A request of my fellow RP supporters: stop the negativity.

[DRV45N05]

The media has turned on us big time, calling us kooks, fringe elements, and extremists. Our angry behavior at times does nothing but drive home these negative characterizations with the notion that we are all a bunch of storm troopers. When we go into forms like a Rudy Giuliani forum, or we fill someone's email box with hateful email, we perpetuate this notion.

I ask my fellow Ron Paul supporters to please stop with the negativity, be it negativity toward journalists/writers or negativity toward other candidates. The only way we're going to win this election is if we do what Mr. Paul is doing: conveying a positive message of ending the war, adhering to the Constitution, and preserving liberty. We're much more persuasive when we act this way, and we win a lot more followers this way. Will there be people who continue to visciously attack Mr. Paul as well as us? Of course there will be. Can we respond to them? Sure. But we should respond in a civilized, rational manner with solid arguments supporting our claims. Never resort to matching their negativity with counterattacks; it's a complete waste of time and distracts us from the work we need to do in obtaining our goal. The reality of politics is that you're going to get attacked, and by a lot of people; you can't hit back at all of them, or you won't win because you're substituting this for productivity. You just have to roll with the punches and keep on chugging.

An eye for an eye leaves both people blind, and we want to make sure that others can see what we see in the good doctor.

[Menthol Patch]

I agree with being positive but there is also a time to be negative.

For example, I will boldly state that all the other candidates are traitors who hate freedom, liberty, and peace.

[DRV45N05]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. We need to be stating that Ron is FOR freedom, liberty, and peace, not that other candidates are traitors who are against them.

People in this country have genuine fears and concerns. They want answers to their questions, not more people and things to fear.

[rockwell]

Yes, be nice, don't rock the boat, keep it to yourself, smile and hope for the best- that has been an excellent strategy for the past- how long has it been now?

Appreciate the thoughts, but for one, the rules that apply to us don't apply to them and this isn't a sewing circle.

[shepburn]

While I agree that we should be careful about being negative, I don't agree that the media has "turned on us".

In fact, ever since 11-5, I believe we have been getting relatively strong media attention. And most of it is positive. If anything, they are geniunely surprised how well Ron is doing. I don't hear many of them making total hit pieces. Yes hit pieces are being done, but mostly by lower tier, irrelevent pundits and bloggers (yes I include Beck into this group.)

[Chibioz]

I agree with the OP. The positivity and enthusiasm of our movement has been a driving force that has created our past successes. We can't let small stuff get us down or create divisions in our ranks. We have the best message, the best man, and the best supporters. There is no reason to let little things get to us.

[Menthol Patch]

I agree we should be positive. I also think we need to expose the other candidates for what they are.

[Original_Intent]

I agree we need to focus on the positive message.

However -

I am in Utah and I guarantee you that if Romney's past is not exposed, he will take this state because too many people vote for the first person to strike their fancy and Romney will take 95% of the "unthinking masses" votes here if a spotlight is not shone on his record.

I am not talking smear here, but factually stating another candidates record and pointing out that not just on one issue but on virtually all issues his record does not match his rhetoric. I do not consider that "being negative" that is allowing the truth to set people free.

[Dave Wood]

The media has turned on us big time, calling us kooks, fringe elements, and extremists. Our angry behavior at times does nothing but drive home these negative characterizations with the notion that we are all a bunch of storm troopers. When we go into forms like a Rudy Giuliani forum, or we fill someone's email box with hateful email, we perpetuate this notion.

I ask my fellow Ron Paul supporters to please stop with the negativity, be it negativity toward journalists/writers or negativity toward other candidates. The only way we're going to win this election is if we do what Mr. Paul is doing: conveying a positive message of ending the war, adhering to the Constitution, and preserving liberty. We're much more persuasive when we act this way, and we win a lot more followers this way. Will there be people who continue to visciously attack Mr. Paul as well as us? Of course there will be. Can we respond to them? Sure. But we should respond in a civilized, rational manner with solid arguments supporting our claims. Never resort to matching their negativity with counterattacks; it's a complete waste of time and distracts us from the work we need to do in obtaining our goal. The reality of politics is that you're going to get attacked, and by a lot of people; you can't hit back at all of them, or you won't win because you're substituting this for productivity. You just have to roll with the punches and keep on chugging.

An eye for an eye leaves both people blind, and we want to make sure that others can see what we see in the good doctor.

I disagree with you slightly. The main reason is that this very same topic has been run and re-run through these forums at least 200 times.
There is no room for baseless attacks and all around juvenile behavior.
That being said, and agreed upon, this is a very strong unit of people filled with passion. We should continue to do what has worked until now. If they label us, too bad. We have been called everything there is and they still cant figure out how to stop us.

Keep doing what works and dont be afraid to offend as long as you are representing FACTS. We will NOT lat down to slander, ever. Why should we?

In case you havnt noticed, these media people havnt been very kind and considerate towards us or RP so why should we act like sheep and just SHUT UP AND TAKE IT?

They wanted to stop us in Michagan(Sau Anuzis), Iowa, (Christian alliance), South Carolina (Rick Beltram).....and they didnt! You want to know why? Because we are LOUD, proud, and passionate and we wont take being brushed off or slandered, sorry to be crude, but it used to be called "having a pair". My $.02

[Dave Wood]

Yes, be nice, don't rock the boat, keep it to yourself, smile and hope for the best- that has been an excellent strategy for the past- how long has it been now?

Appreciate the thoughts, but for one, the rules that apply to us don't apply to them and this isn't a sewing circle.


+1 !

[LFOD]

One counterproductive response would be to resort to smears, caricaturizing others positions, curses, personal insults and the like - all the things we hate when they're directed at Ron Paul. The smear artists will just pick that up and say "see? They're bullies and wackos."

Another counterproductive response to would be to "ignore" all the smears and pretend they can't influence the opinions of the people we're trying to get to vote for RP. They can and do, and it is a proven strategy.

The best response is a ruthless campaign of truth. Just respond to smears with facts, to propaganda with reason, to fear-mongering with the question "who does it benefit?"

We can't play good doggies, play nice and hope they'll like us, yet we can't stoop to their level. It goes beyond the false dichotomy of being "negative" versus being "positive." We have to be true, and give the truth the chance to win.

[davidhperry]

Yes, be nice, don't rock the boat, keep it to yourself, smile and hope for the best- that has been an excellent strategy for the past- how long has it been now?

Appreciate the thoughts, but for one, the rules that apply to us don't apply to them and this isn't a sewing circle.

Rockwell, It looks like you're drawing a relationship between not being offensive and being passive cowards who don't stand up for anything. I know a lot of people who don't take crap from any man and they still are nice enough to respect others.

I heard the OP saying: "let's be respectful while we do our thing" and it appears that you think that's not a good idea. Did I read you right?

[LibertyEagle]

The media has turned on us big time, calling us kooks, fringe elements, and extremists. Our angry behavior at times does nothing but drive home these negative characterizations with the notion that we are all a bunch of storm troopers. When we go into forms like a Rudy Giuliani forum, or we fill someone's email box with hateful email, we perpetuate this notion.

I ask my fellow Ron Paul supporters to please stop with the negativity, be it negativity toward journalists/writers or negativity toward other candidates. The only way we're going to win this election is if we do what Mr. Paul is doing: conveying a positive message of ending the war, adhering to the Constitution, and preserving liberty. We're much more persuasive when we act this way, and we win a lot more followers this way. Will there be people who continue to visciously attack Mr. Paul as well as us? Of course there will be. Can we respond to them? Sure. But we should respond in a civilized, rational manner with solid arguments supporting our claims. Never resort to matching their negativity with counterattacks; it's a complete waste of time and distracts us from the work we need to do in obtaining our goal. The reality of politics is that you're going to get attacked, and by a lot of people; you can't hit back at all of them, or you won't win because you're substituting this for productivity. You just have to roll with the punches and keep on chugging.

An eye for an eye leaves both people blind, and we want to make sure that others can see what we see in the good doctor.

Great post. Thank you.

[davidhperry]

Yes, be nice, don't rock the boat, keep it to yourself, smile and hope for the best- that has been an excellent strategy for the past- how long has it been now?

Appreciate the thoughts, but for one, the rules that apply to us don't apply to them and this isn't a sewing circle.

Agreed - this isn't a sewing circle. What do you recommend?

[conner_condor]

The media has turned on us big time, calling us kooks, fringe elements, and extremists. Our angry behavior at times does nothing but drive home these negative characterizations with the notion that we are all a bunch of storm troopers. When we go into forms like a Rudy Giuliani forum, or we fill someone's email box with hateful email, we perpetuate this notion.

I ask my fellow Ron Paul supporters to please stop with the negativity, be it negativity toward journalists/writers or negativity toward other candidates. The only way we're going to win this election is if we do what Mr. Paul is doing: conveying a positive message of ending the war, adhering to the Constitution, and preserving liberty. We're much more persuasive when we act this way, and we win a lot more followers this way. Will there be people who continue to visciously attack Mr. Paul as well as us? Of course there will be. Can we respond to them? Sure. But we should respond in a civilized, rational manner with solid arguments supporting our claims. Never resort to matching their negativity with counterattacks; it's a complete waste of time and distracts us from the work we need to do in obtaining our goal. The reality of politics is that you're going to get attacked, and by a lot of people; you can't hit back at all of them, or you won't win because you're substituting this for productivity. You just have to roll with the punches and keep on chugging.

An eye for an eye leaves both people blind, and we want to make sure that others can see what we see in the good doctor.

Sometimes you have to have soldiers to carry out the deed though when one is attacked. When attacked over and over again,you don't just sit there and let it happen time after time do you? I didn't think so.

[angelatc]

The media has turned on us big time, calling us kooks, fringe elements, and extremists..

They haven't turned on us. It has always been like that. Heck, I'm still happy that they're finally acknowledging us!

[Ron Paul Fan]

I myself follow Ron Paul's good example on this matter. I would encourage others to do the same, but there are always some who will always be overly negative and that's their prerogative. So I'm not naive enough to think that we can completely elminate the negative. I mean who am I, Johnny Mercer? People will be people. Mind your own business. Don't enforce your goodness on people like the neo-cons preach. Set a good example and have others want to emulate you. And so on.

[Dave Wood]

One counterproductive response would be to resort to smears, caricaturizing others positions, curses, personal insults and the like - all the things we hate when they're directed at Ron Paul. The smear artists will just pick that up and say "see? They're bullies and wackos."

Another counterproductive response to would be to "ignore" all the smears and pretend they can't influence the opinions of the people we're trying to get to vote for RP. They can and do, and it is a proven strategy.

The best response is a ruthless campaign of truth. Just respond to smears with facts, to propaganda with reason, to fear-mongering with the question "who does it benefit?"

We can't play good doggies, play nice and hope they'll like us, yet we can't stoop to their level. It goes beyond the false dichotomy of being "negative" versus being "positive." We have to be true, and give the truth the chance to win.

+1 good post.

[Fyretrohl]

I agree we need to focus on the positive message.

However -

I am in Utah and I guarantee you that if Romney's past is not exposed, he will take this state because too many people vote for the first person to strike their fancy and Romney will take 95% of the "unthinking masses" votes here if a spotlight is not shone on his record.

I am not talking smear here, but factually stating another candidates record and pointing out that not just on one issue but on virtually all issues his record does not match his rhetoric. I do not consider that "being negative" that is allowing the truth to set people free.

So, as an LDS member from outside of Utah...How many of the 'unthinking' masses do you think would respond to real calls to adhere to the teaching of the church to pray and ponder, look at the scriptures and teachings of our leaders, and the fact that the Constitution is God Inspired? The Church has no reason to tell us who to vote for, as members. Our teachings already tell us the right candidate will be made clear, if we but excercise our faith.

[davidhperry]

Sometimes you have to have soldiers to carry out the deed though when one is attacked. When attacked over and over again,you don't just sit there and let it happen time after time do you? I didn't think so.

What do you suggest as the alternative? You mention "you don't just sit there" - what are you suggesting we do about it?

[LFOD]

What do you suggest as the alternative? You mention "you don't just sit there" - what are you suggesting we do about it?


Find out the facts about Ron Paul's position on the topic. Do a little research on what he's said and written over the years. With those facts on your side, the attack withers into absurdity and it can be seen for the smear that it really is.

[davidhperry]

Find out the facts about Ron Paul's position on the topic. Do a little research on what he's said and written over the years. With those facts on your side, the attack withers into absurdity and it can be seen for the smear that it really is.

That sounds like what OP is suggesting though, right? The OP is saying "stop the negativity" and others point out that "you can't be nice all the time." So, it sounds like you agree with the OP, correct?

[Original_Intent]

So, as an LDS member from outside of Utah...How many of the 'unthinking' masses do you think would respond to real calls to adhere to the teaching of the church to pray and ponder, look at the scriptures and teachings of our leaders, and the fact that the Constitution is God Inspired? The Church has no reason to tell us who to vote for, as members. Our teachings already tell us the right candidate will be made clear, if we but excercise our faith.

I see your point and I agree. However, my experience is that if you talk about Ron Paul exclusively, they may smile and nod their head but there is no real conversation. However something like "Boy I sure was looking forward to supporting Mitt Romney until I looked at his past record on abortion, gun rights, etc. Plus he supports going to war without a declaration of war by Congress as required by the Constitution. There is another candidate, Ron Paul, who has a twenty year record of supporting the Constitution....."

That's not really negative, but here in Utah I think it is a good conversation starter and a lot of people really do not know his record, and are appalled when they do hear the truth.