PDA

View Full Version : If it ain't broke, why are we fixing it?




Pharoah
11-11-2007, 03:51 AM
Reading a lot of threads here, I'm concerned that a number of the changes going forward involve walking away from things that already worked well for us. A few of the changes either proposed or already in place:

* We should no longer use "Revolution" on our signs.
* Ron Paul Girl no longer used to promote money bomb.
* The term "money bomb" should no longer be used.
* Ron should get a speech writer.
* Ron should put a more positive spin on things.

My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...

We achieved record-breaking fund-raising success with all of the above working for us... so why are we fixing it again?

Lord Xar
11-11-2007, 03:58 AM
why isn't the Ron Paul girl not gonna promote?

I agree, you never get rid of what works.... if something works better, great! But you keep all cyclinders going....all of them.

Get the Ron Paul girl back on the wagon, pronto!

hard@work
11-11-2007, 04:05 AM
why isn't the Ron Paul girl not gonna promote?

I agree, you never get rid of what works.... if something works better, great! But you keep all cyclinders going....all of them.

Get the Ron Paul girl back on the wagon, pronto!

She was insulted by someone. I'd go to her to find out the rest so we can keep it from being drama. She could use some support and encouragement. No, I do not think the 30,000 emails she got was enough.

Richandler
11-11-2007, 04:12 AM
Reading a lot of threads here, I'm concerned that a number of the changes going forward involve walking away from things that already worked well for us. A few of the changes either proposed or already in place:

* We should no longer use "Revolution" on our signs.
* Ron Paul Girl no longer used to promote money bomb.
* The term "money bomb" should no longer be used.
* Ron should get a speech writer.
* Ron should put a more positive spin on things.

My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...

We achieved record-breaking fund-raising success with all of the above working for us... so why are we fixing it again?

We need to change tactics for 2 reasons, there is less than 2 month till the first prmary and we don't have the percent that looks for a more "polished" candidate. That doesn' mean that any of the old stuff has to stop it just means it is crunch time.

LibertyOfOne
11-11-2007, 04:15 AM
Ron Paul gained his support because he does not represent the establishment. So we should move to establishment like tactics?

Richandler
11-11-2007, 04:31 AM
He got his support because he doesn't represent the unethical hacks and their tactics is constant attack and BS.

freelance
11-11-2007, 04:34 AM
Ron Paul gained his support because he does not represent the establishment. So we should move to establishment like tactics?

No, I don't think anyone would favor that! I think what people are saying is that he might want to find a way to appeal to the more mainstream folks.

There are two dynamics at work--the campaign and the American people. The American people are becoming more disenchanted by the day (except for the base), if you look at the polls. That means that they are more receptive to a new message. I think that people are suggesting that he "refine" his message a bit so that his appeal invites those people into the fold. In order to get the message, they have to understand the message.

For anyone who's watched Ron Paul over time, some days he's really on--his thoughts flow effortlessly from one to the next. Other days, he rambles and jumps from one thought to the next without any segue whatsoever and without completing thoughts.

We are already on board. We understand what he's saying. Those outside the fold are not. The American people have been told what to think for so long that when they hear a new message (liberty as opposed to conformity), they have to have it expaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiined thoroughly and in bite-sized pieces.

I sure hope that no one wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater, because that's what got us here, and I'm sure that Ron Paul would have none of that idea.

Benaiah
11-11-2007, 04:35 AM
///

Richandler
11-11-2007, 04:38 AM
One thing I would like to mention as an actor, is that my mentor and teacher For about 2 years has predicted every election she's taken a stab at. The reason? The "positive energy" from the candidates. She has no biased she can just tell and learning from her I know what she means by it now. Ron could use a speech coach more than a speech writer. It might be a little more work but it would definately pay-off. It would get us more fired up too.

huchahucha
11-11-2007, 04:40 AM
In no particular order (and not directed to the original poster):

If you don't like the term "money bomb", go here: http://www.luntz.com/
Perhaps this guy can help with words that might work for you.

Ron Paul Girl is perfect in every way.

As the poet Marilyn Manson once said,
"...you say you want a revolution man, and I say that you're full of shit"

Maybe a speech writer should get Ron Paul.

You should get a more negative outlook.

Malakai0
11-11-2007, 04:41 AM
My god fuck the MSM already. Don't let their spin change the campaign. Have some guts people! Liv, go right on doing your thing.


The establishment is going to do EVERYTHING they can to discredit us until the primary and then the general election when we win. You look worse by changing your message to accommodate bad perceptions, Dr Paul never ever does this and neither should we.


This IS a revolution.
We have many diverse participants.
We are doing very well.

Just go with it and stop being so critical! If you ignore the media bs it goes away quickly. You bet your ass they will report over and over that we got rid of the revolution thing with some nasty spin on it. If they didn't use the Liv vid they would have just associated us with terrorists for the nov 5th thing again or some other ridiculous nonsense. Theres zip we can do about it but keep doing what we're doing, raising money and attention!

LibertyOfOne
11-11-2007, 04:42 AM
At the most all Ron might need is a speech coach to polish him up a bit. I can see how that would help, but to have someone write speeches for him would take away what makes him Ron Paul.

Benaiah
11-11-2007, 04:42 AM
Ron Paul isn't that great of an orator, he has said so himself. He's also said that he has his shortcomings, but the message has no short comings. Ron Paul fever is spreading like wildfire because of our grass roots tactics, I still don't see how blending in with the rest will add more fuel to our fire.

In all honesty, even if Ron were to win the Republican primary, I would still think that we should keep up with the Revolution stuff mixed in with the normal stuff. Don't do away with it, though.

eloquensanity
11-11-2007, 04:42 AM
I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE! And with the original poster, also!!

I do not understand why people want to change what is working. Guys, seriously.


Who are you trying to attract with these new changes? My family and I are the type that you would probably point to and say "we have to change to attract them." Well guess what, the "Revolution" attracted us to Ron Paul.

Me - I go to 4 church services a week, am waiting until I'm married to kiss my fiancé, go door-knocking to invite people to church every week, don't drink or do drugs, don't swear, and voted for Bush both elections.

My parents and siblings - They home school, go to 4 church services a week, have voted Republican their whole life, have NEVER donated money or time to a politician or campaign, and supported the war up until they found Ron Paul.

My grandparents - attend church but aren't that religious, have been lifelong Republicans, voted for Bush both elections, supported the war in Iraq until I showed them Paul's views.

My brother - Missionary in a country that would put him in jail if they found out. Lifelong Republican who has never voted Democrat. Add all my "morals" and times it by two. He never kissed a girl until he was married and I doubt he's even cussed his whole life.


I could go on and on and on. Who are "these people" that you think aren't going to come around unless we act like the other campaigns? The Revolution is attracting EVERYONE-- from anti war hippies on the left, to religious right nut jobs like my family on the right.

Guys, we are on FIRE. Why stop now? I seriously don't get it.


[edit] I think that the Revolution is working because people want a change. Lefties, righties, and "mainstream" all want a change in this country, and nobody is providing any alternatives except Ron Paul. I've converted 2 people at work who are "mainstream." One liked McCain, and the other liked Clinton and Obama. Once I showed them what the Revolution was up to, they we're both hooked.


Good post. We don't need to change we just need the message to be heard.

.

Benaiah
11-11-2007, 04:52 AM
//

Pharoah
11-11-2007, 05:21 AM
Thanks for the thoughtful replies. freelance and others makes a good case for adopting a speech coach, though I'm not convinced that any other refinements would be an improvement. Benaiah makes an impassioned plea the power of "Revolution." - we'd be foolish to ignore it. According to Ron Paul Girl, teaparty07.com received complaints about her underwear videos [not the ones used by the grassroots campaign] and the decision was made to avoid controversy and not use her videos. On this subject, I agree with huchahucha.

Proemio
11-11-2007, 08:01 AM
My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...
Perhaps that is the idea... I say perhaps but am personally satisfied that this is so.

Some formula peddlers are doing it reflexively and innocently - they should reexamine why they support a movement about freedom and personal responsibility. Others are interested in what is good for the party first, the battle and Ron Paul second. And others still, are clearly gatekeepers for various special interests, who would like this thing to go away. It would be unnatural if it weren't so.

Therefore, the key is to rely on good instinct and common sense when evaluating all the suggestions, especially demands of what MUST be done. This "grassroots phenomena going main-stream" has shown to be able to walk and chew gum AND give the dark-agers a headache or two, precisely because most people simply follow the best advice - their own.

Consider:
It's the official campaign's job to dot the is and cross the ts as far as ensuring all the forms are filed to comply wih the (s)election machine, make sure Ron Paul gets to where he needs to be on time, and devise some coherent national message.

It's our job to energize the whole, while growing support locally and individually. Obviously, that will require all kinds of different and creative approaches. (In jest, I was wondering when someone would suggest a uniform.)

And most important. There is not a single person alive who can credibly claim experience with what is going on, even less with what "must" be done. Even history doesn't tell us much, except that when enough people decide it's time to clean house, they will, in creative and unexpected ways.

Suggestions are great, but demands are out of line, and when directed at the good doctor himself, they are preposterous.

All's cool though. The usual sequence goes like this: A thread is started with some demand or formula. It is immediately followed by a number of "I agree, 'we' must." Followed by some contrarian opinions. And then everything goes on as it naturally must - there is no stopping this...

Dlynne
11-11-2007, 08:06 AM
One thing I would like to mention as an actor, is that my mentor and teacher For about 2 years has predicted every election she's taken a stab at. The reason? The "positive energy" from the candidates. She has no biased she can just tell and learning from her I know what she means by it now. Ron could use a speech coach more than a speech writer. It might be a little more work but it would definately pay-off. It would get us more fired up too.

I don't think a speech writer/speech coach is changing things. It is only making his wonderful speeches getting an even better delivery. Candidates have speech writers and coaches because they are tired, tired, tired on the ccampaign trail and they need help making sure that the least number of words delivers the message at a level that hits the greatest number of people.

Ron Paul Fan
11-11-2007, 08:12 AM
I don't agree with any of the changes in the OP. I think Ron Paul is doing a great job and I was the only one who commended him for it in the other thread discussing this. Not only is he doing a great job, but we're doing a great job! When we make a mistake, it is the obligation of the people through their representatives to correct the mistake not to continue the mistake. But are the things in the OP mistakes? I don't think so! LET THE REVOLUTION CONTINUE TO GROW!!!!!!!!!!!

Thunderbolt
11-11-2007, 08:16 AM
We are fixing it to appeal to a broader base. We need more voters. If it weren't broke we would be polling at 100%, everyone in the world would know Ron Paul and not one person would ever call him or his supporters a kook.

You don't play the first quarter the same way you do the fourth quarter. Things change and if we don't change we will stagnate.

Thomas Paine
11-11-2007, 08:35 AM
Keep in mind that the GOP establishment frontrunners like Romney, Guiliani, Thompson and McCain are only polling better because they have spent tens of millions of dollars more the Ron Paul. In fact, if I am not mistaken, Romney has already spent $50 Million dollars yet he is only polling 20-30 percent depending on which state you look at. By contrast, like Commodore John Paul Jones, Dr. Paul has not even yet begun to fight. Now that Dr. Paul has raised more money than McCain and is closing in on Thompson in terms of money, you should start to see Dr. Paul rising in the polls assuming the money is spent wisely.

In light of the foregoing, don't fix what isn't broken. Keep using the term "Revolution." If it was a term that this nation's Founding Fathers were proud to utter while birthing this nation, then it should be term that supporters of the Ron Paul are proud to embrace.

Likewise, don't hesitate to use the term "money bomb." If the GOP establishment wants to use such terms to misportray Dr. Paul's campaign, then the establishment will be revealing how desparate and fearful they are of Dr. Paul's campaign.

Finally, about the Ron Paul "girl", Liv. While I come from a strict religious background, I find Liv's video to be funny, witty, and not at all degrading. Frankly, I see way more exposed flesh when I go to the beach. More importantly, she is not trying to sell liquor or sex like some bimbo in a beer commercial but simply delivering the simple but most important message for our generation: elect Ron Paul! Therefore, I hope Liv returns and is welcomed by everyone for a job well done and continues to do what she does best and that is helping Ron Paul get elected to save this country.

jenius
11-11-2007, 08:36 AM
I agree that we need to focus on gaining mainstream appeal.

Case and point: swearing on the boards. Some people are turned off by swearing, some aren't. But if someone is new to the boards and just checking them out for the first time, there's no reason to scare away people who are a bit uncomfortable with it, particularly because swearing is completely unnecessary 99% of the time.

As for Ron Paul, I think the only thing he has to do is to make sure he focuses on his strongest topics:

* Iraq war opposition
* devaluation of currency
* loss of civil liberties
* tax opposition

As for some of his other issues, such as the elimination of the war on drugs and abortion, I don't think he should mention those unless someone brings them up first. He states his position eloquently, as always, but these issues have far less mainstream appeal and his stance on these issues is unlikely to sway new voters to his cause.

Also, Ron Paul needs to CLARIFY his stance on education. LOTS of people seem to think Ron Paul wants the department of education eliminated for no good reason, and every child in America home-schooled. When people only hear that he wants to eliminate the department of education, and aren't able to hear his full reasoning, it's one of those issues that people point at and say, "Ron Paul is nuts!" He needs to present this argument in a more digestible format, or stop mentioning it as one of his key issues.

DrNoZone
11-11-2007, 08:38 AM
Herding Ron Paul supporters is about 300 times more difficult than herding cats...I suggest people stop trying. Make a suggestion if you like, but don't get upset when people do their own thing and ignore you.

Proemio
11-11-2007, 08:42 AM
We are fixing it to appeal to a broader base. We need more voters. If it weren't broke we would be polling at 100%, everyone in the world would know Ron Paul and not one person would ever call him or his supporters a kook.

You don't play the first quarter the same way you do the fourth quarter. Things change and if we don't change we will stagnate.

That this is simply not supportable by any stretch. There is every indication that the other campaigns are either stagnating or crating more 'independents', precisely because they used and still follow traditional electionering formulas.

Most activists will naturally adapt their approaches to changing requirements; they have phantastically done so since the beginning, when most people familiar and supportive of Ron Paul said "Fabulous - but he can't win". It's precisely formulas and directives that would prevent the necessary nimbleness to adapt.

"Something is going on in this country that nobody really understands" - Ron Paul, stating the obvious, you might add.

In the sum of things, every honest and considered effort will add to the whole, no matter how off-the-wall it may appear from the comfort of commentary.

walt
11-11-2007, 09:09 AM
No, I don't think anyone would favor that! I think what people are saying is that he might want to find a way to appeal to the more mainstream folks.

There are two dynamics at work--the campaign and the American people. The American people are becoming more disenchanted by the day (except for the base), if you look at the polls. That means that they are more receptive to a new message. I think that people are suggesting that he "refine" his message a bit so that his appeal invites those people into the fold. In order to get the message, they have to understand the message.

For anyone who's watched Ron Paul over time, some days he's really on--his thoughts flow effortlessly from one to the next. Other days, he rambles and jumps from one thought to the next without any segue whatsoever and without completing thoughts.

We are already on board. We understand what he's saying. Those outside the fold are not. The American people have been told what to think for so long that when they hear a new message (liberty as opposed to conformity), they have to have it expaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiined thoroughly and in bite-sized pieces.

I sure hope that no one wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater, because that's what got us here, and I'm sure that Ron Paul would have none of that idea.


All I advocate is a simplification of his message with an emphasis on showing how Ron's ideas driectly affect people's everyday lives.

aravoth
11-11-2007, 09:14 AM
Nothing has changed. All thats happening is that some people here think they can somehow reign in a bunch of Libertarians. Good luck with that. let me know how it works out.

Craig_R
11-11-2007, 09:14 AM
Reading a lot of threads here, I'm concerned that a number of the changes going forward involve walking away from things that already worked well for us. A few of the changes either proposed or already in place:

* We should no longer use "Revolution" on our signs.
* Ron Paul Girl no longer used to promote money bomb.
* The term "money bomb" should no longer be used.
* Ron should get a speech writer.
* Ron should put a more positive spin on things.

My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...

We achieved record-breaking fund-raising success with all of the above working for us... so why are we fixing it again?

whats with "we" you got a frog in your pocket? we're individuals, I aint changing anything in the way I promote paul, if others are who am I to say they cant.

this is a grassroots campaign and NOBODY not even the pushy people within the grassroots dictates anything we do Period

freelance
11-11-2007, 09:16 AM
All I advocate is a simplification of his message with an emphasis on showing how Ron's ideas driectly affect people's everyday lives.

Yeah, that's what I used way too many words to say. Why on earth would we want to throw out Revolution and money bomb? Those things work!!! Those things got us here. Without Trevor's money bomb, we would not be where we are just a few days later. We took an astronomical leap, even with all the hand wringing that went on over here about the V thing. I sure hope that we don't fall into that syndrome where we are eager to grasp defeat from the claws of victory! It's happened too many times before in other campaigns.

constituent
11-11-2007, 09:23 AM
She was insulted by someone. I'd go to her to find out the rest so we can keep it from being drama. She could use some support and encouragement. No, I do not think the 30,000 emails she got was enough.

sometimes one bad one is all it takes, really.

or maybe it's just a drama thing, i don't know either way.

i see "ron paul girls" the way i saw... well, pretty much all
girls when i was younger.

if it ain't this one, it'll be another (and you can't get mad about that if you want, life is what it is and i have no illusions about it).

tmg19103
11-11-2007, 09:24 AM
Reading a lot of threads here, I'm concerned that a number of the changes going forward involve walking away from things that already worked well for us. A few of the changes either proposed or already in place:

* We should no longer use "Revolution" on our signs.
* Ron Paul Girl no longer used to promote money bomb.
* The term "money bomb" should no longer be used.
* Ron should get a speech writer.
* Ron should put a more positive spin on things.

My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...

We achieved record-breaking fund-raising success with all of the above working for us... so why are we fixing it again?

I think all the above are great. I hope Liv comes around and does a vid for the teaparty07.com. I have no problem with "money bomb" and the press has not used it in a negative way. When they say "money bomb" and "$4 million in one day" it has great impact. From the 45 minute speech I heard at the Philly rally - Ron Paul does NOT need a speech writer. He has become much more polished, but part of his appeal is that he is not a sound bite, warm and fuzzy, phony politician. I think this will work with mainstream voters. They will see RP is just telling the truth (and in this election voters really want the truth after being sold out by Bush), telling it like it is in an off the cuff manner while the other candidates are so practiced, phony and full of it.

As for postive spin, I believe RP still needs to tell it like it is, BUT he should add a positive spin with positve SOLUTIONS and by painting a picture of how well off we will be with him as Prez. Voters need to be able to visualize how much better their lives, this country and the world will be with RP as prez. I LOVE the Ron Paul rEVOLution sings, but RP still has real low name recognistion. I think "President '08" should be in most signs. People see Ron Paul rEVOLution and they just wonder what it is. If the sign has "President '08" it will cause those who are now thinking about the candidates as we get closer to the primaries to look him up more so than rEVOLution signs.

constituent
11-11-2007, 09:27 AM
Nothing has changed. All thats happening is that some people here think they can somehow reign in a bunch of Libertarians. Good luck with that. let me know how it works out.

right, lmao at those people.

every once in awhile the (relative newbies at the) forums start trying to
throw their weight around... these people see politics and life as a team
sport, all they want is a winner (no matter who, no matter what they
stand for) and to be on that winning side.

Expect to see more folks of this taint flocking to our humble online abode, telling everyone
to do things their way or just stfu ...

you know, for the team.

AdoubleR
11-11-2007, 09:33 AM
Reading a lot of threads here, I'm concerned that a number of the changes going forward involve walking away from things that already worked well for us. A few of the changes either proposed or already in place:

* We should no longer use "Revolution" on our signs.
* Ron Paul Girl no longer used to promote money bomb.
* The term "money bomb" should no longer be used.
* Ron should get a speech writer.
* Ron should put a more positive spin on things.

My concern is that in adopting all these changes, we run the risk of making Ron appear just as bland and insincere as the other candidates...

We achieved record-breaking fund-raising success with all of the above working for us... so why are we fixing it again?


Right on!!! Why change what's worked? The revoution sign is what drew many of us... Beleive me, revolution is not Taboo... It's what most people fantasize about in their subliminal thoughts.... We just needed Ron Paul to show them that it is indeed viable...