everlasticity
01-21-2012, 08:16 PM
Everyone here knows how difficult it is to talk about Ron Paul with those who don't think that he is electable. These individuals might like him and his platform, but won't vote for him because he doesn't appear to have the national support that the other candidates do.
Now, I know this is a really sensitive time, and I don't want to get anyone riled up. So let me premise that this conversation is best directed toward those who are feeling particularly discouraged tonight, who no longer feel that it is worth it to support a candidate that isn't putting up the numbers necessary to win the nomination.
I believe in RP's long term strategy. If he can't take the nomination, he can gobble up enough delegates to influence the party platform coming out of the convention. What happens at the GOP convention is that the party comes up with an official platform that represents the party (not necessarily any one candidate). If Ron Paul can influence that platform, it means something.
So I want to suggest a different strategy when it comes to promoting Ron Paul that recognizes the premise that many have about Ron Paul: He won't win so why should I vote for him?
The answer is simple. If we recognize this premise, then we are able to identify with those who are on the fence. We can then say: He might not win but he has a definite chance to influence the party platform coming out of the convention. If you are worried about Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney because they don't represent the conservative cause, then you should vote for Ron Paul because this will draw the party platform in a direction that is more consistent with conservative values. The object changes from voting for the front runner because he or she thinks they will win, to voting for Ron Paul because he or she wants to pull the party in that direction.
For those who are skeptical about voting for RP because he isn't the front runner this could go a long way. No one is satisfied with Gingrich or Romney, but many won't vote for Paul because he isn't clearly favored. I have learned in my discussions with others that if I push the premise that RP can win, they argue up and down against every one of his positions, even if they may have originally indicated that they like some of his ideas. But by accepting their premises we play into this average voter's rules, which takes them off guard. Instead of arguing against something that someone can't get past, we should attempt to argue within their frame of reference and promote what he or she can accept. If we can begin convincing people to vote Ron Paul because they want to influence the party, rather than vote for Romney or Newt who make no difference, then we can make headway with those who can't accept that RP can take the nomination and therefore won't vote for him.
This is a friendly suggestion. I still have high hopes for this campaign. A brokered convention is anyone's game. We need to push for that as much as we need to push for Paul. We know Paul won't take a majority of delegates, the cards are too stacked against him. But we can fight to make sure that no one takes a majority, which benefits nobody more than us.
Now, I know this is a really sensitive time, and I don't want to get anyone riled up. So let me premise that this conversation is best directed toward those who are feeling particularly discouraged tonight, who no longer feel that it is worth it to support a candidate that isn't putting up the numbers necessary to win the nomination.
I believe in RP's long term strategy. If he can't take the nomination, he can gobble up enough delegates to influence the party platform coming out of the convention. What happens at the GOP convention is that the party comes up with an official platform that represents the party (not necessarily any one candidate). If Ron Paul can influence that platform, it means something.
So I want to suggest a different strategy when it comes to promoting Ron Paul that recognizes the premise that many have about Ron Paul: He won't win so why should I vote for him?
The answer is simple. If we recognize this premise, then we are able to identify with those who are on the fence. We can then say: He might not win but he has a definite chance to influence the party platform coming out of the convention. If you are worried about Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney because they don't represent the conservative cause, then you should vote for Ron Paul because this will draw the party platform in a direction that is more consistent with conservative values. The object changes from voting for the front runner because he or she thinks they will win, to voting for Ron Paul because he or she wants to pull the party in that direction.
For those who are skeptical about voting for RP because he isn't the front runner this could go a long way. No one is satisfied with Gingrich or Romney, but many won't vote for Paul because he isn't clearly favored. I have learned in my discussions with others that if I push the premise that RP can win, they argue up and down against every one of his positions, even if they may have originally indicated that they like some of his ideas. But by accepting their premises we play into this average voter's rules, which takes them off guard. Instead of arguing against something that someone can't get past, we should attempt to argue within their frame of reference and promote what he or she can accept. If we can begin convincing people to vote Ron Paul because they want to influence the party, rather than vote for Romney or Newt who make no difference, then we can make headway with those who can't accept that RP can take the nomination and therefore won't vote for him.
This is a friendly suggestion. I still have high hopes for this campaign. A brokered convention is anyone's game. We need to push for that as much as we need to push for Paul. We know Paul won't take a majority of delegates, the cards are too stacked against him. But we can fight to make sure that no one takes a majority, which benefits nobody more than us.