DRUDGE BOMB: Ron Paul Ad: Big Dog

[IndianaPolitico]

Would you like to see the new ad on Drudge? Let's have a Drudge bomb!

COPY AND PASTE: Ron Paul Ad: Big Dog http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXCZVmQ74OA&feature=player_embedded

Drudge: http://www.drudgereport.com

[FSP-Rebel]

pump

[RonPaulCult]

My favorite thing to do when submitting a link to drudge is writing the headline I'd like them to use.

This time I wrote "Ron Paul - DO IT"

and then pasted the link.

[GunnyFreedom]

Posted to G+ with "Go big, or go home!"

[Romulus]

done!

[affa]

that ad is the definition of 'go big or go home'. love it!

[kusok]

I'm sure campaign knows who to target, how, and where. But ads like this absolutely confuse me.

People, at least the ones I talk to in New York, Long island, as well as LA, are horrified of Ron Paul precisely because of such attitude. In a nanny state I would think attacking the nanny state is a bad idea. Makes much more sense (to me) to heavily lean on ending the wars, ending rising prices, ending higher taxes, rather than ending institutions that people think help them. This ad assumes people know those departments are bad... This has not been my experience, if anything people (take the 99% for example, those protesters) think that we need MORE regulation, MORE departments, MORE oversight. Why not cater to their beliefs??? use emotional appeal if have to.


I see a problem with people not accepting Ron Paul usually based on this kind of reaction: "Oh no! he is against abortion, he will end all government aid to people, he will let iran get a nuke, he hates Israel" etc. I can't see how such a tough ad would help improve this vision people have of Ron Paul. I would think the campaign should market Ron Paul as a peace candidate who is for SAVING social programs, for ending wars, for lowering taxes and prices, for individual freedoms, and so on.

[musicmax]

Drudge has had yesterday's RP stuff up (Paul Moves to 2nd, Romney 3rd...; PAUL: 'I'd like to think of myself as the flavor of the decade'...;... Pans Donald Trump as false GOP deity; great picture) for a long time.

[tremendoustie]

I'm sure campaign knows who to target, how, and where. But ads like this absolutely confuse me.

People, at least the ones I talk to in New York, Long island, as well as LA, are horrified of Ron Paul precisely because of such attitude. In a nanny state I would think attacking the nanny state is a bad idea. Makes much more sense (to me) to heavily lean on ending the wars, ending rising prices, ending higher taxes, rather than ending institutions that people think help them. This ad assumes people know those departments are bad... This has not been my experience, if anything people (take the 99% for example, those protesters) think that we need MORE regulation, MORE departments, MORE oversight. Why not cater to their beliefs??? use emotional appeal if have to.


I see a problem with people not accepting Ron Paul usually based on this kind of reaction: "Oh no! he is against abortion, he will end all government aid to people, he will let iran get a nuke, he hates Israel" etc. I can't see how such a tough ad would help improve this vision people have of Ron Paul. I would think the campaign should market Ron Paul as a peace candidate who is for SAVING social programs, for ending wars, for lowering taxes and prices, for individual freedoms, and so on.

You're talking to leftists, who don't vote in the R primary. To win the primary, you have to appeal to republicans, almost none of whom would respond like the people in "New York, Long island, and LA" you're referring to.

For example:
"This has not been my experience, if anything people (take the 99% for example, those protesters) think that we need MORE regulation, MORE departments, MORE oversight."

Almost no republican thinks these things, and most detest the 99% protestors.

[milo10]

I'm sure campaign knows who to target, how, and where. But ads like this absolutely confuse me.

People, at least the ones I talk to in New York, Long island, as well as LA, are horrified of Ron Paul precisely because of such attitude. In a nanny state I would think attacking the nanny state is a bad idea. Makes much more sense (to me) to heavily lean on ending the wars, ending rising prices, ending higher taxes, rather than ending institutions that people think help them. This ad assumes people know those departments are bad... This has not been my experience, if anything people (take the 99% for example, those protesters) think that we need MORE regulation, MORE departments, MORE oversight. Why not cater to their beliefs??? use emotional appeal if have to.


I see a problem with people not accepting Ron Paul usually based on this kind of reaction: "Oh no! he is against abortion, he will end all government aid to people, he will let iran get a nuke, he hates Israel" etc. I can't see how such a tough ad would help improve this vision people have of Ron Paul. I would think the campaign should market Ron Paul as a peace candidate who is for SAVING social programs, for ending wars, for lowering taxes and prices, for individual freedoms, and so on.

Keep in mind that we are running for the Republican nomination, not the general election. That campaign will have different emphases. :)