Dear Rand Paul, this is what you need to get back to. This needs to be your message.

[groverblue]

Here are the videos for Rand's 2011 and 2012 CPAC speeches.

This is my message to Rand. Stay aggressive, but change your message. You didn't get in this to be the anti-Trump; you got into this because you're pro-liberty. Your message needs to be how you spoke in 2011 & 2012. You need to preach. That's all that Trump is doing. He's preaching. So, preach liberty.

[Dianne]

I couldn't agree with you more. The anti-Trump is the dumbest strategy ever.. unless he just wants to see himself on t.v. tomorrow getting crucified. This next debate, if he is even in it, should aggresively highlight his positions on anything of major concern or interest to the electorate. F'k Trump, let some other patsy take him out.

[phill4paul]

Arm chairing...

"Our current debt, the public debt falls at 13 trillion dollars. To pay this debt every American would have to pay $41,000 dollars. Today. How many Americans could afford that? Could you? (points to the crowd) You? (points) I'm sure Donald Trump could. But would he pay your share (points). Or your share.(points) Even "The Donald" is not that rich. I have the plan that can take the burden off everyone's back. That can put the money back in your wallet and by doing so eliminate this debt that...God forbid we pass on to our children."

Less than 30 seconds.

[phill4paul]

Arm chairing...

"I've returned over 1.8 million to the treasury from my budget since taking office. Donald Trump won't release his tax records. I challenge him to prove that he has given more to assuage the debt of the American people than I have. And on this matter, any other candidate on this stage."

[nikcers]

Arm chairing...

Be the different republican, and constantly present yourself as being the different republican, by saying it. If you say it enough times people will believe it. Call out everyone else on the stage, not just trump, not for not being republican enough, but for not being different. Its not just enough to be cut from a different cloth on paper, the people want to hear it. They want to hear it over and over again, as cliche as it sounds.

[r3volution 3.0]

The two strategies (preaching your message and attacking Trump) aren't mutually exclusive.

Preaching the message only works if someone hears it.

Attacking Trump brings attention, which Rand can then exploit to preach his message.

("punching up" is a time-tested political strategy; it works)

And this is precisely what Rand's doing - just today, in the excellent OP-ED from The National Journal posted by the OP, Rand made a passionate case for fiscal conservatism, noting in the margin that Trump is not a fiscal conservative. That article will get additional hits, if not media mentions, because it contained an attack on Trump = more people hear Rand's message = winning.

[Jackie Moon]

The two strategies (preaching your message and attacking Trump) aren't mutually exclusive.

Preaching the message only works if someone hears it.

Attacking Trump brings attention, which Rand can then exploit to preach his message.

("punching up" is a time-tested political strategy; it works)

And this is precisely what Rand's doing - just today, in the excellent OP-ED from The National Journal posted by the OP, Rand made a passionate case for fiscal conservatism, noting in the margin that Trump is not a fiscal conservative. That article will get additional hits, if not media mentions, because it contained an attack on Trump = more people hear Rand's message = winning.

Agree. The videos I've watched of Rand speaking at different campaign stops he spends most of the time talking about his own message, and only briefly mentions Trump and other candidates to show how he's different. But his speeches aren't getting covered as breaking news on CNN and Fox so nobody sees it.

And when he's interviewed he's always asked questions about Trump. The media is in full 24 hour Trump mode... they want to show him, they want to talk about him, they want to ask other candidates about him - they even cover the media coverage about him.

I don't think they're necessarily in his corner, but it's just good for ratings. And the vast majority of people tuning in don't even support him, they're just intrigued by this bizarre reality show playing out.

Unfortunately it's going to be hard for anyone to break through while he's sucking up all the attention. He won't be there forever though, and then the real campaign season will start.

[phill4paul]

Arm chairing...

"Everyone knows about compounding interest. It's where money that you save is reinvested and you make a profit on it. This nation is running on compounding debt. This is when money that is mal-invested losses it's interest, AND it's principle, and forces you to contribute more into a never ending cycle of loss. At some point you will have no more to invest and you will have to borrow on the chance that you will make some back. That is where we, as a nation, are currently at. We have mal-invested to the point that our borrowing has compounded our debt to the extent that we may not be able to pay it back."

[LibertyEagle]

Arm chairing...

"Everyone knows about compounding interest. It's where money that you save is reinvested and you make a profit on it. This nation is running on compounding debt. This is when money that is mal-invested losses it's interest, AND it's principle, and forces you to contribute more into a never ending cycle of loss. At some point you will have no more to invest and you will have to borrow on the chance that you will make some back. That is where we, as a nation, are currently at. We have mal-invested to the point that our borrowing has compounded our debt to the extent that we may not be able to pay it back."

They won't care unless they are told what that means to them.

[EBounding]

Arm chairing...

"Even "The Donald" is not that rich."

lol oh man, I would love if he said that. Along with the other things you mentioned.

[phill4paul]

They won't care unless they are told what that means to them.

See post #3. I'm just arm chairing. Doubt anyone from Rand's camp even gives these forums a passing glance. My armchairing is nothing more than Garanimals to be mixed and matched.

[r3volution 3.0]

Arm chairing...

"Everyone knows about compounding interest....."

ZZZZZZzzzzzZZZZZZZ

^^^the average voter's reaction to hearing the phrase "compounding interest"

...don't even get me started on "mal-investment" (!)

....might as well read them a passage from Human Action in German.

Gotta dumb it down.

If you have any middle school age children, or nephews, nieces, etc, go listen to how they talk.

(not kidding)

[nikcers]

ZZZZZZzzzzzZZZZZZZ

^^^the average voter's reaction to hearing the phrase "compounding interest"

...don't even get me started on "mal-investment" (!)

....might as well read them a passage from Human Action in German.

Gotta dumb it down.

If you have any middle school age children, or nephews, nieces, etc, go listen to how they talk.

(not kidding)

It's not talking down, its effective communication.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

[r3volution 3.0]

It's not talking down, its effective communication.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

Do you think Einstein could explain general relativity in such a way that the average American voter would understand?

[nikcers]

Do you think Einstein could explain general relativity in such a way that the average American voter would understand?

You can dumb down a message without watering it down. Effective communication is speaking in language that people understand, language is fluid, words change in meaning, everyone has different education and different knowledge bases. People aren't stupid, most people just specialize because human beings are made for specialization. I don't know how well Einstein could explain general relativity, but I also don't claim to be smarter then everyone in the world either because I don't think intelligence is something you can measure with a stick.

[r3volution 3.0]

You can dumb down a message without watering it down. Effective communication is speaking in language that people understand, language is fluid, words change in meaning, everyone has different education and different knowledge bases. People aren't stupid, most people just specialize because human beings are made for specialization. I don't know how well Einstein could explain general relativity, but I also don't claim to be smarter then everyone in the world either because I don't think intelligence is something you can measure with a stick.

If you're suggesting that anyone's capable of understanding anything, if only it's explained to them properly, I'll have to disagree.

For any given concept X, I think any person out there can be made to believe that X is true, but (if the idea's sufficiently complicated) only a small fraction will understand why X is true. For example, with the right kind of rhetoric (and enough speaking time, of course), Rand could persuade anyone that central banking is bad and should be abolished; but he'll never make more than a few truly understand why (e.g. understand ABCT). One can argue whether intelligence is genetic or environmental or both, but the fact is that (whatever the cause) intelligence is very unequally distributed. And, aside from pure intelligence, there's also (as you say) a need for specialization: a person can only absorb so much information. Even an Einstein cannot be an expert in everything.

Don't beat your head against a wall trying to make people understand something that's beyond their ability. Instead, come up with a simplified (i.e. incomplete, if not actually false) version of it and teach them that, so that they will come to the correct conclusion, even though the reasoning by which they arrived at that conclusion is invalid. Parents and teachers do this with children all the time. A toddler isn't capable of understanding tooth decay, so you make up some story about why he should brush his teeth (the boogeyman will get him!). He reaches the right conclusion, but for the wrong reason - well, that works.

That's what politics is.

[cindy25]

during the debate bring up the price of milk and gas, and see if Trump and Carson can answer

[Jamesiv1]

Arm chairing...

"Our current debt, the public debt falls at 13 trillion dollars. To pay this debt every American would have to pay $41,000 dollars. Today. How many Americans could afford that? Could you? (points to the crowd) You? (points) I'm sure Donald Trump could. But would he pay your share (points). Or your share.(points) Even "The Donald" is not that rich. I have the plan that can take the burden off everyone's back. That can put the money back in your wallet and by doing so eliminate this debt that...God forbid we pass on to our children."

Less than 30 seconds.

Nobody outside this forum gives a flip about the debt.

[nikcers]

If you're suggesting that anyone's capable of understanding anything, if only it's explained to them properly, I'll have to disagree.

If relativity is such a complicated subject then how can a movie like interstellar be so popular? I am not saying that idiots don't exist, because they do. Fear of consequence is even incomprehensible to some, but in this information age where more and more people are more informed, with government bullies and crony capitalists taking advantage of peoples ignorance to get ahead the one who trusts people with the truth will be trusted and will be king. People can even be tricked easily because they want this that badly, so badly that they would let someone like Trump piss on them and tell them its raining.

[Jackie Moon]

during the debate bring up the price of milk and gas, and see if Trump and Carson can answer

LOL

"I have a guy that buys my milk. I'm a fantastic delegator. I find great people. My guy is the best guy, and he only buys the best milk. I mean he's really terrific.

I don't need to know what the price is, because I'm rich - like really rich. But I'll tell you this, when it's appropriate that I know the price of milk I'll know more about it than you will ever know. And it won't take me long."

[acptulsa]

It's not talking down, its effective communication.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

And Einstein could, too. But it might take him an hour. Don't ask unless you really, really want to know.

A candidate is right to be very wary of launching into an explanation that takes even three minutes, and with good reason. If you launch into an explanation that takes even thirty seconds in a television interview, the host will interrupt you halfway through. But a candidate shouldn't categorically oppose a lengthy explanation. If it's gripping enough, if you have one that can keep Boobus Americanus' attention, run with it.

Armchair quarterbacking:

I think what the newcomer to this discussion has the most trouble understanding is the dollar is not a dollar--it's a nickel.

What do I mean? Well, my old man got out of the Army Air Corps after WWII and got himself a good job paying a dollar an hour. How is that a good job? Easy--it was 1946 and the dollar was still a dollar. As in, when he wanted a Pepsi he paid a nickel for it--now it costs a dollar. When he wanted to ride a bus, he put seven cents in the meter, or a nickel and a half--now it costs a buck and a half. When he wanted to sit down and have a cup of regular old coffee, he paid a dime, or two nickels--now it costs two bucks. When he put gas in the car (it was always cheap in Oklahoma), he paid 14.9 cents per gallon, or three nickles--now it costs three bucks. When he was hungry for lunch, he bought a deluxe double hamburger with all the trimmings for a silver quarter, or five nickles--now it costs five bucks. When he wanted to go to a movie, he paid thirty-five cents or seven nickles--now it costs seven bucks. And when he shopped for a new top of the line Dodge Custom with heater and radio and other options, it would set him back two grand, or forty thousand nickles--now it costs forty thousand dollars.

The Pepsi isn't any wetter, the gas doesn't burn any brighter, the double burger isn't any more filling, and the movie doesn't last any longer today (with no newsreel, serial and cartoon, it actually doesn't last as long). So, there's only one explanation. The dollar is no longer worth a dollar. The dollar is worth a nickel. Period.

Why do you think all the five and ten cent stores have been replaced with dollar stores?

But most of all, Rand Paul needs to hear Bill Clinton in his sleep: 'It's the economy, stupid.' And the government cannot fix it. We have to be set free of overregulation so we can fix it, or it won't get fixed.

That's why I want to see us pressure Bernie Sanders into taking up Rand Paul's debate challenge.

[65fastback2+2]

The two strategies (preaching your message and attacking Trump) aren't mutually exclusive.

Preaching the message only works if someone hears it.

Attacking Trump brings attention, which Rand can then exploit to preach his message.

("punching up" is a time-tested political strategy; it works)

And this is precisely what Rand's doing - just today, in the excellent OP-ED from The National Journal posted by the OP, Rand made a passionate case for fiscal conservatism, noting in the margin that Trump is not a fiscal conservative. That article will get additional hits, if not media mentions, because it contained an attack on Trump = more people hear Rand's message = winning.

can you redo this post, but remove all the logic and sprinkle in some more "sky is falling"? kthxbai

[acptulsa]

can you redo this post, but remove all the logic and sprinkle in some more "sky is falling"? kthxbai

Yeah, 'cause 25% of Republicans don't know anyone's in the race but Tush and Chump, and the only thing they've decided is they aren't voting for either Tush or Chump. And if we don't hurry up and post it all over this forum that Rand has already lost, these people might decide to support him.

[BenMuldowney]

Yeah, 'cause 25% of Republicans don't know anyone's in the race but Tush and Chump, and the only thing they've decided is they aren't voting for either Tush or Chump. And if we don't hurry up and post it all over this forum that Rand has already lost, these people might decide to support him.

rand's great advisors' strategies have taken him from 14% to 2%? it feels like ron's advisors all over again telling us we are winning by losing. JUST WAIT TILL 2016 they would say!!! well we're here and rand is in what place? 12th? immediately after the first debate i came on here and explained why rand attacking trump was so stupid and i got called some interesting names. then i tried to explain to the ayn randers that what people heard was rand attacking trumps message of anti-illegal immigration and anti-establishment. trump crushed him and most of you that night.

it is over..... you fake conservatives need to learn that the libertarian agenda is just another trojan horse and is controlled opposition too. without divine intervention we will be destroyed as a people. you Bible bashers have played right into the hands of your enemy and you can't figure it out.