HGN11
01-07-2012, 07:55 PM
I have been a supporter of Ron Paul since the last campaign, and an on-and-off lurker on these forums since then. That said, this is my first post.
My reason for coming here is that I am quite concerned about the plan for defeating Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination. I think that the Paul campaign is trying to knock out the other contenders to the point that the media sees the race as between just Paul and Romney- at which point the line of attack will be the guy who stood for the same thing over 40 years in the public arena versus the guy who changed positions left and right during his time running for and serving in public office. This may be well and good, but the media narrative is quickly going to shift to "Romney is it" once/if he sweeps NH, SC, and FL. Romney will also likely take Nevada, which I remember him doing last cycle to my own shock until I realized the reaosn for it was that there is a very strong Mormon presence in the state thus making Mitt sort of a "hometown" guy. Ron may finish strong in NH and NV, but I have yet to see what the plan is to make a serious play for a second or close-to third-place finish in SC and FL.
Also, I cannot believe the lack of focus from the Paul and other campaigns when it comes to taking down Romney. He has become much more slick/robotic since the last election cycle, and is very unlikely to make errors that will take himself down this time. Just calling him a flip-flopper is not good enough at this point. He needs to be taken down on the very issues that he and the media say are his strengths- his electability an his private sector record. It needs to be highlighted to Republican Party primary voters that running a weak candidate would mean huge losses at the State and Congressional level at a time when we should be expanding our numbers and influence. It will also mean more of the same Democratic policies and judicial appointees who agree with such policies- maybe even at the Supreme Court level. Primary voters must be warned/asked whether they want to see their candidate lose under a barrage of attacks ads showing him taking both positions on the same issue. It has already happened very recently in American history, as our party used this tactic successfully to take down John Kerry only eight years ago! With regard to his private sector record, I wish that Ron Paul and the others would pin him down in these debates. Romney gets very jittery when he is nervous and starts laughing uncomfortably, but if a follow-up comes and he has to answer he is usually either testy or smiles and says something that contradicts at least one of his many prior positions. I don't have the details on Romney's Bain Capital days, but there are some clips out there on YouTube discussing them, and I just read that Newt's campaign got a hold of some company video that they are going to use against him in ads soon (though likely too late for Newt). I think that Ron needs to get out on the forefront with this line of attack and stop ignoring it or otherwise let Newt try to run with it (as he has lots of "private sector" problems himself). Other than attacking Romney's electability and record, it wouldn't hurt to see some primary ads out there about him denouncing Reagan in 1994 followed by him cloaking himself in Reagan's vision these days- or even better the clip where he declares that he is a "moderate" and that his views are "progressive" followed by some of his quotes from 1994-2002 contrasted with the totally opposite positions he holds at the present.
Remember, voters will reject a guy because they don't like his positions, but that makes it easy for them to settle on a guy who holds no positions. I hope that the campaign does not wait until it's too late to pull the rug out from under Mitt Romney to start attacking his supposed strengths. There are a LOT of low-information voters out there who are very happy to believe/parrot media narratives- they make up most of that 40%-50% that keeps flopping around out there for everyone except Ron Paul and Mitt Romney- and therefore they will decide the nominee.
My reason for coming here is that I am quite concerned about the plan for defeating Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination. I think that the Paul campaign is trying to knock out the other contenders to the point that the media sees the race as between just Paul and Romney- at which point the line of attack will be the guy who stood for the same thing over 40 years in the public arena versus the guy who changed positions left and right during his time running for and serving in public office. This may be well and good, but the media narrative is quickly going to shift to "Romney is it" once/if he sweeps NH, SC, and FL. Romney will also likely take Nevada, which I remember him doing last cycle to my own shock until I realized the reaosn for it was that there is a very strong Mormon presence in the state thus making Mitt sort of a "hometown" guy. Ron may finish strong in NH and NV, but I have yet to see what the plan is to make a serious play for a second or close-to third-place finish in SC and FL.
Also, I cannot believe the lack of focus from the Paul and other campaigns when it comes to taking down Romney. He has become much more slick/robotic since the last election cycle, and is very unlikely to make errors that will take himself down this time. Just calling him a flip-flopper is not good enough at this point. He needs to be taken down on the very issues that he and the media say are his strengths- his electability an his private sector record. It needs to be highlighted to Republican Party primary voters that running a weak candidate would mean huge losses at the State and Congressional level at a time when we should be expanding our numbers and influence. It will also mean more of the same Democratic policies and judicial appointees who agree with such policies- maybe even at the Supreme Court level. Primary voters must be warned/asked whether they want to see their candidate lose under a barrage of attacks ads showing him taking both positions on the same issue. It has already happened very recently in American history, as our party used this tactic successfully to take down John Kerry only eight years ago! With regard to his private sector record, I wish that Ron Paul and the others would pin him down in these debates. Romney gets very jittery when he is nervous and starts laughing uncomfortably, but if a follow-up comes and he has to answer he is usually either testy or smiles and says something that contradicts at least one of his many prior positions. I don't have the details on Romney's Bain Capital days, but there are some clips out there on YouTube discussing them, and I just read that Newt's campaign got a hold of some company video that they are going to use against him in ads soon (though likely too late for Newt). I think that Ron needs to get out on the forefront with this line of attack and stop ignoring it or otherwise let Newt try to run with it (as he has lots of "private sector" problems himself). Other than attacking Romney's electability and record, it wouldn't hurt to see some primary ads out there about him denouncing Reagan in 1994 followed by him cloaking himself in Reagan's vision these days- or even better the clip where he declares that he is a "moderate" and that his views are "progressive" followed by some of his quotes from 1994-2002 contrasted with the totally opposite positions he holds at the present.
Remember, voters will reject a guy because they don't like his positions, but that makes it easy for them to settle on a guy who holds no positions. I hope that the campaign does not wait until it's too late to pull the rug out from under Mitt Romney to start attacking his supposed strengths. There are a LOT of low-information voters out there who are very happy to believe/parrot media narratives- they make up most of that 40%-50% that keeps flopping around out there for everyone except Ron Paul and Mitt Romney- and therefore they will decide the nominee.