One Question: Why No Anti-War Ads?

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

Dr. Paul's opposition to the war and to military interventionism is one of his strongest arguments. It would help us tremendously in NH and with female voters.

I'm baffled as to why the campaign has not put together any anti-war ads. :confused:

[itshappening]

the campaign baffles us a lot.

[Frossty]

the campaign baffles us a lot.

+1

[stefans]

agreed. I could understand that he had none in iowa, but why NH?

[RonPaulCult]

I guess they figure that the war is an issue that divides people whereas things like protecting liberties or defending the borders or getting campaign contributions from our troops are things that could bring in everybody

[jrich4rpaul]

I think the best way to describe the campaign is to quote Mike Gravel:

These people frighten me!|

Anti-war ads would win us many a state.

[walt]

the campaign baffles us a lot.

+1

[Henry]

And why no Ad's on the economy, especially with the latest unemployment numbers. They shoud be on 24 hours a day!!!

[Frankie Lee]

the campaign baffles us a lot.

yup

[ChickenHawk]

Because this is the Republican primary. Ron Paul most likely already has 95% of the anti-war GOP vote. Running anti-war adds would likely lose more GOP votes than it would gain independents.

[ronpaulfan]

campaign = retarded beyond belief

[Pete Kay]

I think the best way to describe the campaign is to quote Mike Gravel:

These people frighten me!|

Anti-war ads would win us many a state.

Exactly. It's what we need to draw in Independents.

Ron Paul needs to emphasise his differences from the other Republicans, not his similarities.

"Ron Paul: A Different Kind of Republican" should be an ad slogan.

I'm a conservative and I believe strongly in peace, not war. Finding out that there was a pro-life, pro-liberty and pro-peace candidate was a dream for me. A lot of other moderate conservatives end up voting for a Democrat just because there is no alternative. Ron Paul is the alternative. He needs to state that.

[FluffyUnbound]

In New Hampshire 40% of the voters are independents. Who hate the war.

Ron should have an ad that says that the definitive way to cast an anti-war vote on primary day is to take the Republican ballot and vote for him.

[wfd40]

Once again.. HQ brings the Lolz..

GRRRRRRR =/

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

Because this is the Republican primary. Ron Paul most likely already has 95% of the anti-war GOP vote. Running anti-war adds would likely lose more GOP votes than it would gain independents.

I don't buy that. If people want war candidates, they have 5 others to choose from. Ron has stated himself that the war issue is his top issue.

[stefans]

I don't buy that. If people want war candidates, they have 5 others to choose from. Ron has stated himself that the war issue is his top issue.

indeed. he brings a lot of questions in debates back to the war(e.g. financial)
I understand that it doesn't make sense to run an anti-war ad in some states, but they should have one for the others.

[Henry]

And why no Ad's on the economy, especially with the latest unemployment numbers. They shoud be on 24 hours a day!!!

I repeat, isn't this the number one issue now for all political parties?

[trey4sports]

the campaign baffles us a lot.


agreed. but we have to worry about what WE the grassroots can control

[Antonius Stone]

the official campaign seems like its INTENT on trying to win over parts of the "base" that traditionally votes Neo-Con by swinging them on economic issues, the border and American Sovereignty

it is up to US to sell the Anti-War and civil liberties issues to people outside the "base". What the campaign seems to be doing with this strategy is trying to factor in exactly what the snowballing grassroots would be capable of. and guess what folks WE ARE ENTIRELY CAPABLE OF SWINGING THOSE INDEPENDENTS ON OUR OWN

we just need to GET out into the mix of things. MAKE YOUR OWN ANTI-WAR FLIERS AND PRINT OUT A COUPLE HUNDRED AT KINKOS (ONLY 20$ FOR 200 copies) THEN GO OUT DOOR-TO-DOOR IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS.

hell, you can pirate my flier design if you want:
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii114/AntoniusStone/RonPaulFlyers.jpg

[slamhead]

Because this is the Republican primary. Ron Paul most likely already has 95% of the anti-war GOP vote. Running anti-war adds would likely lose more GOP votes than it would gain independents.

Agreed...anti war ads will not attracked the republicans that are still drinking from the fox news troff. The anti war issue will be the winner in the general election. Republicans that still try to hold onto their war beliefs will realized they were duped by the neocons.

Hillary voted for the war.
Obama wants us there until 2013.

And on the same note..I don't think we will lose many independents or libertarians as they are generally more political savvy and know where their candidates stand on issues.

[TNFreedom]

I agree that war message is one of Dr. Paul's strongest points but it has to be explained to normal Republicans. Why? Because we as Republicans have been conditioned to assume that anyone that is against the war is a liberal, and once they here Dr. Paul say the words "bring the troops home" he ceases to be a real candidate for them. But that could be changed if his rationale against the war was explained to them somehow....we've just got to get them to open their ears.. I discussed this much better in this post last night. See below, in my opinion as a former outsider, explaining his opposition to the war to the average Republican joe is the single most important thing the campaign must do. Check out this thread and let me know yall think.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=75937&highlight=tnfreedom

[slamhead]

I agree that war message is one of Dr. Paul's strongest points but it has to be explained to normal Republicans. Why? Because we as Republicans have been conditioned to assume that anyone that is against the war is a liberal, and once they here Dr. Paul say the words "bring the troops home" he ceases to be a real candidate for them. But that could be changed if his rationale against the war was explained to them somehow....we've just got to get them to open their ears.. I discussed this much better in this post last night. See below, in my opinion as a former outsider, explaining his opposition to the war to the average Republican joe is the single most important thing the campaign must do. Check out this thread and let me know yall think.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=75937&highlight=tnfreedom

I feel exactly the same way as being a former republican drinking from the fox news troff. It was Paul's message that the true conservative is anti intervention and watching Reagan's 1964 speech on youtube that I realized my position was wrong. So to win over the others it has to be an education process which will come out in the general election.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

We have all the money in the world to do one-minute ads explaining Ron's position on the wars. Why hasn't the HQ jumped on this McCain 100 years gaffe?? They could run that in an ad blasting McCain and explaining Ron's anti-war stance.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

His ads should highlight how Obama is NOT the anti-war candidate and how Obama always votes to give Bush war money despite his B.S.

The NH race should be a contest for Independent voters between Paul and Obama.

I'll donate to the Airplane Banners if the banners say Peace & Sound Money.

I'm sick of this pro-military anti-immigrant shit. There's 10 more republicans and democrats to dish out that same old crap to Boobus Americanus.

[Antonius Stone]

pro-military anti-immigrant shit?

how is bringing the troops home not pro-military and how is legalizing immigration anti-immigrant?

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Why hasn't the HQ jumped on this McCain 100 years gaffe??

Exactly.

They seem bent on treating Boob-Tube-ous Americanus the same way that the power elite program FOX and CNN viewers.

Here's an new idea: maybe if you treat Boobus like a grown up human being, then maybe he'll act like one in return.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

how is bringing the troops home not pro-military

There you go trying to appeal to Archie Bunker. The NH independents that could give RP a victory in NH are on a different wavelength than that.

Ask yourself this: in which county in Iowa did RP win outright and win delegates to Minneapolis?

And then ask yourself if those voters were attracted more by a pro-military emphasis or an anti-war emphasis?

[Spirit of '76]

Because this is the Republican primary. Ron Paul most likely already has 95% of the anti-war GOP vote. Running anti-war adds would likely lose more GOP votes than it would gain independents.

Precisely. We are well past the name-recognition phase, at least in NH, and everyone already knows he is against the war.

What is needed now is precisely what the campaign is doing -- demonstrating that Dr. Paul has the most consistent conservative principles and record out of everyone running.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

I see the RP campaign doing the same thing that the Libertarians would always do as soon as they would start (however rarely) to get a little success. Instead of highlighting their uniqueness, they would always seem to start hiding their differences and try to fit in with everybody else--totally negating their value.

[Spirit of '76]

the official campaign seems like its INTENT on trying to win over parts of the "base" that traditionally votes Neo-Con by swinging them on economic issues, the border and American Sovereignty

it is up to US to sell the Anti-War and civil liberties issues to people outside the "base". What the campaign seems to be doing with this strategy is trying to factor in exactly what the snowballing grassroots would be capable of. and guess what folks WE ARE ENTIRELY CAPABLE OF SWINGING THOSE INDEPENDENTS ON OUR OWN


Great point.

If kids like MayTheRonBeWithYou want to run against Obama in the Republican primary, let them do it as a grassroots effort. It's foolish to criticize the campaign for wanting to win over Republican voters in a Republican primary.

[Antonius Stone]

I see the RP campaign doing the same thing that the Libertarians would always do as soon as they would start (however rarely) to get a little success. Instead of highlighting their uniqueness, they would always seem to start hiding their differences and try to fit in with everybody else--totally negating their value.

yeah, but I think part of their stratagem is relying on US the GRASSROOTS to continue to spell out and define for all the undecideds and such what makes RP unique. so lets go out and do it.

Make you own fliers, head down to kinkos and make a ton of copies and go door-to-door. GO GO!

if you're in CA and you're too lazy to make your own flier, then go ahead and steal mine. (http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii114/AntoniusStone/RonPaulFlyers.jpg)

[TNFreedom]

Precisely. We are well past the name-recognition phase, at least in NH, and everyone already knows he is against the war.

What is needed now is precisely what the campaign is doing -- demonstrating that Dr. Paul has the most consistent conservative principles and record out of everyone running.

Great point. Really great point. Everybody already knows that he is against the war but I would argue that NOBODY not already on board this train knows WHY he is against the war. THAT is the message that has to get out. I have been talking to Republicans left and right explaining his opposition and I havent met anybody that didnt like what they heard from me. The problem is that nobody is giving his story a chance because as soon as they hear the first line "bring the troops home" they shut down and stoplistening because they dont understand that being against the war is THE TRUE conservative standpoint. They all think he is a crazy liberal and thats all they associate with him.

[Paul4Prez]

agreed. I could understand that he had none in iowa, but why NH?

Actually, Iowa Republicans were more anti-war than the national average. Polls showed that around 50% wanted the troops home from Iraq in six months.

The campaign just stayed away from it in the ads and mailers, although Ron Paul clearly stated his position in the debates.

I think it's the single biggest mistake they've made so far.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

We have given the HQ 20 million dollars to get out Ron's message, and they seem to be refusing to put out his strongest argument = his antiwar message.

[familydog]

the campaign baffles us a lot.

+1

[Spirit of '76]

Great point. Really great point. Everybody already knows that he is against the war but I would argue that NOBODY not already on board this train knows WHY he is against the war. THAT is the message that has to get out. I have been talking to Republicans left and right explaining his opposition and I havent met anybody that didnt like what they heard from me. The problem is that nobody is giving his story a chance because as soon as they hear the first line "bring the troops home" they shut down and stoplistening because they dont understand that being against the war is THE TRUE conservative standpoint. They all think he is a crazy liberal and thats all they associate with him.

That's been my experience too.

The campaign is doing the right thing here. They've bombarded WV delegates with mailers emphasizing his conservative credentials, which is essential since everyone here already knows he's against the war.

The task now is to show that he's not against the war like Nancy Pelosi is "against the war", but that he's against the war because it's the real Republican position.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

We have given the HQ 20 million dollars to get out Ron's message, and they seem to be refusing to put out his strongest argument = his antiwar message.

And they tell us to make our own signs if we want to put out the ideas that we gave them 20 million dollars to put out. Pathetic.

[TNFreedom]

That's been my experience too.

The campaign is doing the right thing here. They've bombarded WV delegates with mailers emphasizing his conservative credentials, which is essential since everyone here already knows he's against the war.

The task now is to show that he's not against the war like Nancy Pelosi is "against the war", but that he's against the war because it's the real Republican position.

Nail on the head.

[Spirit of '76]

And they tell us to make our own signs if we want to put out the ideas that we gave them 20 million dollars to put out. Pathetic.

What's pathetic is that some people can't get it through their heads that the Ron Paul 2008 PCC isn't running against Obama in NH; they're running against John McCain and Mitt Romney.

[Sey.Naci]

Anti-war, peace messages could considerably help boost the vote from women. Right now, the majority of voters appear to think that the Dems have the anti-war message cornered. Ads should be made that show what the Dems are really saying compared to RP.

FreeTraveler got a start on something with that theme with this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X4ag2ChUuk). See also this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=76690) where he introduces it.

[MayTheRonBeWithYou]

is there any way to get a message to the campaign to jump on this McCain 100 year gaffe?

it's tailor made for a 30- or 60-second Ron Paul TV ad.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Ads should be made that show what the Dems are really saying compared to RP.

Yes. This message is what inspired college kids in Jefferson County to win outright.

This is where the area of expansion for RP to gain votes in NH is.

All they need to do is spend some of our millions by pasting the TV's in NH with Obama's voting record on all of the war and torture money votes.

They can compare them to McCaine's votes for some Republican color.

Do they want votes in NH or not??

[Lord Xar]

well, there definetly should be an economy commerical.. I mean, that is one of his strongest suites... yet, he is running ads that ALL the candidates do, so who are they to believe? The one with charisma. Not the honest one. You can't tell honesty thru a tv.


personally, they are not playing this right.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

is there any way to get a message to the campaign to jump on this McCain 100 year gaffe?

it's tailor made for a 30- or 60-second Ron Paul TV ad.

I don't know how open they are to suggestions.

It seems they could make some killers just by clipping spots out of interviews and debates.

A good Youtube I saw juxtapositioned 15 seconds of McCain talking about how they all came to Washington to change Washington but Washington changed them with RP's humble but effective response.

[RK Cowan]

IMO, the ads all suck. YouTube ads are wonderful however. If I were making a voting decision (I'm not) and saw the Paul ads, I wouldn't even consider him based on those ads alone. They don't match the man's personality.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

personally, they are not playing this right.

Its really a shame. All they had to have done was let some geek who understood the issues edit RP's killer youtubes. But its too late now. Its pretty depressing.

I'm supposed to be making calls on this list of voters in my NV precinct, but instead I'm bitching about this $20 million Libertarian-esque advertising campaign. My wife's out in another precinct knocking on doors and just called to report finding 3 new RP leaning households--heretofore-not flagged.

And then I read that that big Rasumussen 14% poll number is really a bogus play-money prediction market?? I hope that's not true. Life is hard.....I"m depressed. At least the blimp people posted where they were on their blog for once today. That's something to be happy about.

[Mogwai]

this was a reply i got form a volunteer:
Come the national election, we will try to emphasize Dr. Paul's position on Iraq even more, but as of now it appears that there are many Ron Paul supporters who are not necessarily against the war and are simply voting for his monetary policy, his immigration policy, and his other domestic policies.

I still think the should stress the anti-war more.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

They don't match the man's personality.

Right! At least let RP speak for himself. If we have to hear about anti-immigration, let's hear it from him. In the excellent Q&A's that I've heard, RP says he does NOT want to build walls and scapegoat people. Why pay millions to hear a 3rd rate Tancredo-style scapegoating ad that doesn't match RP's ideas or spirit.