on biggovgop republicans and neo-cons!!!!!!

Carehn
07-19-2011, 08:45 AM
If elected Ron Paul will constitutionally wage war on the brown people of your choosing...

No, I don't like it. Lets stay the peace candidate.

klamath
07-19-2011, 09:20 AM
Unfortunately what you say is true. RP has painted himself as not willing to defend America at any time with his, would not go after Bin laden comment. By now the majority of the republican voters want the hell out of the middle east and want our troops home. Having troops in europe is no longer popular. Nation building is no longer popular but defending America will always be popular with both democrats, republicans and independents and RP has made himself seem really weak on the actual defence of America. I know a lot around here don't believe America deserves to be defended and needs our asses kicked but you are and will remain a minority that can elect nobody.

Canderson
07-19-2011, 09:29 AM
I find the "weve stretched ourselves too thin" line works well followed by the "well fall like the British if we keep it up" those really make definite Republican voters heads itch if said politely

Machiavelli
07-19-2011, 10:02 AM
Why do people love war so much. "He's weak if he won't go to war"...Pathetic

Romulus
07-19-2011, 11:30 AM
You're never going to appease the war hawks... those who pay hipicritical lip service to 'small govt' yet support all these endless wars.

RP could talk tough and they would still say "He's unelectable" for [bullshit] reason.

Screw appeasing the neocons - let them vote for Obomber - he's their man and we will let them know that.

Yes, I realize Rand won an election that way - but we about winning attitudes, not power to rule by force. A concept few people understand it seems.

raystone
07-19-2011, 12:05 PM
Ron Paul does not need to appease the pro-war Republicans. The formerly pro-war Republicans are starting to appease Ron Paul.


Appease is your word, I never suggested Dr. Paul should compromise his non interventionist principles.

Facts are the warhawk candidate won the primaries in '08. In swing states like Ohio and Wisconsin with 50%+ of the vote. All those Republican senior voters haven't changed to doves.

We haven't taken down enough of the establishment yet, to not need at least some establishment support during a primary. The GOP machine unofficially endorsed candidate normally wins the primary.

We can't get there without changing the current misconception of Dr. Paul being an isolationist.

Tinnuhana
07-19-2011, 12:40 PM
I had an interesting discussion with a GOP/TP person a couple of weeks ago. She wanted to know how things were where I lived. I told her about how the people had elected a mayor who ran on a platform of not permitting a military base on their coast. Afterwards, our military went to the prime minister and told them that that was unacceptable. The prime minister then told the mayor, "Sorry; not your decision to make." So of course, the left is having a field day with this: people vs the machine.
It gave her something to think about: how our beligerence and heavy handedness has perverted the will of the people. It would be infuriating enough if that was done in the US by the federal gov't (think fed prison or nuclear waste dump someone doesn't want in their county), but to do it to a free people voting their will...
The only people profiting from the unrest are the ones who'd push a socialist agenda.

georgiaboy
07-19-2011, 01:22 PM
It's so silly that war hawks could think Ron Paul a weak, cowardly man, given what an unshakable, speaking truth to power kinda guy he is. And let's not forget he's the only veteran running at this point.

Other presidential candidates like to say, "an attack on [insert non-US country] is an attack on the United States", and this gets the pro-military types all peacocked and frothing. Obviously the OP doesn't expect Ron to go this far, but this is the mindset you're attempting to appease. Maybe Ron could re-word the statement to say, "This may work in one on one scenarios in a bar room brawl, and I'd be the first to be by a buddy's side in a fight, but by our Constitution, when 300 million free citizens are the concern, only an attack on the United States is an attack on the United States." Or something.

Then maybe he could do some one-handed push-ups:
Jack Palance - One Handed Push-Ups (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGxL5AFzzMY)

Betty Liberty
07-19-2011, 02:15 PM
In an interview I saw recently, a reporter asked him - What if massive genocide was happening in such and such country, would you just let that go?

RP said that if the American people demanded it, and Congress lawfully declared it and established parameters - then go to war, win it, and then come home!

wowrevolution
07-19-2011, 02:41 PM
If THE CONGRESS goes to War then naturally Dr. Paul will honor his Constitutional obligations.

Right now America's #1 enemy is the Rothschild establishment. Should wage an all out war on them.

raystone
07-26-2011, 10:02 AM
This guy says it better than I did, and has a better ad idea...

http://www.dailypaul.com/171798/ron-paul-needs-a-new-tv-commercial-with-war-veterans

Ron Paul needs a new TV commercial featuring war veterans

We all know that in order for Ron Paul to go against Obama in 2012 he needs to win the GOP nomination... Sure getting some Democrats to switch party affiliation just to vote for Ron in the Republican primary is great and all but I'm not so sure that that is enough to assure a victory.

Bottom line: We're going to need the GOP voters in order to win.

I always hear from people in the GOP: "Ron Paul makes perfect sense about his economic policy but he loses me with his foreign policy"

So here's the idea:

There is one subject that seems to play to the heartstrings of most of the GOP and that is the military.

The Ron Paul 2012 campaign needs to capitalize on that and use their strong military support to spread Ron's message of a sensible foreign policy to the GOP voters.

I suggest they produce a video commercial with young and old war vets (It's illegal to have active military personnel on any campaign videos) giving their testimonials of why they want Ron to be THEIR commander in chief. The ad should openly brag about the fact he is the ONLY presidential candidate that actually served in the military. The ad should also mention OUT LOUD that Ron Paul receives more campaign contributions from active military personnel than all the other Republican and Democrat candidates COMBINED!

The ad needs to end with a message like: "Listen to our troops; Vote Ron Paul 2012" or "Support our troops, Vote Ron Paul".

I hope the campaign does this. It's a no brainer.

*Post below is from Nuclear Kid*

Daily Paulers,

I am the owner of Richter Studios, an award-winning production company in Chicago. We own and use the finest motion picture cameras on the planet, including the RED One MX and Phantom camera for our productions. I have been a Writer/Director for over 15 years now and have recently worked with Ludacris, Cyndi Lauper, Arnold Palmer, Captain James Lovell (Apollo 8/13), Greeley Wells (who brought in the stars and stripes on Iwo Jima), Bill Kurtis and many other celebrities. Working with U.S. war veterans for a project like this would be an honor and I would not disappoint.

To date, my company has created over 550 video productions and have won over 50 international awards for our work. We do everything from initial concepts and scriptwriting to filming, animation and world class sound design. And above all else, we know how to coach our talent to achieve great performances on camera.

Here's my company's demo reel:

http://richterstudios.com/portfolio

Here's my personal profile:

http://about.me/jeremyrichter

If you guys are really serious about doing this and want this to be a massive home run, contact me and we'll get the wheels moving on this. I won't kid you, this will cost a few bucks but we can work that out. Perhaps the SuperPAC could fund this.

I represent the finest cinematographers and production crews on the planet, so you can bet the bank that the quality for this would be out of this world. I could imagine having a few dozen war veterans fly out to be filmed on our production stage. With that many people captured on camera, we could not only create a world class commercial or two for broadcast but also limitless high-end pieces for the web as well.

I am also a Libertarian and strong believer in the Constitution. Ron Paul is my hero.

The ball is in your court. Just let me know.

Jeremy Richter
Richter Studios

Paul Or Nothing II
07-26-2011, 12:02 PM
I agree. If Ron triangulated on the war issue it would throw a wrench into the entire race. If red meat GOP voters were assured that Ron would wage war when necessary, it would change some minds.

He's ALREADY said it a billion times that he DEFINITELY will go to war IF national defense was at stake.


In an interview I saw recently, a reporter asked him - What if massive genocide was happening in such and such country, would you just let that go?

RP said that if the American people demanded it, and Congress lawfully declared it and established parameters - then go to war, win it, and then come home!

When was this? You've a youtube video of it?

In the past he'd said that if there was a genocide going on somewhere but it wasn't threatening Americans then he would NOT go to war & I completely agree with that as the government has no right to waste people's money on foreign wars which are unrelated to national defense BUT a lot of people find it appaling so it'd be nice to have this new video to at least counter that he'll go to war if people & the Congress insisted.