The Revolution(Love) logo hurts as much as it helps....

[sluggo]

I know this is going to tee some folks here off, but I think it's time to move on from the Love/Revolution logo.

I've heard negative reactions to this sign from several people who don't support RP yet. They are getting the wrong impression from this image. It's making some people think that Ron Paul is some far out/peacenik type, which couldn't be farther from the truth. Since Dr. Paul is not getting the coverage some of the other candidates are getting, and many people are just too lazy to investigate things on there own, they are relying on the "first impression" factor. Unfortunately, the "love" part of the logo overshadows the other aspects of Dr. Paul's platform.

He's pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-authoritarian, and pro-defense. People are dying for that, and then they see the "love" logo and they will not look any further. I'm not attacking it, I just see it as a major obstacle for many people to get over.

I understand that it is a well intentioned image, but it does not play well in some circles. Please consider that when you hit the streets this weekend.

[Chernitsky]

http://smiliesftw.com/x/iocugh.gif (http://smiliesftw.com)

[sluggo]

http://smiliesftw.com/x/iocugh.gif (http://smiliesftw.com)

Huh?

[hueylong]

I hate to agree with Sluggo, but I think he's right. The 'revolution' theme scares the crap out of Republican Primary voters.

WE are the reason Dr. Paul's negatives are so high among Republicans. A 'back to basics', 'traditional conservative' -- or even, 'constitutionalist' them works much much better.

I'm only saying that because I've been around campaigns for 35 years.

Huey

[SeanEdwards]

I know this is going to tee some folks here off, but I think it's time to move on from the Love/Revolution logo.

I've heard negative reactions to this sign from several people who don't support RP yet. They are getting the wrong impression from this image. It's making some people think that Ron Paul is some far out/peacenik type, which couldn't be farther from the truth. Since Dr. Paul is not getting the coverage some of the other candidates are getting, and many people are just too lazy to investigate things on there own, they are relying on the "first impression" factor. Unfortunately, the "love" part of the logo overshadows the other aspects of Dr. Paul's platform.

He's pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-authoritarian, and pro-defense. People are dying for that, and then they see the "love" logo and they will not look any further. I'm not attacking it, I just see it as a major obstacle for many people to get over.

I understand that it is a well intentioned image, but it does not play well in some circles. Please consider that when you hit the streets this weekend.


They prefer their revolutions bloody and hateful?

[sluggo]

It's not so much the Revolution part, it's the Love part.

Don't ask me to explain why it has a negative reaction with some folks, it just does. It might work for some folks, but others are turned off by it. I spoke with some guys I work with today (mechanics), and heard that the sign gave them an impression of Ron Paul that was completely inaccurate. They thought that Ron Paul was a flower child, not a pro-gun, anti-tax, pro-States rights guy.

I see I've probably opened a can of worms here, my point is that this sign might work better in California, than it does in Alabama.

[tanstaafl]

I understand your frustration. However, the CORE problem isn't the rEVOLution logo itself - which could/should be interpreted as "revolution motivated by LOVE of the Constitution. The core problem is that Dr. Paul is being typecast as a "peacenik" - peace at any cost.

That isn't what Dr. Paul's record shows; that isn't what a thoughtful person would derive from careful reading his writings; but it IS what Dr. Paul is communicating by failing to communicate the bigger picture. He needs to whip together an essay building the case for how our country will be stronger and more secure under his leadership. He needs to begin hammering out speeches about how HE is actually the President that can best make the United States strong again; that our current global military strategy is obsolete; that it makes no sense to defend Iraq more than our southern border; that giving up the bankrupting cost of empire - and role of unpaid "policeman" - in favor of a strictly US-territory-based strong military and more Conservative use of military force is actually going to make the US vastly stronger. He needs to boldly assert that HE is the one who will make the US maximally strong again. He needs to assert it, and assert it, and assert it!

I think you are blaming the *brilliant* rEVOLution logo when you ought to be blaming the failure to communicate that Ron Paul is, according to Ronald Reagan, THE strongest voice for a strong America.

I wear a rEVOLution tee shirt. It captures the lion's heart of what we seek and how resolutely we seek it. Many of us are giving our all for the Republic; most of us would have been there - gun in hand and wiling to die if necessary - in 1776.

If the campaign management would get its head in gear on this issue, the logo would be no problem; it would actually continue to power the message forward. If the campaign management DOESN'T get its head in gear, than changing the logo isn't going to make converts but is more likely to cost us a lot of the enthusiasm we already have.

Tell the campaign headquarters to wake up! Dr. Paul IS the candidate who will make the United States strongest. Fiscal sanity, individual freedom, limited government, and obedience to the Constitution IS what made the United States an international powerhouse and beacon of courage to begin with.

[sluggo]

I see what you are saying, but I think that Dr. Paul tends to sell himself if you can get people to look past their first impression of him.

I live in the South, and have for my entire life. Fred Thompson appeals to a lot of people around here because their impression is of a tough talking, good ol' boy.
But the reality is that Ron Paul is the better choice, and has a flawless record of defending the Constitution. However, there are a lot of folks that I encounter every day that are put off by the "Love" signs.

I'm not trashing the sign. It's a good design, and is what got this thing rolling. But the SC primary is around the corner, and we need to get the other aspects of Ron Paul out there. And that sign just doesn't appeal to lot of potential primary voters in these parts.

[tanstaafl]

As I said, Sluggo, I ABSOLUTELY understand your frustration. It is much of mine, as well. But you are mistaken that the logo is the problem. The problem would be there pretty much the same without the logo - the problem would be there but much of the existent grassroots might not be.

Dr. Paul is brilliant and he has ALL the facts, record, logic, and communication talent he needs to fix the message - to slingshot himself to the FRONT of the Republican pack. But he needs to begin hammering home that the US has *diluted* its forces and *wasted* its wealth in 60 years of foreign boondoggles and military fiascos. When the US goes to war it should be only when the people of this country are deadly serious enough to put their OWN lives on the line; the last time we had a war like that was WWII ... and, as Dr. Paul has rightfully pointed out, it was the LAST time we actually won.

[Perry]

I know this is going to tee some folks here off, but I think it's time to move on from the Love/Revolution logo.

I've heard negative reactions to this sign from several people who don't support RP yet. They are getting the wrong impression from this image. It's making some people think that Ron Paul is some far out/peacenik type, which couldn't be farther from the truth. Since Dr. Paul is not getting the coverage some of the other candidates are getting, and many people are just too lazy to investigate things on there own, they are relying on the "first impression" factor. Unfortunately, the "love" part of the logo overshadows the other aspects of Dr. Paul's platform.

He's pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-authoritarian, and pro-defense. People are dying for that, and then they see the "love" logo and they will not look any further. I'm not attacking it, I just see it as a major obstacle for many people to get over.

I understand that it is a well intentioned image, but it does not play well in some circles. Please consider that when you hit the streets this weekend.

Christ said let there be NO revolution. Why? because revolutions are historically tainted with violence. I think the LOVE balances this idea out for many Christians and makes the idea more acceptable. And believe me there are a great many Christians supporting Ron Paul because the movement is a very Christian movement.

[noztnac]

I think it's a great logo for a great candidate.

People put off by "love" or "revolution" need to rethink what it means to be an American.

[austin4paul]

I prefer the Hope for America message now that I know Ron Paul because it expresses what I want more than the revolution message which has anger in it. Yet -- it was the rEVOLution logo that first attracted me to Ron Paul. I don't know if I would have been attracted by a Hope for America sign as that seems cliche. I think for people to become active in a political campaign, they have to get in touch with their anger about the status quo to be motivated to DO something. So both work -- they just serve different purposes. My personal favorite is the one that got me off my ass - "Google Ron Paul." When I did that, wow...I was hooked.

[plp]

It's not so much the Revolution part, it's the Love part.

Don't ask me to explain why it has a negative reaction with some folks, it just does. It might work for some folks, but others are turned off by it. I spoke with some guys I work with today (mechanics), and heard that the sign gave them an impression of Ron Paul that was completely inaccurate. They thought that Ron Paul was a flower child, not a pro-gun, anti-tax, pro-States rights guy.

I see I've probably opened a can of worms here, my point is that this sign might work better in California, than it does in Alabama.


At first blush, when you combine his anti-Iraq stance and the 'Love' insert, it hearkens back to the flower child movement of the late 1960's, a tie that the GOP has fought feverishly since we went into Iraq and the DNC has fostered, as they realized opposition to the war could in fact bring them back to their glory days. The fact that LBJ was THEIR candidate always seems to get glossed over.

The problem is, Dr. Paul is a thinking man's candidate, and the mainstream political machine is all about the 15 second sound byte. The seeds for my personal support were sown decades ago, and just needed a candidate that verbalized those views.

I am encouraged, howerer, as I see a lot of homemade Ron Paul signs all over the Gulf Coast, many in the yards of those I know to be die hard Republicans.

[Leroy_Jenkems]

Christ said let there be NO revolution. Why? because revolutions are historically tainted with violence. I think the LOVE balances this idea out for many Christians and makes the idea more acceptable. And believe me there are a great many Christians supporting Ron Paul because the movement is a very Christian movement.

Very true, but on the basis of first impressions, and in the context of post-1960s "Hippie" culture, of incessant chants of "Make love, not war," etc., people see these signs, and when they hear Dr. Paul's stance on foreign entanglements, they are quick to draw a conclusion about his motivations for saying such things. I sometimes wonder if people perceive the younger crowd of RP's support base as children of the "flower children" caught up in the nostalgic romance of '60s counterculture, somewhat like the Cindy Sheehan crowd of '05 when she was getting publicity and there were all these people with signs reminiscent of those seen in the '60s around her. It's sad but true that many, many people make up their minds about newly encountered people or organizations within 20 seconds or so, and with a high dose of prejudice, especially when it comes to politicians. It's also sad but true that big media and big left-wing-right-wing government has polarized the masses to think that everything's black or white, one extreme or the other.

As a Christian living in the "Bible Belt," I can tell you that many of the stereotypes of people talking the talk, but not walking the walk have weight to them. Christian or not, people let ego and other mental "chatter" pervade their logic, and be judgmental as a result.

I'm not trying to slam the rEVOLution logo at all, I think it's very creative, but the general public can be quick to judge, quick to take sides, because they've been conditioned to do so. Just my two cents.

[Leroy_Jenkems]

The problem is, Dr. Paul is a thinking man's candidate, and the mainstream political machine is all about the 15 second sound byte. The seeds for my personal support were sown decades ago, and just needed a candidate that verbalized those views.

I am encouraged, howerer, as I see a lot of homemade Ron Paul signs all over the Gulf Coast, many in the yards of those I know to be die hard Republicans.


Okay, plp beat me to it.

[voiceactivated]

I'm a baby boomer and here's why I do not like the REVOLution sign. When it first started springing up this summer I assumed Ron Paul supporters were just a bunch of college kids trying to resurrect the 60's because they think they missed something. Believe me, you did not miss a thing. Anyone over 50 or 55 probably associates the sign the bad old days that are best forgotten. Please lose the sign and replace it with Hope for America. Thanks.

[LibertysLegacy]

Valid points from all camps. Wouldn't the "solution" simply be to make RP supporters aware of the potential for negative connotations (as was just done) and just let the individuals on the ground choose whichever approach best suits their own target audience? I personally think both are appropriate as they honestly represent our own diversity.

"Hope For America" yard sign and "rEVOLution" bumper magnet...for the refrigerator?

:)

[work2win]

I agree with the OP's assesment, which is why I do not use the Revolution logo. I will admit that it has become a major campaign brand, though, and probably doesn't hurt that much. I think the best strategy is to balance the message. For evey "End the War" sign, have one "Secure Borders" or "Gun owners for Ron Paul" sign. If placed in close proximity, this should cause a few neo-con heads to explode. Gun-toting hippies that believe in protecting our national sovereignty?!?!?!

Do what you think will promote RP the best. I focus on:

Secure Borders
Abolish the IRS
Limited Government
Ron Paul - President '08

[CountryboyRonPaul]

I have to agree with the OP, we are alienating some of the base by speaking of 'revolution' and linking Guy Fawkes day to Nov. 5th...

We already have the anti-war people, we NEED to focus on the conservative base. We can win hardcore GOP'ers over, we just need to focus on issues other than Iraq.

IMO his position on the Economy is his strongest selling point, but do an educated guess on what issues someone will agree with him on.

Find a way to plant a positive seed in someone's head, and leave it at that, a good first impression in someone's head will go a long way when they hear him mentioned again.

[JerryRowe]

I think the original poster's point was that we might want to think of something else to put, like:

Ron Paul
Champion of the Constitution

or "Liberty and Justice with Paul"

I think he has a point; I live amongst those of the crimson necks, and politics + the word "love" = nonsense for them.

Words like "liberty" and "champion" however get their blood a-boiling. That might be a better emphasis for the southern states, or at least some other people.

Don't throw away R3volution, but maybe someone can make a new poster for the conservative base.

[FenceWalker]

It might work for some folks, but others are turned off by it.
Which will be the truth for whatever logo anybody chooses.

I have not had anybody tell me the logo (or whatever it actually is) has been a deciding factor in their voting decision. Pro or con.

[sluggo]

I've thought that this one: http://www.unitedforliberty.com/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?product=promotion&pid=1

is a good one for the more traditional, Conservative types.

My point was one of marketing more than anything. Not trying to rock the boat.

[noztnac]

Hope for America sounds like Obama.

I also think it sounds like someone who wants to wish away America's problems without actually dealing with them.

[sluggo]

Which will be the truth for whatever logo anybody chooses.

I have not had anybody tell me the logo (or whatever it actually is) has been a deciding factor in their voting decision. Pro or con.

In any case, we need all the people we can get. And one approach doesn't work for everybody.

[Leroy_Jenkems]

I think the original poster's point was that we might want to think of something else to put, like:

Ron Paul
Champion of the Constitution

or "Liberty and Justice with Paul"

I think he has a point; I live amongst those of the crimson necks, and politics + the word "love" = nonsense for them.

Words like "liberty" and "champion" however get their blood a-boiling. That might be a better emphasis for the southern states, or at least some other people.

Don't throw away R3volution, but maybe someone can make a new poster for the conservative base.

Sounds like a good idea. This tactic should also be used in the early primary states, where Huckabee is polling high because of the Evangelical endorsements. I still maintain that the only reason the Eves shunned Paul for Huckabee is because of his foreign policy stance on "protecting" Israel/The Holy Land, and the prospect of establishing a Christian outgrowth in Iraq and its neighbors. We need to present a clear, concise, and different perspective on Middle Eastern affairs to Christians in our
country than the ideologies espoused by these Evan leaders. As Ron said in the "Christians for Ron Paul" video w/ Pastor Baldwin, Israel is, figuratively speaking, like a child coming of age who needs to begin to take care of themself. As for spreading the Word of Christ, we can't do it by force. This is a concept many power-drunk Evan leaders don't seem to follow.

[Leroy_Jenkems]

Hope for America sounds like Obama.

I also think it sounds like someone who wants to wish away America's problems without actually dealing with them.

It's also cliche. People have heard this slogan many, many times before. "The Champion of the Constitution" is a good one, and there are plenty more.

[user]

I've always thought the EVOL logo made no sense for the GOP primary, and I'm no conservative. I gave up on this a while ago though, and so has the campaign apparently. It was in the youtube video they used for the debate, surprisingly.

[stoutmaker]

http://www.cafepress.com/sixmillion

This should be the next big push for Ron Paul. It's a record and we need to let people know about it. (Plus it's a really cool tie in to the old 70's TV show which used to run with the Bionic Woman, which they just brought back)

[Oliver]

From a factual and high-profile point of view:

A.) It the most recognized logo Ron Paul has
B.) It refers to revolution - but the "Love"-part takes away any aggressive interpretation
C.) Ron Paul's intentions are indeed a positive revolution
D.) Many Grassroots people love it - it's basically their logo, not the official one
E.) The Logo itself is appealing - it makes people think about why the "evol" is
red and what it means
F.) It certainly has a positive message, no matter if people like to ridicule it - even
if they wouldn't ridicule it if it was THEIR candidates Grassroots Logo.

So no - I don't see any reason to get rid of it. It's an established part of the movement.

[zoobie555]

What about a "reverse psychology" campaign, like signs that say "What he really wants to do to America" with a referal to a website like www.therealronpaul.org or something. People that think he's a lazy peace and love hippy might go there thinking it is going to affirm their beliefs, when it does the opposite. Especially if the site was written in a way that made it sound that the author had the opposite view as Paul...

[AisA1787]

My complaint with the R3volution signs I've seen is that they don't say "For President 2008" or give you any indication that Paul is running for President. If a person sees them in isolation (on a bumper sticker or window decal, or on a sign along the highway) and he's never heard of Ron Paul then he still won't know he's running for President, and that's a lost opportunity.

[Kevlar]

I think "Google: Ron Paul" is much more effective. It gets people curious.