The two questions were perfect for Ron Paul and the other candidates frankly took his position and articulated it better than him. He needs to step up his public speaking skills.
Ron Paul still has time to get some debate coaching. This has been suggested in the past. I hope the candidate does something about this. The media has already written stories on his speaking style and image.
Image can be changed with just a few modifications from a good coach.
Audio link for anyone not listening/watching:
http://www.cnn.com/audio/radio/cnntv.html
"Aggressive wars, income taxes, national IDs, domestic spying, torture regimes, secret prisons, Federal Reserve manipulation -- we don't have to take it any more." -- Ron Paul, Sept 27, 2007
I disagree. I think his honesty and sincerity is unmatched by anyone up there. He speaks the truth in plain language. That's part of his charm.
People don't want the truthOriginally Posted by jenninlouisiana
University of Iowa
Iowa City, IA
Check out my blog covering the Iowa Caucus.
http://hawkeyenick.wordpress.com
what happened to him railing against the IRS??
is it me or does it seem like Ron Paul did way better in the summer debates? he used to answer the questions, and he had much more strength it seemed.
It may be plain to us, his supporters, but not to the majority of Americans.
I've written the campaign.
I've written to Carol Paul.
I've typed up a page of debate suggestions (drop toxic buzzwords like 'neocon', 'competing currency' and 'empire') and handed it directly to Dr. Paul.
And still his debate answers and style remain the same: steer everything to foreign policy and currency with the same strained high-pitched whine
It is the message and not the man. Hit the streets and help spread the word . . . "Freedom."
Peer pressure is more effective than a 1 and a half hour debate.
Unfortunately, we go to war with the candidate we have, not the candidate we wished we had. (And to be clear I'm talking about RP as a Politician where in my opinion he is only OK, rather than as a statesman and purveyor of ideas, where he is wonderful). It's unfortunate, that RP seems reluctant to take coaching and suggestions that would help him communicate his ideas more effectively. Part of that stubbornness is the same stubbornness that has allowed him to be bravely right on issues where the rest of the field is wrong. But it's sad for the campaign that he can't separate the message from the way he delivers it. I adore RP's sincerity, but a bit more "smoothness" would go a long way.I've written the campaign.
I've written to Carol Paul.
I've typed up a page of debate suggestions (drop toxic buzzwords like 'neocon', 'competing currency' and 'empire') and handed it directly to Dr. Paul.
And still his debate answers and style remain the same: steer everything to foreign policy and currency with the same strained high-pitched whine
Articulated it better? Then how come I think Ron Paul won? lol
I agree. Hard to expect more given the format.
I think some of us are expecting too much from Paul or expecting him to change too much. Sure, he's not the most polished speaker up there. But you know what? That hasn't stopped his campaign from getting to where it is today -- if anything, his unvarnished style has helped him because it separates him from the obviously rehearsed and smarmy answers of certain other candidates. Why try to change that now?
Because it would only add to his success?
THe difference is. Paul has so much to say ,in the small time allotted, that at times it can become a little jumbled. The other candidates have so little to say that they cant really get jumbled up.
THe reason is because Paul understands how economics and freedom ,etc, work and how they affect each other. The others dont.
I agree he needs to articulate a little better but i f he comes out screaming and yelling he might turn some people off
He doesn't have to come out screaming. He just has to come out speaking in clear sentences.
True, but by now he should have learned how to sell himself to the voting public. All that knowledge on economics and freedom is meaningless if he doesn't win the nomination.
Paul had a nice run where he was beginning to get some attention in the media. The grassroots/internet phenom was talked and written about - at that point he needed to vault himself to the top, but it doesn't seem like that has happened and we are weeks away from this race being all but over.
Yes, his delivery could be much better, and remember who we are dealing with. The average voter is pretty much retarded...heck they elected W for a second term remember? Many people will vote on what the candidate looks like or if they consider him to be "presidential" or not. To us this sounds like complete stupidity...which it is...but the average person is stupid and unfortunately they outnumber us. Ron Paul is hands down the best candidate that has run for office that I have ever seen but does he appeal to the sheeple masses? I hope somehow they see the light.
Agreed. He needs to slow and calm down.
The debates have shown that they really don't affect much except when someone says they believe in god. These debates are mostly style over substance. Remember John Kerry swept the debates for the presidency in 2004, but that didn't make a difference in the end against evangelicals.
Checkout Ron Paul's legislation, write your representatives and spread the word!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legisla...ed_by_Ron_Paul
Lord of the Rings and Liberty: http://www.lewrockwell.com/carson/carson10.html
I think his campaign staff leaves a lot to be desired. At the end of the day whether we like it or not the elections are a popularity contest and the average voter is more interested in what Britney Spears had for breakfast than in understanding the gold standard. It is sad but it is reality. I hope i am proven 100% wrong and that the sheeple masses completely surprise me.
Like Emeril sys, "It's all in the presentation." (or somebody says that, LOL). Anyway, points over and above just the "good message" will be gained with a good presentation. I love him, but he needs help in this area.
Too many new - and - almost new members stirring up $#@! again.
Sorry, but it has to be said...
George W. Bush isn't the most articulate speaker, yet he still got elected. Dr. Paul doesn't need to turn into a slick-talking snake oil salesman to win. His current speaking style and demeanor add credibility to his message.
"...yes, there's probably a risk I could win."
"You'll come around." - Ron Paul to Sean Hannity 1/2/2008
i couldn't agree more. ive been saying this for a while. everytime i go back and watch those first debates, his performances outshine any of his recent ones. but i do have to say that his post-debate speeches, and his speeches in general, are incredible. if the debates featured less candidates and more speaking time for each candidate, Dr. Paul would destroy the competition.
When he gets agitated (easily) he starts to sound like an old granny. He adopts a scolding attitude sometimes misdirected at the audience. He stutters and gets spastic and can't find his words and no self-respecting jarhead/farmer/macho-man can support that image. Most people will judge based on image without even realizing it. They are electing a father image.
He needs to remain calm and presidential. Then he is classy and this the the presidential image we need. He needs to remain calm under all circumstances. Then he is unmatched and speaks very very well.
Needs less negativity.
Personally, Ron's no nonsense very plain 'truth to power' speaking style is one of the things that first attracted me to him. In a world of perfectly rehearsed political soundbytes, someone speaking from the mind and heart off the top of their head was more than a breath of fresh air. It shows understanding of the issues and not expensive speaking coaches and speechwriters.
I'm still not sure why some of you want to turn Ron Paul into the other guys, when he's the only candidate showing constant growth with income and volunteers.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us