PDA

View Full Version : Are we repeating Dean's mistakes?




dirka
12-14-2007, 06:30 PM
I just want to put this question out there not to compare the Ron Paul supporters to Dean's, but rather to make sure we are not just doing the same things they did which in the end didn't work out. I don't want history to repeat itself...

So, what are the Paulites doing differently and why will we be successful?

Jobarra
12-14-2007, 06:31 PM
Dean didn't have Youtube ;)

jblosser
12-14-2007, 06:32 PM
Dean couldn't attract the crossover & disillusioned vote/support/enthusiasm Ron can. With Ron if you don't like his position on a non-Federal issue, you can rest assured he'll leave it to the States. He's absolutely not interested in telling you what to think, he just wants the Constitution followed, even when changing it.

tsetsefly
12-14-2007, 06:33 PM
Dean didnt have the message he was a one trick pony, running just on the iraq issue and it was ridiculous to think he woudl win Iowa, but when he lost he had his "Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!" moment which just sealed his fate, take that away and it would of been more of a battle in NH.

that is why I think Paul needs a GOOD showing in Iowa to inspire the NH voters!

LibertyEagle
12-14-2007, 06:34 PM
What we certainly do NOT want to repeat is being too pushy to people. That is one of the things that turned people majorly off.

We, as a group, can get very excited about what we are doing and have a hard time understanding when others are not interested. It doesn't serve us well when we try to cram something down their throats. Not only does it not work, it will turn them and anyone who sees us doing it, totally against our candidate.

csen
12-14-2007, 06:35 PM
I think Huck is much more likely to be a Dean than RP -- getting someone on board with Ron Paul is a difficult process, but once you're on board it's hard to imagine going with any other candidate. I think our poll numbers, wherever they are, are rock solid, and there's basically nothing that can make them go lower at this point. Huck is riding a wave, but how sturdy is it? We'll see.

LibertyEagle
12-14-2007, 06:36 PM
I think Huck is much more likely to be a Dean than RP -- getting someone on board with Ron Paul is a difficult process, but once you're on board it's hard to imagine going with any other candidate.

Very true, but we don't want to drive potential supporters away by being too pushy.

Soccrmastr
12-14-2007, 06:38 PM
Dean had a LOT less supporters and they never got anything done. We have MEETUPS that are very ACTIVE. Deans supporters just kinda chilled on the internet spamming stuff. We do that and much more.

hueylong
12-14-2007, 06:39 PM
Dr. Paul's biggest problem is that so many of his supporters feel free to be rude, arrogant, snotty, vulgar, narrow-minded, immature and shallow -- no matter how it affects the campaign or turns people off.

Not so different from many of the Dean people online...

Huey

dirka
12-14-2007, 06:39 PM
One thing I think Dr. Paul needs to do is talk a little more positively about the future and what he plans for America and not be too negative about the war. I think this is where Yuckabee is doing well, he is trying to be positive and say we are a great nation (also what Obama is doing)

So I think if he was a little happier and optimistic about the Future, he could do a lot better

JMann
12-14-2007, 06:39 PM
Howie Dean is a dick. Paul is a nice person.

Goldwater Conservative
12-14-2007, 06:40 PM
Dean was more establishment than Paul is, and peaked way too early. When we're tied with Huckleberry for the lead in Iowa and start slinging mud at each other, then we should worry about the comparison.

V4Vendetta
12-14-2007, 06:43 PM
Alex Jones Didn't promote Dean.... Like he does with Paul.... Thats the BIG difference!!

hawkeyenick
12-14-2007, 06:45 PM
Alex Jones Didn't promote Dean.... Like he does with Paul.... Thats the BIG difference!!

most people don't like alex jones because of his ignorance of evolution

ThePieSwindler
12-14-2007, 06:52 PM
most people don't like alex jones because of his ignorance of evolution

I agree he is wrong on that issue, but thousands upon thousands of people support and listen to alex jones who disagree with him on that, but agree with him on everything else. In all honesty, tahts a very stupid reason not support someone. "oh they dont believe in evolution? They are idiots and i dont want to associate with them or have anything to do with them" this elitist, anti-scientific (in the sense that it rejects friendly arguement and decorum and favors shunning) mentality is the reason i dislike many atheists so much, not their beliefs. (Ps i "believe" in evolution but i dont fault those who dont, and i dont see why its a big deal. Even if ron paul were a creationist, as long as he is not a fundamentalist, which he is obvious not, why the fuck should we care?) Ironic how atheists pride themselves on being adherents to reason alone and yet come up with some very irrational complexes of their own.

hawkeyenick
12-14-2007, 06:54 PM
I agree he is wrong on that issue, but thousands upon thousands of people support and listen to alex jones who disagree with him on that, but agree with him on everything else. In all honesty, tahts a very stupid reason not support someone. "oh they dont believe in evolution? They are idiots and i dont want to associate with them or have anything to do with them" this elitist, anti-scientific mentality is the reason i dislike many atheists so much, not their beliefs. (Ps i "believe" in evolution but i dont fault those who dont, and i dont see why its a big deal. Even if ron paul were a creationist, as long as he is not a fundamentalist, which he is obvious not, why the fuck should we care?) Ironic how atheists pride themselves on being adherents to reason alone and yet come up with some very irrational complexes of their own.

I have yet to see him make a case about the bilderberg meetings.

Until he gets a camera in there to find out what they are actually saying, it's just a meeting of friends.

V4Vendetta
12-14-2007, 06:55 PM
Evolution - Like Global Warming - IS A FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lynnf
12-14-2007, 06:56 PM
Dean had followers, Paul has activists! how many blimps did Dean's followers put up? how many money bombs did Dean's followers have? how many tea-parties did Dean's followers have? how many of Dean's followers made and bought their own bumper stickers and signs? how many of Dean's followers drove for miles and miles just to hear their candidate speak? how many granny warriors did Dean have behind him?

contrast that with what Paul's activists have done!

lynn

coffeewithchess
12-14-2007, 06:56 PM
Dean had a LOT less supporters and they never got anything done. We have MEETUPS that are very ACTIVE. Deans supporters just kinda chilled on the internet spamming stuff. We do that and much more.

If this is the case...how was he first in the polls?

V4Vendetta
12-14-2007, 06:57 PM
most people don't like alex jones because of his ignorance of evolution

funny, you're the first I heard of....

Paul would not be anywhere today if it wasn't for Alex Jones.... And I don't think even Ron Paul understands that!

He would have been off of the debates a long time ago, like Mike Gravel.

ThePieSwindler
12-14-2007, 06:58 PM
I have yet to see him make a case about the bilderberg meetings.

Until he gets a camera in there to find out what they are actually saying, it's just a meeting of friends.

Ok, thats all well and good, but what does his disbelief in evolution have anything to do with that? Its absurd to connect that as if it completely discredits him. What would ron paul do? He doesnt argue in fallacious manners via nonsequitors and false parallels, he directly attacks a specific arguement based on its own merit. Im sorry im singling you out on this, but ive seen this rationale alot, these indirect assaults on ones beliefs as though they are all invalidated by one erroneously held outlier.

Im not trying to get into a debate about evolution, or alex jones' body of work, but im trying to attack this mentality that alot of people seem to have that they use to discredit an arguement via a red herring. Its a fallacy that i see ALOT of so called "rational" folks use to rationalize away support for something. Like this guy in an atheist libertarian facebook group, said he was no longer supporting ron paul SIMPLY BECAUSE HE WAS NO AN ATHEIST! This mentality is JUST AS BAD as that of fundamentalists who will not support anyone who is a non christian, yet atheists somehow seem to think their proclaimation that they use reason means they are above actually using it, rather than merely invoking it. But its not just atheists, its a very large majority of people who attempt to make arguements.

Anyways back on topic: dean was a media favorite, did not have much substance or depth, and did not have a strong grassroots organization that was actually active other than exclusively on the internet. Ron Paul has a very, very strong and appealing message.

PrimarilyPaul
12-14-2007, 06:58 PM
Did Dean register people as Democrats so they could vote in the primary?

Hope
12-14-2007, 06:58 PM
Dean's people were rude and obnoxious and turned a lot of other Democrats off. We need to get off this path of justifying any kind of behavior in the name of "revolution" and put pragmatism before egotism.

JacobLyles
12-14-2007, 06:59 PM
No. People only compare them because they both use the internet. There, the similarities stop.

cac1963
12-14-2007, 06:59 PM
What we certainly do NOT want to repeat is being too pushy to people. That is one of the things that turned people majorly off.

We, as a group, can get very excited about what we are doing and have a hard time understanding when others are not interested. It doesn't serve us well when we try to cram something down their throats. Not only does it not work, it will turn them and anyone who sees us doing it, totally against our candidate.

This.

The enormous influx of out-of-staters campaigning for Dean in Iowa actually did more harm than good because their enthusiasm wasn't shared by the passive Iowa residents and that's all they saw was overbearing mega-enthusiasm from Dean's supporters.

DealzOnWheelz
12-14-2007, 07:00 PM
the polls are useless

Luther
12-14-2007, 07:03 PM
Dean didn't really have a compelling message except for ending the war in Iraq.

dirka
12-14-2007, 07:05 PM
Dean had followers, Paul has activists! how many blimps did Dean's followers put up? how many money bombs did Dean's followers have? how many tea-parties did Dean's followers have? how many of Dean's followers made and bought their own bumper stickers and signs? how many of Dean's followers drove for miles and miles just to hear their candidate speak? how many granny warriors did Dean have behind him?

contrast that with what Paul's activists have done!

lynn

So how did Dean raise $100 million bucks??? was it corporate money??

hawkeyenick
12-14-2007, 07:07 PM
funny, you're the first I heard of....

Paul would not be anywhere today if it wasn't for Alex Jones.... And I don't think even Ron Paul understands that!

He would have been off of the debates a long time ago, like Mike Gravel.

I'm the first you heard of because most people just turn it off. That point doesn't even belong in the video because it's a non-sequitur(sp?).

You keep mixing terms as well. Global warming can't be denied, it's just the method by which it's happening and the degree that's in question. Anthropogenic global warming is the fraud, not global warming itself.

I really wish you would research some of this stuff instead of just taking a position and then only accepting information if it fits your world view.

That's why science is go great and evolution is so awesome. When you make a hypothesis in science, the goal is to disprove it and to see if others can disprove it. If they can't it becomes a theory, if they can it becomes junk science (aka not science at all). I can give you text book after textbook, and hard evidence on evolution. Evolution is fact, it the exact means that it happens that is still being debated. Much like gravity is a fact, just the method by which it happens is what is being debated.

In all your rambling, have you ever even once come across a piece of evidence or an experiment that tried to make the case for creationism/id? All it ever does is try to discredit evolution without making any points. They look for perceived gaps, which usually aren't actually gaps at all, and then go "see, evolution can't explain it, so it HAS to be creationism/ID by default" and other god of the gaps concepts.

Biology is completely based on evolution. Most modern vaccines are based on it as well.

ThePieSwindler
12-14-2007, 07:07 PM
Also, dean didnt have voter turnout the way we will, because everyone expected him to win due to the high polling numbers. This is where underdog status and lower polling numbers (though ones sufficiently high enough to register a large amount of support, ads in, above double digits) gives us an advantage - it wwill force us ALL to WANT to turn out in order to win, whereas it was seen as being so easy for dean that alot of people just stayed home. That, and Byaah.

hawkeyenick
12-14-2007, 07:07 PM
Also, what the hell is the point of this thread?

cac1963
12-14-2007, 07:08 PM
Dean had followers, Paul has activists! how many blimps did Dean's followers put up? how many money bombs did Dean's followers have? how many tea-parties did Dean's followers have? how many of Dean's followers made and bought their own bumper stickers and signs? how many of Dean's followers drove for miles and miles just to hear their candidate speak? how many granny warriors did Dean have behind him?

contrast that with what Paul's activists have done!

lynn

Dean raised $40 million online, before the primaries.

His Sleepless Summer Tour in 2003 was comprised of nothing but a bunch of hippie nomads traveling the country to pad the crowds at each stop, hoping to be large enough in numbers to finally grab some media attention.

There are enormous similarities between the two campaigns, especially the efforts of the grassroots. True they didn't go out and form huge companies to launch a blimp but they had their own inspiring activities with hand-printed signs and streetcorner rallies going on MONTHS before the primaries even started. I was one of these avid supporters who traveled all over the southeast whenever the opportunity came up to make a big showing for something Dean-related, and stood on streetcorners for weeks on end waving Dean signs.

Perry
12-14-2007, 07:10 PM
Dean started earlier and had much more support within the house & senate then Paul had.
Paul started much later and with nothing but a message & his wifes cookbook..

Deans got NOTHING on Ron Paul.

Anyway Paul can win as long as he doesn't do this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE) Lol...

cac1963
12-14-2007, 07:20 PM
Dean started earlier and had much more support within the house & senate then Paul had.
Paul started much later and with nothing but a message & his wifes cookbook..

Deans got NOTHING on Ron Paul.

Anyway Paul can win as long as he doesn't do this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE) Lol...

That's not true. Both Paul and Dean launched their campaigns in the spring before the primaries. And Dean's message wasn't all that different from Paul's - that was to take our country back from the corporate elite and restore accountability and rule of law. Dean gave several speeches about his planned Great American Restoration, including several in Boston.

Paul runs circles around Dean regarding actual devotion to the constitution, but Dean was the first candidate in the Bush II era to put it out there that we needed to get these criminals under control and restore America's greatness, including more emphasis on local control instead of one-size-fits all federal control.

Revolution9
12-14-2007, 07:22 PM
Very true, but we don't want to drive potential supporters away by being too pushy.

LE..Stop with the broken record. OTOH we don't want to have potential voters not know about us.

Thanks
Randy

Revolution9
12-14-2007, 07:24 PM
Dr. Paul's biggest problem is that so many of his supporters feel free to be rude, arrogant, snotty, vulgar, narrow-minded, immature and shallow -- no matter how it affects the campaign or turns people off.

Not so different from many of the Dean people online...

Huey

Dr Paul's supporters biggest problem is other ~supporters~ who claim they do things they don't. Much like the above pile of manufactured crap.

Randy

redpillguy
12-14-2007, 07:24 PM
The TRUTH about the Howard Dean Scream:

http://rabbit-hole-journey.blogspot.com/2007/11/truth-about-howard-dean-scream-and.html

From http://www.wanttoknow.info/howarddeansdemise


The Scream

by David Podvin

On December 1, 2003, Howard Dean was ahead by twenty points in the polls when he appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and said, "We're going to break up the giant media enterprises." This pronouncement went far beyond the governor's previous public musings about possibly re-regulating the communications industry. It amounted to a declaration of war on the corporations that administer the flow of information in the United States.

The media giants quickly responded by crushing his high-flying campaign with the greatest of ease. This time, they didn't even have to invent a scandal in order to achieve the desired result; merely by chanting the word "unelectable" at maximum volume, the mainstream media maneuvered democratic voters into switching their support to someone who poses no threat to the status quo.

John Kerry is a member of a group of politicians whose disagreements with the mercantile elite tend to be merely rhetorical. Any doubts about Kerry's level of commitment to his stated progressive beliefs were answered in 1994 when he proclaimed himself "delighted" with the Republican takeover of Congress (Boston Globe, New York Times). The media oligarchy knows that a general election race between Kerry and George W. Bush will insure a continuation of its monopoly, regardless of who wins.

The news cartel had always been hostile to Dean. Independent surveys revealed that he had received the most negative coverage of any candidate except Dennis Kucinich (the only other contender who strongly favors mandatory media divestment). But after his statement on Hardball, reporting about Dean abruptly came to an end and was replaced by supposition.

By mid-December, the news divisions of the four major television networks were reporting as fact that Dean was unelectable. The print media echoed the theme; on December 17, the Washington Post printed a front-page story that posited Dean could not win the presidency. The Post quickly followed up with an onslaught of articles and editorials reasserting that claim. Before the month was over, Dean's lack of electability had been highlighted in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe, the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and every other major paper in the United States.

As 2004 began, Time and Newsweek simultaneously ran cover stories emphasizing that Dean was unelectable. In the weeks before the Iowa caucus, the ongoing topic of discussion on the political panel shows was that Dean was unelectable. National talk radio shows repeatedly stressed that Dean was unelectable. The corporate Internet declared that Dean was unelectable. And the mainstream media continued with the storyline that Dean was unelectable right up until Iowans attended their caucuses. Iowa Democrats could not watch a television or listen to a radio or read a newspaper or go online without learning that Howard Dean was unelectable.

On January 19, Democratic caucus goers in Iowa - who were the initial intended audience for this propaganda disguised as reportage - overwhelmingly repudiated Dean, telling pollsters they believed he was unelectable. Later that evening, Dean yelled encouragement to his supporters at a pep rally, an incident that provided the pretext for the coup de grâce.

During the week leading up to the New Hampshire primary, the media obsessed about Dean's "bizarre" rally incident, adding "un-presidential" and "emotionally unstable" to its descriptions of the governor. The unified message was that Dean had self-destructed. When he finished a distant second in New Hampshire, journalists and pundits hailed the defeat as confirmation of their premise that Dean had always been unelectable.

Yet there had been no tangible basis for that assertion. At the beginning of 2004, a poll conducted by Time magazine showed that Dean trailed Bush by only six points. That was a smaller deficit than Gore faced shortly before the general election in 2000, and he wound up getting the most popular votes. Undaunted by this evidence to the contrary, reporters adhered to the motif that Dean had absolutely no chance.

It is not what a politician does that creates a scandal. It is whether the television networks and major metropolitan newspapers respond to the incident with saturation coverage. When a presidential candidate who was committed to deregulating the corporate media got caught lying about breaking the law, the importance of the event was minimized. When a presidential candidate who was committed to breaking up the corporate media got caught shouting at a pep rally, the importance of the event was maximized.

Howard Dean's campaign now lies in ruins because he chose to confront the multinational conglomerates that run this country. If Dean is so resilient that he fights his way back into contention, the Fourth Estate will be ready to batter him again. In the United States of America, people who pose a threat to the reigning corporate establishment are destroyed. Or, as the Soviets used to put it, emotionally unstable individuals who deviate from the party line are guilty of engaging in "self-destruction".

Thomas Paine
12-14-2007, 07:24 PM
Dean was done in by his "scream." I knew his campaign was over when even Howard Stern was poking fun at him the next morning by replaying the "scream" every 15 minutes.

Perry
12-14-2007, 07:27 PM
That's not true. Both Paul and Dean launched their campaigns in the spring before the primaries. And Dean's message wasn't all that different from Paul's - that was to take our country back from the corporate elite and restore accountability and rule of law. Dean gave several speeches about his planned Great American Restoration, including several in Boston.

Paul runs circles around Dean regarding actual devotion to the constitution, but Dean was the first candidate in the Bush II era to put it out there that we needed to get these criminals under control and restore America's greatness, including more emphasis on local control instead of one-size-fits all federal control.

What's not true? Paul announced in April. When did Dean announce? Seems like it was much earlier. Also like I said dean did have some backing from certain house members whereas Paul has been completely shunned by not only the house and senate but the media. The media were all over Howard Dean.

I understand that you probably have some fuzzy feelings left over from those days but Pauls achievements have easily trumped anything Howard Dean ever accomplished. Deans campaign was 50% grassroots at best whereas Pauls is 90%.

Revolution9
12-14-2007, 07:33 PM
most people don't like alex jones because of his ignorance of evolution

If there has been genetic manipulation like evidence is arising indicating manipulation that statistics show is far outside normal genetic mutations then that means intervention has taken place in the human genome somewhere between 15,000 and 50,000 years ago.. If intervention has taken place then evolution as it pertains to the human species is false. Tell me my genes come from Lucy in Africa and the core of my Celtic genetics screams no effing way. I don;t care what 19th and 20th century science says. They were wrong about gravity and the theory of relativity too. And removing two parts of the quaternion equations to create the math for the basis of modern electronics has left the ability to design open circuits tapping the seething vacuum flux and forcing assymetry a sidelined science left to those who do not take the modern teachings at face value.

Best Regards
randy

hawkeyenick
12-14-2007, 07:38 PM
If there has been genetic manipulation like evidence is arising indicating manipulation that statistics show is far outside normal genetic mutations then that means intervention has taken place in the human genome somewhere between 15,000 and 50,000 years ago.. If intervention has taken place then evolution as it pertains to the human species is false. Tell me my genes come from Lucy in Africa and the core of my Celtic genetics screams no effing way. I don;t care what 19th and 20th century science says. They were wrong about gravity and the theory of relativity too. And removing two parts of the quaternion equations to create the math for the basis of modern electronics has left the ability to design open circuits tapping the seething vacuum flux and forcing assymetry a sidelined science left to those who do not take the modern teachings at face value.

Best Regards
randy

What you said was an attempt to sound educated, but made absolutely no sense whatsoever.

you = fail

cac1963
12-14-2007, 07:38 PM
What's not true? Paul announced in April. When did Dean announce? Seems like it was much earlier. Also like I said dean did have some backing from certain house members whereas Paul has been completely shunned by not only the house and senate but the media. The media were all over Howard Dean.

I understand that you probably have some fuzzy feelings left over from those days but Pauls achievements have easily trumped anything Howard Dean ever accomplished. Deans campaign was 50% grassroots at best whereas Pauls is 90%.

Howard Dean won the first-in-the-nation primary in Washington DC with 40% of the vote a full week before Iowa's caucuses (January 14 2004), and managed to raise 4 times the amount of money online that Paul has raised to date. The media most certainly did NOT coddle up to Dean until Dean hit 30% in the polls after Gore's endorsement. Prior to that it was tiny little drips of news coverage about the same frequency as what Paul's getting right now. And Dean also had grassroots rapid response teams ready to pounce on any media item that even remotely skewed his message or dissed his campaign, exactly the way we all launch our attacks on every little hit piece that comes down the pike.

You can try to blank it all out and assume Paul's is the only genuine grassroots campaign to ever exist, but Dean's in many ways rivals Paul's, especially in the amount of money raised and on-the-ground supporters blanketing their towns with signs and rallies.

In terms of support by other elected officials, I don't recall too many office holders endorsing Dean, whereas Paul's got quite a few on his side right now. Rep. Guest (R-MO) campaigns for him all the time on the radio. Paul Broun (R-GA) ran on Paul's platform and won. Paul's got alot of support from others in the Liberty Caucus in the house.

Ron Paul Fan
12-14-2007, 07:38 PM
I don't see the correlation. Dean peaked and then dissapointed at the Iowa Caucus and then fizzled after the Dean Scream. Ron Paul hasn't peaked yet! Sunday will be a HUGE day and will give us momentum going into the Iowa Caucus! We're going to SURPRISE people on January 3rd! Dean was the frontrunner going in to Iowa and could only dissapoint unless he won it all. We're seeing a REVOLUTION happen right before our very eyes and people are going to see it in action around the world on DECEMBER 16TH and again on JANUARY 3RD and JANUARY 8TH!

Revolution9
12-14-2007, 07:38 PM
Paul started much later and with nothing but a message & his wifes cookbook..



Ya gotta love this guy! That is almost too cute..And yeah.. I am a tough guy saying this:D

Best Regards
Randy

Dorfsmith
12-14-2007, 07:40 PM
Ya gotta love this guy! That is almost too cute..And yeah.. I am a tough guy saying this:D

Best Regards
Randy

LOL, best post in this thread.

TheNewYorker
12-14-2007, 07:42 PM
Ron Paul has so far and will be a Kerry. Just this time, he's going to win the general.

Lunchbox
12-14-2007, 07:43 PM
One thing I think Dr. Paul needs to do is talk a little more positively about the future and what he plans for America and not be too negative about the war. I think this is where Yuckabee is doing well, he is trying to be positive and say we are a great nation (also what Obama is doing)

So I think if he was a little happier and optimistic about the Future, he could do a lot better

Definitely agree with this, in as much as the Huckster's sly tongue has lured a number of evangelicals to his side. It is temporary, but interesting.

Where Huck has continued to take the well-informed positions that Dr. Paul as his own, we could stand to take a little bit of that charm (and that's it) from his campaign.

It is so tough for Dr. Paul to be able to stress the dire importance of the choices we need to make (and the consequences of those already made), and not seem a little "peeved," be it in interview, debate, or in action. We all are! But building those more hopeful, poetic, cooperative messages will have resounding effect.

Back on topic, I think the stoic, calculating, and agreeably reserved style of Dr. Paul, and consistent collaboration and to some extent, self-moderation of our community, will not lend itself to repeating the mistakes in the Dean campaign. We are able to get the word out in so many more forms and across many lines the Dean campaign could not cross. We adapt quickly, respond quickly, and work smarter.

Better still, when RP gets angry, his head never turns into a tomato and looks like it's going to pop off. No "scream" is going to end our campaign (how many Americans even remember the REASON why Dean was screaming?)

cac1963
12-14-2007, 07:49 PM
Dean had a LOT less supporters and they never got anything done. We have MEETUPS that are very ACTIVE. Deans supporters just kinda chilled on the internet spamming stuff. We do that and much more.

Dean had 140,000 people signed up in meetups by the time it was over. Meetup.com came into its own thanks to the Dean campaign.

idiom
12-14-2007, 07:56 PM
Dean was a democrat. The basis of his platform was that people are idiots. His grassroots was funneled, like RP's, by opposition to the war, but after that there was nothing more. HD was entirely emotional, RP takes the emotions and converts it into educated conviction.

Dan D.
12-14-2007, 07:57 PM
It wasn't the scream that undid Dean, it was Al Gore's endorsement. Seriously, his drop in the polls started the day after. Similarly, Robertson's endorsement seems to have been the death nell for Giuliani.

That said, it wasn't just the scream that was awful, it was the whole "speech" he gave, if you can call it that.

daviddee
12-14-2007, 08:02 PM
...

Dave Pedersen
12-14-2007, 08:07 PM
Yeah Ron Paul is relying too much on a falling dollar and failure in Iraq, both negative and both being moderated of late (by the unseen hand?). Ron Paul's message of freedom is a message of constructive hope and he needs to play that to the max.

If all the establishment has to do to defeat Ron Paul is keep the dollar healthy for a few months and keep our military death toll below average for a few months it will be a small price for them to pay.

Revolution9
12-14-2007, 08:10 PM
What you said was an attempt to sound educated, but made absolutely no sense whatsoever.

you = fail

Your intellect failed in the comprehension stage. That is a fault of your intellect and not my promulgation. Perhaps evolution did not make it past your shoulders?

Randy

Perry
12-14-2007, 08:21 PM
Ya gotta love this guy! That is almost too cute..And yeah.. I am a tough guy saying this:D

Best Regards
Randy

I couldn't help it it just popped in there.:D

BillyDkid
12-14-2007, 08:26 PM
Dean didn't have any like the grassroots Ron Paul does.

shepburn
12-14-2007, 08:44 PM
Difference btw Ron and Dean is simple. Ron didn't do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE

lynnf
12-14-2007, 08:50 PM
So how did Dean raise $100 million bucks??? was it corporate money??


looks like it wasn't $100 million (numbers for 2004 election cycle):

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00025663

P R E S I D E N T I A L C A N D I D A T E
Howard Dean (D)
Former Governor (Vermont)

A practicing physician, Howard Dean entered politics in 1982 with his election to the Vermont House of Representatives. He was later elected, and twice reelected, lieutenant governor. He became governor in 1991 when the incumbent died in office. As governor, Dean styled himself as a fiscal conservative who balanced the state’s budget, and a social liberal who fought for environmental protection and gay rights. He was governor until 2002. Dean dropped out of the presidential race Feb. 18, 2004.

Cycle:

Total Receipts: $52,968,040
Total Spent: $52,113,785
Cash on Hand: $854,255
Debts: $155,032
Date of last report: December 31, 2004
All totals include compliance fund receipts

conner_condor
12-14-2007, 08:51 PM
I didn't have internet at his time.

redpillguy
12-17-2007, 11:55 AM
Difference btw Ron and Dean is simple. Ron didn't do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE

I will repeat myself:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=604862&highlight=rabbit#post604862