What if Ron Paul said...

[James R]

Lets say we break the all-time donating record on December 16th. If that happens I propose that Ron Paul makes the following announcement: "I will no longer collect money for the campaign in the primaries race. Firstly, I have all the money I need to win. Secondly, the grassroots movement is so large now that I can count on them to do the advertising for me. I encourage the grassroots to accomplish the fund-raising and the fund-spending for the rest of the primaries race." Ron Paul would chose which ads to endorse, but obviously approval is not required.

While this would be a high-risk move, it would multiply the news-worthyness of Ron Paul several times over and possibly give him the momentum through the entire remainder of the race.

The benefits:
1. After making a statement like that everyone would be watching his campaign like a hawk, media and otherwise. In fact, I'd like to think that he would become a household name overnight.
2. It would lead to our grassroots advertisements getting press coverage.
3. The ads that the official campaign run are fairly bad compared to the ones we do.
4. Donations to the campaign may actually increase due to the feeling of being actively involved.

[reduen]

Very nice post James! Certainly worth pondering..

[Ron LOL]

Not quite sure I'm able to follow the logic here...

[Adamsa]

The actual fundraising would overshadow any statement like that. Not to mention I think it's a pointless one.

[kotetu]

The idea is
(1) This month raises enough money to spend for the entire primary and
(2) Ron Paul publicly and loudly declares he's going to win and will only raise funds for the election and
(3) he will let the funds come in grass roots style, giving total faith to the people.

I think it would be interesting, but I'd wait until my postulate comes true. See my sig.

:)

[James R]

Not quite sure I'm able to follow the logic here...

The logic is that December 16th proves Ron Paul doesn't need his official campaign at all. He can hand control over to the grassroots completely and say "no more donations to me." Instead of seeing a donation bar at the website, you see "The grassroots movement now has control over the campaign. Join a Meetup group to join the campaign." Furthermore, by doing so, Ron Paul gets explosive media coverage.

[Ron LOL]

The logic is that December 16th proves Ron Paul doesn't need his official campaign at all. He can hand control over to the grassroots completely and say "no more donations to me." Instead of seeing a donation bar at the website, you see "The grassroots movement now has control over the campaign. Join a Meetup group to join the campaign."

Huh.

It certainly jives with the whole bottom up aspect. I guess it really all depends on how much we raise on 12/16. Indeed, an interesting idea.

[AlexMerced]

Yeah, he still needs to look like he's leading his campaign, a lot of people vote based on leadership, if he just openly its back and saids "you guys do everything" we'll lose a lot of moderate votes.

[LBT]

While I think the grassroots movement could effectively take over much of the campaign advertising, and probably do a better job, I'm not sure that Ron Paul making this declaration would generate huge media attention. Certainly it would be a talking point.

I do think the grassroots will create and fund more and more advertising ventures and that this is a good thing. But the issue of trust can be a tricky thing and that may mean that far less money actually gets donated overall.

Certainly worth thinking about though!

[James R]

Yeah, he still needs to look like he's leading his campaign, a lot of people vote based on leadership, if he just openly its back and saids "you guys do everything" we'll lose a lot of moderate votes.

I do see now how this can be spun negatively. Thanks for pointing that out. But I think it would only be spin for this reason:
A good leader delegates wisely. If Ron Paul views the grassroots movement as the source of his success, he should therefore delegate a lot of authority to the grassroots.

[LBT]

This reminds me that it would be a strong talking point / news story if an independent campaign analyst came up with a report that looked something like this:

Non MSM Generated Exposure (Advertising budget from fundraising, Internet Videos, Blogs, Meetup Groups, Fence Signs etc)
Ron Paul: $280 million
Hillary: $180 million
Obama: $160 million
Rudy: $90 million

MSM Exposure
Hillary $300 million
Obama $240 million
Rudy $230 million
Ron Paul $20 million

(figures totally guessed at, though I expect a similar trend)

I believe getting the word out on such a study would both help to prove that Ron Paul is a front runner and that the MSM must increase their coverage on him.