An educational campaign would be a great idea, if......

[LayZayFaire]

....Americans weren't such idiots. Especially when it comes to economics and the immoral nature of democracy (which includes democratic voting with no restraints, which is what we have today).

Imagine how effective an educational campaign is nowadays, then think about how effective an educational campaign will be when all the 18-24 year old college kids today are running the show in the future.

Now, realize today that around 20% of working aged people are functionally illiterate. These aren't exactly the type of people that we can direct towards Ron's books or mises.org. Most of the convincing will have to take place with discussion, which is labor intensive. Forget any type of literature bombs or written ideas campaign.

--

I'm always a pessimist, but if there is one thing Ron Paul can do to help his chances...STOP TALKING OVER PEOPLE'S HEADS. If you walk on the streets, who can really describe what the federal reserve is, aside from the leftists retards who will tell you that it is a privately owned institution (and private institutions are bad and public institutions are good (because they are for the people) which is why Congress should issue paper money for the good of the people)? Keep that issue to a minimum.

The inflation thing is also problematic because most people think inflation is just a natural part of growing economies. If people even understand what inflation is, they will most likely associate it with greedy corporations than government.

The business cycle and malinvestment explanation needs to be avoided altogether.

In the last debate, Ron explained higher tuition costs because of inflation and government loans. The moderators asked how kids would get an education without these loans and Ron again attacked the Federal Reserve (which is a main source of the problem, but not the ABSOLUTE culprit). He would have come off looking stronger if he attacked the whole notion that people even need to go to college, and the people on the left who convinced most young people that they would be better off going to college. Most of my fellow college goers when I was student were studying degrees that you would have to be crazy to study if you wanted a job in the future. If he criticized Obama's, Americans-needs-to-attain-a-higher-education agenda, he would get much more recognition from conservatives.

If Ron could explain economics in terms of social consequences rather than technical understanding, he would be in better shape.

--

I'll stop now before I go into rant mode.

[LibertyEagle]

I disagree with you about inflation. He needs to talk about it and keep hammering home who and what is causing it, because inflation is going to be on the tip of everyone's tongues very soon.

[ShaneEnochs]

I find that most people have no idea what inflation is. So I explain it to them. They understand, and think that banks should have no part in it. Education FTW.

[MelissaWV]

I don't find that most people are idiots. I find that they are unnecessarily busy. If you can find a way to speak to them at a time when they can listen, many will.

[TCE]

Education Campaigns have been proven to be worthless for some time now. Inb4 "but Ron's 2008 Campaign was successful!" Really? Spending tens of millions of dollars was successful? That money could have been used to take over state legislatures or elect two U.S. House members. But I digress.

The problem with education campaigns is that at the end of the day, even if 95% of Americans are pro-liberty, they still will vote Democrat or Republican and that will be that. 75% wanted a real Fed Audit. Over 60% want all U.S. foreign aid ended. Most didn't want the health care bill. Etc. It doesn't matter what the people want when the people in Washington D.C. want something else. Education belongs in the classroom and via books, speeches, talks, and websites. Political campaigns are for winning influence in government. Tom Woods has done an excellent job of reaching middle America and he has never run a political campaign.

EDIT: Also OP, realize Ron is who he is and he's not going to change. Right in the thick of things, it would be incredibly hard, even if he wanted to, to re-do many of his talking points and it could lead to Perry-like mess-ups.

[Gumba of Liberty]

I agree that Dr. Paul needs to speak the peoples language but I disagree he should stop talking about inflation and malinvestment. The way I explain our problems to my high school economics class is is to say "Look, imagine your parents give you a credit card and you rack up a boat load of debt. Now imagine that you have hit your credit card limit (your debt ceiling) and you have to pay your bills. If your parents make you work extra hard, get a second part-time job, and stop going out to dinner and the movies with your friends they are imposing austerity measures on you. If your parents pay your credit card bill you are getting a bailout. If you get a printer, go into your basement, and start printing money to pay your credit card you are inflating the currency and engaging in "quantitative easing". Which one is easiest to do? Which one seems is illegal for you to do? When the government prints money their is more money available and all the money that you have becomes worth less and less while everything you buy becomes more and more expensive.

I like how Dr. Paul explained in the last debate that he is more concerned with spending that taxation. He should break it down for the average person with the credit card analogy. "When you charge money to your credit card you already know that in the future you have to pay this money back. When politicians charge money to America's credit card the American people pay it back in three ways. The first way politicians attempt to pay back the debt is by paying one credit card with another credit card, they push debt into the future by using the credit of other countries to keep their debt ponzi scheme going. Right now we are heavily using our China Express Card. The second way politicians pay back the debt is by taxing the people and taking their money by force. There is a reason the Obama Administration is expanding the IRS. They want your hard earned money! The final way politicians pay back the debt is by going to their basement, the Federal Reserve, and printing money out of thin air. This is the biggest tax of all and it hurts the poorest Americans the most because it makes everything we buy everyday, like food and gasoline, more expensive. The reason you Grandma says she used to be able to buy a candy bar for a nickle and you cannot today if because of the Federal Reserve. America it is time to wake up!"

[1836]

....Americans weren't such idiots.

Well, you lost me right at the start. I refuse to read the rest.

If you think all political action to change things is pointless because other people are so stupid, the implication – essentially – is that they are unable to make the right choice. But by making such a value judgment on their ability to choose, you are in essence condoning government force in shaping their choice. You may not think that is what you are doing, but it is. And it is against everything that you say you believe in.

Given your pessimism, I think the only solution is to create "Ron Paul Land" on some uninhabited island. Maybe you can join some seasteaders.

[moderate libertarian]

If I were RP, I would put bit less focus on philosophical economic ideas about Gold standard, Federal Reserve ( while including them still in key points) on mass public forums and more on bankruptcy due to Iraq revenge attack/spending addiction, controlled media, corruption in Washignton, assassinations of US citizens by Obama, TSA groping, blowbacks from aid to mideast oppressors and torturers.