Should there be more emphasis & ads about Ron's superior electability against Obama?

[Paul Or Nothing II]

***

This is what I've been saying we MUST do for ages, bring out the "electability" card because Paul is the ONLY Republican that can garner enough Independents & Democrats, he can challenge Obama on issues like economy, foreign policy, Patriot Act, NDAA, healthcare & what not..........but we've been wasting too much time on attacking others, attacking others is fine, it brings their numbers down but why should voters vote for Paul? That we never tell them! And I've been saying for a while that right now, Republican Party is basically "anybody-that-can-beat-Obama Party" & we need to cash in on Paul's superior electability against Obama due to his appeal with Independents, Democrats, non-whites, he's leading all those major decisive voting-blocks

Where are the fricking electability ads??? :(

Changing minds IS important but let's not kid ourselves that we can change everyone's minds, not in such short time, just imagine if the Founders had said - hey, let's not declare war, let's wait for the rest of the population to become pro-liberty & then we'll declare war on Britain - if they'd done that then who knows, this land may still have been a "colony" of Britain so no, we CAN'T wait for the whole population to change their minds, just tell them that Paul has the best chance to beat Obama & let's get in the power & try to change things as much as we do at the local level - Let's go for the "The Pincers Approach" :D

Fact : Ron Paul can't win unless voters are made to realize that he's the ONLY answer to Obama!

[Hyperion]

without a doubt.

[digitaldean]

They did that with the tea one where they mixed Social Security with electability.

[Paulitics 2011]

They did that with the tea one where they mixed Social Security with electability.


That's RevPAC not the campaign.

[PolicyReader]

has this been posted to the Suggestions section/sent as an idea to someone from the PCC? Wouldn't hurt to put the concept more fully on their radar :)

ps ~ Phone From Home ("http://phone.ronpaul2012.com/v/faq.php)

[Ivash]

I'm not sure people would buy it, though. The media has always said that 'polls this far out don't matter', and many Republicans (erroneously) believe that 'even a dog catcher could beat Obama' (can't tell you guys how many times I've seen that posted/heard it said). A lot of Republicans would also say something along the lines of 'Liberals have next to nothing in common with libertarianism, conservatives won't vote en masse for Dr. Paul, and Independents don't like Obama as is, so they aren't going to hurt our candidate anyways'.

[TheGrinch]

If the campaign had more funds, I'd agree completely, but when you're working on a budget, they have to allocate the resources to the places they'll have the msot immediate impact, and so they've decided (and I believe correctly so) that the best use of ad money is to plant the seeds of doubt, most recently about Santorum's record not matching his rhetoric, to eliminate the field down. In fact, Dr. Paul has confirmed that this is exactly the plan. If you can't take all of the wind out of Romney's sails, the best bet is to eliminate the other options, until you're the last "anti-Romney" candidate standing for those who want a conservative alternative....

But make no mistake, Ron did address this twice in the last debate, in both the last question and interview right afterwards, so it's not as if they don't want to reinforce this meme. Unfortunately, it's just it's not enough in itself to convince the majority of conservatives that he's the best candidate to get behind. Sadly, it makes far more sense to play into the very founded doubts that people have about the rest of the GOP field.

But should the grassroots be emphasizing electability every chance we get? ABSOLUTELY!!! He's the only one who draws swing voters and dedicated supporters the GOP cannot win without. You shouldn't use that as a threat, but an endorsement that Ron clearly gives them the best chance to win.... At very least, I post something on facebook everytime Ron says something about it, or I see a poll that reinforces it, and all should be doing the same every time any republicans doubt his viability.... It is only them who are keeping him from beating Obama.

[Bruno]

No One But Paul can beat Obama!

[coffeewithchess]

There's no point in the post, the campaign clearly is now in a reactionary state...as their lack of actions the 2 weeks before Iowa showed they were not prepared to deal with the kitchen sink, when they knew what the kitchen sink would be from 4 years ago.

The campaign should just release the next RP book now, and at least let RP start signing some autographs to it at the campaign stops.

@TheGrinchWhoStoleDC: I would agree at eliminating the field, but this was to happen in Iowa with Santorum AND Bachmann AND Perry, but when they failed to do that in Iowa with Santorum, that was probably the biggest mistake this election by the campaign.

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

If all Ron Paul supporters donated $10 each, on a weekly basis. Things like this could be done with minimal concern. Ron Paul can stretch a dollar, but it can only go so far.

[Butchie]

If all Ron Paul supporters donated $10 each, on a weekly basis. Things like this could be done with minimal concern. Ron Paul can stretch a dollar, but it can only go so far.

Alot of buzz I hear, and this definitely includes my view, is that people are not going to continue to just blindly donate and "trust the campaign and Ron". Sorry, but that strategy has netted us a string of 3rd and 4th place finishes. For me it all started with the Perry ad, why on earth did we waste our money on that ad before the guy had even opened his mouth, and remind me again, what happened when he did speak?

Then in Iowa, they act like this newsletter thing was a complete shock, how could anyone think that issue would not have been brought up if Ron ever surged, likewise he had another cringe worthy moment on the FP policy discussion just days before the vote - he's been asked about FP a thousand times and he still loses his cool everytime it's asked.

FF to MI, we spend a ton of money with an attack ad on Santorum???? Why? Why help Romney. We should have let Santorum win, this would help to kill Mitt's "inevitable" status and prolong things, plus, a negative ad is fine as long as you add something in the end saying what's RIGHT about Ron, you may bring the guys numbers down with the attack but then you give them no reason to choose you instead.

[coffeewithchess]

Alot of buzz I hear, and this definitely includes my view, is that people are not going to continue to just blindly donate and "trust the campaign and Ron". Sorry, but that strategy has netted us a string of 3rd and 4th place finishes. For me it all started with the Perry ad, why on earth did we waste our money on that ad before the guy had even opened his mouth, and remind me again, what happened when he did speak?

Then in Iowa, they act like this newsletter thing was a complete shock, how could anyone think that issue would not have been brought up if Ron ever surged, likewise he had another cringe worthy moment on the FP policy discussion just days before the vote - he's been asked about FP a thousand times and he still loses his cool everytime it's asked.

FF to MI, we spend a ton of money with an attack ad on Santorum???? Why? Why help Romney. We should have let Santorum win, this would help to kill Mitt's "inevitable" status and prolong things, plus, a negative ad is fine as long as you ad something in the end saying what's RIGHT about Ron, you may bring the guys numbers down with the attack but then you give them no reason to choose you instead.

Very good points, and I agree with most. I think the Perry ad was only to try and help RP get some media attention though, which isn't a bad thing...but I agree the ads have not done a very good job of pointing out WHY RP is better than the other candidates for the most part; only a few have.
The problem is the campaign failed 100% on the newsletter issue, and have failed on addressing foreign policy in a meaningful way to the zombie voters that watch Fox News and only regurgitate what they hear, and can't be bothered with actually reading books.

When supporters repeat it, loud and clear, and the campaign ignores them, loud and clear...there is a serious issue somewhere, and it's not with the supporters.

[TheGrinch]

Please tell me you two are not referring to the "Manchurian Candidate" Perry youtube video by a "supporter" that's been shown to be directly from the Huntsman campaign, and was painted across the media as an official "ad"...

And stop with the woulda, coulda shouldas with the campaign decisions. You try to run a limited-budget campaign with the media and establishment marginalizing and ignoring you at every step, and see how good you do... By your attitude, I assume you would have given up long ago... For the vast majoirty of this, this is a movement, not jsut a campaign, so take your defeatist attitudes elsewhere, for the good of everyone who do too much good in growing the movement to listen to you gripe and whine about the fact that Dr. Paul can't run a campaign the way he'd like to, if the establishment and media would just let him.

The grassroots is here to do what the campaign can't, not to second-guess them. Your complaints aside, they're fighting the good fight, and that's what we support.

[coffeewithchess]

Please tell me you two are not referring to the "Manchurian Candidate" Perry youtube video by a "supporter" that's been shown to be directly from the Huntsman campaign, and was painted across the media as an official "ad"...

And stop with the woulda, coulda shouldas with the campaign decisions. You try to run a limited-budget campaign with the media and establishment marginalizing and ignoring you at every step, and see how good you do... By your attitude, I assume you would have given up long ago... For the vast majoirty of this, this is a movement, not jsut a campaign, so take your defeatist attitudes elsewhere, for the good of everyone who do too much good in growing the movement to listen to you gripe and whine about the fact that Dr. Paul can't run a campaign the way he'd like to, if the establishment and media would just let him.

The grassroots is here to do what the campaign can't, not to second-guess them. Your complaints aside, they're fighting the good fight, and that's what we support.

Ummm, the Perry ad was released in September I think...the other one was the Huntsman ad by Huntsman's daughters. See Perry ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n449lOZfyWQ

Try to run on a limited-budget? Yea, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich...they have both done that. As for the media, if you have watched some of my YouTube videos you will see that I hate the media, and I know full well how they treat Dr. Paul...BUT, Dr. Paul does himself no good by avoiding these people repeatedly, because he is avoiding FREE airtime and possibly waking up new supporters. Ignoring Bill O'Reilly who has the largest fake news show on cable tv, with lots of zombie viewers, but wanting millions to run attack ads? If this is about the movement, it should be to wake up some of those zombies as well.

[satchelmcqueen]

oh yes and it needs to be mentioned in every interview. doug weed does a great job of this.

[Butchie]

Please tell me you two are not referring to the "Manchurian Candidate" Perry youtube video by a "supporter" that's been shown to be directly from the Huntsman campaign, and was painted across the media as an official "ad"...

And stop with the woulda, coulda shouldas with the campaign decisions. You try to run a limited-budget campaign with the media and establishment marginalizing and ignoring you at every step, and see how good you do... By your attitude, I assume you would have given up long ago... For the vast majoirty of this, this is a movement, not jsut a campaign, so take your defeatist attitudes elsewhere, for the good of everyone who do too much good in growing the movement to listen to you gripe and whine about the fact that Dr. Paul can't run a campaign the way he'd like to, if the establishment and media would just let him.

The grassroots is here to do what the campaign can't, not to second-guess them. Your complaints aside, they're fighting the good fight, and that's what we support.

Yeah, here we go with another "blame the media" supporter because ofcourse Ron walks on water and can do no wrong, ditto with the campaign. Me, ofcourse, I'm just a dumb fool who doesn't know what he's talking about, FYI, I drug 13 (maybe more haven't confirmed everyone yet) voters to the polls yesterday who never even would have heard of Ron if not for me, I'm not saying that to brag, I'm simply saying some of us are actually out in the field listening to the voters, if I WAS running the campaign, I certainly would not ignore feedback from the field.

[J_White]

We need an electability ad - I think Reagan was considered "unelectable" by the media and establishment. AFAIK at some point even Obama was considered unelectable.
so put in the poll numbers against Obama, mention about these previous cases, and that he gets the most support from new and young voters and independents.
thats how the GOP can win the election.
maybe mention his main stances - no to taxes, have balanced budget, cut the deficit and debt, more liberties !

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Seriously! Who voted no? I think Obama is already scared! :D


I'm not sure people would buy it, though. The media has always said that 'polls this far out don't matter', and many Republicans (erroneously) believe that 'even a dog catcher could beat Obama' (can't tell you guys how many times I've seen that posted/heard it said). A lot of Republicans would also say something along the lines of 'Liberals have next to nothing in common with libertarianism, conservatives won't vote en masse for Dr. Paul, and Independents don't like Obama as is, so they aren't going to hurt our candidate anyways'.

None of what you're saying matters because look at the race, NONE of them can bring in enough Indies & Dems to beat Obama, ONLY PAUL CAN, once the primaries are gone then Repubs vs Dem so Republicans mayn't necessarily vote "for Paul" but "against Obama", they mayn't agree with his FP at all but they know exactly what they're getting with Paul, & more of them need to made aware by us that if Paul isn't the nominee then GOP is sure to lose because they lose the support of 10% or so of energetic Paul-supporters, in fact, they'll vote against GOP - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_p residential_election,_2012#Three-way_race


Alot of buzz I hear, and this definitely includes my view, is that people are not going to continue to just blindly donate and "trust the campaign and Ron". Sorry, but that strategy has netted us a string of 3rd and 4th place finishes. For me it all started with the Perry ad, why on earth did we waste our money on that ad before the guy had even opened his mouth, and remind me again, what happened when he did speak?

Then in Iowa, they act like this newsletter thing was a complete shock, how could anyone think that issue would not have been brought up if Ron ever surged, likewise he had another cringe worthy moment on the FP policy discussion just days before the vote - he's been asked about FP a thousand times and he still loses his cool everytime it's asked.

FF to MI, we spend a ton of money with an attack ad on Santorum???? Why? Why help Romney. We should have let Santorum win, this would help to kill Mitt's "inevitable" status and prolong things, plus, a negative ad is fine as long as you add something in the end saying what's RIGHT about Ron, you may bring the guys numbers down with the attack but then you give them no reason to choose you instead.

That's the point, we never tell them why they should vote for Ron! And bringing up all the other issues is fine BUT the biggest meme against Paul is that he's "unelectable" so unless that is countered, they'll be skeptical


We need an electability ad - I think Reagan was considered "unelectable" by the media and establishment. AFAIK at some point even Obama was considered unelectable.
so put in the poll numbers against Obama, mention about these previous cases, and that he gets the most support from new and young voters and independents.
thats how the GOP can win the election.
maybe mention his main stances - no to taxes, have balanced budget, cut the deficit and debt, more liberties !

I think electability is VERY IMPORTANT to average voters, they neither understand nor care about bigger issues & campaign should have spent more money on bringing out Paul's electability & leave attacking to the other campaigns for the most part

[yaz]

Hmm, 30 votes to 1...



wait... Ron Paul is here?

[DanConway]

For sure.

I talked to someone in Washington last night who couldn't caucus, thought Ron Paul had some good ideas, but still wanted to know if I seriously thought Paul could be elected. I said "Well, if he can get past the Republican primaries, a lot of polls have him running in a dead heat with Obama." She didn't know that at all. She was hopeful that Paul would change the conversation, but did not think he could do more than that. We need to show that he can win.

And now I wish I'd mentioned that he's the candidate that a lot of young people and independents, who were big for Obama in 2008, are getting excited about, when no one is too excited about the other Republicans. Oh well. One can always do better, and I've only made, what, 450 calls to all the states so far? And maybe 20% of those had me talking to someone? I need more practice -- guess that means I should make more calls! ;-)

[Paul Or Nothing II]

shameless bump :D