Campaign: What if Ron says this during tom debate...

[Publicani]

"I see no difference between Obama, George Bush and any of my opponents. If any one of them becomes the President, we'll have unemployment, inflation, Fed printing money, debt, endless wars, individual mandates, and bailouts. But if you, the voter, think that Obama is much worse than anybody else, than you have no choice but vote for me. My supporters will not vote for anybody else regardless of what I say or do. Regardless of the convention prime time speech, Vice Presidency, or whatever GOP might offer me. Regardless of who I endorse, I have no influence among my supporters in this regard. So, South Caroline, if you don't want Obama, you have to vote for me."

He can give this answer to the first question he's asked, regardless of the question. Why he is negative? He has to tell the voters the truth, because "I see no difference..."

Who he would support? Third party? Economics, foreign policy...
"I see no difference..."

[ShaneEnochs]

He'd be seen as a pompous jackass.

[dbill27]

He'd be seen as a pompous jackass.

aka newt gingrich

[Publicani]

He'd be seen as a pompous jackass.
Why? This is all true, isn't it?

[ShaneEnochs]

Why? This is all true, isn't it?

It doesn't matter if it's true. The way you have it presented would be seen very negatively.

[Paulitics 2011]

The way you have it presented would be seen very negatively.

This.

[Publicani]

It doesn't matter if it's true. The way you have it presented would be seen very negatively.
Ok, how would YOU present it?

[Edward]

Ok, how would YOU present it?

Present what? A thirty second soundbite that sums-up who Ron Paul is? Na' ga' da.

[ropo]

He aint gonna win over any voters talking like that

[ShaneEnochs]

Ok, how would YOU present it?

"To defeat President Obama, we'll need a nominee that is the polar opposite. I am the only one that is realistically different from the President in every way that counts. If we continue down this path, as my opponents might have us do, we'll be facing disaster. I want to have a real audit of the Federal Reserve. I understand the business cycle. I want to end the wars. I was against the bailouts. I'm against individual mandates. I'm against raising the debt limit. I'm against expanding the powers of the president. These are conservative principles.

If there is one other candidate on this stage that can realistically say that, I'll drop out right now and endorse them."

Now that would create headlines.

[Publicani]

He aint gonna win over any voters talking like that
Maybe you are right, but can you explain why? Is it because people will not believe him?
Or they will believe him, but despite giving Obama victory they will not vote for Ron anyway?

[Edward]

"To defeat President Obama, we'll need a nominee that is the polar opposite. I am the only one that is realistically different from the President in every way that counts. If we continue down this path, as my opponents might have us do, we'll be facing disaster. I want to have a real audit of the Federal Reserve. I understand the business cycle. I want to end the wars. I was against the bailouts. I'm against individual mandates. I'm against raising the debt limit. I'm against expanding the powers of the president. These are conservative principles.

If there is one other candidate on this stage that can realistically say that, I'll drop out right now and endorse them."

Now that would create headlines.

Damn. ShaneEnochs 2012!

[yeshuaisiam]

Or he could just make a funky scream. LOL.

[ShaneEnochs]

Maybe you are right, but can you explain why? Is it because people will not believe him?
Or they will believe him, but despite giving Obama victory they will not vote for Ron anyway?

It's because no one likes being told what to do, and that they have no choice.

[Edward]

Maybe you are right, but can you explain why? Is it because people will not believe him?
Or they will believe him, but despite giving Obama victory they will not vote for Ron anyway?

Saying that the other Republican candidates are just like Obama is going to turn off Republicans who would perceive that to be false. The statement about his supporters just makes us look like jackasses.

[Publicani]

"To defeat President Obama, we'll need a nominee that is the polar opposite. I am the only one that is realistically different from the President in every way that counts. If we continue down this path, as my opponents might have us do, we'll be facing disaster. I want to have a real audit of the Federal Reserve. I understand the business cycle. I want to end the wars. I was against the bailouts. I'm against individual mandates. I'm against raising the debt limit. I'm against expanding the powers of the president. These are conservative principles.

If there is one other candidate on this stage that can realistically say that, I'll drop out right now and endorse them."

Now that would create headlines.

This is good, but it's not the final blow. Also, there's a risk that some of them say I am that candidate. And Ron will not be given time to argue against.

[ShaneEnochs]

This is good, but it's not the final blow. Also, there's a risk that some of them say I am that candidate. And Ron will not be given time to argue against.

None of them can say that. Gingrich was for individual mandates. As was Romney. Santorum was for bailouts and raising the debt limit. They all want to continue the wars and expand executive power.

[Publicani]

Saying that the other Republican candidates are just like Obama is going to turn off Republicans who would perceive that to be false. The statement about his supporters just makes us look like jackasses.

Ok, your first sentence could be addressed by saying "You may think there's a big difference between ... but look at ... and ..."
Your second sentence - so what? Ok, we look like jackasses, but we will give them Obama. Do they want that to happen?

[Edward]

None of them can say that. Gingrich was for individual mandates. As was Romney. Santorum was for bailouts and raising the debt limit. They all want to continue the wars and expand executive power.

They could all say that they want to end wars and a global US presence is the way to do so.

[Publicani]

None of them can say that. Gingrich was for individual mandates. As was Romney. Santorum was for bailouts and raising the debt limit. They all want to continue the wars and expand executive power.
They all have a history of occasionally not saying full truth regardless.

[RonPaulFever]

How many more "Ron should say this" threads do we need? Enough already.

[J_White]

Dr. Paul does not talk like that, the message has truth, but needs to be articulated differently.

[Lord Xar]

LACK OF HIS OPPONENTS BALLET ACCESS!!!
SOPA/NDAA

[giovannile07]

By talking like that you make those who are radically against Paul more angry and those leaning towards him or even unsure annoyed because you are talking toward them negatively acting as if they vote for anyone else they are an idiot and that will rile up some people just enough to vote for anyone, BUT Dr. Paul. That is a terrible play and they might just want Obama over Ron Paul if he talks like that. Talking negatively and acting like a pompous fool with just turn off people, you should see the effect on Gingrich, we fully dislike him, especially because he acts like he is our only hope along with saying oh it's most likely that I will be the nominee, people don't like it when you are cocky and it especially turns off voters if you tell them that you only have one option.

[TakeThePowerBack]

"I see no difference between Obama, George Bush and any of my opponents. If any one of them becomes the President, we'll have unemployment, inflation, Fed printing money, debt, endless wars, individual mandates, and bailouts. But if you, the voter, think that Obama is much worse than anybody else, than you have no choice but vote for me. My supporters will not vote for anybody else regardless of what I say or do. Regardless of the convention prime time speech, Vice Presidency, or whatever GOP might offer me. Regardless of who I endorse, I have no influence among my supporters in this regard. So, South Caroline, if you don't want Obama, you have to vote for me."



YOU ARE RIGHT AND I STAND WITH YOU!!! Who cares if the voters see him as pompous; they will reap their reward of ignorance! WE AS RON PAUL SUPPORTERS have to STAND TRUE and be known as liberty lovers that WILL NOT CONCEDE to the fake neocons. NO ONE BUT PAUL!!!!

[jjockers]

It'd be fun to see this in more of a 'prediction' type setting. Similar to the video below. "If we continue to reelect the status quo, I foresee the following future:..."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alaeMXX_juU

[sratiug]

Yeah, that's a damn good start.

[Publicani]

How many more "Ron should say this" threads do we need? Enough already.
It's still a free country. Don't read what you don't want to read.

[Publicani]

By talking like that ... you should see the effect on Gingrich...
Exactly.

[Blue]

Nothing in this thread matters because Ron isn't going to say what OP posted. Let it die.

[Publicani]

He hates negative ads, but he does it.
His campaign is reading this thread. If it makes sense, he will do it.

[Edward]

Nothing in this thread matters because Ron isn't going to say what OP posted. Let it die.

Actually, it might serve as an example to others regarding how not to talk to their friends, family, and colleagues about Ron Paul. Pompous jackasses and blowhards might have difficulty convincing others of Ron' s merits.

[Publicani]

Actually, it might serve as an example to others regarding how not to talk to their friends, family, and colleagues about Ron Paul. Pompous jackasses and blowhards might have difficulty convincing others of Ron' s merits.
These are just baseless insults. If you are so sure, why don't use logic?

[Edward]

These are just baseless insults. If you are so sure, why don't use logic?

I know not what point you are attempting to make.

[Publicani]

I know not what point you are attempting to make.
My point is this. Some voters sincerely don't understand that by voting for anybody but Ron Paul they are voting for Obama. MSM will not say this. Opponents will not say this. If Ron Paul says this forcefully during debate, the voters can't say later on that they didn't know. Suddenly, instead of making decision between Romney or Gingrich, they have to decide between Ron Paul and Obama. I believe this framing of the main decision is both true and also is better for us.

[freneticentropy]

He should just say he's going to nuke all the muslims, execute all drug users, ban abortion, deport the foreigners and make christianity the official religion.

[helmuth_hubener]

Actually, it might serve as an example to others regarding how not to talk to their friends, family, and colleagues about Ron Paul. Pompous jackasses and blowhards might have difficulty convincing others of Ron' s merits. Actually, as a supporter it's possible to make the "only Paul can bet Obama, because we'll only vote for Paul" point without it coming off wrong. Because you're just the third-party analyst, not the candidate. So you don't come off as arrogant. Plus, you're not saying "my people won't vote for you" you're just saying "I won't vote for anyone else", and you do have some inside information about that; they can't very well argue that you're wrong about what you'd do, and RP supporters in general, by extension.

[Simple]

LACK OF HIS OPPONENTS BALLET ACCESS!!!
SOPA/NDAA

Yes x1000 and might I add a Whoop Obama with the Constitution.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5dZt27YTSY&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

[Publicani]

He should just say he's going to nuke all the muslims, execute all drug users, ban abortion, deport the foreigners and make christianity the official religion.
That would certainly help, but 1. it wouldn't be true for him and 2. all the others can say the same thing.
What I suggest is to show the ace that he keeps up his sleeve. The fact that his supporters will vote only for him is 1. true and 2. Nobody else can make this statement. Why not use it now?

[Matthew Zak]

I hope he responds differently when they ask him "which of your opponents would you endorse if you didn't get the nomination?"

Maybe something like, "I will endorse whichever candidate that can convince me they have read the constitution and that they want to end these wars."

[cavalier973]

"How sad would it be for our soldiers to come home to a country that is no longer free."

[Franky6767]

IMO all the man has to do is straight talk about his foreign policy. If military action becomes needed....congress should vote on it and declare a war. A declaration of war clearly defined with goals listed. Then I as commmander in chief would go in and take care of business. I hope and pray it never has to come to that but if need be a will go in and quickly and soundly defeat any threat against us. There will be no fooling around.....

Its would be his exact policy as I understand it....and that type statement alone..... said with a bold, look them in the eye serious voice would make ALLLLL the difference in a place like SC.....and everywhere else with the Republicans. There is no lie in it....I think that is what RP belieives as well....and I think it would help him in a BIG way. Why its not being hammered at this point I just don't know.

[Edward]

My point is this. Some voters sincerely don't understand that by voting for anybody but Ron Paul they are voting for Obama. MSM will not say this. Opponents will not say this. If Ron Paul says this forcefully during debate, the voters can't say later on that they didn't know. Suddenly, instead of making decision between Romney or Gingrich, they have to decide between Ron Paul and Obama. I believe this framing of the main decision is both true and also is better for us.

I get where you are going with this, but it is the previous comment/question to me that I still don't understand. (Thread drift happens, so don't worry about it.) Although it isn't something that can easily be demonstrated to others, I do buy the premise that Obama and the Republican establishment are two sides of the same coin.

[Edward]

I hope he responds differently when they ask him "which of your opponents would you endorse if you didn't get the nomination?"

Maybe something like, "I will endorse whichever candidate that can convince me they have read the constitution and that they want to end these wars."

I believe he said something like that in 2007/2008.

[Edward]

IMO all the man has to do is straight talk about his foreign policy. If military action becomes needed....congress should vote on it and declare a war. A declaration of war clearly defined with goals listed. Then I as commmander in chief would go in and take care of business. I hope and pray it never has to come to that but if need be a will go in and quickly and soundly defeat any threat against us. There will be no fooling around.....

Its would be his exact policy as I understand it....and that type statement alone..... said with a bold, look them in the eye serious voice would make ALLLLL the difference in a place like SC.....and everywhere else with the Republicans. There is no lie in it....I think that is what RP belieives as well....and I think it would help him in a BIG way. Why its not being hammered at this point I just don't know.

Couldn't have said it better myself.