Romney attack ad before Texas please?

[Gray Fullbuster]

srsly. gotta sway them grinch supporters.

[CaptUSA]

If you want to see ads, you need to donate. The funds have been coming in slower and slower.

I got a call last night asking for $650,000 by the end of the week.

[Kotin]

To my mind, they have not done one yet.. And there must be a reason..

[sailingaway]

Ron is going to have enough party bad will getting nominated on the floor of the RNC and disrupting Romney's coronation thereby, if it is a coronation. If Gingrich supporters, some of whom are quite intelligent, really dislike Romney, that prospect should make them smile.

[Gray Fullbuster]

To my mind, they have not done one yet.. And there must be a reason..

I mean, we got a 30% support base of a candidate that just dropped out hopping somewhere and there isn't an attack on the person they are half willing to go to and not switching the chances they hop ship.

[coffeewithchess]

If you want to see ads, you need to donate. The funds have been coming in slower and slower.

I got a call last night asking for $650,000 by the end of the week.

There is absolutely no proof to back up what you have said, other than a political campaign continuing to ask for money. There is no reason to "donate" to a campaign that has raised/spent $30 million, and expect anything new from it.
If the campaign was serious about attacking Romney, they have had the entire last month to do so since Santorum dropped out, and they have not.

The Ron Paul campaign has:
1) Attacked Rick Perry only in an ad
2) Attacked Newt Gingrich ONLY in ads
3) Attack Rick Santorum ONLY in ads
4) Failed to attack Romney ONLY with ONE single ad, the entire race
5) Is wasting money running an ad in Texas, still attacking Gingrich and Santorum... again wasting money, and turning off potential Gingrich and Santorum supporters that may swing to Paul, but instead they are continuing to attack two candidates not even in the race?

The campaign needs money for what? To run outdated ads, and not release one single Romney attack ad yet? It costs very little to run a delegate strategy, because that relies more on the grassroots turning out and participating, than anything from the campaign than a few people at most, keeping things organized.

[sailingaway]

delegate strategy costs a ton because it is very rules intensive and the rules are different in every state and need a lot of outreach to grass roots to teach them.

[floridasun1983]

There will be no Romney attack ads from the campaign, no matter if you donanted $100,000,000. The only way its going to happen is if a PAC does it.

[Badger Paul]

I've got an idea, if you want to run anti-Romney ads, get together a few likeminded persons on RPF, organize a chip-in, design an ad then find some cable or local TV stations in Texas or wherever to run it. Hell, we've done it before. Why keep complaining when you can do something about it.

[coffeewithchess]

delegate strategy costs a ton because it is very rules intensive and the rules are different in every state and need a lot of outreach to grass roots to teach them.

No, delegate strategy is a few campaign staff, and lots of volunteers doing PFH and the grassroots showing up and participating.
A few campaign staffers in each state they have concentrated on, is minimal salaries.

How many full-time staffers did the Louisiana HQ have? Same for Iowa, and the others? Most campaign staffers are underpaid and overworked, though for RP most don't care about the time/efforts put into it, because of the message/cause...but again, saying the campaign needs MORE money to produce more ads, when they are wasting money on an outdated ad, that was only effective against one candidate for 2 hours is really misleading.
If I can put together internet YouTube videos for free, and Chainspell, and the multitude of other RP supporters can...the campaign does not need $650,000 to make Romney ads. Run them? Perhaps, but it would have been nice before the last moneybomb had the campaign shown it was "in it to win it" and released some sort of internet attack ad on Romney, or at the very least, President Obama...

[Barrex]

No, delegate strategy is a few campaign staff, and lots of volunteers doing PFH and the grassroots showing up and participating.
A few campaign staffers in each state they have concentrated on, is minimal salaries.

How many full-time staffers did the Louisiana HQ have? Same for Iowa, and the others? Most campaign staffers are underpaid and overworked, though for RP most don't care about the time/efforts put into it, because of the message/cause...but again, saying the campaign needs MORE money to produce more ads, when they are wasting money on an outdated ad, that was only effective against one candidate for 2 hours is really misleading.
If I can put together internet YouTube videos for free, and Chainspell, and the multitude of other RP supporters can...the campaign does not need $650,000 to make Romney ads. Run them? Perhaps, but it would have been nice before the last moneybomb had the campaign shown it was "in it to win it" and released some sort of internet attack ad on Romney, or at the very least, President Obama...

[Agorism]

Texas is such an expensive market, I'm not sure this would be worthwhile.

Also I've been a bit disappointed with the last few ads that guy has made. Some of his early ads were good though, but big dog and anything there after seemed bad.

[coffeewithchess]

Texas is such an expensive market, I'm not sure this would be worthwhile.

Also I've been a bit disappointed with the last few ads that guy has made. Some of his early ads were good though, but big dog and anything there after seemed bad.

Didn't somebody say the campaign was keeping/hoarding cash for Texas and California? Then the campaign announces they are running an ad that is irrelevant to 2/3 candidates in it?
If Texas is expensive, wouldn't it make sense to not attack candidates not in the race, and instead use those candidates' own words against Romney to help RP win over more supporters in Texas that probably do not like Romney?

[r3volution]

dunno if you want an ad war with a guy that has 10s of millions in the bank .

[Crystallas]

Brilliant idea, attack Romney. I don't know if you are paying attention, but Romney is funded by Goldman Sachs. If we spend $2million on Romney attack ads, Romney or his PACs will turn around and spend $20million.

You're basically asking for Ron Paul to take a knife into a gunfight. Our strategy now is going to be the MOST effective of all options, quit hating on Paul's campaign for not attacking Romney. They have made the right choice.

[coffeewithchess]

Brilliant idea, attack Romney. I don't know if you are paying attention, but Romney is funded by Goldman Sachs. If we spend $2million on Romney attack ads, Romney or his PACs will turn around and spend $20million.

You're basically asking for Ron Paul to take a knife into a gunfight. Our strategy now is going to be the MOST effective of all options, quit hating on Paul's campaign for not attacking Romney. They have made the right choice.

So, the fact that Newt won two states, and Santorum many more...and they both DIRECTLY attacked Romney doesn't matter? Romney unloaded on both of them, and the only reasons Santorum dropped out were because his home state of Pennsylvania was a questionable state (if he lost it, he lost any credibility moving forward in 2016) and to build name recognition/2016.
Santorum is a career politician, and stayed in the race long enough to build a decent base of supporters and connections, to jump back into it in 2016 if he chooses.

I seriously doubt Romney's campaign and PACs at this point, want to spend another DIME on a Republican...because they are already taking attacks from President Obama's campaign for the general election.

Again, even if the campaign released an internet only ad...that would be better than nothing, which is exactly what we have gotten so far.

[kathy88]

Chess, man you have got to stop trying to talk people out of donating to the campaign.

[Crystallas]

So, the fact that Newt won two states, and Santorum many more...and they both DIRECTLY attacked Romney doesn't matter? Romney unloaded on both of them, and the only reasons Santorum dropped out were because his home state of Pennsylvania was a questionable state (if he lost it, he lost any credibility moving forward in 2016) and to build name recognition/2016.
Santorum is a career politician, and stayed in the race long enough to build a decent base of supporters and connections, to jump back into it in 2016 if he chooses.

I seriously doubt Romney's campaign and PACs at this point, want to spend another DIME on a Republican...because they are already taking attacks from President Obama's campaign for the general election.

Again, even if the campaign released an internet only ad...that would be better than nothing, which is exactly what we have gotten so far.

And the fact that both Newt and Santorum failed and both ended up in serious campaign debt.

[alucard13mmfmj]

dunno if you want an ad war with a guy that has 10s of millions in the bank .

It is not necessarily bad if Romney uses money to attack Ron Paul. If the campaign or a PAC puts together an attack ad and piss Romney off, then Romney might respond and produce ads attacking Ron Paul. In my opinion, it is a win-win situation

People will know Ron Paul is still running and still exists. We use Romney's resources and money to get people to know that Ron is still there as a choice and that he is a serious contender. Now Romney is an experience businessman and he probably has a lot of advisors... so he might not take the bait.

Attacking Romney would also dispell this bro-mance that the media kinda kept pushing. The bromance between Romney and Ron.

We spend 200,000 on attack ads and Romney would probably spend a million or two on attack ads. We indirectly get free advertisement/mention from Romney. The more money Romney spends, the better. Hell, Romney could spend 10 mill attacking Ron Paul... but it would only help us. There is only 2 things Romney can really attack Ron on... Newsletters and the fact that he has not won a major primary/beauty contest yet (excluding virgin islands) and MAYBE "legalizing drugs/hookers" or misintepreting non-interventionalist.

I think it would be worth the money to attack Romney in Texas. Remember, Ron needs a certain percentage to even get delegates from Texas. We don't want another Virginia where a little bit more effort would have pushed us over the top.

[coffeewithchess]

Chess, man you have got to stop trying to talk people out of donating to the campaign.

Not trying to talk people out of it, but the campaign needs to either listen to supporters and try to gain new supporters from Santorum and Gingrich, or stop acting like if they don't get $2.5 million here, $650K there, the campaign is going to end. Seriously, they are wasting money on an ad in Texas attacking Santorum and Gingrich, instead of focusing on spreading Ron's message AND/OR addressing issues that have been holding back some GOP voters.
When a campaign adviser not only responds to emails, but then does things within his power to show supporters that he is listening to the requests and questions while the official HQ isn't...there's something odd going on.

I'm hoping that perhaps Mitt Romney isn't a bad guy, and really does care for the country and his children's, grandkids', and great grandkids' futures...and he will hand Ron the nomination at the GOP convention...BUT, Mitt Romney does not have a track record that I would trust if that were the going rumor.

All it will take is one Romney only attack ad, from the same company that has done the others, from the RP campaign, and I have a fundraising idea...but I'm not going to support a campaign staff that will roll out of RP's campaign HQ, back to C4L staff positions when all is said and done and not bat an eyelash.

There's a reason I only get 4-6 hours of sleep at night right now, if that, while being married and having two little ones...and it's not because I'm up late at night watching cable tv, playing video games, or trolling Facebook.
Drones flying around America in the next few years by the thousands, $16 trillion in debt now and counting, continuous war talk with Iran...somethings going to give somewhere, and it probably won't be pretty when the Constitution hits the fan.

Playing tiddlywinks with campaign funds running outdated ads make no sense, and whomever made that decision, should be fired IMHO.

[dude58677]

Not trying to talk people out of it, but the campaign needs to either listen to supporters and try to gain new supporters from Santorum and Gingrich, or stop acting like if they don't get $2.5 million here, $650K there, the campaign is going to end. Seriously, they are wasting money on an ad in Texas attacking Santorum and Gingrich, instead of focusing on spreading Ron's message AND/OR addressing issues that have been holding back some GOP voters.
When a campaign adviser not only responds to emails, but then does things within his power to show supporters that he is listening to the requests and questions while the official HQ isn't...there's something odd going on.

I'm hoping that perhaps Mitt Romney isn't a bad guy, and really does care for the country and his children's, grandkids', and great grandkids' futures...and he will hand Ron the nomination at the GOP convention...BUT, Mitt Romney does not have a track record that I would trust if that were the going rumor.

All it will take is one Romney only attack ad, from the same company that has done the others, from the RP campaign, and I have a fundraising idea...but I'm not going to support a campaign staff that will roll out of RP's campaign HQ, back to C4L staff positions when all is said and done and not bat an eyelash.

There's a reason I only get 4-6 hours of sleep at night right now, if that, while being married and having two little ones...and it's not because I'm up late at night watching cable tv, playing video games, or trolling Facebook.
Drones flying around America in the next few years by the thousands, $16 trillion in debt now and counting, continuous war talk with Iran...somethings going to give somewhere, and it probably won't be pretty when the Constitution hits the fan.

Playing tiddlywinks with campaign funds running outdated ads make no sense, and whomever made that decision, should be fired IMHO.

I agree that there should be an attack ad but should it be done now or should it wait for the convention?

[Ivash]

^Why would Romney ever throw all that money into the race only to hand it to Ron Paul?

And why would Romney even have that power anyways? Of course he can't just *give* the nomination to whoever he wants to.

[coffeewithchess]

^Why would Romney ever throw all that money into the race only to hand it to Ron Paul?

And why would Romney even have that power anyways? Of course he can't just *give* the nomination to whoever he wants to.

Make Ron his VP, and resign due to "health" concerns. There's many ways it could happen, not that it will though.

[Ivash]

I don't know if running negative now would be all that helpful...

It might look extremely petty as well as hurt the spread of libertarianism.


Make Ron his VP, and resign due to "health" concerns. There's many ways it could happen, not that it will though.

I feel like that is probably illegal if forethought was involved.

That being said you have indeed found a possible (if illegal) loophole.

That being said there is still no reason for Romney to hand it to another.