RP needs to appeal to the emotional masses

[Matt Collins]

I am a marketing minor. The very first thing they teach you about marketing is that a lot of times to make a sale, or to convince someone to buy something, they need to be removed from their intellectual mindset, and moved into their emotional mindset.

Ron Paul is a great intellectual, and I would venture to say that the average Ron Paul supporter has a higher IQ than the average supporter of any other candidate. This is because Ron appeals to our intellect.

However the majority of voters in the US are NOT intellectuals, and more often than not vote based upon their emotions. "How do they feel about a candidate"? This isn't to say that RP doesn't arouse emotions from us, I have felt the adrenaline myself watching some of the videos because the energy he generates for freedom and liberty is electrifying!

But the other candidates know that they must appeal to an emotional mass. Why do you think Rudy only talks about him being the Mayor on 9/11? Why do you think McCain talks about being a POW? Why do you think Romney discusses his faith so often?

To conclude, I think that to appeal to the AVERAGE voter, RP should try and shift his message (without compromising his values of course) to appeal to the emotional mindset a bit more. All of us intellectuals are on board, but those that vote with their emotions are not (yet).

[sylvania]

I completely agree with this. One of the most effective ways of selling Ron Paul is the Congressional Gold Medal story. Even if you're not republican, you have to admire those ethics. This always gets people interested for me (this is the information from a link someone here on the forum supplied):

AWARDING A GOLD MEDAL TO FORMER PRESIDENT AND MRS. RONALD REAGAN IN RECOGNITION OF SERVICE TO NATION
In 1976, Ron Paul was one of only 4 members of the House of Representatives to endorse Ronald Reagan for President. So when it was proposed that the former President and First Lady should receive a Congressional Gold Medal for their many years of service, you would think that he would’ve voted YES.
He voted NO.
Here’s his explanation:
STATEMENTS OF CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL OF TEXAS
“Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3591. At the same time, I am very supportive of President Reagan's publicly stated view of limiting the federal government to it's proper and constitutional role. In fact, I was one of only four sitting members of the United States House of Representatives who endorsed Ronald Reagan's candidacy for President in 1976. The United States enjoyed sustained economic prosperity and employment growth during Ronald Reagan's presidency.”
“I must, however, oppose the Gold Medal for Ronald and Nancy Reagan because appropriating $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor in the spirit of Ronald Reagan's notion of the proper, limited role for the federal government.”
“Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution--a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath.”
“In fact, as a means of demonstrating my personal regard and enthusiasm for Ronald Reagan's advocacy for limited government, I invited each of these colleagues to match my private, personal contribution of $100 which, if accepted by the 435 Members of the House of Representatives, would more than satisfy the $30,000 cost necessary to mint and award a gold medal to Ronald and Nancy Reagan. To me, it seemed a particularly good opportunity to demonstrate one's genuine convictions by spending one's own money rather that of the taxpayers who remain free to contribute, at their own discretion, to commemorate the work of the Reagans. For the record, not a single Representative who solicited my support for spending taxpayer's money, was willing to contribute their own money to demonstrate their generosity and allegiance to the Reagan's stated convictions.”
“It is, of course, very easy to be generous with the people's money.”
- Congressman Ron Paul

[DeadheadForPaul]

I agree.

I think the freedom message has a very emotional appeal as well as an intellectual one.

[Ronstock '08]

I am a marketing minor. The very first thing they teach you about marketing is that a lot of times to make a sale, or to convince someone to buy something, they need to be removed from their intellectual mindset, and moved into their emotional mindset.

Ron Paul is a great intellectual, and I would venture to say that the average Ron Paul supporter has a higher IQ than the average supporter of any other candidate. This is because Ron appeals to our intellect.

However the majority of voters in the US are NOT intellectuals, and more often than not vote based upon their emotions. "How do they feel about a candidate"? This isn't to say that RP doesn't arouse emotions from us, I have felt the adrenaline myself watching some of the videos because the energy he generates for freedom and liberty is electrifying!

But the other candidates know that they must appeal to an emotional mass. Why do you think Rudy only talks about him being the Mayor on 9/11? Why do you think McCain talks about being a POW? Why do you think Romney discusses his faith so often?

To conclude, I think that to appeal to the AVERAGE voter, RP should try and shift his message (without compromising his values of course) to appeal to the emotional mindset a bit more. All of us intellectuals are on board, but those that vote with their emotions are not (yet).

You have a good point. My daughter and son-in-law told me RP is too intellectual for most Americans. The election will probably come down to who has the best hair.

[Shatterhand]

I disagree with the premise of this thread. Dr. Ron Paul speaks about individual freedom and liberty and this message resonates with freedom-loving people. There is already plenty of emotional content in Dr. Paul's philosophy of freedom. To try and think of ways to sway people with emotions cheapens Dr. Paul's message. Why do people like Dr. Paul? Because he is an honest man. He is not trying to sway people with emotion. He is merely sharing his personal philosophy of freedom. I would hope other people on these forums would agree with me.

[sylvania]

In regard to this thread, I found the following article interesting. It seems this debate is nothing new.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiential_marketing

"Experiential marketing is a widely recognized marketing methodology. Experiential Marketing uses brand relevant experiences to appeal to both the rational and emotional buying triggers of the intended audience.

The idea of experiential marketing reflects a right brain bias because it is about fulfilling consumers’ aspirations to experience certain feelings – comfort and pleasure on one hand, and avoidance of discomfort and displeasure on the other.

In contrast, traditional product centric marketing reflects a left brain bias because it generally seeks to persuade consumers by invoking rational factors that position the advertised brand as better than competing brands. Product centric marketing presumes a degree of rationality in consumers’ decision-making that contemporary brain science refutes. Consumers’ decisions are much more influenced by emotionally generated feelings than by their rationally derived thought."

I have to say I think a lot of people read fiction, attend concerts, go to movies, etc, because it evokes emotion. Emotion is a powerful tool.

[Ron Paul Fan]

I agree. I think he needs to show more emotion. It worked pretty well for this guy....

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

[bygone]

Look at what fear has sold.

I think you can sell freedom better, if you're careful.

[LibertyEagle]

Well, I disagree Shatterhand. Appealing to people's emotions about things like being tracked like animals with national ID cards/chips, or about the sovereignty of their country, I think would be a very rational thing to do. I fail to see how it would cheapen his message at all.

Dr. Paul is both Thomas Jefferson and Paul Revere, all wrapped into one.

[LibertyEagle]

I agree. I think he needs to show more emotion. It worked pretty well for this guy....

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

Dr. Paul wouldn't come off like Dean even if he tried.

[LibertyEagle]

I completely agree with this. One of the most effective ways of selling Ron Paul is the Congressional Gold Medal story. Even if you're not republican, you have to admire those ethics. This always gets people interested for me (this is the information from a link someone here on the forum supplied):

AWARDING A GOLD MEDAL TO FORMER PRESIDENT AND MRS. RONALD REAGAN IN RECOGNITION OF SERVICE TO NATION
In 1976, Ron Paul was one of only 4 members of the House of Representatives to endorse Ronald Reagan for President. So when it was proposed that the former President and First Lady should receive a Congressional Gold Medal for their many years of service, you would think that he would’ve voted YES.
He voted NO.
Here’s his explanation:
STATEMENTS OF CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL OF TEXAS
“Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3591. At the same time, I am very supportive of President Reagan's publicly stated view of limiting the federal government to it's proper and constitutional role. In fact, I was one of only four sitting members of the United States House of Representatives who endorsed Ronald Reagan's candidacy for President in 1976. The United States enjoyed sustained economic prosperity and employment growth during Ronald Reagan's presidency.”
“I must, however, oppose the Gold Medal for Ronald and Nancy Reagan because appropriating $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor in the spirit of Ronald Reagan's notion of the proper, limited role for the federal government.”
“Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution--a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath.”
“In fact, as a means of demonstrating my personal regard and enthusiasm for Ronald Reagan's advocacy for limited government, I invited each of these colleagues to match my private, personal contribution of $100 which, if accepted by the 435 Members of the House of Representatives, would more than satisfy the $30,000 cost necessary to mint and award a gold medal to Ronald and Nancy Reagan. To me, it seemed a particularly good opportunity to demonstrate one's genuine convictions by spending one's own money rather that of the taxpayers who remain free to contribute, at their own discretion, to commemorate the work of the Reagans. For the record, not a single Representative who solicited my support for spending taxpayer's money, was willing to contribute their own money to demonstrate their generosity and allegiance to the Reagan's stated convictions.”
“It is, of course, very easy to be generous with the people's money.”
- Congressman Ron Paul

Yes, the associated video and music really tugs at the heartstrings and love of country.

[freelance]

Fear is a greater motivator than happiness (insert whatever synonym for lack of fear). We SHOULD fear what will happen unless Ron Paul gets elected!

I don't know about the rest of you, but I actually spend a lot sleepless nights wondering what is going to happen to this country.

[bygone]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I actually spend a lot sleepless nights wondering what is going to happen to this country.

I'd like to think you spend sleepless nights thinking of what you can do about it.

If you liked the earlier Dean link you might like this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCGSdUlxPhE

[monotony]

This is a very important idea that should not be ignored. Part of the reason Avaroth's videos are so popular is because they are set to music and have an emotional component in them. This is how all advertising, as well as most entertainment is presented. If there was a way to simplify the message so that that it could trigger emotional support that would be ideal.

It is noteworthy to say that Dr. Paul himself does not need to be overly emotional in delivering the message (for those who replied with Dean references), but rather his message should be disseminated on the emotional level as well as the rational level for maximum appeal.

How many people are going to study Austrian economics verses being pissed off that Americans continue to die every day. Put a strong message of American casualties to some dramatic music and imagery, and it will move people...much more than economics or history lessons.

This is how the neocons have been winning... creating divisive, polarizing issues, that can elicit emotional support rather than rational understanding.

[DeadheadForPaul]

Exactly Monotony

We can use emotion just like the liberals use the bleeding heart approach and the neo-cons use fear

#1 , compassion: bringing our troops/heroes home and out of harm's way

[mikelovesgod]

Fear is a greater motivator than happiness (insert whatever synonym for lack of fear). We SHOULD fear what will happen unless Ron Paul gets elected!

I don't know about the rest of you, but I actually spend a lot sleepless nights wondering what is going to happen to this country.

Fear motivates more people than happiness ever could. If you want to promote emotion show "fear". Yes, it's a must tactic. I would hate to admit this, but it's absolutely essential.

People fear losing their freedoms when shown the damages it can create, they fear being poor (the dollar), the fear the future of the country (war), they fear uncertainty (economy and war) and this NEED to be focused on.

Having him deny Reagan gov't money will not motivate people. Having Reagan's advisor discuss the new law that allows anyone to be tried as a terrorist because the gov't thinks so without habeus corpus is a better example, and they tie that into a Reaganesque message.

[LibertyBelle]

Vote for Ron Paul.....or blowback will get ya! :(


Vote for Ron Paul.....or illegal aliens will be your roommates. :confused:


Vote for Ron Paul...or your house will be bulldozed to make room for Walmart. :mad:


Vote for Ron Paul...or you will have to hear Rudy say "9/11" 100 times a day. :eek:


Vote for Ron Paul...or you will have to listen to Hillary's monotonous witch voice. :rolleyes:


Vote for Ron Paul....or get out of town! :D

[Matt Collins]

I agree. I think he needs to show more emotion. It worked pretty well for this guy....A little more emotion maybe, but more importantly his message needs to appeal MORE to the emotions for the common average "apathetic" voter.

[entropy]

What I like best about RP's presentation is his sincerity, I think/hope other people see this as well. My biggest fear is people will be AFRAID when they are told to let loose of the government teet. This cradle to grave dependancy on the government to protect us is deeply rooted and generational now.

I think his emotional appeal will shine thru because he actually believes in what he says, therefore he says it from the heart. He just needs the exposure. My only fear is people will have to connect the dots in regards to more freedom equates to more prosperity once we break the bonds of our dependancy on big government.

[RP08]

Does this work?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmKwlE3fO-Y

(originally posted elsewhere by rajibo)

[Broadlighter]

How about a little reverse psychology?

Have someone with a voice that sounds similar to Hillary's talk about Ron Paul's positions in a denigrating manner.

"Can you imagine? This guy wants Liberty for everyone! He wants to shrink the government, end the income tax and quit trying to fix other countries! Who does he think he is?"

[MozoVote]

How about letting Ron experience weightlessness? THAT's an emotional experience, right? :)

http://toinfinityandbeyond.ytmnd.com/

[LibertyEagle]

A little more emotion maybe, but more importantly his message needs to appeal MORE to the emotions for the common average "apathetic" voter.

Yes. You summed this up well.

[Matt Collins]

What I like best about RP's presentation is his sincerity, That is very true

[freelance]

I'd like to think you spend sleepless nights thinking of what you can do about it.

Actually, I spend some of those sleepless night actually doing something about rather than thinking about what I can do about it.

[Matt Collins]

Actually, I spend some of those sleepless night actually doing something about rather than thinking about what I can do about it.

I have actually been rolling around in my sleep a bit lately due to Ron