It's Time to Start "Keeping it simple"

[tbone717]

We are just over 7 weeks away from IA and from that point on things are going to start moving at a much faster pace. At this point, I believe it is time for the campaign to start "dumbing it down" so that the average voter can see the clear distinction between Paul and the other candidates.

Paul uses a lot of terms (Keynesian economics, Austrian economics, TARP, Sarbanes–Oxley, Dodd-Frank, etc) that mean nothing to the average voter. This is not because they are necessarily unintelligent, but more so because they don't spend the time reading and researching things that us political types do. Their lives are busy with work, kids, etc so this information needs to be presented to them in a simplified means without all the buzzwords that excite the political geeks like us that get it.

Particularly on the economic issues, Paul needs to frame things out very simply and succinctly. Romney, Newt & Cain believe that the government needs to intervene in the economy; whether it is bailing out banks and corporations, creating regulations, manipulating the tax code or fixing interest rates. Paul believes in the free market and that the government does more harm than good when it intervenes in the marketplace.

Without changing the message, Paul can reach a lot more people by making it simple. Teach the difference between Keynesian and Austrian economics as you would to a high school class. Don't name the regulations by name. Instead call them what they are, excessive regulations that hurt businesses and cost jobs.

I realize that he does this to a point, but I feel that when Paul speaks at times his message is clouded by his intellect. In short, he loses some people when he starts using the political phrases, so they do not hear the message behind it all.

It is important to remember that the overwhelming majority of primary voters do not read political blogs, news sites or forums. They don't watch the news programs or even the debates. They instead go to work, they watch sports, sitcoms and movies. They take their kids to soccer games and ballet classes. The campaign gets a small amount if time to reach these folks in their day to day lives. They need to work on a strategy to show the stark differences between Paul and the others in a concise, understandable manner. And they need to do it quickly.

[nayjevin]

You make good points, but this is why I love Dr. Paul. If his goal were to dip the pool for votes, he'd dumb it down. Instead he speaks truth to power.

[tbone717]

nayjevin - isn't the goal to win the GOP nomination? If so then he needs to do what it takes to reach those voters. You do not need to compromise your principles to do so either.

I think a good example is a pastor. Most pastors have either a PhD or Masters degree. They are highly school on the Greek and Hebrew languages, theology, etc. Now take a pastor and have him speak to other pastors. He can talk about the conjugation of Greek verbs in a text. He can use high level theological terms. He can do this because his audience knows what he means when he talks about infralapsarianism without the need to define it. However, that same pastor delivers a much differently sounding message to his congregation on a Sunday morning, and even again differently when he teaches a children's class. The very same message can be delivered three different ways dependent upon the audience.

[acptulsa]

Well, you know, the issues before us are complex. That's just the way it is. We got in this mess by running the greatest and most powerful republic the world has ever seen on pat answers and sound bites. And people at least understand that it's a damned mess. That's a start.

Ron Paul has been trying to 'dumb it down' all along, and find simpler, more clear ways to say what needs to be done. And we have been trying all along to educate voters enough to understand the issues before us. Will he and they meet in the middle soon enough to save this nation? I suppose that's up to us...

[Butchie]

nayjevin - isn't the goal to win the GOP nomination? If so then he needs to do what it takes to reach those voters. You do not need to compromise your principles to do so either.

I think a good example is a pastor. Most pastors have either a PhD or Masters degree. They are highly school on the Greek and Hebrew languages, theology, etc. Now take a pastor and have him speak to other pastors. He can talk about the conjugation of Greek verbs in a text. He can use high level theological terms. He can do this because his audience knows what he means when he talks about infralapsarianism without the need to define it. However, that same pastor delivers a much differently sounding message to his congregation on a Sunday morning, and even again differently when he teaches a children's class. The very same message can be delivered three different ways dependent upon the audience.

YOU NAILED IT!!! For those who claim you can't dumb it down I do it all the time and I've gotten so many new voters for Ron without compromising anything. I've said this before and I will again, I think far to many RP supporters only associate with other RP supporters and just don't realize that is not the majority of Americans. In an ideal world yes, voters would do hours of research, but if we lived in an ideal world we wouldn't have these problems to begin with.

[Rocket_pilot]

I'm with you. I've been saying this all along...

[JamesButabi]

A common theme of my critiques. With foreign policy on the table for the debate tonight, emotions running high, and the obvious lone view Ron Paul has, this could be the biggest debate of the campaign.

[KramerDSP]

Tonight could be monumental. They will almost certainly ask Ron about Iran. He needs to have a response ready to go.

[centure7]

Anyone who doesn't know what TARP is simply should not be allowed to vote since the program was next to last nail on the economic coffin (the last nail was Obamacare).

But yes you're right, we should have always focused on a dumbed down message for the masses.

[raystone]

Voters get the representatives they deserve. Unfortunately, we all pay for the results.

[sailingaway]

To some extent I agree it needs to be in terms someone who hasn't majored in comparative economic theory can understand. However Ron can't be expected to both respond concisely to questions of why all others on stage are starting from the wrong point on a question and completely avoid economic tags

And I've always thought talking down by politicians came off as elitist pandering. I find it refreshing that Ron assumes that if a voter isnt familiar with a particular word, it doesn't mean they don't know how to operate a dictionary.

[Butchie]

To some extent I agree it needs to be in terms someone who hasn't majored in comparative economic theory can understand. However Ron can't be expected to both respond concisely to questions of why all others on stage are starting from the wrong point on a question and completely avoid economic tags

And I've always thought talking down by politicians came off as elitist pandering. I find it refreshing that Ron assumes that if a voter isnt familiar with a particular word, it doesn't mean they don't know how to operate a dictionary.

Well, just off the top of my head here are things I didn't know 6mnths ago:

Austrian Economics
Keynesian Eco
How many Senators we had
How many Congressman we had
What was the diff between the House and Senate
Dodd/Frank
Glass/Steagal
Fannie/Freddie
Where Libya, Syria, and Yemen were on a map
What was a majority or minority leader or their names
No idea who John Stossel was, Judge Nap, Jack Cafferty, etc, etc

I could go on and on, but you have to remember things that are common knowledge to us at this point others have never heard of, and unfrotunately the first primary is in Jan, we don't have time to "educate" the masses, nor are most even interested in being educated, I want Ron to stay on message, but he needs to seriously rephrase alot of things, this is not the time to be a professor.

[nayjevin]

nayjevin - isn't the goal to win the GOP nomination?

I doubt that's what Ron grew up thinking his mission in life is. But it's certainly our current, short term goal isn't it?


If so then he needs to do what it takes to reach those voters. You do not need to compromise your principles to do so either.

Possibly. It may also be a narrow view to think that speaking in simpler language will effect lasting change. Perhaps those in power need to change, and what the 'masses' think doesn't actually matter as much as they think it does. Perhaps the 'masses' will follow whatever those in power tell them to, and it is better to re-educate the educated.


I think a good example is a pastor. Most pastors have either a PhD or Masters degree. They are highly school on the Greek and Hebrew languages, theology, etc. Now take a pastor and have him speak to other pastors. He can talk about the conjugation of Greek verbs in a text. He can use high level theological terms. He can do this because his audience knows what he means when he talks about infralapsarianism without the need to define it. However, that same pastor delivers a much differently sounding message to his congregation on a Sunday morning, and even again differently when he teaches a children's class. The very same message can be delivered three different ways dependent upon the audience.

This is a very good point, but Ron's in a different position. When he speaks in a debate, he is speaking to all three groups - he must make a choice. I personally like that he speaks to the educated. Others can lift themselves up, or perhaps only vaguely recognize the guy sounds smart. Perhaps a better balance can be reached, by sprinkling in some easily understood examples and the like. I don't totally disagree with what you're saying.

[sailingaway]

I doubt that's what Ron grew up thinking his mission in life is. But it's certainly our current, short term goal isn't it?



Possibly. It may also be a narrow view to think that speaking in simpler language will effect lasting change. Perhaps those in power need to change, and what the 'masses' think doesn't actually matter as much as they think it does. Perhaps the 'masses' will follow whatever those in power tell them to, and it is better to re-educate the educated.



This is a very good point, but Ron's in a different position. When he speaks in a debate, he is speaking to all three groups - he must make a choice. I personally like that he speaks to the educated. Others can lift themselves up, or perhaps only vaguely recognize the guy sounds smart. Perhaps a better balance can be reached, by sprinkling in some easily understood examples and the like. I don't totally disagree with what you're saying.

Our entire political model depends on an educated and engaged electorate. If they aren't now, they had better get cracking, but as a crash course, Ron is trying to summarize. But he can't prep shorthand for every eventuality. Heck, he's the only person on stage who can even RESPOND SUBSTANTIVELY to every eventuality.

[heavenlyboy34]

Voters get the representatives they deserve. Unfortunately, we all pay for the results.
More accurately, a simple majority of people get the representatives they deserve. All the other voters and non-voters are stuck with the simple majority's decision. The 17th amendment makes the situation even worse. That's one of the major bits of legislation that needs to be repealed.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

I have a sinking suspicion that at some point, more likely sooner rather than later, some change, some shock to the system - something - is going to happen that is going to frame the debate over who should be the GOP nominee. When that "something" happens, all Ron Paul will need to do is to present himself as the right man, available at the right time.

Will this be a market collapse? Will this be the collapse of the Dollar, or the Dollar's loss of being the world reserve currency...

Unless the American people are woken up, they will remain asleep. Only minds that are still asleep will be willing to support Romney, or Cain...and only a shock to the system will wake them up.

[anaconda]

You make good points, but this is why I love Dr. Paul. If his goal were to dip the pool for votes, he'd dumb it down. Instead he speaks truth to power.

I'm guessing the biggest voting demographic in the U.S. is the "clueless" vote. We need those people and no one can win without their votes. It is essential to float many simple talking points with media hype potential. Time's a wasting..

[PierzStyx]

"True wisdom is taking a complex idea and making it so simple even a child can understand it." - Prophet/LDS Church President Thomas S. Monson

Remember K.I.S.S.- Keep It Simple, Stupid.

Dr. Paul si great at making his ideas understandable if they'd only give him the time to do so. But simplicity and clarity and essential, even above brevity.

[Johnny Appleseed]

There are a large number of people that have never voted and are afraid that when they walk into a polling place everyone is going to laugh at them for not knowing how to vote.
There should be a sticky how to register and vote... heck do a video of the entire process...make people that have never voted feel guilty for the mess we are in and that it is their duty to make things right and vote RP ...for the children!

[Paul4Prez]

Ron Paul has a record among American political leaders that is unmatched in US history. It's not up to us to advise his campaign on how to present his ideas, it's up to us to inform everyone we can about why Ron Paul is the best choice for president.

[Paul4Prez]

More accurately, a simple majority of people get the representatives they deserve. All the other voters and non-voters are stuck with the simple majority's decision. The 17th amendment makes the situation even worse. That's one of the major bits of legislation that needs to be repealed.

Somehow I think we would end up with 99 percent the same Senators if the state legislatures picked them. And the one we wouldn't have elected would be Ron Paul's son.