PDA

View Full Version : Do not call into talk shows unless you know what you are talking about.




Ronulus
09-28-2011, 08:45 AM
Yesterday I was listening to AM 660 in the dallas area and both times I got into my car and turned it on there was someone calling in to talk about ron paul. The first was a guy calling in because the host called him dr demento because of his views on 9/11 and our foreign policy and how he's a fringe candidate.

The guy that called in could not articulate any of ron pauls policies or even his sentiment on 9/11. Instead when the host said "the guy wants to blame us for 9/11" the caller just said "ok" and then started to argue "what about the economy, is he wrong on that".

Perhaps the caller doesn't read these forums and maybe he truly doesn't understand Rons positions. However whenever you call in and can't even articulate anything, it makes Ron look worse.

The next caller on a different show was talking about the devaluing of our dollar. The host was saying it hadn't devalued at all and a dollar is a dollar. Just gold has gone up in price because it is now an equity on the market. The caller was anti fed but could not come up with any actual reason why the fed was bad or how inflation has actually hit us. He even mentioned the silver dime and the host said "yeah that was when the cure for polio was coming out". The caller could have said "the price of gas hasn't gone up, you can still get it for a silver dime" or even used the price of any good in comparison to end the of breton woods to the value of goods today. Look at the cost of vehicles, food, any item on the market and it has gone up.

When guys like this try to argue against inflation you have to use real evidence, like the fact that in the 70's when my mom bought her first car, brand new it cost about 2,000 dollars. Now it would cost about 25,000.





Anyways, there are correct ways to respond to criticisms that make more headway and are factual instead of looking like uninformed supporters. If those callers had answered the questions the listeners would have been more likely to go look up Ron's positions and the host may have even agreed.

Original_Intent
09-28-2011, 09:00 AM
Hear, hear! I have heard a couple of callers on CNN and so forth that really do Ron a disservice. I appreciate that they are trying to support him, but you have to have something better to say than "He is for a gold standard and $#!&!"

smartguy911
09-28-2011, 09:02 AM
it makes sense since our support is increasing.

CasualApathy
09-28-2011, 09:03 AM
Some of Ron's supporters make me cringe, so yeah - please, if you're a retard, don't call talkshows :p

phill4paul
09-28-2011, 09:04 AM
Agree 100%. Just flipping through the channels last night and came across a commentator I hadn't heard before. Some host named Andy Dean was telling his screeners not to let any Ron Paul people through to him unless they were "nerdy" Paul supporters so that he could school them.

Edit: Quote from his website showing his antipathy for Paul. "DEAN: “The only proof that aliens do exist on this planet is in the form of Ron Paul. …tell me why you’re attracted to Ron Paul’s candidacy and why does the mainstream media ignore Ron Paul? Is it because he’s an ugly guy?”"

V3n
09-28-2011, 09:05 AM
It also helps to have a conversation related to the current conversation..
Just calling to say his name on air without even discussing the topic of the day is not good.

Jeremy
09-28-2011, 09:05 AM
This happens a lot too. They call into Mark Levin and he tears them apart.

KingNothing
09-28-2011, 09:07 AM
This weekend I had a 25-ish minute conversation on air about economics and politics, and plugged Ron Paul at the end.

I think the key is to get the host to agree with you on everything, and then throw in the Ron Paul stuff. They can't write you off as a loon if they've just agreed with everything you stand for.

phill4paul
09-28-2011, 09:09 AM
This weekend I had a 25-ish minute conversation on air about economics and politics, and plugged Ron Paul at the end.

I think the key is to get the host to agree with you on everything, and then throw in the Ron Paul stuff. They can't write you off as a loon if they've just agreed with everything you stand for.

^^^This.

ninepointfive
09-28-2011, 09:10 AM
If anything, this just proves people think Ron, and Liberty are legitimate enough to hop on the wagon, and take our "gospel" as truth. Although, you do raise a good point.

I doubt anyone on these forums would stumble as much.

erowe1
09-28-2011, 09:14 AM
The problem is, Ron Paul supporters are always convinced they know what they're talking about.

Hence all the threads about how people who don't support Ron Paul are supposedly less knowledgeable than people who do.

D.A.S.
09-28-2011, 09:24 AM
The fact that people do call in means our message is spreading, and after they are stumped by a talk show host, they probably go back and dig a little bit deeper on Ron's positions and come out stronger next time. People who listen to these talk shows probably aren't Ron's supporters to begin with, so i doubt these callers do much damage... our strength is in the numbers.

Brian4Liberty
09-28-2011, 09:26 AM
Edit: Quote from his website showing his antipathy for Paul. "DEAN: “The only proof that aliens do exist on this planet is in the form of Ron Paul. …tell me why you’re attracted to Ron Paul’s candidacy and why does the mainstream media ignore Ron Paul? Is it because he’s an ugly guy?”"

That is the first time I've heard an "ugly" argument. Could this be the result of the SNL skit, where they used a very alien-strange looking guy to play Ron?

phill4paul
09-28-2011, 09:30 AM
That is the first time I've heard an "ugly" argument. Could this be the result of the SNL skit, where they used a very alien-strange looking guy to play Ron?

Don't know when the interview quoted was produced. However, it does bring up an interesting point in light of the OP post. Perhaps, we are only hearing these poorly planned out calls because those are the only calls screeners are letting through. That way it gives the 'air' of equal time but in reality damages the message that the host is opposed to.

bpitas
09-28-2011, 09:35 AM
I think the key is to get the host to agree with you on everything, and then throw in the Ron Paul stuff. They can't write you off as a loon if they've just agreed with everything you stand for.

This makes a ton of sense - going to try that next time I call into POTUS on XM. Pete Dominick seems to be a reasonably non-partisan guy some of the time, but Ron Paul makes him bring up really hard to answer questions about little-known stuff that Dr. Paul has said in the past, and it's hard to answer when you're put on the spot like that. But if you go through the whole conversation BEFORE mentioning RP, then he won't get defensive and might leave his "Anti Paul" flashcards in his desk drawer.

KingNothing
09-28-2011, 09:42 AM
This makes a ton of sense - going to try that next time I call into POTUS on XM. Pete Dominick seems to be a reasonably non-partisan guy some of the time, but Ron Paul makes him bring up really hard to answer questions about little-known stuff that Dr. Paul has said in the past, and it's hard to answer when you're put on the spot like that. But if you go through the whole conversation BEFORE mentioning RP, then he won't get defensive and might leave his "Anti Paul" flashcards in his desk drawer.

Disarming people is so vitally important, and its something many ardent Paul supporters haven't embraced. It seems like we go out looking for arguments, instead of agreements.

The fact of the matter is that NO ONE wants corporations to be getting billions of taxpayer dollars. And no conservatives enjoy taxes. And if you're talking to liberals they'll dislike the wars and the losses of civil liberties. If you know your audience and frame the conversation around those issues, you can build a relationship and then move on to issues to which you can RESPECTFULLY disagree with one another.

raider4paul
09-28-2011, 09:45 AM
This happens a lot too. They call into Mark Levin and he tears them apart.

The only reason he rips anyone apart is because he lets them talk for just long enough to get a vague idea of the subject they're calling in on, then he puts them on mute and goes on a rant giving very little opportunity for the caller to rebut anything that he says. Then he asks them questions that aren't legitimate but kinda sound like they are and it puts them in a corner. Michael Savage does the same thing, although he seems to respect Ron a lot more and has had him on the show. But them "ripping people apart" is all smoke and mirrors.

bpitas
09-28-2011, 09:50 AM
The only reason he rips anyone apart is because he lets them talk for just long enough to get a vague idea of the subject they're calling in on, then he puts them on mute and goes on a rant giving very little opportunity for the caller to rebut anything that he says. Then he asks them questions that aren't legitimate but kinda sound like they are and it puts them in a corner. Michael Savage does the same thing, although he seems to respect Ron a lot more and has had him on the show. But them "ripping people apart" is all smoke and mirrors.

Sage advice, and usually when I call into POTUS it's because either Pete or a guest have just said something wrong/misleading about Dr. Paul, and I am calling in to "correct" them, so I am sorta on the attack. I think your suggestion of debate-judo will be much more effective.

erowe1
09-28-2011, 09:52 AM
The only reason he rips anyone apart is because he lets them talk for just long enough to get a vague idea of the subject they're calling in on, then he puts them on mute and goes on a rant giving very little opportunity for the caller to rebut anything that he says. Then he asks them questions that aren't legitimate but kinda sound like they are and it puts them in a corner. Michael Savage does the same thing, although he seems to respect Ron a lot more and has had him on the show. But them "ripping people apart" is all smoke and mirrors.

Yeah, you've got to understand that radio hosts control their shows to make the side win that they want to win. Any image of it being an open forum is fake. Trying to use Levin to spread the word about RP would be a total waste of anyone's time.

Brian4Liberty
09-28-2011, 09:55 AM
Perhaps, we are only hearing these poorly planned out calls because those are the only calls screeners are letting through. That way it gives the 'air' of equal time but in reality damages the message that the host is opposed to.

That's probably the majority of the cases.

RIPLEYMOM
09-28-2011, 10:04 AM
Careful drinking and blogging too :o

The neocon site, The Blaze, has a surprisingly supportive article on Ron's appearance with Jon Stewart featuring all three videos. Great comments follow the article. One Ron Paul supporter deserves huge kudos for the way they are taking on the misinformed. I'm proud of the supporters who can do that!

Simple
09-28-2011, 11:29 AM
Well if you guys don't want the fringe of our support to be the voice of the movement, might I humbly suggest that we get core supporters to be a more active voice in media. I've enjoyed Jesse Benton's contribution, but from what I've read in this forum there are lots of well read, intelligent voices in this crowd that could be heard.

RonPaulCult
09-28-2011, 11:33 AM
This happens a lot too. They call into Mark Levin and he tears them apart.

Levin never puts on people who disagree with him unless he is certain they are retarded. I know this for a fact because sometimes people lie about who they are and what they want to talk about - and then he dumps their calls and says "this person lied to our call screener"

Interesting that the only intelligent opposing views I ever hear on the show are people who lied to get on.