PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul should make an attack ad against Romney




Unknown.User
06-26-2012, 10:45 AM
..

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 11:10 AM
I think we should make an attack ad against Romney.
"The votes are not in yet, No one has won the Republican Nomination yet. Mitt Romney is not the nominee, and there is still another option for voters, that other option is Ron Paul. (talk about Ron Paul) The voting that occurred during the primaries do not determine the nominee. The nominee is elected by people like you and me who became delegates. We are the people who will go to Tampa Florida and listen to the candidates make there last ditch effort to win the delegates vote. If you are a delegate going to Tampa, and you don't fully agree with the way the Republican party has chosen Mitt Romney with out your consent, then you have the legal right to vote your conscience and choose a true conservative who will defend the Constitution and has the record to prove he is the true conservative in the Republican Party. Voting for Mitt Romney, is voting for another term for Barrack Obama. Delegates should vote for Ron Paul, the one who can easily defeat Obama.
This ad is not sponsored by Ron Paul, and was created by the grass roots for Ron Paul at www.ronpaulforums.com"

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 11:24 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHAHOzx2-I4&feature=player_embedded

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 11:40 AM
I like that video. But I think the message of telling delegates they can vote for Ron Paul instead of Romney it far more powerful. Any time you attack a candidate, the supporters of that candidate dig their heels in even deeper.
You need to play on the message that everyone knows the Republicans are being forced to nominate Romney and they have a choice still to vote for someone better. If you target the emotion of being railroaded by the GOP and show the delegates they still have freedom, it will go a longer way to opening up peoples thought process on what they need to do at Tampa.

We can do billboards and tow signs behind cars on trailers. Radio, TV airplane banners. These are the things where a quick (vote your conscience) message can be delivered on a regular basis during the convention.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 12:38 PM
Your post... it's almost like... you didn't think it through at all!

- An attack ad against Romney... WHY?
- Aired nationally... do you have any idea how much that would cost??
- We will supply the money to broadcast it... do you have any idea how much that would cost? and why would anyone want to donate to such a waste of money?

erowe1
06-26-2012, 12:45 PM
Your post... it's almost like... you didn't think it through at all!

- An attack ad against Romney... WHY?
- Aired nationally... do you have any idea how much that would cost??
- We will supply the money to broadcast it... do you have any idea how much that would cost? and why would anyone want to donate to such a waste of money?

What you're witnessing is the natural consequence of all the nonsense that was perpetuated on websites like this one for the past several months about there being no such thing as bound delegates and all the primaries and caucuses that all the campaigns spent millions of dollars on being "straw polls" and "beauty contests."

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 01:20 PM
What you're witnessing is the natural consequence of all the nonsense that was perpetuated on websites like this one for the past several months about there being no such thing as bound delegates and all the primaries and caucuses that all the campaigns spent millions of dollars on being "straw polls" and "beauty contests."
I think you are clearly mistaken. Even Doug Weed is saying the delegates are not bound now. I think you need to rethink that statement because clearly the evidence is against it.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 01:24 PM
I think you are clearly mistaken. Even Doug Weed is saying the delegates are not bound now. I think you need to rethink that statement because clearly the evidence is against it.

If you take that to mean that there is some strategy for Ron Paul to get the nomination by getting Romney's delegates to vote for him, there is not, and there never has been. The official campaign has never had any part in propagating that idea, and they want nothing to do with it. We stand to gain nothing at all by taking that kind of talk seriously here, and we've already suffered losses because of it.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 01:30 PM
If you take that to mean that there is some strategy for Ron Paul to get the nomination by getting Romney's delegates to vote for him, there is not, and there never has been. The official campaign has never had any part in propagating that idea, and they want nothing to do with it. We stand to gain nothing at all by taking that kind of talk seriously here, and we've already suffered losses because of it.

It does not matter if the official campaign has plans to convert Romney delegates. What matters is if Ron Paul delegates have plans to convert Romney Delegates. If you are a Ron Paul delegate and you do not try and convert Romney delegates, then what is the point of you going to Tampa?

trey4sports
06-26-2012, 01:31 PM
Your post... it's almost like... you didn't think it through at all!

- An attack ad against Romney... WHY?
- Aired nationally... do you have any idea how much that would cost??
- We will supply the money to broadcast it... do you have any idea how much that would cost? and why would anyone want to donate to such a waste of money?


What you're witnessing is the natural consequence of all the nonsense that was perpetuated on websites like this one for the past several months about there being no such thing as bound delegates and all the primaries and caucuses that all the campaigns spent millions of dollars on being "straw polls" and "beauty contests."


+rep to you both. Some folks just don't think.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 01:35 PM
If you are a Ron Paul delegate and you do not try and convert Romney delegates, then what is the point of you going to Tampa?
The campaign has already talked about that in emails. Not only are our delegates not trying to convert Romney delegates, but a good number of bound Romney delegates are already Ron Paul supporters, and all of these are going to fulfill the commitment of what they were elected to do and vote for Romney. But we still want them at the convention for platform debates and influence, especially if Ron or Rand give a speech. They may also be able to submit Ron's name for nomination as either president or vice president (which is what I think Doug Wead was talking about), which, if a majority from 5 states do it, could force them to let him give a speech.

jcannon98188
06-26-2012, 01:42 PM
1.) Delegates are NOT bound.
2.) We are thinking. We simply are smart enough to read the rules, and know that they are NOT bound.
3.) An attach ad would be pointless right now.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 02:04 PM
The campaign has already talked about that in emails. Not only are our delegates not trying to convert Romney delegates, but a good number of bound Romney delegates are already Ron Paul supporters, and all of these are going to fulfill the commitment of what they were elected to do and vote for Romney. But we still want them at the convention for platform debates and influence, especially if Ron or Rand give a speech. They may also be able to submit Ron's name for nomination as either president or vice president (which is what I think Doug Wead was talking about), which, if a majority from 5 states do it, could force them to let him give a speech.
Sorry, but an email from the campaign means nothing. 2. how could you possibly know what delegates are planning or not planning? 3. Platform and speeches mean nothing 4. You are pulling shit out of thin air and it is really fucking annoying.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 02:11 PM
Sorry, but an email from the campaign means nothing.
So you speak for the campaign, but the campaign doesn't speak for itself? Or is it more that there's some shadow campaign of delegates out there that is acting on its own contrary to the official campaign, and you speak for it?


2. how could you possibly know what delegates are planning or not planning?
I can't speak for all of them. But I participated as a delegate to my state convention where we tried to elect Ron Paul supporters as Romney-bound delegates, and I can tell you that we would not have tried to nominate anybody that we thought would try some stunt of voting against the way they were bound by our primary.


3. Platform and speeches mean nothing.
That's too bad, because that's all that's left at this point. Going into the convention Romney already has more than enough delegates even if you only count the bound ones.

Unknown.User
06-26-2012, 02:20 PM
..

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 02:25 PM
What you're witnessing is the natural consequence of all the nonsense that was perpetuated on websites like this one for the past several months about there being no such thing as bound delegates and all the primaries and caucuses that all the campaigns spent millions of dollars on being "straw polls" and "beauty contests."

What's truly nutty is that people seem to think that unbinding all the delegates will actually make a difference and potentially win the nomination for Paul. Go ahead, unbind the delegates, the final roll call vote will be, at best, 75% for Romney, 25% for Paul... Romney wins. I suppose people must think that every bound Gingrich/Santorum delegate will be anti-Romney and thus would vote for Paul if unbound. I'm pretty sure of all the non-Paul national delegates, 99% of them are pro-Romney.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 02:32 PM
So you speak for the campaign, but the campaign doesn't speak for itself? Or is it more that there's some shadow campaign of delegates out there that is acting on its own contrary to the official campaign, and you speak for it?
What? The point was that the campaign has never been bottom down. It has always been grass roots and delegates who want to win will not abide by the campaigns email or video request to be submissive. As a matter of fact, if you watched that last video Ron him self said dont get pushed around. He also said be respectful, but that was with the understanding that they should be respectful to us as well. Once shit starts going down, all bets are off.



I can't speak for all of them. But I participated as a delegate to my state convention where we tried to elect Ron Paul supporters as Romney-bound delegates, and I can tell you that we would not have tried to nominate anybody that we thought would try some stunt of voting against the way they were bound by our primary. Then you did a disservice to the 5 years we fought to win. Shame on you for not playing just as dirty as they play with us.



That's too bad, because that's all that's left at this point. Going into the convention Romney already has more than enough delegates even if you only count the bound ones. Fuck the bound delegates. Talk to them, show them they are wrong for voting for Romney. They are human beings and are capable of logic and reason. Use it just as you used it to bring new people into the movement before.

Dude, you are being defeatist. Go smoke a bowl or something.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 02:36 PM
What's truly nutty is that people seem to think that unbinding all the delegates will actually make a difference and potentially win the nomination for Paul. Go ahead, unbind the delegates, the final roll call vote will be, at best, 75% for Romney, 25% for Paul... Romney wins. I suppose people must think that every bound Gingrich/Santorum delegate will be anti-Romney and thus would vote for Paul if unbound. I'm pretty sure of all the non-Paul national delegates, 99% of them are pro-Romney.
That is why you talk to them, and show them they should vote for Ron Paul. If you can't do that then you should not have become a national delegate. If you can convert them and the only thing standing in there way of voting for Ron Paul is the stupid bound delegates rule that simply don't exsist, then you win when you show them they are not bound.
Of course being unbound is not going to automatically get a vote for Ron Paul. Other wise the Newt and Santorum Delegates would already be Paul delegates. You have to convert them. I don't get why some people can't understand this simple thing.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 02:37 PM
The official campaign can do a great job. Secondly, it is important to let everyone know, including delegates, that Paul is still in it to win it. If they had an ad money bomb right now for an attack ad as good as Serial Hypocrisy against Romney I would max out.

You should sign up for campaign emails. Paul is NO LONGER 'in it to win the nomination.' He was, when the primaries started, and the campaign did a great job, but they came up short. Believe it or not, most GOP voters do not like what Paul stands for. This is why Paul is still 'in it to reform the GOP,' and that's why the campaign has NOT suspended and is instead marching with its delegates into Tampa.

Secondly, if you have $2500 laying around that you're so eager to waste on the most useless TV ad in American history, I would urge you instead to send it to someone who could actually use it, like Justin Amash or Kerry Bentivolio.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 02:42 PM
You should sign up for campaign emails. Paul is NO LONGER 'in it to win the nomination.'
If he was out he would have officially dropped out. That is all the evidence I need to keep fighting.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 02:48 PM
What's truly nutty is that people seem to think that unbinding all the delegates will actually make a difference and potentially win the nomination for Paul. Go ahead, unbind the delegates, the final roll call vote will be, at best, 75% for Romney, 25% for Paul... Romney wins. I suppose people must think that every bound Gingrich/Santorum delegate will be anti-Romney and thus would vote for Paul if unbound. I'm pretty sure of all the non-Paul national delegates, 99% of them are pro-Romney.

I agree that the money is better focused on getting our delegates to Tampa at this point, and I would suggest (along with liberty candidates of people's individual choice) also a money bomb split between the state gops we have taken over where it is the official policy to retain donations from 'our' parties and make them seem ineffectual. But that doesn't have to be today. I think we need to do it though, to maintain our gains, and I like the money bomb idea because it makes it clear where their money is coming from. In fact, I think the max donation is $50,000, and I would think if Ron has sufficient money left over to put his plans into place, that he might want to donate to each of those from his campaign account. They are literally ASSUMING our guys can't raise money, so will be a flash in the plan.

However, all of that ^^ is an aside. Without saying it will happen, or even that I would have chosen this remedy, what the law suit guys are trying to do is make the RNC itself NOTIFY delegates that they aren't bound and are free to vote for whomever, assuming more candidates will then throw their hats in the ring, Palin, Santorum, Gingrich, whomever, bringing us back to a brokered convention strategy.

That is not what I am planning, I am hoping for our five states to get Ron into nomination for a speech on his own power, and lots of votes to spotlight policy changes that should have occurred long ago if the RNC walked their own talk.

But that is the current idea being looked at on the side of those who are hoping they will be unbound. I certainly wouldn't turn it down, but I think we all recognize it would be extraordinary if it happened. My own hopes for the law suit in the moments when I am leaning towards liking it have to do with the RICO suit, to be honest. THAT would change policy and accountability. The remedy I'd have chosen for the suit would be ballot access on all 50 states and getting rid of the party preferences for ballot access as a state action forcing disenfranchisment on those defrauded by the private parties. However, I'm not the one bringing the suit.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 02:51 PM
If he was out he would have officially dropped out. That is all the evidence I need to keep fighting.

What you're doing is not really "fighting," at least not in any sense that involves accomplishing any actual goals. What you're doing is pontificating on the internet. What Ron and Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Kerry Bentivolio, Kurt Bills, Glen Bradley, and a bunch of others are doing is fighting. Some of us are fighting alongside them. Then there are others who are only interested in making enemies of the people we're trying to win over to our way of seeing things. And those people are pretty much just getting in the way.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 02:55 PM
What you're doing is not really "fighting," at least not in any sense that involves accomplishing any actual goals. What you're doing is pontificating on the internet. What Ron and Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Kerry Bentivolio, Kurt Bills, Glen Bradley, and a bunch of others are doing is fighting. Some of us are fighting alongside them. Then there are others who are only interested in making enemies of the people we're trying to win over to our way of seeing things. And those people are pretty much just getting in the way.

Clearly you two have different ideas on how you want to spend your own time. Why isnt' that fine?

jmdrake
06-26-2012, 02:58 PM
I think you are clearly mistaken. Even Doug Weed is saying the delegates are not bound now. I think you need to rethink that statement because clearly the evidence is against it.

And according to Ron Paul the estimated number of delegates, including "unbound" Romney delegates that really support Paul, are not enough for Dr. Paul to win the nomination.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 02:58 PM
Clearly you two have different ideas on how you want to spend your own time. Why isnt' that fine?

I'm not really concerned about how other individuals want to spend their own time. I just don't want to see this website become a tool for belligerent people to exacerbate the problems we have with the rest of the GOP by making it look like there is some significant number of us who actually know what we're talking about who support some strategy to get Ron Paul to win the nomination with delegates after losing all the primaries and caucuses. There is not and never has been any such strategy on the part of anyone who should be taken seriously.

robertwerden
06-26-2012, 02:59 PM
What you're doing is not really "fighting," at least not in any sense that involves accomplishing any actual goals. What you're doing is pontificating on the internet. What Ron and Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Kerry Bentivolio, Kurt Bills, Glen Bradley, and a bunch of others are doing is fighting. Some of us are fighting alongside them. Then there are others who are only interested in making enemies of the people we're trying to win over to our way of seeing things. And those people are pretty much just getting in the way.
When you run a business, you have people working for you in many capacities. Accountants, sales people, stock clerks etc. You are working in a capacity that suites your goals and I am working in a capacity that suites my goals. The ultimate goal is to restore the Constitution. If you think that your way is the only way, then you are a part of the problem. To focus on only one aspect is dangerous and flies in the face of what grass roots is all about. Stop telling people to do it your way, and just accept there are things that happen in this world you will never have control over. We all just want to be left alone, and when someone posts a topic with an idea, and other people come in to tell them how they are wrong and you are right, then you destroy the ultimate goal we all have in common and that is for the Liberty to do what we want and be left alone.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 02:59 PM
That is why you talk to them, and show them they should vote for Ron Paul. If you can't do that then you should not have become a national delegate. If you can convert them and the only thing standing in there way of voting for Ron Paul is the stupid bound delegates rule that simply don't exsist, then you win when you show them they are not bound.
Of course being unbound is not going to automatically get a vote for Ron Paul. Other wise the Newt and Santorum Delegates would already be Paul delegates. You have to convert them. I don't get why some people can't understand this simple thing.

Have you ever been to a state convention? Have you ever noticed who gets elected to the national convention? National delegates are almost always big time party activists, major elected officials, and party bosses. These are people who don't give a shit about rebel candidates like Paul. They are very establishment and wholeheartedly support the presumptive nominee. They have no interest in rebelling.

Let me put it to you another way:
Imagine you are an elected delegate to the national convention. The vast majority of your delegation consists of the types of people I mentioned before, and they are very pro-Romney and anti-trouble making. Imagine you attempt your little fantasy of magically converting one of these people to vote for Paul (assuming they are free to do so). You tell them why Paul is good, why his stances are right, why this person's are wrong, etc. Here you are... let's say 30 years old... telling, say, the governor of your state as well as his friends around him (say, the state Lt. Gov, state SOS, state Treasurer, state party chairman, etc), why they should abandon every belief they've had for 30 years and should now listen to a no-name like you. In nicer terms, they are going to tell you to fuck off.

Similarly,
Imagine you're basically the only Romney delegate in the Maine delegation. You're surrounded by Paul supporters. You try to convince them to abandon their beliefs and vote with you for Romney. They will also tell you to fuck off.

If you want national delegates voting for Paul, then you have to elect the Paul delegates in the first place. Your little fantasy of convincing, say, 700 people to vote Paul over Romney is nothing more than that, a fantasy.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:04 PM
I'm not really concerned about how other individuals want to spend their own time. I just don't want to see this website become a tool for belligerent people to exacerbate the problems we have with the rest of the GOP by making it look like there is some significant number of us who actually know what we're talking about who support some strategy to get Ron Paul to win the nomination with delegates after losing all the primaries and caucuses. There is not and never has been any such strategy on the part of anyone who should be taken seriously.

The particular subforum you are in is RON PAUL's 2012 campaign subforum. Why aren't you haunting the subforums of other candidates you don't think will win? Shouldn't they stop focusing on those people in those subforums just as much? Or more since with Ron we are at least talking about building to the maximum presence, numerous events and international TV coverage for Ron coming up in Tampa? I doubt the candidate you support expects to get more than that out of their campaign. You are trying to pull people away from focusing on Ron's campaign to do what you want them to do, it seems, or why bother?

erowe1
06-26-2012, 03:05 PM
When you run a business, you have people working for you in many capacities. Accountants, sales people, stock clerks etc. You are working in a capacity that suites your goals and I am working in a capacity that suites my goals. The ultimate goal is to restore the Constitution. If you think that your way is the only way, then you are a part of the problem. To focus on only one aspect is dangerous and flies in the face of what grass roots is all about. Stop telling people to do it your way, and just accept there are things that happen in this world you will never have control over. We all just want to be left alone, and when someone posts a topic with an idea, and other people come in to tell them how they are wrong and you are right, then you destroy the ultimate goal we all have in common and that is for the Liberty to do what we want and be left alone.

I get and appreciate all of that. But one of the capacities we have for pursuing our goals is through politics. That's not the only way. It might not even be a very important one. But that's the capacity that's being filled by those RNC delegates. And fulfilling that particular role involves a lot of pragmatic considerations, like building alliances with others. There are plenty of capacities for people to fill that don't involve those things. But people involved in those other roles shouldn't be counteracting what the political ones are up to and imagine that they're doing them a favor.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:06 PM
Have you ever been to a state convention? Have you ever noticed who gets elected to the national convention? National delegates are almost always big time party activists, major elected officials, and party bosses. These are people who don't give a shit about rebel candidates like Paul. They are very establishment and wholeheartedly support the presumptive nominee. They have no interest in rebelling.

Let me put it to you another way:
Imagine you are an elected delegate to the national convention. The vast majority of your delegation consists of the types of people I mentioned before, and they are very pro-Romney and anti-trouble making. Imagine you attempt your little fantasy of magically converting one of these people to vote for Paul (assuming they are free to do so). You tell them why Paul is good, why his stances are right, why this person's are wrong, etc. Here you are... let's say 30 years old... telling, say, the governor of your state as well as his friends around him (say, the state Lt. Gov, state SOS, state Treasurer, state party chairman, etc), why they should abandon every belief they've had for 30 years and should now listen to a no-name like you. In nicer terms, they are going to tell you to fuck off.

Similarly,
Imagine you're basically the only Romney delegate in the Maine delegation. You're surrounded by Paul supporters. You try to convince them to abandon their beliefs and vote with you for Romney. They will also tell you to fuck off.

If you want national delegates voting for Paul, then you have to elect the Paul delegates in the first place. Your little fantasy of convincing, say, 700 people to vote Paul over Romney is nothing more than that, a fantasy.

and the same thing to you, you are just hounding people here who want to focus on Ron's campaign in his own subforum. What makes that a proper role?

And if we should stop focusing on Ron because you are sure he can't win, despite delegate battles, events and the RNC yet to come, why would we focus on Gary? Does anyone really think he can win? Isn't that at least as much of a fantasy as Romney's delegates coming to their senses -- which is only ONE of the goals of Ron's campaign?

I'm not objective, but trying to be, I honestly think 'what is left' of Ron's campaign is more meaty than I expect GJ's to be.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 03:08 PM
the Liberty to do what we want and be left alone.

Well, if you want to be left alone, then don't post an ill-conceived TV ad fantasy on a public message board. (This is directed to the OP, not you)

erowe1
06-26-2012, 03:09 PM
The particular subforum you are in is RON PAUL's 2012 campaign subforum. Why aren't you haunting the subforums of other candidates you don't think will win? Shouldn't they stop focusing on those people in those subforums just as much? Or more since with Ron we are at least talking about building to the maximum presence, numerous events and international TV coverage for Ron coming up in Tampa? I doubt the candidate you support expects to get more than that out of their campaign. You are trying to pull people away from focusing on Ron's campaign to do what you want them to do, it seems, or why bother?

I don't pay attention to subforums except when I'm starting a new thread. I just go to "new posts" and respond to whatever is there with whatever I think is an appropriate response.

As for Ron Paul, it's not about whether or not I think he will win. It's about being involved in what he is actually doing. What he is doing now is not trying to get elected president. That ship has sailed.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:11 PM
Well, if you want to be left alone, then don't post an ill-conceived TV ad fantasy on a public message board. (This is directed to the OP, not you)

We don't let people attack candidates in their campaign forums, or their chances. There is constructive criticism and there is hounding so that that candidates's supporters can't utilize the forum as it is intended to be used because attempts to post constructive threads are routinely derailed, and that is what is starting to occur here.

Unknown.User
06-26-2012, 03:13 PM
..

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:14 PM
I don't pay attention to subforums except when I'm starting a new thread. I just go to "new posts" and respond to whatever is there with whatever I think is an appropriate response.

As for Ron Paul, it's not about whether or not I think he will win. It's about being involved in what he is actually doing. What he is doing now is not trying to get elected president. That ship has sailed.

why does it offend you so if others want to hold out hope, however much of a long shot, to build enthusiasm to work on Tampa? As Parocks said it one thread, there is always a chance, for example, Romney might get eaten by a shark. I don't think that bet would find a taker on intrade, but if people want to think something could happen because it makes it more fun, kind of like buying a lottery ticket, knowing the odds, why does that so offend you?

erowe1
06-26-2012, 03:15 PM
The official campaign has at this moment over 3 million dollars (plus whatever else we will give them) to convince ~500-600 people that Romney makes a horrible nominee and that Ron Paul is still in it to win.

That's an interesting point. The fact that the official campaign isn't doing anything like that should tell us something about what they are and are not trying to do.

erowe1
06-26-2012, 03:21 PM
why does it offend you so if others want to hold out hope, however much of a long shot, to build enthusiasm to work on Tampa? As Parocks said it one thread, there is always a chance, for example, Romney might get eaten by a shark. I don't think that bet would find a taker on intrade, but if people want to think something could happen because it makes it more fun, kind of like buying a lottery ticket, knowing the odds, why does that so offend you?

I have been "working on Tampa." The official campaign has been working on Tampa. Working on Tampa doesn't involve getting Romney-bound delegates to vote for Ron Paul. What offends me isn't that some people hold out hope for something silly. What offends me is that this website has at times become a place that makes those people appear representative of others of us who have tried to work face-to-face with other flesh-and-blood Republicans who have greater numbers than us, more money than us, and more leadership positions in the party than us. It's a given that some people will be like those you say are holding out hope. But when other Republicans read this forum, I don't want them to think that the people who think like that and the people attending their state party conventions as delegates or becoming precinct chairs and such are the same people.

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:23 PM
People here think many different things.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 03:37 PM
and the same thing to you, you are just hounding people here who want to focus on Ron's campaign in his own subforum. What makes that a proper role?

And if we should stop focusing on Ron because you are sure he can't win, despite delegate battles, events and the RNC yet to come, why would we focus on Gary? Does anyone really think he can win? Isn't that at least as much of a fantasy as Romney's delegates coming to their senses -- which is only ONE of the goals of Ron's campaign?

I'm not objective, but trying to be, I honestly think 'what is left' of Ron's campaign is more meaty than I expect GJ's to be.

I think you have my stances confused so I'll just state them...

- From everything I have read about the results of the state conventions and the national delegates elected, it looks like, at best, Paul will have 500 delegates, as his campaign predicted in the last email. These articles also suggest that essentially every non-Paul delegate is an establishment, Romney delegate. So that's why I think at best, Romney will win the roll call nomination 75%-25%. Thus, I think if you unbind all the delegates, it will make no difference and Romney will still win in an actual landslide. The primary elections are over and the GOP establishment has accepted and united around Mitt Romney already. Paul Republicans will never unite around him. Conservatives are a good VP away from uniting around him, but they will still vote for him and have no desire to see a distracting brokered convention. Of all the non-Paul delegates elected to the national convention, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that any of them have any desire to broker and nominate another candidate (aside from the token Santorum/Gingrich supporters which I'm assuming exist).

- I believe that even if you unbind every delegate and throw people like Palin, Christie, and J. Bush into the fold, the GOP has already for the most part fully united around Romney and that at least 75% of the national delegates are Romney supporters with ZERO interest in voting for someone else.

- I believe that, even if these Romney delegates secretly would love to vote for someone like Christie, they would rather have a smooth national convention than a distracting spectacle.

- Thus, I believe there is zero chance for a brokered convention and zero chance of a Ron Paul nomination in 2012.

- I am NOT saying we should therefore fold and go home. We should send as many delegates to Tampa as possible, and to have them fight for our positions. We can't win the nomination, but just maybe we can make the platform, rules, etc. better for future liberty GOP candidates. Furthermore, the RNC is a GREAT chance to show the entire GOP that Ron Paul Republicans are civil and respectful. In fact, you could make the argument that the absolute best thing the Ron Paul delegates could do at the RNC for the sake of the future is to not object to anything and vote wit the Romney people on every vote. I certainly don't argue this, I agree with Ron that we should stand our ground. But while standing our ground, we can interact with party insiders are make valuable connections/relationships.

- Gary Johnson... I'll vote for him in November (unless there's a Romney/Paul ticket which there won't be), but that's about it. We're so much better off keeping our support in the GOP. Gary can have our votes in November (isn't that all he really wants?), but our time and money should stay in the GOP in order to complete our successful reform strategy.

Unknown.User
06-26-2012, 03:43 PM
..

sailingaway
06-26-2012, 03:46 PM
The part about the brokered convention I find in the lottery ticket arena is the law suit having the outcome to unbind delegates and have the RNC send that letter. If it were to actually happen, it would be with tons of media, at least by Dem stations, highlighting all the fraud at the conventions. In the light of THAT I could see the party establishment itself putting someone up, and the less establishment oriented thinking that in that case their own pics are fair game -- or not. I dont' know. But that part isn't as unlikely as getting that judgment in the first place, imho.

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 04:07 PM
If the campaign gave me the 3 million dollars they have left I would personally go the home of each and every delegate giving them a full fact sheet of each position and action Romney has endorsed and held that makes him completely unacceptable as a nominee. Additionally I will present the polling data showing Ron Paul able to beat Obama in November. That effort alone would be enough for Ron to win the nomination. That would even cost me much less than 3 million. A national attack ad by Paul adds credibility to the fact that he is still in the race and still wants to win.

Again... what evidence do you have to support this theory?

If your theory was actually correct that a measly $3 million is all it would take to win the nomination, then why is no other candidate carrying out your plan? Also, why wouldn't Romney counter? Ok, so $3 million will buy all the delegate votes Paul needs... so the next day Romney will come in, spend $10 million, and buy them right back.

Further, if you are SO SURE that $3 million is all it would take, then surely you would be able to raise that money yourself? Go ahead, prove me wrong, start a PAC and see if you can raise a measly $3 million. See if others agree with your idea. Tell them your plan that $3 million is all it takes to win the nomination. Tell them how you will spend it. If your plan has legs, you'll raise the money overnight. If your plan is nonsense, you won't raise anything. Please, prove me wrong. Give it a shot.

As I tried to communicate before, you have to think about the people you are trying to convert. Put yourself in their shoes: You are a Ron Paul Republican Congressman in your state. You are at home with your family after a long, busy day and a Romney supporter comes to the door trying to convince you that Romney is good and Paul is bad. What would you do? If you're polite, you'll humor them and let them give their speech. Otherwise, you won't even open the door. Any literature they give you will end up in the garbage.

Still think your plan will work?

AJ Antimony
06-26-2012, 04:11 PM
But that part isn't as unlikely as getting that judgment in the first place, imho.

Agreed

Unknown.User
06-27-2012, 06:21 AM
..

parocks
06-27-2012, 12:43 PM
Brutal attacks against Romney that leave Ron Paul out of it entirely.

Truly nasty stuff.

Hurts Romney.

Makes delegates want to not vote for Romney.

Not a national ad.

A local ad.

We still have 2 long months.

parocks
06-27-2012, 12:52 PM
Your post... it's almost like... you didn't think it through at all!

- An attack ad against Romney... WHY?
- Aired nationally... do you have any idea how much that would cost??
- We will supply the money to broadcast it... do you have any idea how much that would cost? and why would anyone want to donate to such a waste of money?

This is better than a blimp.

parocks
06-27-2012, 12:55 PM
It does not matter if the official campaign has plans to convert Romney delegates. What matters is if Ron Paul delegates have plans to convert Romney Delegates. If you are a Ron Paul delegate and you do not try and convert Romney delegates, then what is the point of you going to Tampa?

Well, there are a lot of good reasons to go to Tampa. It might be fun.

But I'm in general agreement. Most of the 2300 or so delegates have been picked. Target them.

parocks
06-27-2012, 01:06 PM
The campaign has already talked about that in emails. Not only are our delegates not trying to convert Romney delegates, but a good number of bound Romney delegates are already Ron Paul supporters, and all of these are going to fulfill the commitment of what they were elected to do and vote for Romney. But we still want them at the convention for platform debates and influence, especially if Ron or Rand give a speech. They may also be able to submit Ron's name for nomination as either president or vice president (which is what I think Doug Wead was talking about), which, if a majority from 5 states do it, could force them to let him give a speech.

We most certainly do want to have our delegates unbound. We most certainly are hoping that is the case.

1) Anonymously slam Romney hard. HARD. BRUTAL Leave Ron Paul out of it completely. Citizens against World War III.

2) Romney's delegates will be looking for an alternative.

A new version of the famous "daisy" ad, but much more brutal. Brutal. Leave Ron Paul out of it completely 100%. Because these should be brutal ads. Brutal.

parocks
06-27-2012, 01:09 PM
Many of the Republicans who do like Romney like him because they think he can win. If he is ripped to shreds, made unelectable by really nasty ads, those Republicans will very much like to go somewhere else.

We have 2 months to make people hate Mitt Romney. TV ads most certainly can do that.

AJ Antimony
06-27-2012, 04:11 PM
Many of the Republicans who do like Romney like him because they think he can win. If he is ripped to shreds, made unelectable by really nasty ads, those Republicans will very much like to go somewhere else.

Great logic. "Romney's electability may be one reason Republicans like him, therefore it is the only reason Republicans like him." Do you have any proof that a single attack ad (where do you get adS from? the secret billionaire??) will convince 700 delegates to completely change their minds and abandon the presumptive nominee? Every single published convention news article seems to indicate that virtually every non-Paul delegate is a pro-Romney delegate. The national delegates getting elected, besides ours, are the party insiders of party insiders; the core of the establishment. They are already united around the landslide winner of the GOP primaries. The pro-Romney delegates are not mindless zombie conservatives who secretly would love to vote for anyone but Romney. They support him. They endorse him. They campaign for him. No ad is going to change their minds. ESPECIALLY since we already know what type of information is already going to be in the ad. Blueprint for Obamacare? Yeah they know. A flip flopper? Yeah they know. Unless your ad will feature a breaking Romney sex scandal or something, it's not going to have the slightest effect on anyone's opinion of Romney. I bet the ad is more likely to give people a negative impression of Ron Paul than of Mitt Romney. I mean, you have to be a kook candidate to run a national attack ad after the entire nominating process is completed.


We have 2 months to make people hate Mitt Romney. TV ads most certainly can do that.

Sounds exactly like Obama's campaign strategy! Running an attack ad now will only hurt Romney and help Obama.

Vanilluxe
06-27-2012, 11:23 PM
I like how this is an example of the forum and supporters falling apart and fighting each other and ripping this movement of liberty that united us apart. The other Republicans will surely take note of this and use it to their advantage, tanks a lot.

Vanilluxe
06-27-2012, 11:24 PM
..

Unknown.User
06-28-2012, 06:31 AM
..

parocks
06-28-2012, 12:14 PM
Great logic. "Romney's electability may be one reason Republicans like him, therefore it is the only reason Republicans like him." Do you have any proof that a single attack ad (where do you get adS from? the secret billionaire??) will convince 700 delegates to completely change their minds and abandon the presumptive nominee? Every single published convention news article seems to indicate that virtually every non-Paul delegate is a pro-Romney delegate. The national delegates getting elected, besides ours, are the party insiders of party insiders; the core of the establishment. They are already united around the landslide winner of the GOP primaries. The pro-Romney delegates are not mindless zombie conservatives who secretly would love to vote for anyone but Romney. They support him. They endorse him. They campaign for him. No ad is going to change their minds. ESPECIALLY since we already know what type of information is already going to be in the ad. Blueprint for Obamacare? Yeah they know. A flip flopper? Yeah they know. Unless your ad will feature a breaking Romney sex scandal or something, it's not going to have the slightest effect on anyone's opinion of Romney. I bet the ad is more likely to give people a negative impression of Ron Paul than of Mitt Romney. I mean, you have to be a kook candidate to run a national attack ad after the entire nominating process is completed.



Sounds exactly like Obama's campaign strategy! Running an attack ad now will only hurt Romney and help Obama.

Well, I'm not in favor of spending $3,000,000 on one ad that reaches a ton of people. I'm not in favor of an attack ad that compares and contrasts Romney and Paul.
I'm in favor of a number of very small buys with very brutal ads that have nothing at all to do with Ron Paul, and everything to do with hurting Romney. Airing one ad on a local cable station would cost almost nothing. We aren't talking about $3 Million, but maybe $1000 or less. Just to get it on the air. And then spread it on youtube.

Your quote isn't my argument. There are many who like Romney because he is considered "electable". This should not come as a surprise to you. If Romney comes into Tampa bruised, bleeding and covered with mud, that would likely cause delegates to think twice about voting for him. Romney's supporters are not diehards.

Here's an ad. Mormons believe that Jesus visited the United States. Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Christians don't believe this. Mormons are a cult. Mitt Romney is not a Christian.

When I say BRUTAL, I mean BRUTAL. Don't mention Ron Paul at all in the ad.

Mitt Romney has known Benjamin Netanyahu for 36 years. If you want WWIII, with millions of dead Americans, vote Mitt Romney.

Again, BRUTAL. And leave Ron Paul out of it.

Paid for by Americans against WWIII.

SilenceDewgooder
06-28-2012, 12:28 PM
Here's an ad. Mormons believe that Jesus visited the United States. Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Christians don't believe this. Mormons are a cult. Mitt Romney is not a Christian. And leave Ron Paul out of it.

You're leaving something else out also, the 1st Amendment. Mormonism meets the critieria of a religion. The sad part of this is that do not even practice a religion, but I'm not an atheist either. But I do recognize and respect a person's right to choose.

Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.

the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices

the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith

parocks
06-28-2012, 12:36 PM
Ad Title: Young People Hate Mitt Romney.

And short little ads.

"Why do you hate Mitt Romney"

"We need real change, a real alternative to Obama. Mitt Romney is not that. People are going to stay home. The Republican Party is about Limited Constitutional Government. I wouldn't say that I hate Mitt Romney, but I don't know anyone who is voting for him. Ok, my grandpa who lives in Greenwich, CT likes him. But no one I know under 45. They'll stay home, or vote 3rd party. We're all tired of more government, less freedom no matter who you vote for. We're fed up."

"The only thing you can be sure about Mitt Romney is that we will spend more money making sure that Israel is safe, even though we're broke. We will borrow money, give it to Israel, and we will help them fight wars. Mitt Romney has known Benjamin Netanyahu for 36, thats thirty six, years. You know that there will be more wars. No etch a sketch on that, that one you can believe."

"I don't want the Goldman Sachs candidate. Goldman Sachs was the #1`contributor to Mitt Romney. Goldman Sachs got huge bailout money. Will money be transferred to Goldman Sachs from the taxpayer? You betcha. We want a real choice."

jointhefightforfreedom
06-28-2012, 12:40 PM
I think we should make an attack ad against Romney.
"The votes are not in yet, No one has won the Republican Nomination yet. Mitt Romney is not the nominee, and there is still another option for voters, that other option is Ron Paul. (talk about Ron Paul) The voting that occurred during the primaries do not determine the nominee. The nominee is elected by people like you and me who became delegates. We are the people who will go to Tampa Florida and listen to the candidates make there last ditch effort to win the delegates vote. If you are a delegate going to Tampa, and you don't fully agree with the way the Republican party has chosen Mitt Romney with out your consent, then you have the legal right to vote your conscience and choose a true conservative who will defend the Constitution and has the record to prove he is the true conservative in the Republican Party. Voting for Mitt Romney, is voting for another term for Barrack Obama. Delegates should vote for Ron Paul, the one who can easily defeat Obama.
This ad is not sponsored by Ron Paul, and was created by the grass roots for Ron Paul at www.ronpaulforums.com"

Absolutely!

I think we have little time left to garner any major media attention.

This movement in the MSM will die down dramatically after the vote and you won't hear squat until after we survive the next 4 yrs of spending out of control if we have a
New True Champion to Rally behind in 2016.

put in on the airwaves that AMERICANS HAVE A CHOICE and DO NOt have to Put up with this shit !

IMO , we haven't been Blunt or In your face enough to get thru to the masses.

America is Not The Greatest Nation in the world any longer , But it can be again!

jointhefightforfreedom
06-28-2012, 12:42 PM
An attack Ad Keeps Debate Alive !!!

Silence is obedience !

AJ Antimony
06-28-2012, 01:00 PM
I've already made my points in this thread.

Some of you just have absolutely no sense of reality.

I would say that those of you who support this ad idea should make a very thorough cost/benefit analysis in hopes that doing so will show you the reality of the situation, but I don't think that would work because some of you make the most unfounded assumptions I have ever heard, such as 'Romney delegates will change their minds if they see 1 single attack ad,' and 'They will never find out that our brutal attack ad was made by Ron Paul supporters.'

SilenceDewgooder
06-28-2012, 01:51 PM
Ad Title: Young People Hate Mitt Romney.

And short little ads.

"Why do you hate Mitt Romney"

"We need real change, a real alternative to Obama. Mitt Romney is not that. People are going to stay home. The Republican Party is about Limited Constitutional Government. I wouldn't say that I hate Mitt Romney, but I don't know anyone who is voting for him. Ok, my grandpa who lives in Greenwich, CT likes him. But no one I know under 45. They'll stay home, or vote 3rd party. We're all tired of more government, less freedom no matter who you vote for. We're fed up."

"The only thing you can be sure about Mitt Romney is that we will spend more money making sure that Israel is safe, even though we're broke. We will borrow money, give it to Israel, and we will help them fight wars. Mitt Romney has known Benjamin Netanyahu for 36, thats thirty six, years. You know that there will be more wars. No etch a sketch on that, that one you can believe."

"I don't want the Goldman Sachs candidate. Goldman Sachs was the #1`contributor to Mitt Romney. Goldman Sachs got huge bailout money. Will money be transferred to Goldman Sachs from the taxpayer? You betcha. We want a real choice."

This type of "attack" ad spreads hate which will only breed hate. And instead of telling people of Romney's many positions on issue that solicits a debatable stance, let Romney tell them for himself.

But there is alot of videos that already do this, we need to figure out way to get the "news has to be true bc its on tv" people to watch with an objective mind.

SilenceDewgooder
06-28-2012, 01:53 PM
Really - look at the attacks ads and what they are attacking - what issues are being debating.

Unknown.User
06-28-2012, 01:56 PM
..

Unknown.User
06-29-2012, 10:06 AM
..

Dutch
06-29-2012, 10:19 AM
Last bump...

We need this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk0LzhNsNS4
QFT