# Start Here > Ron Paul Forum >  New Poll Shows Paul @ 7% in Iowa, Bachmann & Romney neck and neck

## svobody

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.co...ttle-traction/

----------


## Ex Lux lucis

This is somewhat disappointing

----------


## bolidew

Not good considering he got 10% votes in 08.

----------


## acptulsa

I know there are antiwar Democrats in Iowa.  Is it a closed caucua?




> Not good considering he got 10% votes in 08.


Don't forget that he wasn't polling that well going in.  Our people won them over during the actual caucuses.  That's why we were so gung ho on caucuses throughout '08.  We always did better in those than in primaries.

----------


## Patrick Henry

I figured this. I am not really worried as it is still early. I believe without a doubt, that we can win the straw poll.

----------


## RP Supporter

Ugh. Well, this just makes Ames more critical. A win there would really help the campaign. If we can make inroads and pass Cain and Gingrich, we'll have a shot in the caucus.

Blame Bachmann and to a lesser extent Cain. They stole the Tea Party label this year. I think Cain's on his way down, at least.

And as others have said, it's early. Paul was at 2% or so this time in 2008. I'm confident he'll do better then 2008 in 2012. And at least we're beating media ordained frontrunner TPaw.

----------


## rich34

It is my understanding that both independents and democrats can vote in the straw poll.  I'm not sure about the caucus, but we're going to have to make some progress.  I believe winning the straw poll will be it.  If we can do that we can convince the Iowans that Ron can win the primary.

----------


## rich34

> Blame Bachmann and to a lesser extent Cain. They stole the Tea Party label this year. I think Cain's on his way down, at least.


Bachmann burns me up anyway.  Like when Rand came out talking about creating a teaparty caucus she came out the next day that she was creating one in the house as if it was her idea.  The sad thing is most republicans I talk to still think it was her idea.  

At any rate, I know it's been discussed here about the pros and cons of sending Rand into Iowa to campaign for dad, but if we don't start making some inroads we might just have to.

----------


## Ex Lux lucis

Winning the straw poll is a necessary first stop. But I think Paul also needs to be winning some hearts and minds in Iowa. Being tied with Gingrich in single digits and behind Cain/Bachman is not a good place to be. On the other hand, it is still early, and I am confident in Paul's message and campaigning.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ugh. Well, this just makes Ames more critical. A win there would really help the campaign. If we can make inroads and pass Cain and Gingrich, we'll have a shot in the caucus.
> 
> *Blame Bachmann and to a lesser extent Cain. They stole the Tea Party label this year. I think Cain's on his way down, at least.*
> 
> And as others have said, it's early. Paul was at 2% or so this time in 2008. I'm confident he'll do better then 2008 in 2012. And at least we're beating media ordained frontrunner TPaw.


They didn't steal anything.  It was there for the taking.

----------


## RP Supporter

Bachmann and Cain are the big opponents in the straw poll. Especially Bachmann. I don't know much about her supporters, but if she wins it or even comes close to second the media will pin to that.

"Paul always wins these things Greg, but the _real_ story is Bachmann's numbers. She can get her supporters motivated and out to vote for her."



Ah well. You play the card you're dealt. Paul won loads of straw polls last time, but came in 5th in Ames. I think a win there this year and the media will reluctantly have to acknowledge his campaign has gotten stronger and is a factor.

----------


## acptulsa

> At any rate, I know it's been discussed here about the pros and cons of sending Rand into Iowa to campaign for dad, but if we don't start making some inroads we might just have to.


I sure don't see why not.  He's brilliant in red states.  He's much better at G.O.P.-flavored spin than the old man.  The only reason I'd hesitate for a second is that the good ol' boys of Kentucky might actually figure out what Rand glossed over and how, and get testy.  And I kind of doubt that.

Once you win a redneck's loyalty, it's hard to kill it.  That may be their greatest virtue of all.

----------


## LibertyEagle

We have work to do.  Maybe it's time we funded the Iowa projects?  They do need money to be able to execute their plans in Iowa.

----------


## sailingaway

> Not good considering he got 10% votes in 08.


caucuses are who shows up.

This isn't good.  MB is milking her announcement 'window' for all it is worth, and had a good debate.  Monday I expect her ads and organizing over the last couple of weeks are going to have a fairly major rally for her announcement, as well.  Cain I still don't think will last, but it looks like MB picked up everything he dropped, so far.  I honestly don't know if she will have legs or not.   She did do well in the debate.

Things change if Palin enters the race.

I don't know the pollsters though.  You are saying these guys are reliable for Iowa?  Because I usually don't think much of WaPo polls, but each state has different pollsters who do well there.

----------


## acptulsa

> ...it looks like MB picked up everything he dropped, so far.  I honestly don't know if she will have legs or not.   She did do well in the debate.


Bachmann will undoubtedly hit Iowa with all she can muster.  She obviously intends for Iowa to do for her what it did for Huckabee last time.  And she stands a good chance of making a formidable showing, especially in the straw poll.  But the caucus is a different matter.




> I don't know the pollsters though.  You are saying these guys are reliable for Iowa?  Because I usually don't think much of WaPo polls, but each state has different pollsters who do well there.


We can make liars of this poll.  But it's going to require we recruit a whole lot of antiwar, anti-drug war, anti-corporatist Democrats and independents.  And if the campaign doesn't feel comfortable targeting them overtly, well, we should focus there as much as we can.

----------


## simon1911

I do not think Paul voters come much from "likely Republican caucus-goers". Yet, I don't know how we can effectively change the minds of those people. Those 23% for Romney...22% for Bachmann...(really?). Those people must have heard RP's message at some point, deliberated (however briefly) and tossed them away and opt for the new label but the same old message. Sorry if I sound so negative...it's just so frustrating to find that the people are still not ready for the message of "freedom, prosperity and peace."

----------


## MRoCkEd

Ron needs a major breakout moment to surge to the top. Otherwise, it's a battle for third.

----------


## AuH20

Ron's inherent problem is that he isn't a new face. That's why Bachmann, despite her flaws jumped up so incredibly in light of a conservative power vacuum this primary season.

----------


## sailingaway

> Winning the straw poll is a necessary first stop. But I think Paul also needs to be winning some hearts and minds in Iowa. Being tied with Gingrich in single digits and behind Cain/Bachman is not a good place to be. On the other hand, it is still early, and I am confident in Paul's message and campaigning.


Yeah, Cain and Gingrich being ahead of and tied with Ron kind of astonishes me.  Bachmann made a big splash and she is playing up her Iowa ties.  She may fall or who knows? But Cain and Gingrich.....

The only plus is Ron is still ahead of Pawlenty.  But all four of them are within the margin of error of each other, whereas Bachmann is not..

----------


## acptulsa

> Ron needs a major breakout moment to surge to the top. Otherwise, it's a battle for third.


We can try.  Don't know if it will work.  But if we can pull third in the straw poll, and keep up the pincers movement, I feel sure we can take the caucus itself.  Which, of course, is what counts, and what promotes candidates to the undeniable status of 'viable'.

I think the caucus is doable.  In fact, I'm sure of it.  If we don't let up, and don't turn our noses up at any potential participants.

----------


## sailingaway

> We have work to do.  Maybe it's time we funded the Iowa projects?  They do need money to be able to execute their plans in Iowa.


this^^

----------


## sailingaway

> Ron's inherent problem is that he isn't a new face. That's why Bachmann, despite her flaws jumped up so incredibly in light of a conservative power vacuum this primary season.


All of them, except Ron, shot to the top as they announced because they were knew, and what they knew of Ron was the spin that marginalized him.  We need some sort of 'give him a second look' campaign, which I thought we were going to get because they weren't happy with anyone else, but unless Bachmann messes up they might conceivably be happy with her.  I wouldn't be with the patriot act, police state and middle east wars, but I don't know how big those issues are in Iowa.  Not very, I suspect.

----------


## AuH20

> All of them, except Ron, shot to the top as they announced because they were knew, and what they knew of Ron was the spin that marginalized him.  We need some sort of 'give him a second look' campaign, which I thought we were going to get because they weren't happy with anyone else, but unless Bachmann messes up they might conceivably be happy with her.  I wouldn't be with the patriot act, police state and middle east wars, but I don't know how big those issues are in Iowa.  Not very, I suspect.


Ron has been unfortunately labeled and many folks aren't willing to give him a second look.

----------


## acptulsa

Perhaps our biggest advantage in the straw poll that we won't enjoy at caucus time is the fact that the out of state students are home.  Have to reach them, though, and can't do that on campus.

----------


## Agorism

We can still win the Straw poll.

Also Bachmann may struggle to defeat Romney etc, and Paul voters can still hold sway in the race. If Bachmann loses to Romney and complains of Paul supporters not supporting her so called (speudo) "Tea Party" it will be a good laugh.

----------


## AuH20

> We can still win the Straw poll.
> 
> Also Bachmann may struggle to defeat Romney etc, and Paul voters can still hold sway in the race. If Bachmann loses to Romney and complains of Paul supporters not supporting her so called (speudo) "Tea Party" it will be a good laugh.


I'd rather see Bachmann beat Romney. We actually wield some control over her as opposed to Romney who basically blew off the pro-life pledge as well as the balanced budget pledge.

----------


## Canderson

> They didn't steal anything.  It was there for the taking.


Absolutely true, how did Ron Paul lose the Tea Party label???? We started it in 2007 for gods sake!!!!

----------


## Agorism

Intrade says 78% chance that Perry will run

Field not totally complete yet.

----------


## acptulsa

> I'd rather see Bachmann beat Romney. We actually wield some control over her as opposed to Romney who basically blew off the pro-life pledge as well as the balanced budget pledge.


We're not the ones holding sway over Bachmann.  Someone is, but it ain't We, the People.

We need to win the caucus.

----------


## Agorism

> I'd rather see Bachmann beat Romney. We actually wield some control over her as opposed to Romney who basically blew off the pro-life pledge as well as the balanced budget pledge.


I wouldn't care.

I'd rather have Paul supporters vote for neither to the annoyance of both of them.

----------


## acptulsa

> I wouldn't care.
> 
> I'd rather have Paul supporters vote for neither to the annoyance of both of them.


You don't stage a revolution by begging for policy scraps.  As the Democrats found out over the last four years.

----------


## Agorism

Bachmann would be a more entertaining president as far as comedy central is concerned.

----------


## AdamT

The average voter does not "get" Ron when he talks over their heads! He needs to dumb down the message. Sorry folks but that's what wins elections in this day and age. The average person is acclimated to fluffy soundbites. I mean Romney?? He's the fluffiest of fluff. Bachmann is a GOP babe and a good fluffy talker. You can have all the principles in the world and the best voting record in all of Congress, but if people don't understand what you're saying it's moreless worthless.

Please Doug Wead inject advice and soon.

----------


## trey4sports

well, this sucks.

----------


## AuH20

> We're not the ones holding sway over Bachmann.  Someone is, but it ain't We, the People.
> 
> We need to win the caucus.


We technically reside in her sphere of influence. Any shenanigans and we can create alot of problems for a Bachmann administration. With that said, I'm not advocating for RP supporters to financially support Bachmann but if it's Romney and Bachmann as the final two in the latter stage, voting for someone who we hold the reins on wouldn't be the worst idea in the world.

----------


## acptulsa

> We technically reside in her sphere of influence. Any shenanigans and we can create alot of problems for a Bachmann administration.


The Obama administration is getting all kinds of problems from once-ardent supporters.  We're still in twice as many wars as we were under Dubya.

You think the people around here will be satisfied with a 'drawdown'?  Will we be happy with a return to pre-surge levels of backbreaking imperialism?  Sounds like a recipe for remaining there forever to me.

The thing we have going for us is that they all sound the same, and very conventional, and people are sick to #$%&ing death of the status quo.  We either go for the revolution or go home.  We've got the goods.  We've just got to get the knowledgeable and disgusted people of every stripe to the poll.  That's all.

At this point, he who compromises is lost.  Especially if the wars or the economy go badly--and one or the other is bound to.  People are disgusted.  Either we give them principle worth supporting or they won't support anything.  We want the lowest common denominator, sure.  And maybe they're starting to 'get it', too...

----------


## AuH20

> The Obama administration is getting all kinds of problems from once-ardent supporters.  We're still in twice as many wars as we were under Dubya.


But that's Obama, the same man who once uttered that the constitution is a charter of negative rights. He was elected to be the unitary executive 800 pound gorilla in the room. Conversely, like it or not, Bachmann is married to constitutional principles.  She can't claim ignorance as easily, especially given the clarion call which went out after the Bush Administration.

----------


## BUSHLIED

I have to agree with AdamT. I recently met someone while grabbing lunch and we started talking politics. He is a young professional. He wasn't a Ron Paul supporter but being that he is an investor, he spends a lot of time watching the markets and knows a lot about what is going on in the economy. I sent him a link to Ron's recent debate. He said, he is NOW supporting Ron because he is the closest candidate that can do something to HELP.... BUT he definitely said that he doesn't communicate his message effectively for the average person and that it is easily to marginalize him because on the surface he appears to make no sense. Anyway, I convince him to give Ron $2500 and he said, this is our only chance cause Ron doesn't have another RUN, so he is donating. He also said, that Ron's new bill to legalize Marijuana has to be explained very well on how it can improve the economy by reducing spending on the drug war, prisons, court costs etc...anyway, he is a completely unbiased and objective person that I have come to respect so he is telling the truth about his first impression...just a FYI.

----------


## AuH20

> The Obama administration is getting all kinds of problems from once-ardent supporters.  We're still in twice as many wars as we were under Dubya.
> 
> You think the people around here will be satisfied with a 'drawdown'?  Will we be happy with a return to pre-surge levels of backbreaking imperialism?  Sounds like a recipe for remaining there forever to me.
> 
> The thing we have going for us is that they all sound the same, and very conventional, and people are sick to #$%&ing death of the status quo.  We either go for the revolution or go home.  We've got the goods.  We've just got to get the knowledgeable and disgusted people of every stripe to the poll.  That's all.
> 
> At this point, he who compromises is lost.  Especially if the wars or the economy go badly--and one or the other is bound to.  People are disgusted.  Either we give them principle worth supporting or they won't support anything.  We want the lowest common denominator, sure.  And maybe they're starting to 'get it', too...


I do not want to compromise but sometimes the cards you're dealt dictate otherwise. We have no sway over Romney. That's pretty much confirmed. He's pro Fed & sympathetic to New Deal era social institutions. At least Bachmann was pressured to vote NO on Libya. That my friend is progress. Keep the heat on and never relent.

----------


## acptulsa

Our side of the pincers will not support Bachmann.  They'll never believe her sincerity in a million years, now that Obama has shown them the folly of their ways.  Ron Paul's twenty-three years of continual integrity in the House is the only thing that is winning them over.  This is a report from the trenches.  Woo the right as you will by sounding sympathetic to her.  But don't count on her 'marriage to constitutional principles' to be any more enduring than Obama's marriage to peace.  And don't expect any help from the other side of the pincers in this folly of thinking that Bachmann can tap all of the anti-Obama fervor in the nation.

She can't win over half of it.  Only Ron Paul can get more than 75% of it in the general election.  No one else.

----------


## AuH20

> Our side of the pincers will not support Bachmann.  They'll never believe her sincerity in a million years, now that Obama has shown them the folly of their ways.  Ron Paul's twenty-three years of continual integrity in the House is the only thing that is winning them over.  This is a report from the trenches.  Woo the right as you will by sounding sympathetic to her.  But don't count on her 'marriage to constitutional principles' to be any more enduring than Obama's marriage to peace.  And don't expect any help from the other side of the pincers in this folly of thinking that Bachmann can tap all of the anti-Obama fervor in the nation.
> 
> She can't win over half of it.  Only Ron Paul can get more than 75% of it in the general election.  No one else.


I believe the poll for Bachmann in this very forum broke 40% to 60% when juxtaposed against Obama in the general. People want Obama out.  

We're nearing 10 percent unemployment and without QE3 you could see a 25% regression in the DOW. I'd say Jo Jo the Elephant Boy could beat Obama at this time.

----------


## Agorism

Bachmann is like a poor man's version of Pat Buchanan.

----------


## sailingaway

> I believe the poll for Bachmann in this very forum broke 40% to 60% when juxtaposed against Obama in the general. People want Obama out.  
> 
> We're nearing 10 percent unemployment and without QE3 you could see a 25% regression in the DOW. I'd say Jo Jo the Elephant Boy could beat Obama at this time.



No.  The Dems have scared people with Ryan's plan.  Ron's plan to cut foreign militarism to patch social security and medicare as best it can be done is a necessary piece, if not in the primary, in the general.  Otherwise people will go with divided government.  I firmly believe that.  And Bachmann voted for Ryan's plan.

----------


## TheDriver

> They didn't steal anything.  It was there for the taking.


Bingo^    QFT~

----------


## AuH20

> No.  The Dems have scared people with Ryan's plan.  Ron's plan to cut foreign militarism to patch social security and medicare as best it can be done is a necessary piece, if not in the primary, in the general.  Otherwise people will go with divided government.  I firmly believe that.  And Bachmann voted for Ryan's plan.


The dems can scare all they like. The economy is in tatters. Retirement takes a backseat to job creation, which pays monthly bills. No president since FDR has been re-elected with unemployment surpassing just 7.2%.

----------


## acptulsa

> I believe the poll for Bachmann in this very forum broke 40% to 60% when juxtaposed against Obama in the general. People want Obama out.  
> 
> We're nearing 10 percent unemployment and without QE3 you could see a 25% regression in the DOW. I'd say Jo Jo the Elephant Boy could beat Obama at this time.


There are people in this nation concerned enough about its future to be a bit picky about what replaces Obama.  There are.  And only Ron Paul can get a broad spectrum of them.  Only Ron Paul.

We're growing a cult of integrity.  Bachmann hasn't got the chops to play.

The Dems will do as they like, much to Obama's chagrin.  In fact, many of them are disgusted enough to do what they _don't_ like.  But none of the ones I'm talking about will do what they don't believe in.

Bachmann they don't believe in.

----------


## AuH20

> There are people in this nation concerned enough about its future to be a bit picky about what replaces Obama.  There are.  And only Ron Paul can get a broad spectrum of them.  Only Ron Paul.
> 
> We're growing a cult of integrity.  Bachmann hasn't got the chops to play.
> 
> The Dems will do as they like, much to Obama's chagrin.  In fact, many of them are disgusted enough to do what they _don't_ like.  But none of the ones I'm talking about will do what they don't believe in.
> 
> Bachmann they don't believe in.


Are you talking about urban city democrats or Reagan democrats situated in the Rust Belt and Midwest? Obama in a formerly blue stronghold of Pennsylvania has dropped a shocking 15 points there! And other polls show him rapidly bleeding support in North Carolina as well as Virginia and other battleground states.  This illusion that only Ron Paul could win is just that, an illusion. If the pain is severe enough, which we're rapidly approaching, they will pull this clown backstage by hook or crook.

----------


## AJ Antimony

1st thought: God dammit! Why isn't he moving up in the polls?!?

2nd thought: Caucus date is still a LONG time away.

3rd thought: Wait a minute, wasn't Cain at the top of the polls a couple weeks ago? Oh, and wasn't it Huckabee before that? Oh, and Trump too? And doesn't it seem like Perry will jump to the top if he declares?

Conclusion: I hate to sort of quote the Trey Grayson campaign, but polls now are fairly meaningless. We just need to be leading in the polls on caucus day.

----------


## acptulsa

Would Barry Goldwater have advocated turning one's nose up at supporters, or expediency over principle?

You say Bachmann could win the general.  Maybe.  I doubt it highly, as she would only fail to energize a major portion of the populace.  But as Obama can no longer do any better, this might work even if he draws down the surge.  But I still doubt it.

But will We, the People win?  No.  Obama is not swayed by us, and Bachmann would owe us no more than Obama does.  Period.

So, she's principled (as you seem to hope) or she isn't.  Her voting record indicates the latter.  And those who we are drawing from well outside what _any_ poll would _ever_ consider 'likely G.O.P. primary voters' will not support her for love or money.  Period.  They don't want to get fooled again.

You're just weakening your side of the pincers with this talk.  That's all.  But maybe, just maybe, our side of the pincers will be strong enough by primary season that we won't need you.

----------


## Thomas

> we have work to do.  Maybe it's time we funded the iowa projects?  They do need money to be able to execute their plans in iowa.


+rep

----------


## AuH20

> Would Barry Goldwater have advocated turning one's nose up at supporters, or expediency over principle?
> 
> You say Bachmann could win the general.  Maybe.  I doubt it highly, as she would only fail to energize a major portion of the populace.  But as Obama can no longer do any better, this might work even if he draws down the surge.  But I still doubt it.
> 
> But will We, the People win?  No.  Obama is not swayed by us, and Bachmann would owe us no more than Obama does.  Period.
> 
> So, she's principled (as you seem to hope) or she isn't.  Her voting record indicates the latter.  And those who we are drawing from well outside what _any_ poll would _ever_ consider 'likely G.O.P. primary voters' will not support her for love or money.  Period.  They don't want to get fooled again.
> 
> You're just weakening your side of the pincers with this talk.  That's all.  But maybe, just maybe, our side of the pincers will be strong enough by primary season that we won't need you.


At this juncture, I could care less if she's principled. Ron is the only principled one left, but he's hopelessly buried due to past misconstrued statements, public notoriety and MSM smears.  It's all about exacting a debt to be repaid at a future date. That is how I view the Bachmann candidacy. Do you think the Neocon brass lost sleep because George W. Bush wasn't a _principled_ Neocon but nevertheless did their bidding? If she can enact and protect parts of our agenda because of grassroots fear, sign me up.

----------


## Paul4Prez

> Winning the straw poll is a necessary first stop. But I think Paul also needs to be winning some hearts and minds in Iowa. Being tied with Gingrich in single digits and behind Cain/Bachman is not a good place to be. On the other hand, it is still early, and I am confident in Paul's message and campaigning.


It would be nice to see him polling in the top 3 in all of the early primary states.  Romney and Bachmann are quickly locking up the front-runner slots, but if we stay behind Cain, the media will ignore us.  Winning at Ames will help, and reporting a top-tier Q2 fundraising number will help, but we also need to help the campaign raise enough cash to start changing hearts and minds with TV ads in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada.

----------


## ChanceForRonPaul

How was this "poll" conducted?  I live in Iowa and didn't hear a word about it.  The Gannet Group was the one that the Des Moines Register had do the poll and they own several newspapers that promote Romney non-stop.  I have a hard time believing this isn't rigged.

----------


## ronpaulhawaii

Bachmann supported Roy "Bailout Blunt" over Chuck "Filibuster Purgason" in the MO Primary, pissing off the entire grassroot Tea Party Base (not the astroturfers, who made $$$ excuses, but definitely backstabbed the tea partiers, and the Tea Party principles.) She is a known backstabber, I can hardly believe anyone here thinks she would be under our sway... 




> *Tea Party Coalition: Bachmann's Support For Blunt "An Abomination"* 
> 
> "More that two dozen Missouri TEA parties  say a bid by US Senate candidate to capitalize on their movement has 'shocked' them...'Roy Blunt voted for TARP and Cash for Clunkers. For Michele Bachmann to come to Missouri and give the impression that all the Missouri Tea Parties support Roy Blunt is an abomination of everything we have been standing up for,' said Jedidiah Smith, a Tea Party leader in Franklin County, Missouri."
> http://www.firedupmissouri.com/conte...nt-abomination

----------


## AuH20

> Bachmann supported Roy "Bailout Blunt" over Chuck "Filibuster Purgason" in the MO Primary, pissing off the entire grassroot Tea Party Base (not the astroturfers, who made $$$ excuses, but definitely backstabbed the tea partiers, and the Tea Party principles.) She is a known backstabber, I can hardly believe anyone here thinks she would be under our sway...


Well, the ball would in her court to come forth as a full-fledged phony, which would be political suicide. We win either way. If she doesn't want to participate in the restoration program, she will be outed by her peers in Mike Lee, the Pauls, Amash, Napolitano etc., especially when you realize that the Bush wounds are still fresh. 

 I'm really enjoying the sway we're starting develop in the media circles. I have a simple warning for Michelle Bachmann and her staff. Betray the principles _you ran on_, and we will wield an unrelenting attack on your very person, cutting you off from grassroots support. You will be a pariah after we're done with you.

----------


## Paul4Prez

It's clear that this is becoming a 3-person race:  Romney, Bachmann, and Paul.  Pawlenty is stuck in the mud.  Gingrich has lost his campaign team and is running on fumes.  People found out that Cain supported TARP, and he won't be able to raise enough money to compete.  Santorum is more or less finished.  Huntsman never had a chance.  The media never gave Johnson a chance.  Palin isn't running.  Perry may jump in, but has the lowest favorability ratings of anyone.

We need to finish in the top two at Ames, and win if we can.  Beating the rest of the field besides Bachmann and Romney shouldn't be difficult, and Romney isn't trying to win at Ames.

----------


## itsnobody

This doesn't mean we can't win Iowa, Ron Paul was polling @ 3% in Iowa right before the Iowa Ames Straw poll yet got 9.1% of the vote....so we can still win 1st place by simply getting a very high voter turn out. We need around 8,000 votes to win  in the Iowa Ames Straw poll and already got more than 11,000 votes in the Iowa Caucus

So all we need to win it is organization and ambition, regardless of what RP is polling we can still easily win the Ames Straw poll

----------


## Matt Collins

.





Ron can do better than this IF we give him the tools to do so.



_DONATE TO THE IOWA PROJECTS ASAP!!!!!_
http://iowaforronpaul.com/projects.php

----------


## Cleaner44

The poll, conducted by Selzer & Co. Inc. of Des Moines, was based on telephone interviews with *400* likely Republican caucus-goers June 19 to 22. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

Not exactly a large sample size...

----------


## ChanceForRonPaul

We have to remember, Romney's not going to be at the Iowa Straw Poll.  The fool's going to be doing 'other' things (thank God).  So in reality, we're probably going to be up against mainly Bachmann.  The Palin supporters hate her and will do whatever they can to bring her poll numbers down.  I know this because my mother's one of them lol.  Ron Paul's got $3.5 million in the bank and an ever growing support base.  I think he'll do just fine in the Iowa Straw poll as long as we continue to build our momentum.

----------


## sailingaway

> How was this "poll" conducted?  I live in Iowa and didn't hear a word about it.  The Gannet Group was the one that the Des Moines Register had do the poll and they own several newspapers that promote Romney non-stop.  I have a hard time believing this isn't rigged.


Gannet did it? Yeah, they can't stand the Pauls.  Plural.  Hm.  Now I want to see the cross tabs.  But even so, it is a BIG difference between Bachmann's share, right now, and Ron's.  She may not keep it, it may be hope more than knowledge, but if the poll is skewed, Ron might be third, but not first or second, I would think, and the margin of error does that much.

----------


## sailingaway

> It's clear that this is becoming a 3-person race:  Romney, Bachmann, and Paul.  Pawlenty is stuck in the mud.  Gingrich has lost his campaign team and is running on fumes.  People found out that Cain supported TARP, and he won't be able to raise enough money to compete.  Santorum is more or less finished.  Huntsman never had a chance.  The media never gave Johnson a chance.  Palin isn't running.  Perry may jump in, but has the lowest favorability ratings of anyone.
> 
> We need to finish in the top two at Ames, and win if we can.  Beating the rest of the field besides Bachmann and Romney shouldn't be difficult, and Romney isn't trying to win at Ames.


I actually hope Palin does run, seeing Bachmann's numbers without her....

----------


## klamath

It is way early get concerned about these polling numbers. The only thing to be gained from this, right now is that the campaign is not on the right track but there is still plenty of time for readjustments. McCain was doing really poorly at this time in '08 but he turned his campaign around. RP needs to reevaluate and do the same otherwise he will do the same as '08 also.

----------


## MisterTickle

If Palin and Perry jump in this whole race is going to get a bit more cluster$#@!.

----------


## ChanceForRonPaul

> If Palin and Perry jump in this whole race is going to get a bit more cluster$#@!.


Isn't that the truth!  It's already a circus.  They're only stealing votes from one another.  They all suck, minus Ron Paul.

----------


## ChanceForRonPaul

Don't be gettin' your panties in a bunch people.  This is a skewed poll.  Don't think much of it.  We just need a huge turnout for the Iowa Straw Poll.  Ron Paul's got everything but the MSM going for him, just like Reagan.

----------


## Badger Paul

To me, the poll says we're in third in Iowa right now at least as far as the caucus goes, second in the straw poll.

Cain is not only losing altitude (we're within the margin of error) but he really has no campaign infrastructure in Iowa compared to what we have or the other candidates. Even if there was goodwill towards him there's no way he can organize it to make come out to Ames to vote for him. And since Newt can't even travel outside of Atlanta without someone else paying for it, I'm not worried about him either.

Remember this poll is of_ likely_ Republican caucus goers. We probably have a few more percentage points of people who wouldn't be on their radar screens. However, we have to identify, organize and get those persons to the straw poll and the caucus. So yes, I would encourage local Iowa grassroots efforts and grassroots phonebanking as much as possible because efforts are reaching beyond just GOP voters. Let the official campaign worry about finding support among party members and bump that up as well.

Democrats and Independents can vote in the straw poll and they can change their registration to Republican on the night of the caucus. The more we expand the pool of voters, the better we'll do in Iowa. There's no way around it. Romeny's getting the regulars and Bachmann the religious voters. We have to get bring in our voters to do well.

----------


## TIMB0B

> How was this "poll" conducted?  I live in Iowa and didn't hear a word about it.  The Gannet Group was the one that the Des Moines Register had do the poll and they own several newspapers that promote Romney non-stop.  I have a hard time believing this isn't rigged.


I knew something was up with this poll.  Comforting news here.

----------


## ChanceForRonPaul

Let's be honest, Ron Paul kicked ass at the RLC.  If his supporters show up at the Straw Poll like they did at the RLC, we won't have a problem.

----------


## libertybrewcity

This is the Bachmann bump. Cain had it too. Ron had it also. If Perry enters he will have it too. Huntsman sucks so he only has a 2% bump.

----------


## MJU1983

I commented the article:

_I see one true conservative - Ron Paul...and then I see a conglomerate of status quo republicans to challenge the status quo democrat - Obama._

----------


## Uriah

> It is my understanding that both independents and democrats can vote in the straw poll.  I'm not sure about the caucus, but we're going to have to make some progress.  I believe winning the straw poll will be it.  If we can do that we can convince the Iowans that Ron can win the primary.


Yes, in Iowa, all Iowans or college students residing in Iowa may vote in the Iowa Straw Poll regardless of political affiliation. One must be registered as a republican which, you can do at the Iowa caucus, to vote in the caucus.

So this says Paul is polling at 7%, so what? At this point in 2007 Paul polled at 2%. Just prior to the straw poll in 2007 Paul was still at 2% but got 9%. And right before the Iowa caucus in January of 2008 polls showed Dr. Paul averaging about 4-7% but he got 10%. This makes me think that 5-7%(roughly) of the caucus goers and straw poll voters were NOT typical republican primary voters. If this is so then add 5-7% to that 7% from the latest poll and viola... 14%! 

Of course, this is highly skeptical but good food for thought. I would also like to mention that here in Jefferson county there were possibly dozens of democrats that supported Ron Paul but chose to attend the democratic caucus instead. Most of the democrats stated they wanted to support Obama because they did not want Clinton to win. 

Well, we all know what kind of administration Obama has had and what a disappointment he has been to his grassroots supporters. If we had persuaded those democrats last time then Paul would have won Jefferson county by an even larger margin. I think Jefferson county can turn out some of those democrats this time around. 

And don't forget, Ron Paul has had 4 years of spreading his name and message. We are still in the fighting phase so take a moment to lighten your hearts and breathe a sigh of relief that we HAVE made progress.

Study, donate, and act. Talk to everyone, don't argue, if you don't persuade someone walk away with a smile knowing you just planted a seed that someday may sprout into a wondrous tree with the properly timed nourishment.

7%: what does it mean? Keep working young grasshopper!

----------


## parocks

23
7
6
4
2
42% - 5 establishment rinos


22
10
7

39% - 3 tea party conservatives (no palin)

We are going to want to be the tea party candidate.  The numbers are there for a tea party win.   





> At this juncture, I could care less if she's principled. Ron is the only principled one left, but he's hopelessly buried due to past misconstrued statements, public notoriety and MSM smears.  It's all about exacting a debt to be repaid at a future date. That is how I view the Bachmann candidacy. Do you think the Neocon brass lost sleep because George W. Bush wasn't a _principled_ Neocon but nevertheless did their bidding? If she can enact and protect parts of our agenda because of grassroots fear, sign me up.

----------


## parocks

Just because he out performed his poll numbers for the Iowa caucus doesn't mean that RPS aren't typical republican primary voters.  It could just mean that the polls were wrong, or that we did a better job of GOTV.  That's not saying that they are typical, just that there could be many explanations for it.




> Yes, in Iowa, all Iowans or college students residing in Iowa may vote in the Iowa Straw Poll regardless of political affiliation. One must be registered as a republican which, you can do at the Iowa caucus, to vote in the caucus.
> 
> So this says Paul is polling at 7%, so what? At this point in 2007 Paul polled at 2%. Just prior to the straw poll in 2007 Paul was still at 2% but got 9%. And right before the Iowa caucus in January of 2008 polls showed Dr. Paul averaging about 4-7% but he got 10%. This makes me think that 5-7%(roughly) of the caucus goers and straw poll voters were NOT typical republican primary voters. If this is so then add 5-7% to that 7% from the latest poll and viola... 14%! 
> 
> Of course, this is highly skeptical but good food for thought. I would also like to mention that here in Jefferson county there were possibly dozens of democrats that supported Ron Paul but chose to attend the democratic caucus instead. Most of the democrats stated they wanted to support Obama because they did not want Clinton to win. 
> 
> Well, we all know what kind of administration Obama has had and what a disappointment he has been to his grassroots supporters. If we had persuaded those democrats last time then Paul would have won Jefferson county by an even larger margin. I think Jefferson county can turn out some of those democrats this time around. 
> 
> And don't forget, Ron Paul has had 4 years of spreading his name and message. We are still in the fighting phase so take a moment to lighten your hearts and breathe a sigh of relief that we HAVE made progress.
> ...

----------


## Uriah

@ parocks

Very true, point taken. I like to speculate. Too much I'd say.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Anyone willing to listen to me yet? I told you guys this was the case, yet everyone is still making excuses for the poor polling numbers. It's either "not legitimate" or "still too early"

----------


## Uriah

@ rockandrollsouls

What is your argument? I don't know what you've been saying.

----------


## parocks

> I actually hope Palin does run, seeing Bachmann's numbers without her....


Well, if Palin and Bachmann both run, it just means that we have to beat one of them, and then the other.

It would be easier to beat one, than to have to beat both, I would think.  Bachmann is less likely to just run away with
the whole chunk of tea party, and she isn't as well known, well liked as Palin.

----------


## tpreitzel

We need higher poll numbers at this point, barely 1.5 years, from election day. 7% isn't good enough even with a skewed poll. Ron, we need you to step up to the plate and hit  home runs from here forward until the general election. Your supporters are counting on you. If you must replace part of your closest staff to accommodate victory, then do it ... NOW ... please.

----------


## tpreitzel

Ron needs to start distilling his message into foundational arguments  for a theme of hope. People want a POTUS that reassures them of a  brighter future. Ron, explain to the American people why your positions should ultimately give Americans hope for a brighter future. You CAN do it.

For example, I support the 2nd amendment because it's the cheapest and most cost effective method for securing our freedom without the need for a leviathan of abuse like the Department of Homeland Security. Without an oppressive police state, an armed populace is our best defense against terrorism. We shall once again be free to travel without restriction and confident that we and our fellow countrymen will be ready and willing to stop any act of terrorism in progress.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Ron needs to start distilling his message into foundational arguments  for a theme of hope. People want a POTUS that reassures them of a  brighter future. Ron, explain to the American people why your positions should ultimately give Americans hope for a brighter future. You CAN do it.
> 
> For example, I support the 2nd amendment because it's the cheapest and most cost effective method for securing our freedom without the need for a leviathan of abuse like the Department of Homeland Security. Without an oppressive police state, an armed populace is our best defense against terrorism. We shall once again be free to travel without restriction and confident that we and our fellow countrymen will be ready and willing to stop any act of terrorism in progress.


Sorry, but that is not even close to reaching the average Republican primary voter. "Department of Homeland Security? Police state? Who is this wacko?" they'd say.

----------


## tpreitzel

> Sorry, but that is not even close to reaching the average Republican primary voter. "Department of Homeland Security? Police state? Who is this wacko?" they'd say.


I certainly doubt it ... but the specifics can certainly be rewritten as necessary.  My main point involves the *process* of communicating hope for the future.

----------


## acptulsa

> At this juncture, I could care less if she's principled. Ron is the only principled one left, but he's hopelessly buried due to past misconstrued statements, public notoriety and MSM smears.  It's all about exacting a debt to be repaid at a future date. That is how I view the Bachmann candidacy. Do you think the Neocon brass lost sleep because George W. Bush wasn't a _principled_ Neocon but nevertheless did their bidding? If she can enact and protect parts of our agenda because of grassroots fear, sign me up.


The United States of America wasn't founded by dogs begging to get their bones back.

You could care less if she's principled, you just want the perceived least among evils because you figure you'll get one or two measly treats.  The Democrats went that route and there hasn't been a treat passed out yet...




> Well, the ball would in her court to come forth as a full-fledged phony, which would be political suicide. We win either way.


As you noted, Obama committed political suicide.  So we won!  We won four wars, debt, dollar devaluation, outsourcing, a loss of civil liberties on a wholesale basis and a nation we barely recognize.  And Obama still gets to retire and live like a king.  Victory.  Yay.

Are you, by chance, familiar with the term pyrrhic victory?  They can do this for decades, and win by doing so.  One term presidents and two term presidents get the same retirement plan.  Whose side are you on?

----------


## acptulsa

> Anyone willing to listen to me yet? I told you guys this was the case, yet everyone is still making excuses for the poor polling numbers. It's either "not legitimate" or "still too early"


Are you willing to listen to me yet?  These polls are of 'likely Republican voters'.  In 2008, when the Obama the Messiah of Peace kool-aid flowed like wine, the pool of 'likely Republican voters' was just a bit smaller than it is today.  There is a good sized pool of 'peace trumps all' voters out there.  We're tapping them.  The Gannet pollsters are very specifically not tapping them.

Won't make a difference?  We shall see.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Bachmann supported Roy "Bailout Blunt" over Chuck "Filibuster Purgason" in the MO Primary, pissing off the entire grassroot Tea Party Base (not the astroturfers, who made $$$ excuses, but definitely backstabbed the tea partiers, and the Tea Party principles.) She is a known backstabber, I can hardly believe anyone here thinks she would be under our sway...


That quote you have in your post and the source needs to be somewhere on here front-and-center.  It does far more to inform people who read here (lurkers and all) about Ms. Bachmann's credentials, or lack thereof, than 10K articles of her hiding behind some bushes that someone obtained from a liberal rag.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> At this juncture, I could care less if she's principled. Ron is the only principled one left, but he's hopelessly buried due to past misconstrued statements, public notoriety and MSM smears.  It's all about exacting a debt to be repaid at a future date. That is how I view the Bachmann candidacy. Do you think the Neocon brass lost sleep because George W. Bush wasn't a _principled_ Neocon but nevertheless did their bidding? If she can enact and protect parts of our agenda because of grassroots fear, sign me up.


I agree that Dr. Paul has some digging out to do.  But, I firmly disagree with you about tossing in the towel.  Wead is on-board now.  Dr. Paul has made significant inroads with some of the Christian leaders in Iowa and elsewhere.  What we need to do, in my opinion, is FUND THE CAMPAIGN'S PLAN IN IOWA.  We have yet to do that and time is running out.  




> If she can enact and protect parts of our agenda because of grassroots fear, sign me up.


  I have to say that I am more than a bit disappointed.

----------


## The Dark Knight

Guys do you really think this poll is accurate. Paul got 9% in the caucuses last time in Iowa. Now they say he has only 7 % support. I dont buy it for a second. I am willing to bet the real numbers would reveal his numbers between 20-25% support. The Ames Straw poll will have a sample size of about 20,000 so that should be a more accurate poll.

----------


## tpreitzel

> Guys do you really think this poll is accurate. Paul got 9% in the caucuses last time in Iowa. Now they say he has only 7 % support. I dont buy it for a second. I am willing to bet the real numbers would reveal his numbers between 20-25% support. The Ames Straw poll will have a sample size of about 20,000 so that should be a more accurate poll.


After several years of exposure from his previous campaign, Ron should be at  least 15% regardless of his RINO competitors. Only results from the caucuses will either prove or disprove the baseline established by  this particular poll.

----------


## robert9712000

Im not advocating throwing in the towel,but to me it appears the stage is already set and will play itself out pretty predictably .I think either romney or bachman will get the republican nomination and then go on to loose to obama.

 The benefit to me in this though is when the economy goes back into turmoil ,people will grow weary of the crap the democrats and the establishment republicans have been selling them .Then with the seed that ron paul will have sown over the last 8 years, people will be very drawn to rand paul who has the same attraction of sincerity that ron has but will deliver a more easily digestible message that the masses will resonate with and stick too.

So while i dont see ron winning i think hell be very important in establishing the ground work for rand paul in 2016

----------


## LibertyEagle

Not so fast.  Go read this:  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-new-Iowa-poll

----------


## LibertyEagle

...

----------


## sailingaway

> Guys do you really think this poll is accurate. Paul got 9% in the caucuses last time in Iowa. Now they say he has only 7 % support. I dont buy it for a second. I am willing to bet the real numbers would reveal his numbers between 20-25% support. The Ames Straw poll will have a sample size of about 20,000 so that should be a more accurate poll.


Ron's supporters show up at caucuses and know that in Iowa when you vote in the 'straw poll' the caucus has, your vote doesn't count.  You have to wait until a bunch of people leave and they elect DELEGATES those delegates aren't bound by candidate, so you need to be careful who you elect.  Only they, not the 'results of the poll at the caucus' move up to the next round in picking delegates.  Ron Paul supporters will stay for that and will be more heavily represented than other candidates whose supporters either don't bother to caucus or don't stay for delegate selection.

So if 3% polling translated to 10% in the caucus last time.... 7% polling will translate into something more.

----------


## sailingaway

> Im not advocating throwing in the towel,but to me it appears the stage is already set and will play itself out pretty predictably .I think either romney or bachman will get the republican nomination and then go on to loose to obama.
> 
>  The benefit to me in this though is when the economy goes back into turmoil ,people will grow weary of the crap the democrats and the establishment republicans have been selling them .Then with the seed that ron paul will have sown over the last 8 years, people will be very drawn to rand paul who has the same attraction of sincerity that ron has but will deliver a more easily digestible message that the masses will resonate with and stick too.
> 
> So while i dont see ron winning i think hell be very important in establishing the ground work for rand paul in 2016


McCain was toast in the Iowa straw poll and won the GOP nomination.  We don't intend Ron to be toast in the Iowa straw poll, but we have a lot of 'reeducating' to do about Ron, no doubt, and it is a good thing it is early in the campaign so it is possible to do it.  But we need those Iowa projects funded!  Remember after the South Carolina debate, and Cain jumped way up there in polls?  He has come much more down to earth.  I don't know enough about Bachmann to say that will happen to her exactly the same way (I suspect she has somewhat more staying power) but people don't really know her yet, and some aren't going to like what they find out.

----------


## AuH20

> After several years of exposure from his previous campaign, Ron should be at  least 15% regardless of his RINO competitors. Only results from the caucuses will either prove or disprove the baseline established by  this particular poll.


Correct. But he's been saddled with the anti-American crank label by the MSM. That's hard to wash off. Ron's message is A+ but his identity is D-. Folks made their mind up about him from previous years and he's not gaining the necessary traction.

----------


## johnrocks

There is time but he needs to crack 10% and come in at least third I would think in Iowa, third in that Bible thumping State would be awesome;imho; especially with such a strong socially conservative field of candidates.

----------


## sailingaway

He is socially conservative.  That is why Doug Wead is involved, to let that shine through.  Ron is so anti wearing things on his sleeve (which I respect) that people have to look into him to even find that out.

----------


## LibertyEagle

As a reminder...




> " *In May 2007, the Iowa Poll had eventual caucus-winner Mike Huckabee with 4 percent*, tied with U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado. *There's still plenty of time for someone to burst the front-runners' balloon.*"


http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...106260311/1001

----------


## tpreitzel

> He is socially conservative.  That is why Doug Wead is involved, to let that shine through.  Ron is so anti wearing things on his sleeve (which I respect) that people have to look into him to even find that out.


Which is a major part of the problem... First impressions are unfortunately lasting impressions for many voters. I know from members of my own family. For success, Ron needs to *sell* his message quickly and smartly.

----------


## acptulsa

> Correct. But he's been saddled with the anti-American crank label by the MSM. That's hard to wash off. Ron's message is A+ but his identity is D-. Folks made their mind up about him from previous years and he's not gaining the necessary traction.


Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.  So, I'm going to keep right on fighting.  Right up until the fat lady sings.

The popular option this round is not the same old same old.  We've been stirring up this groundswell for four long years and more, and we'd be fools to undermine ourselves now.

----------


## johnrocks

> He is socially conservative.  That is why Doug Wead is involved, to let that shine through.  Ron is so anti wearing things on his sleeve (which I respect) that people have to look into him to even find that out.


I didn't mean it as a slant against Christian beliefs; I think of myself as a very imperfect Christian; I agree with you but I was thinking of the term in a political way and he refers to himself as more of a  libertarian/Constitutionalist; he's a Christian ,not a political social conservative; and freedom has to be sold to political social conservatives just like it has to be sold to other groups;imho anyway.

----------


## AuH20

> Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.  So, I'm going to keep right on fighting.  Right up until the fat lady sings.
> 
> The popular option this round is not the same old same old.  We've been stirring up this groundswell for four long years and more, and we'd be fools to undermine ourselves now.


Worst case scenario the money goes to a good cause regardless. We wouldn't have CFL without people like you.

----------


## AuH20

> I didn't mean it as a slant against Christian beliefs; I think of myself as a very imperfect Christian; I agree with you but I was thinking of the term in a political way and he refers to himself as more of a  libertarian/Constitutionalist; he's a Christian ,not a political social conservative; and freedom has to be sold to political social conservatives just like it has to be sold to other groups;imho anyway.


He should emphasize his paleocon credentials instead of being slurred with the libertarian tag. There was a reason why Rand took the Constitutional Conservative mantle. Politics is a war of words and the opposition will do all in their power to subconsciously plant seeds in the heads of likely voters.

----------


## tpreitzel

> He should emphasize his paleocon credentials instead of being slurred with the libertarian tag. There was a reason why Rand took the Constitutional Conservative mantle. Politics is a war of words and the opposition will do all in their power to subconsciously plant seeds in the heads of likely voters.


During the primaries, ABSOLUTELY. Libertarians are viewed as fringe elements of the party.

----------


## sailingaway

> He should emphasize his paleocon credentials instead of being slurred with the libertarian tag. There was a reason why Rand took the Constitutional Conservative mantle. Politics is a war of words and the opposition will do all in their power to subconsciously plant seeds in the heads of likely voters.


Ron COINED the Constitutional Conservative mantle in the last debate.  A lot of what worked with Rand is stuff Ron said, but Rand made it stick by pushing back against 'Libertarian' etc. whereas Ron just lets it wash over him.  I will say there are people out there who really hate Rand because of media spin, and in a general election that will come up.  But it sure helped him get the GOP behind him.

----------


## AuH20

> During the primaries, ABSOLUTELY. Libertarians are viewed as fringe elements of the party.


Most libertarians aren't high 24/7 and living in a van down by the river. The establishment has created this narrative that libertarians are somehow unworthy of a seat at the table because of the proclivities of their most extreme members. So when the word starts to get thrown around recklessly, collateral damage is wrought, which is the entire design of the word choice.

----------


## sailingaway

I posted this in media spin, but note that Ron, who was tied with Gingrich for the poll is not shown on this front page AOL picture discussing it:

----------


## trey4sports

> Most libertarians aren't high 24/7 and *living in a van down by the river*. The establishment has created this narrative that libertarians are somehow unworthy of a seat at the table because of the proclivities of their most extreme members. So when the word starts to get thrown around recklessly, collateral damage is wrought, which is the entire design of the word choice.

----------


## klamath

> There is time but he needs to crack 10% and come in at least third I would think in Iowa, third in that Bible thumping State would be awesome;imho; especially with such a strong socially conservative field of candidates.


RP did better in this bible thumping state than in the wonderful libertarian, anti religious NH. RP HAS to win one of these states or his chances are done.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Bachmann is like a poor man's version of Pat Buchanan.


Not sure what you mean.  I wouldn't even make a comparison between the two.

----------


## sailingaway

> RP did better in this bible thumping state than in the wonderful libertarian, anti religious NH. RP HAS to win one of these states or his chances are done.


Or come in high. If he's second in NH and second or third in Iowa, or vice versa, he's not 'done'.  The problem is that after that we go south.  If the primary states were reversed with the western states first and he got Montana, Idaho, the Dakotas etc before the south it would make all the difference in messaging.  I think about this every time PPP ( a Dem polling company) polls in Washington or Montana or somewhere and decides freakishly NOT to run their presidential primary poll as they poll the state.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> He should emphasize his paleocon credentials instead of being slurred with the libertarian tag. There was a reason why Rand took the Constitutional Conservative mantle. Politics is a war of words and the opposition will do all in their power to subconsciously plant seeds in the heads of likely voters.


I agree.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

Dumbing down the message isn't going to help, guys.  I wouldn't even know how to "dumb it down."

Beside, I think that's a compromise no matter how you choose to look at it because running on principle and not identity is PART of the message.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

I don't think should get scared by this poll & how it'll affect Ron's chances at the Ames straw poll because if you look at this thread, there's no reason for us to wonder why we can't win it; we've more than enough supporters there & considering the enthusiasm RonPaul supporters have for straw polls & with campaign taking on the expenses, it's just a question of whether we & the campaign can reach all the supporters that are there in the state so people should start calling or find other ways to reach Ron's base in Iowa & maybe even create a few new supporters as well.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> Dumbing down the message isn't going to help, guys.  I wouldn't even know how to "dumb it down."
> 
> Beside, I think that's a compromise no matter how you choose to look at it because running on principle and not identity is PART of the message.


If Ron doesn't state the message in simple terms then the message won't be reaching farther than it already has because intelligence is rare & regular people don't vote based on principles or philosophy, they don't research the candidates, they don't see the larger picture; most of the time they just ask one question over & over again "what can this candidate do for ME?" & if you don't answer that question in simple terms that people can understand then you might as well stop trying to spread the message because speaking complicated technical jargon is NOT going to help spread it anyway.




> He should emphasize his paleocon credentials instead of being slurred with the libertarian tag. There was a reason why Rand took the Constitutional Conservative mantle. Politics is a war of words and the opposition will do all in their power to subconsciously plant seeds in the heads of likely voters.


+1
This video makes this point very nicely

----------


## Imaginos

> Bachmann burns me up anyway.  Like when Rand came out talking about creating a teaparty caucus she came out the next day that she was creating one in the house as if it was her idea.  The sad thing is most republicans I talk to still think it was her idea.


Majority of Re-pukes think Rubio is genuine too.
Re-pukes + Demagogue-crats = Text book definition of THE SHEEPLE.

----------


## acptulsa

> ...most of the time they just ask one question over & over again "what can this candidate do for ME?" & if you don't answer that question in simple terms that people can understand then you might as well stop trying to spread the message because speaking complicated technical jargon is NOT going to help spread it anyway.


Very accurate, imo.

But the question is easy to answer.  He can get government the hell out of your way.  He can cause the federal government to steal less of your resources, cause it to export less of your jobs, and get it the living hell out of our way so WE can get this nation back on track.  That's what he can and will do.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> Very accurate, imo.
> 
> But the question is easy to answer.  He can get government the hell out of your way.  He can cause the federal government to steal less of your resources, cause it to export less of your jobs, and get it the living hell out of our way so WE can get this nation back on track.  That's what he can and will do.


Well, we're not debating over what he can or can't, will or won't do, that should be pretty obvious to almost everyone here but the point is that he needs to tell that to the masses in _simple & uncomplicated language_ otherwise he won't be getting anywhere near the WH.

----------


## acptulsa

> Well, we're not debating over what he can or can't, will or won't do, that should be pretty obvious to almost everyone here but the point is that he needs to tell that to the masses in _simple & uncomplicated language_ otherwise he won't be getting anywhere near the WH.


In the meantime, if I want something done right, I (for one) will do it myself.

----------


## trey4sports

> Or come in high. If he's second in NH and second or third in Iowa, or vice versa, he's not 'done'.  The problem is that after that we go south.  If the primary states were reversed with the western states first and he got Montana, Idaho, the Dakotas etc before the south it would make all the difference in messaging.  I think about this every time PPP ( a Dem polling company) polls in Washington or Montana or somewhere and decides freakishly NOT to run their presidential primary poll as they poll the state.


He has to WIN one of the early 3 states or he's done. Don't care if he comes in 2nd in each of the first 3, without a win early we wont win one contested primary/caucus.

----------


## ForLiberty2012

"69 percent of respondents said they could still be persuaded to support a candidate other than their first choice."

This is the most disturbing sentence in this article... yet the most promising as well.

----------


## Bama Boy

Don't dismiss the poll.  One thing I learned last go round, the polls don't lie.

----------


## acptulsa

> Don't dismiss the poll.  One thing I learned last go round, the polls don't lie.


Heh.

Maybe not, but they sure do 'fudge' it often enough.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

I still don't like this idea of 'dumbing down.'  I mean, what do you really expect out of the man?  I, personally, just don't want to hear him talking like he's schooling a bunch of 10-year olds.  To me, it's wrong to assume everyone except us is stupid.  It's a popular idea, but I really just don't like that approach.

On another note, does anyone know what he was polling immediately before the Iowa caucuses last time?

----------


## rich34

It's just hard to say.  Is it like those polls that the RNC ran last time where they put Ron on the second page so to speak where it said press 6 for more candidates or other candidates?  I'm sure Romney and Bachmann are the first and second choices when asked.  Either way, we have work to do and money to raise.

----------


## sailingaway

> Don't dismiss the poll.  One thing I learned last go round, the polls don't lie.


They didn't predict Ron well in the last election in Iowa, and I doubt they do this time either, whether because it is caucuses or because he has atypical primary voters energized.

However, I agree it shows general reality.  Who is in third place is to argue, not who is in second or first at this moment before Bachmann has any vetting.  Cain collapsed.  I expect Bachmann will go down but will have more substance than Cain with her particular niche, if Palin doesn't get in (and she wasn't included in the poll, was she?) We need to focus on 'reintroducing' Ron.  Because I think a lot of the opinion on him is from inaccurate spin, but that means we have to get the right message out there.

----------


## stefank

While 7 percent say Paul is their top choice for president, he’s also second choice for 12 percent. we just need to convince those twelve to vote for paul and the poll only had 400 voters isn't that a bit low

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Would you F*cking shut up already? I think about 50 people have tried to explain to you that phrasing, debate preparation, and tailoring his message does not equate to "dumbing down."

But then again, you've been trumpeting the same horn for the past two months and we've only slipped in the polls. If we continue with your "do nothing" suggestions we'll likely be down to 5% by Ames.

I'm seriously sick of your "F*ck everyone else if they don't get it" attitude, and I'm sure everyone else is too after seeing *another* disappointing poll.

I can only pray to the heavens that Doug Wead does something miraculous after this, because lord knows we need it.




> Dumbing down the message isn't going to help, guys.  I wouldn't even know how to "dumb it down."
> 
> Beside, I think that's a compromise no matter how you choose to look at it because running on principle and not identity is PART of the message.

----------


## newyearsrevolution08

principles haven't won an election since I've been born.

TV coverage and what is currently the "HOT TOPIC" will win

We have tried a black president and now I think the so called

Progressive dems/repubs want to test the waters on a female president.

----------


## RP Supporter

Not sure if this has been posted, but the poll the same paper released in 2007 at around this time(May):

30% Romney
18% McCain
17% Giuliani
  7% Thompson
  5% Brownback
  4% Huckabee
  4% Tancredo
  1% Cox
  1% Gilmore
  1% Hunter
12% Undecided

Paul was likely not given as a choice, but given the absence of him and as others have pointed out, the weakness of Huckabee, this is pretty meaningless. If Paul can win Ames it will be a game changer. In addition, if he can outraise Bachmann and Cain significantly and invest the money wisely into commercials and ground game I still think we have  a great shot at winning Iowa. Far be it from me to tell the campaign how to operate, but Iowa is crucial. A win there shows all the voters who are favorable to Ron but don't think its worth voting for him because "he can't win" that it is indeed possible.

----------


## sailingaway

And if you would prefer a visual reminder (again missing Ron entirely) here is tracking of the Iowa vote in 2008 elections from May 2007 poll (this same one, I believe) to just before the Caucuses:




http://www.desmoinesregister.com/app...EWS09/71231042

So it is to be taken seriously, but only as a moment in time.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> We need to focus on 'reintroducing' Ron.  Because I think a lot of the opinion on him is from inaccurate spin, but that means we have to get the right message out there.


How do "we" do that? We don't have the resources like the MSM, we can do our little bit here & there which I'm sure most of us are already doing in terms of trying to sell Ron to as many people as we can & so on but there are limits to that so the real "reintroducing" has to come from Ron himself; when he's on TV during debates & interviews, he has the opportunity to reach millions of people simultaneously & this is where he can make the biggest impact by explaining his positions in simple terms & then, "we" the grassroots, can take it from there when it comes to further elaboration, addressing further questions & general consolidation of the support-base but first & foremost people need to hear it from the horse's mouth in simple & comprehensible terms.

Again, with Wead's inclusion, I hope we'll be seeing some solid improvements on that front; I don't think it'd be that hard, Ron's a very intelligent man so if Wead can make Bush Jr. look so good then surely he can do a lot better with Ron.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

I'm going to act as a counterweight to all of the Doug Wead love.

Didn't he say winning CPAC and SRLC would force the media to focus on Ron and the campaign?

Didn't really work out so well. In fact, Fixed News reported this morning, as the very first blurb on Faux and Friends, that Bachmann finished second in some phone poll of 400 people.

H.W. lost his re-election bid.

G.W. won by hanging chads.

I say we let Wead talk to SoCons and Israel Firsters, and bring Woods in for debate prep.

----------


## wgadget

So is it true that this is a poll of 400 Republicans?  This poll means SO MUCH, especially compared to Ron Paul winning the CPAC and the SRLC polls, which was a poll of a couple of thousand Republicans.


Perspective, my friends.

LOL

----------


## VanBummel

The thing that gives me the most hope is this:




> Veteran campaign watchers caution that its early: Candidates fortunes will rise and fall. Indeed, 69 percent of respondents said they could still be persuaded to support a candidate other than their first choice.


I highly doubt there were many Ron Paul supporters in that group.  If the campaign makes the best use possible of it's prime real estate at Ames, Ron still has a chance to take this.

----------


## sailingaway

> How do "we" do that? We don't have the resources like the MSM, we can do our little bit here & there which I'm sure most of us are already doing in terms of trying to sell Ron to as many people as we can & so on but there are limits to that so the real "reintroducing" has to come from Ron himself; when he's on TV during debates & interviews, he has the opportunity to reach millions of people simultaneously & this is where he can make the biggest impact by explaining his positions in simple terms & then, "we" the grassroots, can take it from there when it comes to further elaboration, addressing further questions & general consolidation of the support-base but first & foremost people need to hear it from the horse's mouth in simple & comprehensible terms.
> 
> Again, with Wead's inclusion, I hope we'll be seeing some solid improvements on that front; I don't think it'd be that hard, Ron's a very intelligent man so if Wead can make Bush Jr. look so good then surely he can do a lot better with Ron.


By 'we', I didn't just mean us here, but also the campaign. However, I was thinking of videos with that theme, twittering the old stuff, don't know if 3Liberty and Avaroth would be willing to slightly update a couple of old classics...and focus on getting those on tea party blogs and message boards which sprang up, mostly, AFTER the 2008 campaign was decided, so they didn't see those...

I'm not sure how 'we' do that.  But I'm trying to think of ways.

----------


## Uriah

From print edition of The Des Moines Register

poll of "1,831 Republican and independent and independent voters in Iowa ages 18 or older, of which 400 said they would definitely or probably participate in the February 2012 Republican caucuses. Interviewers contacted individuals randomly selected from the Iowa voter registration list by telephone. The full sample of 1,831 respondents was adjusted for age and sex based on distribution among active Republican and no-party registered voters. Questions asked of the 400 likely Republican caucusgoers have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. Results based on smaller samples of respondents such as by gender or  age have a larger margin of error."



                                      Favorable     Unfavorable     Not Sure
Michelle Bachmann            65%                 12%              23%
Tim Pawlenty                    58%                 13%              29%
Sarah Palin                       58%                  37%               5%
Ron Paul                           53%                  32%             15%
Mitt Romney                     52%                  38%              10%
Herman Cain                     47%                 17%               36%
Newt Gingrich                   46%                  43%               11%
Chris Christie                    45%                  14%               41%
Rudy Guliani                     45%                  44%               11%  
Rick Perry                         43%                   8%                49%
Paul Ryan                         38%                  13%                49%
Rick Santorum                  38%                  17%                45%
Jon Huntsman                   22%                  19%                59%
John Bolton                       21%                  17%                62%
Roy Moore                        14%                   12%                74%
Gary Johnson                    10%                   14%               76%
Buddy Roemer                    8%                   13%               79%
Fred Krager                        4%                    46%               50%

62% of respondents say being a fiscal conservative is more important than a social conservative

Credit to The Des Moines Register

I'll add more info in a few hours. I need to work.

----------


## belian78

Donated....Anyone want to match me?

Dear ****,

 Thank you for your generous donation to the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee. Your contribution to Ron will help fuel the fight to return this country to the principles that made it great. 

Here are your transaction details: 
Donation amount: $50.00 
Transaction date/time: 2011-06-26 16:19:33 
Transaction ID: 292983325 
Thank you, Ron Paul 2012 PCC

----------


## belian78

> Would you F*cking shut up already? I think about 50 people have tried to explain to you that phrasing, debate preparation, and tailoring his message does not equate to "dumbing down."
> 
> But then again, you've been trumpeting the same horn for the past two months and we've only slipped in the polls. If we continue with your "do nothing" suggestions we'll likely be down to 5% by Ames.
> 
> I'm seriously sick of your "F*ck everyone else if they don't get it" attitude, and I'm sure everyone else is too after seeing *another* disappointing poll.
> 
> I can only pray to the heavens that Doug Wead does something miraculous after this, because lord knows we need it.


Myself, I'm getting tired of every post I read from you being able to be summarized as 'we're doomed, its a lost cause unless you listen to me'.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

I'm tired of sitting in 4th or 5th place in every legitimate poll with the same people saying "they don't matter." 

You can go side with college boy over there, who seems to be the resident know-it-all on everything from nutrition to politics. I'm sick of that loser taking valid suggestions and spinning them to support his agenda and criticize.

So please, show me where I've been wrong. Guarantee if you did half of what I said we wouldn't be at 7%. Again. 3 years of name recognition in that state and we're only at 7% and you and a minority don't seem to think this is an issue? Didn't you learn to take the polls seriously last time around?




> Myself, I'm getting tired of every post I read from you being able to be summarized as 'we're doomed, its a lost cause unless you listen to me'.

----------


## acptulsa

I sure remember the pollsters last time around trying publicly to figure out why they were so far off.  Of course, Paul was still He Who Must Not Be Named, so they were mainly talking about how they skewed the hell out of Huckabee.  But I remember.

So, you're both right.  Can you take this argument elsewhere now?  Thanks.

----------


## AuH20

> I'm tired of sitting in 4th or 5th place in every legitimate poll with the same people saying "they don't matter." 
> 
> You can go side with college boy over there, who seems to be the resident know-it-all on everything from nutrition to politics. I'm sick of that loser taking valid suggestions and spinning them to support his agenda and criticize.
> 
> So please, show me where I've been wrong. Guarantee if you did half of what I said we wouldn't be at 7%. Again. 3 years of name recognition in that state and we're only at 7% and you and a minority don't seem to think this is an issue? Didn't you learn to take the polls seriously last time around?


You're right but you should be more polite.

----------


## Billay

> I'm tired of sitting in 4th or 5th place in every legitimate poll with the same people saying "they don't matter." 
> 
> You can go side with college boy over there, who seems to be the resident know-it-all on everything from nutrition to politics. I'm sick of that loser taking valid suggestions and spinning them to support his agenda and criticize.
> 
> So please, show me where I've been wrong. Guarantee if you did half of what I said we wouldn't be at 7%. Again. 3 years of name recognition in that state and we're only at 7% and you and a minority don't seem to think this is an issue? Didn't you learn to take the polls seriously last time around?


People on here don't like truth thats why 9-11 conspiracies play such a big part in some Ron Paul circles.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> I'm tired of sitting in 4th or 5th place in every legitimate poll with the same people saying "they don't matter." 
> 
> You can go side with college boy over there, who seems to be the resident know-it-all on everything from nutrition to politics. I'm sick of that loser taking valid suggestions and spinning them to support his agenda and criticize.
> 
> So please, show me where I've been wrong. Guarantee if you did half of what I said we wouldn't be at 7%. Again. 3 years of name recognition in that state and we're only at 7% and you and a minority don't seem to think this is an issue? Didn't you learn to take the polls seriously last time around?


Talk about a know-it-all.  I think you take the cake on that one.  What's more, you seem to think being in college is some kind of derogatory term.  However, you fail to realize that even people in college can be smart and proactive and sensible, which is what I'm trying to do.  All you're doing is being a know-it-all Debbie Downer perfectionist that can't seem to see the good side of anything.  Do you not recognize the successes of the campaign lately?  The awesome straw poll tent, the hiring of Doug Wead, the Iowa Projects, and the massive presence in both Iowa and NH?  So, really isn't there at least SOME good?  I'm just trying to offer real solutions, and I never said the campaign was perfect.  I admit I don't know that much and reserve harsh criticism, but to you that makes me a know-it-all?  You need a reality check, sir.  I've never said everything was OK, I'm just trying to get people to be sensible and offer real solutions instead of bitching about how bad the campaign is and never, ever seeing any positives.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> People on here don't like truth thats why 9-11 conspiracies play such a big part in some Ron Paul circles.


Do you have a problem with me or what?  I suggest you bashers say it to my face if you get the chance.  In the meantime, STFU.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Myself, I'm getting tired of every post I read from you being able to be summarized as 'we're doomed, its a lost cause unless you listen to me'.


Hear, hear!  That's my whole point, but for some reason the dude just wants to play the "who's a bigger badass" game.  I mean, seriously, get real.

----------


## sailingaway

I think the conversation is deteriorating.

Please don't attack other forum members.





> From print edition of The Des Moines Register
> 
> poll of "1,831 Republican and independent and independent voters in Iowa ages 18 or older, of which 400 said they would definitely or probably participate in the February 2012 Republican caucuses. Interviewers contacted individuals randomly selected from the Iowa voter registration list by telephone. The full sample of 1,831 respondents was adjusted for age and sex based on distribution among active Republican and no-party registered voters. Questions asked of the 400 likely Republican caucusgoers have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. Results based on smaller samples of respondents such as by gender or  age have a larger margin of error."
> 
> 
> 
>                                       Favorable     Unfavorable     Not Sure
> Michelle Bachmann            65%                 12%              23%
> Tim Pawlenty                    58%                 13%              29%
> ...


Thanks.  That makes me feel better.  Ron's favorables have gone way up since right after OBL was caught, and are now higher than Romney's.  Of those running, only Bachmann and Pawlenty beat him, and they are neighbors and were never hit with the level of spin he was hit with.  We can turn this around.

----------


## Billay

> Do you have a problem with me or what?  I suggest you bashers say it to my face if you get the chance.  In the meantime, STFU.


Lol is that a threatening post? Mods give this guy a vacation please.

----------


## sailingaway

> Lol is that a threatening post? Mods give this guy a vacation please.


My comment referred to your reference to not liking truth as well.  Let's just lighten up.  We all want Ron to win.

----------


## Billay

> My comment referred to your reference to not liking truth as well.  Let's just lighten up.  *We all want Ron to win.*



This.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Lol is that a threatening post? Mods give this guy a vacation please.


Not threatening.  Just think it would be better to reserve judgment on people until you meet them face-to-face.

----------


## BUSHLIED

Ron just gave a terrible interview on CSPAN, he said Keynesian or a variation of the term, at least 3 times...the average voter doesn't know what that means...he was asked to size up his opposition and he declined to attack Romney, he just said they are the "status quo..." like he did in the debates...But he says he is in it to WIN the election. Wouldn't really hit Obama, says he is just "average"...never mentioned jobs..why would I donate to the campaign after hearing this? You wouldn't never know he was running for President with an interview like that...says he is leaving it up to his Staff to get the votes...

----------


## svobody

> Ron just gave a terrible interview on CSPAN, he said Keynesian or a variation of the term, at least 3 times...the average voter doesn't know what that means...he was asked to size up his opposition and he declined to attack Romney, he just said they are the "status quo..." like he did in the debates...But he says he is in it to WIN the election. Wouldn't really hit Obama, says he is just "average"...never mentioned jobs..why would I donate to the campaign after hearing this? You wouldn't never know he was running for President with an interview like that...says he is leaving it up to his Staff to get the votes...


well, at least it was on c-span, which means about 250 people were watching it

----------


## rockandrollsouls

This is true. However, no changes, no different results. You'd think someone as smart as Ron would recognize that....probably his largest (and only flaw  ) 

What a catch 22. 




> well, at least it was on c-span, which means about 250 people were watching it

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

A win or a strong second is needed @ Ames... It will put the corporate Media Masters on the meat hook. If they attempt a blackout, it will be too obvious. The advantages of the campaign to completely focus on Ames are momentum, donations, grassroots following, and finally the establishment media.

----------


## parocks

Who is Fred Krager exactly, and why does he have 46% negative?  Higher negatives than anyone else.  Are we sure all this is right?




> From print edition of The Des Moines Register
> 
> poll of "1,831 Republican and independent and independent voters in Iowa ages 18 or older, of which 400 said they would definitely or probably participate in the February 2012 Republican caucuses. Interviewers contacted individuals randomly selected from the Iowa voter registration list by telephone. The full sample of 1,831 respondents was adjusted for age and sex based on distribution among active Republican and no-party registered voters. Questions asked of the 400 likely Republican caucusgoers have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. Results based on smaller samples of respondents such as by gender or  age have a larger margin of error."
> 
> 
> 
>                                       Favorable     Unfavorable     Not Sure
> Michelle Bachmann            65%                 12%              23%
> Tim Pawlenty                    58%                 13%              29%
> ...

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Who is Fred Krager exactly, and why does he have 46% negative?  Higher negatives than anyone else.  Are we sure all this is right?


He's gay.

----------


## parocks

There will be an establishment candidate and a tea party candidate.  If, let's say, Pawlenty wins Iowa, Ron comes in 2nd, Romney wins NH, Ron comes in 2nd, Newt wins SC, Ron comes in 2nd, Ron appears to be the tea party candidate, and the establishment side race is unsettled.  Ron needs to be an acceptable choice to tea party.




> He has to WIN one of the early 3 states or he's done. Don't care if he comes in 2nd in each of the first 3, without a win early we wont win one contested primary/caucus.

----------


## sailingaway

> Ron just gave a terrible interview on CSPAN, he said Keynesian or a variation of the term, at least 3 times...the average voter doesn't know what that means...he was asked to size up his opposition and he declined to attack Romney, he just said they are the "status quo..." like he did in the debates...But he says he is in it to WIN the election. Wouldn't really hit Obama, says he is just "average"...never mentioned jobs..why would I donate to the campaign after hearing this? You wouldn't never know he was running for President with an interview like that...says he is leaving it up to his Staff to get the votes...



People on a different thread really liked the interview. I haven't seen it yet, but people here seem to be taking your opinion, and should know others had different opinions, so I suspect it was at least mixed.

----------


## sailingaway

> He's gay.


He's not just gay he's a gay rights activist running for that purpose with sketchy policy positions on all other issues I've read.  I suspect that won't go over well in Iowa.

----------


## trey4sports

> There will be an establishment candidate and a tea party candidate.  If, let's say, Pawlenty wins Iowa, Ron comes in 2nd, Romney wins NH, Ron comes in 2nd, Newt wins SC, Ron comes in 2nd, Ron appears to be the tea party candidate, and the establishment side race is unsettled.  Ron needs to be an acceptable choice to tea party.


Parocks, if we cannot win the Ames Straw poll which is an event tailored to enthusiastic supporters and where turnout wins the election then i dont think we have a chance to win statewide where our greatest strength (ability to turnout our base) is neutralized. 

I understand your point about Ron being the Tea Party alternative to Romney but to have that mantle he would have to beat Bachmann and right now SHE is being labeled the alternative to Romney. 

On top of the points ive mentioned you fail to realize that the meme the media has been playing up is that Ron _CANNOT WIN_ a primary. If we do not win early at least one of the first 3 then the "fringe" label will be so strong we simply wont be able to rebound.  

I'm not trying to be derogatory but we have a very tight window to move up a tier into "contender" status and that window is from now until the SC primary and it looks like our BEST chance of winning is Iowa which starts with winning an event tailored to our strengths, the Ames Iowa Straw Poll. As i've said before out of all the things we can do to help ourself winning the Ames Straw Poll is the EASIEST of them, and my honest belief is that if we cannot win that event, we cannot win statewide.

----------


## sailingaway

> Parocks, if we cannot win the Ames Straw poll which is an event tailored to enthusiastic supporters and where turnout wins the election then i dont think we have a chance to win statewide where our greatest strength (ability to turnout our base) is neutralized. 
> 
> I understand your point about Ron being the Tea Party alternative to Romney but to have that mantle he would have to beat Bachmann and right now SHE is being labeled the alternative to Romney. 
> 
> On top of the points ive mentioned you fail to realize that the meme the media has been playing up is that Ron _CANNOT WIN_ a primary. If we do not win early at least one of the first 3 then the "fringe" label will be so strong we simply wont be able to rebound.  
> 
> I'm not trying to be derogatory but we have a very tight window to move up a tier into "contender" status and that window is from now until the SC primary and it looks like our BEST chance of winning is Iowa which starts with winning an event tailored to our strengths, the Ames Iowa Straw Poll. As i've said before out of all the things we can do to help ourself winning the Ames Straw Poll is the EASIEST of them, and my honest belief is that if we cannot win that event, we cannot win statewide.


I'm not sure the straw poll is the absolute telling sign, because more months to identify supporters has to be worth something. However, we need a strong showing, and we really want first, for the media and impact on people's expectations.

----------


## parocks

> He's gay.


I started looking at the des moines newspaper website.  Saw that they identified him as gay rights in the call.

Pretty good poll looking at 1st and 2nd.
first plus second

bachmann - 40%
romney - 33%
cain - 20%
paul - 19%
pawlenty - 18%
gingrich - 12%
santorum - 8%
huntsman - 4%

----------


## parocks

I don't greatly disagree with what you're saying.  I'm not arguing that winning a state is a bad thing.

I'm just saying that the race will shape up to be a tea party conservative vs an establishment rino.

I picked those specific people we lost to, to show that we can lose to 3 different establishment rinos
while being the tea party frontrunner.

You mention Bachmann.  In my scenario, we weren't beaten by Bachmann.  With the results that I mentioned, Cain would be out, or 
on the way out, and his supporters would be looking at "the" tea party choice, which would be Ron Paul.  Bachmann would be
on the way out as well, and her supporters would be looking at Ron Paul.   Tea Party organizations will be rallying at this time to the winner of the
tea party primary, which would be Ron Paul.

I would take any analysis that says the tea party would flock to Ron Paul under my scenario over any analysis that concludes that favorable treatment from the media will result from one outcome and not another.  I don't buy any argument that says that the media can't cover up an Ames Straw Poll victory, that the media must treat Ron Paul as a front-runner under such circumstances.

I do think we could win the Ames Straw Poll.  We may, we may not.  Our greatest strength is our ability to get extremely enthused and motivated about something that is meaningless in a lot of ways.  I would like it if the media treated us fairly and gave us front runner status for winning Ames though.




> Parocks, if we cannot win the Ames Straw poll which is an event tailored to enthusiastic supporters and where turnout wins the election then i dont think we have a chance to win statewide where our greatest strength (ability to turnout our base) is neutralized. 
> 
> I understand your point about Ron being the Tea Party alternative to Romney but to have that mantle he would have to beat Bachmann and right now SHE is being labeled the alternative to Romney. 
> 
> On top of the points ive mentioned you fail to realize that the meme the media has been playing up is that Ron _CANNOT WIN_ a primary. If we do not win early at least one of the first 3 then the "fringe" label will be so strong we simply wont be able to rebound.  
> 
> I'm not trying to be derogatory but we have a very tight window to move up a tier into "contender" status and that window is from now until the SC primary and it looks like our BEST chance of winning is Iowa which starts with winning an event tailored to our strengths, the Ames Iowa Straw Poll. As i've said before out of all the things we can do to help ourself winning the Ames Straw Poll is the EASIEST of them, and my honest belief is that if we cannot win that event, we cannot win statewide.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> I started looking at the des moines newspaper website.  Saw that they identified him as gay rights in the call.
> 
> Pretty good poll looking at 1st and 2nd.
> first plus second
> 
> bachmann - 40%
> romney - 33%
> cain - 20%
> paul - 19%
> ...


Wait, what are those percentages you put up?  They don't add up to 100 and I have no idea what they are for.

----------


## parocks

First choice plus second choice.

In Ron Pauls case, he was the first choice of 7%, the second choice of 12%, for a total of 19%




> Wait, what are those percentages you put up?  They don't add up to 100 and I have no idea what they are for.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> By 'we', I didn't just mean us here, but also the campaign. However, I was thinking of videos with that theme, twittering the old stuff, don't know if 3Liberty and Avaroth would be willing to slightly update a couple of old classics...and focus on getting those on tea party blogs and message boards which sprang up, mostly, AFTER the 2008 campaign was decided, so they didn't see those...
> 
> I'm not sure how 'we' do that.  But I'm trying to think of ways.


Well, I'm not against any of that but my point was that that is only going to help so much but the real breakthrough will only come when Ron starts presenting himself in a way that ordinary citizens can identify with & understand his message; if that doesn't happen then well.......




> I've never said everything was OK, I'm just trying to get people to be sensible and offer real solutions instead of bitching about how bad the campaign is and never, ever seeing any positives.


The suggestion many people've made repeatedly is that Ron should simplify his message to reach a larger audience & that is THE real solution if not the only one but you always oppose it even though none of us are asking Ron to change the message, we just want him to simplify it because obviously most voters are NOT understanding it & the stagnant poll-numbers & whatever LITTLE growth we've'd over FOUR years tells us just that. 




> Ron just gave a terrible interview on CSPAN, he said Keynesian or a variation of the term, at least 3 times...the average voter doesn't know what that means...he was asked to size up his opposition and he declined to attack Romney, he just said they are the "status quo..." like he did in the debates...But he says he is in it to WIN the election. Wouldn't really hit Obama, says he is just "average"...never mentioned jobs..why would I donate to the campaign after hearing this? You wouldn't never know he was running for President with an interview like that...says he is leaving it up to his Staff to get the votes...


Actually, he gave Obama a "poor" grade but I agree on the overall point that he should point out Romneycare in Romney's case, PA & support for ME-wars in the case of Bachmann, Fed chairmanship & TARP bailouts when it comes to Cain & so on & expose these people rather than stopping at calling them "status quo candidates".

I agree he doesn't seem to have the fervor that a presidential candidate should exhibit, maybe it's because he's not a power-hungry authoritarian like others but he needs to realize that only HE can win this thing to save the country, he needs to attract new voters through his interviews & debates, the grassroots & the campaign can only play a "support-role", he can't count on them to win a national election, not under present environment anyway.




> This is true. However, no changes, no different results. You'd think someone as smart as Ron would recognize that....probably his largest (and only flaw  ) 
> 
> What a catch 22.


I think he doesn't know what to say, he has his own way of thinking & he can't seem to bring it down to the level of the ordinary people; he just needs someone who understands people & the political communication process & hopefully we've the man for that job.




> People on a different thread really liked the interview. I haven't seen it yet, but people here seem to be taking your opinion, and should know others had different opinions, so I suspect it was at least mixed.


It wasn't rank bad, it was average, just the usual stuff you expect from Ron, some good parts but then a lot of rambling & jumping from one issue to another & apart from simplifying the message, one thing he REALLY needs to do is to SLOW DOWN, the pace at which he speaks, it's almost impossible for a regular person to understand him, especially on a lot of the issues which a regular person has no or very little knowledge.




> Parocks, if we cannot win the Ames Straw poll which is an event tailored to enthusiastic supporters and where turnout wins the election then i dont think we have a chance to win statewide where our greatest strength (ability to turnout our base) is neutralized. 
> 
> As i've said before out of all the things we can do to help ourself winning the Ames Straw Poll is the EASIEST of them, and my honest belief is that if we cannot win that event, we cannot win statewide.


Ditto. If we don't win Ames then our chances would be pretty much dead & buried.

----------


## acptulsa

> Ditto. If we don't win Ames then our chances would be pretty much dead & buried.


Oh, well.  Either you get to quantify how we're all that different from McCain last round, or I'm not inclined to believe your tripe.  Sorry.

----------


## Napoleon's Shadow

This is actually very encouraging considering where we were in 2007. Ron has more money now than he did and there is a professional crew in Iowa now that is working hard to win. Ron is getting more media attention now than he ever has. 

We're on the upswing for sure!

----------


## acptulsa

> This is actually very encouraging considering where we were in 2007. Ron has more money now than he did and there is a professional crew in Iowa now that is working hard to win. Ron is getting more media attention now than he ever has. 
> 
> We're on the upswing for sure!


And when you consider the healthy margin by which he and we bettered the poll results in 2008, I'm inclined to consider 'encouraging' an understatement.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> And when you consider the healthy margin by which he and we bettered the poll results in 2008, I'm inclined to consider 'encouraging' an understatement.


My sentiments exactly.  Of course some things need to be worked out, and contrary to popular belief, I wouldn't be against Wead working with Ron at all.  I am hopeful for the future, and I don't think it's all doom and gloom like some people seem to.  Some people here are just depressing.

----------


## trey4sports

> I don't greatly disagree with what you're saying.  I'm not arguing that winning a state is a bad thing.
> 
> I'm just saying that the race will shape up to be a tea party conservative vs an establishment rino.
> 
> I picked those specific people we lost to, to show that we can lose to 3 different establishment rinos
> while being the tea party frontrunner.
> 
> You mention Bachmann.  In my scenario, we weren't beaten by Bachmann. * With the results that I mentioned, Cain would be out, or 
> on the way out, and his supporters would be looking at "the" tea party choice, which would be Ron Paul.  Bachmann would be
> ...



I understand and that there is going to have to be a tea party alternative going up against Romney and that will need to be the slot we pick up, however, the media would write off our campaign with 3 or 4 2nd place finishes and continue to play the "fringe" label whereas if it were bachmann or cain they would hype them up as a tea party alternative to Romney, that is why I say a WIN early is an absolute MUST. We will not get the benefit of the doubt.

Secondly, YES, they could write an Ames Iowa Straw poll very easily, however, my point is that if we dont have the organizational strength to win Ames then we cant win statewide where our greatest asset (our ability to turnout our base) is neutralized because there are going to be more people voting than just the enthused base. The only thing we can do to turn our fortunes from fringe to contender IMHO is win an early state, and right now our best chance is probably Iowa, and whats one thing we can do to help ourselves there? Win the straw poll!

----------


## Bossobass

*



			
				Iowa Has More Registered Voters than Citizens of Voting Age
			
		

*

Bosso

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> Oh, well.  Either you get to quantify how we're all that different from McCain last round, or I'm not inclined to believe your tripe.  Sorry.


McCain was an establishment candidate with big bucks & MSM backing him, Ron is NOT, how can you even make such an unrealistic comparison? In fact, not only does Ron NOT have the establishment, big bucks & MSM on his side but they're all actually more or less working AGAINST him which makes things DOUBLY difficult.

Further, Ron is known to win straw polls & if he couldn't win Ames then that'll give MSM another strong reason to say that he's not electable, he's fringe, etc etc but if he wins, they'll probably overlook it & say it was because Romney wasn't serious about Ames & Ron always does well in straw polls, etc etc so a win is a MUST if this campaign is to go anywhere because Ames will probably be the last biggest launching-pad that Ron will have to make any sort of impact on changing people's minds & making at least some, if not all, of them to reconsider about his electability & ability to be a national player. Of course, it's perfectly POSSIBLE that he may lose Ames & go on to become president but it's not very PROBABLE & you can sweep reality under the rug all you want like most of us here did in 2008 & hoped that something miraculous would happen & Ron would soar in the polls & become president eventually but that'll remain a fantasy if we lose Ames.




> I understand and that there is going to have to be a tea party alternative going up against Romney and that will need to be the slot we pick up, however, the media would write off our campaign with 3 or 4 2nd place finishes and continue to play the "fringe" label whereas if it were bachmann or cain they would hype them up as a tea party alternative to Romney, that is why I say a WIN early is an absolute MUST. We will not get the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> Secondly, YES, they could write an Ames Iowa Straw poll very easily, however, my point is that if we dont have the organizational strength to win Ames then we cant win statewide where our greatest asset (our ability to turnout our base) is neutralized because there are going to be more people voting than just the enthused base. The only thing we can do to turn our fortunes from fringe to contender IMHO is win an early state, and right now our best chance is probably Iowa, and whats one thing we can do to help ourselves there? Win the straw poll!


+1

It seems some of us haven't learned from the last election that if we really want to have any semblance of a chance of winning the GOP nomination then we ought to remain objective about things & not engage in fantasies like we did last time.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Actpulsa and PaulConventionWV think every poll is bunk and we'll always perform better than they say (when we actually have yet to.) 

"I'm convinced we'll do better than the 10 polls that put Ron at 7% they are all trash!" 
"Everyone who doesn't get it is stupid I'm convinced we'll magically perform significantly better than every reliable, scientific poll has put us at!"

Get real, guys. I'm beginning to think this stance is one of laziness, not confidence. 

We're in for a demoralizing defeat at Ames unless something changes, and you can bet when it happens (and it will because the campaign isn't tailoring Ron or his delivery) I'll be rubbing it in BOTH of your faces. 

For being part of a movement that is "awoken" politically, you guys sure are "sheeple" in the game aspect of it all. So sick of both of you fighting and putting down any valid suggestion for progress.

The misinformation that we are "okay" right now at this stage in the game is damaging. It keeps everyone off their guard when they could be working harder.

----------


## libertygrl

> Bachmann burns me up anyway.  Like when Rand came out talking about creating a teaparty caucus she came out the next day that she was creating one in the house as if it was her idea.  The sad thing is most republicans I talk to still think it was her idea.


You have no idea how much she has now become the darling of the tea party people.  It's so sickening how they fell for her.  I've been in a heated discussion about her foreign policy beliefs  ("If we don't support Israel God will curse us")  vs. vs. Ron Paul's.   I got called both an anti-semite and a Libertarian/anti-zionist kool aide drinker!  (the guy who called me an anti-semite was supposedly trying to "save me)."

----------


## Bossobass

Some facts, FWIW:

McCain was broke and had to borrow money to pay his debts as well as sign up for matching funds, just to stay alive, before his "December Miracle".

McCain was never a front runner except in the media.

From Ames 07:



> Scratch #10 McCain. It won't be immediately, but McCain will be out by November or December when he sees that he just won't have the money to compete in the January - March primaries, which will require $5-$10 million minimum in the bank without bills by December 31.


Anyone who actually believes that McCain won the anti-war and gay vote in NH requires a larger funnel for his kool aid drip.

As posted above:
*Iowa Has More Registered Voters than Citizens of Voting Age*

The 08 Iowa vote count required the longest time in history behind locked doors with armed guards at the doors.

*Federal Farm Subsidies Are the Crack Cocaine of U.S. Politics*




> A politician's fate in Iowa usually depends directly on his or her support of farm subsidies: Iowa received 8.5% of all U.S. farm subsidies from 1995 to 2009, the second highest recipient in the nation. Ethanol and corn are top Iowa farm crops.


Huntsman is skipping Ames because, as he admitted:




> "I'm not competing in Iowa for a reason. I don't believe in subsidies that prop up corn, soybeans and ethanol."


So, he's got a down pat reason for a poor showing in Ames that he can use to his advantage elsewhere in the campaign. Of course, the real reason is that Huntsman is a virtual candidate propped up by media BS and with zero actual support.

Romney is skipping Ames because he's a pure and simple panderer who will blurt that he loves farm subsidies to every Iowan you put him in front of, so he must stay away to avoid more of the "hypocrite" label.

Anyone who believes Iowans don't know who RP is needs a fire hose to administer their kool aid drip.

Mainstream religion is said to matter to Iowa voters, but Romney won Ames last time and he's a Mormon. Iowans are mostly anti-war, but Romney, who tried to wield the super hawk sword against RP in the debates won Ames.

Having traveled to Iowa 3 times and run an Iowa phone bank in 07, I found the politics to be extremely corrupt. I most certainly believe the Iowa polls are rigged and their elections results are positively rigged. Anyone who believes the vote count in Iowa is sacrosanct, please show me the ballots so that I may count them myself, or show me what the mechanism is for a valid recount.

Folks who said then and are repeating now that the polls and vote count and the media are all fair and beyond reproach is really just the silliest of pitiable Americans.

Bosso

----------


## parocks

Again, I'm not trying to argue against winning the straw poll or the Iowa caucus.

The media will be trying to portray Ron Paul as fringe no matter the outcome. 

We're talking about the tea party here.  The tea party doesn't care what the media says.  The tea party is against the establishment candidate and the media backs the establishment candidate.  The tea party is not going to be saying "we're not going to support Ron Paul because the media says he's fringe".  After all, in my scenario, we would have been the top tea party candidate in all those primaries.  And the other tea party candidates would be dropping out, and all tea party activity would be going to us.  Media is irrelevant.

The tea party will support the tea party candidate, and the media will support the establishment candidate.  If Ron Paul wins, the media will call it a fluke.  Twice, 2 flukes.
Key is to make sure that the tea party thinks Ron Paul is "one of us". 




> I understand and that there is going to have to be a tea party alternative going up against Romney and that will need to be the slot we pick up, however, the media would write off our campaign with 3 or 4 2nd place finishes and continue to play the "fringe" label whereas if it were bachmann or cain they would hype them up as a tea party alternative to Romney, that is why I say a WIN early is an absolute MUST. We will not get the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> Secondly, YES, they could write an Ames Iowa Straw poll very easily, however, my point is that if we dont have the organizational strength to win Ames then we cant win statewide where our greatest asset (our ability to turnout our base) is neutralized because there are going to be more people voting than just the enthused base. The only thing we can do to turn our fortunes from fringe to contender IMHO is win an early state, and right now our best chance is probably Iowa, and whats one thing we can do to help ourselves there? Win the straw poll!

----------


## sailingaway

> Some facts, FWIW:
> 
> McCain was broke and had to borrow money to pay his debts as well as sign up for matching funds, just to stay alive, before his "December Miracle".
> 
> McCain was never a front runner except in the media.
> 
> From Ames 07:
> 
> 
> ...


That's no reason.  Virtually NO ONE believes in ethanol subsidies of those who ARE competing.

----------


## Badger Paul

_"It keeps everyone off their guard when they could be working harder. "_

The only thing you seem working hard at is writing nasty, defeatist posts. What else did you do for the campaign today?

I don't know of anyone who thinks "we've got this in the bag" and if they do they should have a firehose turned on them. However, to simply say we're doomed no matter what we do or how hard we work is pretty damn silly as well. Considering we have more organization, more endorsements and more visits by RP in the state than we did four years ago and higher in the polls for that matter.

How 'bout this: We have a chance to do well in Ames (top three) but we have to work hard of the next month and half to realize it. There, seems pretty straight forward. I think most can agree with that.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

I keep hearing "changes are being made" and I already sunk $2500 into the official campaign and another sum into other projects and none of it is translating into results.

It's not defeatist. Let me see some progress. I deserve it, as do many others, that consistently sink money into a source that hasn't a clue what to do with it.

It's a piss-poor investment at this point. Three years of name recognition, a f-ton of money, and countless televised interviews gets us 7% in Iowa. It's time the campaign and Ron swallow the bitter pill, realize this fact, and start playing politics. That includes debate prepping him.

Until I see some sign of change or dramatically different poll numbers I'm not giving another penny. They aren't doing a thing with it.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

Very fair assessment. Only problem is the grassroots can't dress Ron. They can't speak well for him at debates. That's on him and the campaign, and that's what matters most. The best "work" we can do is to make a mass push for the campaign to address these issues. Otherwise, we're dead in the water.

How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well. Yea, she's a scumbag and a sleeze-ball but she can mask it. No matter how honest and good Ron is, if he speaks like he does it's going to turn people off.

It's a central point to the campaign, really. We've been fighting for freedom. You can't "make" someone change you can't force them to do something different. On that note, if they won't voluntarily address glaring issues I'm going to voluntarily keep my money, time, and effort. 

Again, no amount of trumpeting, converting, donations, or effort I put forth can make up for the fact Ron and the campaign are not hitting homeruns with the basics that matter. The grassroots cannot compensate for that.

Long story short, *If the campaign and Ron want my support they should at least put forth half the effort I am. At this point I feel like I'm trying to win it harder than him and Benton....and that's not bloody right.*




> [I]
> How 'bout this: We have a chance to do well in Ames (top three) but we have to work hard of the next month and half to realize it. There, seems pretty straight forward. I think most can agree with that.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Actpulsa and PaulConventionWV think every poll is bunk and we'll always perform better than they say (when we actually have yet to.) 
> 
> "I'm convinced we'll do better than the 10 polls that put Ron at 7% they are all trash!" 
> "Everyone who doesn't get it is stupid I'm convinced we'll magically perform significantly better than every reliable, scientific poll has put us at!"
> 
> Get real, guys. I'm beginning to think this stance is one of laziness, not confidence. 
> 
> We're in for a demoralizing defeat at Ames unless something changes, and you can bet when it happens (and it will because the campaign isn't tailoring Ron or his delivery) I'll be rubbing it in BOTH of your faces. 
> 
> ...


I never said the polls were bunk.  I think they are real, and I think we need to work on them, but I am for offering REAL solutions.  So far, you have offered nothing except doom and gloom, so you don't really have much of a reason to rub anything in anyone's face.  You can do that when we lose and I'll be like "Yeah, you sure did say we were doomed!"  Good job, buddy.  Keep up the negative nothings.

----------


## trey4sports

The first real test of the campaign will be Ames, R&R Souls, wait until Ames to make a judgement. That really is the first test of the campaigns ability. If they don't win feel free to offer some harsh criticism but until then lets give them the benefit.

----------


## AuH20

> Very fair assessment. Only problem is the grassroots can't dress Ron. They can't speak well for him at debates. That's on him and the campaign, and that's what matters most. The best "work" we can do is to make a mass push for the campaign to address these issues. Otherwise, we're dead in the water.
> 
> How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well. Yea, she's a scumbag and a sleeze-ball but she can mask it. No matter how honest and good Ron is, if he speaks like he does it's going to turn people off.
> 
> It's a central point to the campaign, really. We've been fighting for freedom. You can't "make" someone change you can't force them to do something different. On that note, if they won't voluntarily address glaring issues I'm going to voluntarily keep my money, time, and effort. 
> 
> Again, no amount of trumpeting, converting, donations, or effort I put forth can make up for the fact Ron and the campaign are not hitting homeruns with the basics that matter. The grassroots cannot compensate for that.
> 
> Long story short, *If the campaign and Ron want my support they should at least put forth half the effort I am. At this point I feel like I'm trying to win it harder than him and Benton....and that's not bloody right.*


A couple months back, they had a  interview with conservative voters who were discouraged that there were no NEW FACES galvanizing enthusiasm and touching on issues that matter to them. That's what we're up against. Ron is considered old hat and is not the best at outlining specific solutions in the most coherent manner.

----------


## AuH20

> Very fair assessment. Only problem is the grassroots can't dress Ron. They can't speak well for him at debates. That's on him and the campaign, and that's what matters most. The best "work" we can do is to make a mass push for the campaign to address these issues. Otherwise, we're dead in the water.
> 
> How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well. Yea, she's a scumbag and a sleeze-ball but she can mask it. No matter how honest and good Ron is, if he speaks like he does it's going to turn people off.
> 
> It's a central point to the campaign, really. We've been fighting for freedom. You can't "make" someone change you can't force them to do something different. On that note, if they won't voluntarily address glaring issues I'm going to voluntarily keep my money, time, and effort. 
> 
> Again, no amount of trumpeting, converting, donations, or effort I put forth can make up for the fact Ron and the campaign are not hitting homeruns with the basics that matter. The grassroots cannot compensate for that.
> 
> Long story short, *If the campaign and Ron want my support they should at least put forth half the effort I am. At this point I feel like I'm trying to win it harder than him and Benton....and that's not bloody right.*


And another thing, at this advanced age Ron doesn't project that alpha male image you need to draw votes.

----------


## SamuraisWisdom

> Very fair assessment. Only problem is the grassroots can't dress Ron. They can't speak well for him at debates. That's on him and the campaign, and that's what matters most. The best "work" we can do is to make a mass push for the campaign to address these issues. Otherwise, we're dead in the water.
> 
> How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well. Yea, she's a scumbag and a sleeze-ball but she can mask it. No matter how honest and good Ron is, if he speaks like he does it's going to turn people off.
> 
> It's a central point to the campaign, really. We've been fighting for freedom. You can't "make" someone change you can't force them to do something different. On that note, if they won't voluntarily address glaring issues I'm going to voluntarily keep my money, time, and effort. 
> 
> Again, no amount of trumpeting, converting, donations, or effort I put forth can make up for the fact Ron and the campaign are not hitting homeruns with the basics that matter. The grassroots cannot compensate for that.
> 
> Long story short, *If the campaign and Ron want my support they should at least put forth half the effort I am. At this point I feel like I'm trying to win it harder than him and Benton....and that's not bloody right.*


My sentiments exactly, especially the bold part.  I've been on the fence about donating to the campaign thus far, but money's tight, and if Ron isn't willing to make an effort to shore up his end of the campaign then I'm not going to give him my money.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

I'll wait 'till after Ames, but my gut is telling me unless something is done now we'll lose it, and by the time that comes to pass it will be too late. But again, you have to understand even if Ron wins Ames...or even comes in top 3....it doesn't change the fact there is much of the race to go....and sooner or later his delivery must change so people understand him. There's just no way around it...*eventually, it will come back to bite him even if we can get by for the time being.*

I understand Ron is perceived as old, or that the field is perceived as having "no new ideas." However, addressing this is within Ron's, and the campaigns power.* He can alter his body language, delivery, and dress. He can speak better and more concisely. Consequently, he'd have the opportunity to showcase his unique, original, and effective ideas along with his energized base.*

You know, you have to dress the part in addition to speaking it. People have to understand you...they have to be able to sit in a room and listen to a 30 second soundbyte without getting confused or frustrated.

It's the one thing that doesn't cost money to fix, has the greatest impact, yet it goes untouched and it's a shame and painful to watch. Every single poll that comes out is a massive slap in the face and I'm over it.

----------


## BUSHLIED

> I'll wait 'till after Ames, but my gut is telling me unless something is done now we'll lose it, and by the time that comes to pass it will be too late. But again, you have to understand even if Ron wins Ames...or even comes in top 3....it doesn't change the fact there is much of the race to go....and sooner or later his delivery must change so people understand him. There's just no way around it...*eventually, it will come back to bite him even if we can get by for the time being.*
> 
> I understand Ron is perceived as old, or that the field is perceived as having "no new ideas." However, addressing this is within Ron's, and the campaigns power.* He can alter his body language, delivery, and dress. He can speak better and more concisely. Consequently, he'd have the opportunity to showcase his unique, original, and effective ideas along with his energized base.*
> 
> You know, you have to dress the part in addition to speaking it. People have to understand you...they have to be able to sit in a room and listen to a 30 second soundbyte without getting confused or frustrated.
> 
> It's the one thing that doesn't cost money to fix, has the greatest impact, yet it goes untouched and it's a shame and painful to watch. Every single poll that comes out is a massive slap in the face and I'm over it.


I'm with you on this. Sadly, I don't think Ron is going to change, seriously...he is stuck in his ways...it would be a pleasant surprise. Come on Ron do it for the children!

----------


## The Moravian

I totally understand the problems about Dr Paul's speaking, clarity and delivery, and cringe every time he falls into one of the media's traps during an interview or a debate. Unfortunately he will be slyly attacked more than any other candidate, so he has to be twice as good at answering questions as the others. 

But what I want to challenge us about is that we also need to be that much better at this than the supporters of other candidates. I constantly hear and read statements from supporters that are many times more foolish than Dr Paul's worst "gaffs". I made some gaffs myself when I ran for state legislature last year, so I know how easy it is to say something incoherent when the camera is rolling and you're on the spot. But if we can't speak logically when talking to a few people or writing something on a blog, why do we expect Paul to do much better when asked an underhanded question on live television. 

So, just as Ron needs to work on speaking clearly and succinctly, so do each of us. After all, we will need to canvass door-to-door in order to win the Iowa straw poll and the early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as the other states later on. That is exactly what was missing last time, and we need to do more canvassing than the other campaigns, because we have more obstacles to overcome in getting our message out to the public. 

I canvassed in January 2008 in Washington State, along with many other people, but there were many more people willing to march and wave signs than canvass, which I think was true across the country. Everything got started too late and we weren't experienced at canvassing and we didn't have the voter information needed to be effective at our task. But this time the campaign is on top of these problems. This past Saturday, June 25th, was the first day of canvassing in Iowa for the Straw Poll, and Iowa director Steve Bierfeldt has a targeted voter list that they are using, so it has already begun and the campaign is doing what is necessary to win this time. 

So, we can all prepare ourselves by practicing our messages, getting them down to 60 seconds or 30 seconds, really training ourselves to do what we need Dr Paul to do on stage amongst the hyenas and vultures.

----------


## newyearsrevolution08

Agreed canvassing is where it is at. I actually was a d2d sales manager for a company. I am actually going to be running the fresno d2d campaign efforts and actually holding people accountable for their voter walk sheets. No one canvassed last go around. I KNOW how hard it is to go up to a door, knock and then TALK. You think it is easy BUT go out and try it.

See how many NO'S it takes to discourage you.  I have knocked thousands of doors whether selling or campaigning and could care less about someone yelling, cussing, swinging at me BUT I will get my message out there. Worst they can say is NO, worste they can do is grab a gun and shoot ya lol.

d2d is where it is at especially if you are from the neighborhood you are knocking. Don't be scared, you are part of the block and with that COMES acceptance. Just don't talk about party affiliation BUT talk about the constitution itself and getting our liberties,rights and freedoms back (all 3 work when talking).

Biggest mistake is d2d knocking WITH ron paul gear on. Big mistake, it is best to campaign as a republican, as a democrat as a surveyer as a ANYTHING but someone dressed head to toe in ron paul gear. Or best yet knock as YOURSELF

Hi I'm jeff from down the street and just got done speaking with tom a couple doors down, you know tom right?

it flows from there....

----------


## BUSHLIED

> I totally understand the problems about Dr Paul's speaking, clarity and delivery, and cringe every time he falls into one of the media's traps during an interview or a debate. Unfortunately he will be slyly attacked more than any other candidate, so he has to be twice as good at answering questions as the others. 
> 
> But what I want to challenge us about is that we also need to be that much better at this than the supporters of other candidates. I constantly hear and read statements from supporters that are many times more foolish than Dr Paul's worst "gaffs". I made some gaffs myself when I ran for state legislature last year, so I know how easy it is to say something incoherent when the camera is rolling and you're on the spot. But if we can't speak logically when talking to a few people or writing something on a blog, why do we expect Paul to do much better when asked an underhanded question on live television. 
> 
> So, just as Ron needs to work on speaking clearly and succinctly, so do each of us. After all, we will need to canvass door-to-door in order to win the Iowa straw poll and the early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as the other states later on. That is exactly what was missing last time, and we need to do more canvassing than the other campaigns, because we have more obstacles to overcome in getting our message out to the public. 
> 
> I canvassed in January 2008 in Washington State, along with many other people, but there were many more people willing to march and wave signs than canvass, which I think was true across the country. Everything got started too late and we weren't experienced at canvassing and we didn't have the voter information needed to be effective at our task. But this time the campaign is on top of these problems. This past Saturday, June 25th, was the first day of canvassing in Iowa for the Straw Poll, and Iowa director Steve Bierfeldt has a targeted voter list that they are using, so it has already begun and the campaign is doing what is necessary to win this time. 
> 
> So, we can all prepare ourselves by practicing our messages, getting them down to 60 seconds or 30 seconds, really training ourselves to do what we need Dr Paul to do on stage amongst the hyenas and vultures.


i agree that we are 'messengers' and that we should all continue to learn the issues and speak well to our fellow voters. It's not easy to be on live TV but this is Presidential politics in the 21st Century and any candidate that expects to WIN, must be a good public speaker and know how to tailor their message to each respective audience.  What good is the message if you don't articulate it well? Ron ranks last out of the candidates in this category (image and public speaking) and one of the main reasons Michele has jumped to the top of the heap and is now the 'tea party' candidate. She worked to brand herself as the 'tea-party' candidate. She rails against Obama...

anyway, this primary is the establishment vs. the 'tea-party.' Ron is clearly not going to win over many establishment voters. His natural constituency are 'tea-party' voters and gop-leaning independents. With Bachman and Cain currently in the race, he has to work hard to reach them. Let's hope Cain's fund-raising numbers are sub-par and the media starts their hack jobs labeling Cain as second-tier or without 'legs.'  Then maybe Cain supporters will look elsewhere. Then it boils down to Bachmann vs. Paul for the heart of the 'tea-party.' Paul's next fund-raising ticker could be sometime about the 'tea-party' or against Bachmann...it should be let's fill up this 'cup of tea.' and show Michele that we are the tea party or something like that....

It is important to point out that the Democrats and other groups are buying ads attacking Romney and the Republicans. I doubt they are going to waste money attacking Ron Paul. Therefore, we have to capitalize on this and grab voters who are dissatisfied with the field and/or have lost interest. If Ron is gaining in favor-ability but not polling, there is a gap between people who like him but won't vote for him. This gap has got to be shortened. He has to change his image quickly before Michele solidifies her herself as the one to battle Romney for conservatives. Quite frankly, the strategy is that simple right now. Go after Romney for his lack of conservative credentials, flip-flopping, health-care bill, not signing the pro-life pledge...that's what the conservatives want to hear. That is what is up in the air for this primary presently.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> Only problem is the grassroots can't dress Ron. They can't speak well for him at debates. That's on him and the campaign, and that's what matters most. The best "work" we can do is to make a mass push for the campaign to address these issues. Otherwise, we're dead in the water.
> 
> How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well. Yea, she's a scumbag and a sleeze-ball but she can mask it. No matter how honest and good Ron is, if he speaks like he does it's going to turn people off. 
> 
> Again, no amount of trumpeting, converting, donations, or effort I put forth can make up for the fact Ron and the campaign are not hitting homeruns with the basics that matter. The grassroots cannot compensate for that.


+1

This is what some of the people don't seem to realise. That it is extremely time-consuming to convert people through grassroots, I mean it took us 4 freaking years to go from 2-3% to 8-10%, this just is NOT how you WIN national elections. The real impetus can only come from Ron when he starts getting Joes & Janes to realize that he has the answers & for them to understand that, he needs to simplify his message; once they understand his message, they'll talk to other RonPaul supporters & this is where the grassroots will come in helping the newcomers understand the liberty message IN DEPTH. Ron can't try to tell regular people about in-depth issues, they simply can't be explained on such a platform so his focus needs to be on simplifying the message & attracting new voters by making them realize that he has the answers & leave the educating bit to the grassroots.




> A couple months back, they had a  interview with conservative voters who were discouraged that there were no NEW FACES galvanizing enthusiasm and touching on issues that matter to them. That's what we're up against. Ron is considered old hat and is not the best at outlining specific solutions in the most coherent manner.





> And another thing, at this advanced age Ron doesn't project that alpha male image you need to draw votes.


It's NOT always about shaping one's product to the market, a revolutionary product is one which CREATES A NEW MARKET which is what Ron is in the sense that he's drastically different from the other candidates & is very different from what the "market" is used to. Hell, he's already created a libertarian market or at least significantly consolidated it & this market doesn't care about his "old face" because they know that he has the answers; in the same way, he needs to get the new voters to realize that he has the answers & then they'll stop expecting him to be an "alpha-male" & stop caring about his "old face" so instead of worrying about what he isnt', he should try to sell who he IS & thereby expand the new market he's created. He doesn't need to be the alpha-male, he needs to play the old wise guy that has been right on everything & has all the solutions to the problems that this country is facing.




> What good is the message if you don't articulate it well?


+1

That's a fantastic line, I hope everyone here understands it.

----------


## scrosnoe

> I have to agree with AdamT. I recently met someone while grabbing lunch and we started talking politics. He is a young professional. He wasn't a Ron Paul supporter but being that he is an investor, he spends a lot of time watching the markets and knows a lot about what is going on in the economy. I sent him a link to Ron's recent debate. He said, he is NOW supporting Ron because he is the closest candidate that can do something to HELP.... BUT he definitely said that he doesn't communicate his message effectively for the average person and that it is easily to marginalize him because on the surface he appears to make no sense. Anyway, I convince him to give Ron $2500 and he said, this is our only chance cause Ron doesn't have another RUN, so he is donating. He also said, that Ron's new bill to legalize Marijuana has to be explained very well on how it can improve the economy by reducing spending on the drug war, prisons, court costs etc...anyway, he is a completely unbiased and objective person that I have come to respect so he is telling the truth about his first impression...just a FYI.


that is how you do it -- one by one by one!  good work~  

I think I converted a cab driver in Las Vegas recently -- hope so anyway (that is someone who talks to others every day!)  Question is will he vote in the primary?  Takes people planting seeds and others watering and others getting them to the polls on election day.

Go team!

----------


## parocks

Spot on on tea party vs establishment.  One think to note is that we're 6 months away, at least, before the first votes.  A lot can happen.  Palin could join the race.
That would completely reconfigure the tea party side.  Watch out for Perry.  They're trying to call him tea party.  We don't want that.  Based on the polls out of 
Iowa, it looks like tea party wins there.  Bachmann plus Cain plus Paul is greater than Romney plus everyone else.  

I'm not sure that Bachmann is battling Romney for conservatives, but that Bachmann is the tea party conservative vs the establishment RINO (or liberal/moderate, not conservative) Romney.

But definitely tea party vs establishment.  There was a tea party convention or something having to do with freedomworks.  Some reporter asked for audience reaction to
various candidates.  Bachmann got the best reaction, Paul and Perry got the 2nd best reaction, Romney the worst reaction.   It's beneficial to firmly establish that Ron Paul is a fully legitimate tea party candidate.  Much in the same way that we would like to push Cain and Perry out of the tea party, others would like to push Ron Paul out of the tea party.  So,  I'd try to gather up as much of the footage from the tea parties as possible.  Apparently there's footage of Ron Paul dumping tea on 12/16/07.





> i agree that we are 'messengers' and that we should all continue to learn the issues and speak well to our fellow voters. It's not easy to be on live TV but this is Presidential politics in the 21st Century and any candidate that expects to WIN, must be a good public speaker and know how to tailor their message to each respective audience.  What good is the message if you don't articulate it well? Ron ranks last out of the candidates in this category (image and public speaking) and one of the main reasons Michele has jumped to the top of the heap and is now the 'tea party' candidate. She worked to brand herself as the 'tea-party' candidate. She rails against Obama...
> 
> anyway, this primary is the establishment vs. the 'tea-party.' Ron is clearly not going to win over many establishment voters. His natural constituency are 'tea-party' voters and gop-leaning independents. With Bachman and Cain currently in the race, he has to work hard to reach them. Let's hope Cain's fund-raising numbers are sub-par and the media starts their hack jobs labeling Cain as second-tier or without 'legs.'  Then maybe Cain supporters will look elsewhere. Then it boils down to Bachmann vs. Paul for the heart of the 'tea-party.' Paul's next fund-raising ticker could be sometime about the 'tea-party' or against Bachmann...it should be let's fill up this 'cup of tea.' and show Michele that we are the tea party or something like that....
> 
> It is important to point out that the Democrats and other groups are buying ads attacking Romney and the Republicans. I doubt they are going to waste money attacking Ron Paul. Therefore, we have to capitalize on this and grab voters who are dissatisfied with the field and/or have lost interest. If Ron is gaining in favor-ability but not polling, there is a gap between people who like him but won't vote for him. This gap has got to be shortened. He has to change his image quickly before Michele solidifies her herself as the one to battle Romney for conservatives. Quite frankly, the strategy is that simple right now. Go after Romney for his lack of conservative credentials, flip-flopping, health-care bill, not signing the pro-life pledge...that's what the conservatives want to hear. That is what is up in the air for this primary presently.

----------


## Badger Paul

At least the conversation in this thread has gotten more constructive. Thanks one an all.

To say RP has not put in the effort this time around is just not true. He visited Iowa and New Hampshire more times now than he did all through the 2007-08 cycle. The Iowa and New Hampshire campaigns have more organization then they did four years ago. There's more local pol endorsements than four years ago. Where did your $2,500 go to? Probably to the private plane which allows Dr. Paul to fly to more events in Iowa and New Hampshire much easier than flying commercial did four years ago. Or maybe your money went to securing the best spot on the grounds of the Iowa Straw Poll, $31,000 worth.

As for RP the candidate, well, he is what he is. But if it was really about spit and polish, none or very few of us would be here supporting him if it was just all that. There's something a lot deeper than just good looks that keeps us going.

"_a revolutionary product is one which CREATES A NEW MARKET which is what Ron is in the sense that he's drastically different from the other candidates & is very different from what the "market" is used to. Hell, he's already created a libertarian market or at least significantly consolidated it & this market doesn't care about his "old face" because they know that he has the answers; in the same way, he needs to get the new voters to realize that he has the answers & then they'll stop expecting him to be an "alpha-male" & stop caring about his "old face" so instead of worrying about what he isnt', he should try to sell who he IS & thereby expand the new market he's created. He doesn't need to be the alpha-male, he needs to play the old wise guy that has been right on everything & has all the solutions to the problems that this country is facing._

I couldn't have set it better. We have to change the game. It's that simple.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> At least the conversation in this thread has gotten more constructive. Thanks one and all.
> 
> To say RP has not put in the effort this time around is just not true. He visited Iowa and New Hampshire more times now than he did all through the 2007-08 cycle. The Iowa and New Hampshire campaigns have more organization then they did four years ago. There's more local pol endorsements than four years ago. Where did your $2,500 go to? Probably to the private plane which allows Dr. Paul to fly to more events in Iowa and New Hampshire much easier than flying commercial did four years ago. Or maybe your money went to securing the best spot on the grounds of the Iowa Straw Poll, $31,000 worth.
> 
> As for RP the candidate, well, he is what he is. But if it was really about spit and polish, none or very few of us would be here supporting him if it was just all that. There's something a lot deeper than just good looks that keeps us going.
> 
> "_a revolutionary product is one which CREATES A NEW MARKET which is what Ron is in the sense that he's drastically different from the other candidates & is very different from what the "market" is used to. Hell, he's already created a libertarian market or at least significantly consolidated it & this market doesn't care about his "old face" because they know that he has the answers; in the same way, he needs to get the new voters to realize that he has the answers & then they'll stop expecting him to be an "alpha-male" & stop caring about his "old face" so instead of worrying about what he isnt', he should try to sell who he IS & thereby expand the new market he's created. He doesn't need to be the alpha-male, he needs to play the old wise guy that has been right on everything & has all the solutions to the problems that this country is facing._
> 
> I couldn't have set it better. We have to change the game. It's that simple.


Actually, you might be misunderstanding what I'm saying; I DO want Ron to sell himself & not just "be himself", he definitely NEEDS to sell & do it with a simple sales-pitch that concisely describes the usefulness of the product & thereby attracts "customers" while right now it's like he's just standing there speaking a language that very few people in the "market" understand & he's just hoping that people'd buy but why should they if they don't even understand what he's selling & how useful it is? So he definitely needs to simplify his mesasge. Further, no amount of "changing the game" by the grassroots is going to win this one for Ron, he himself MUST lead the way in changing people's minds & converting them by communicating his message in simple & concise terms, the grassroots can only play a "support role" at best.

----------


## sorianofan

At this point Ron is not going to change.  Yesterday Glenn Beck was throwing him softballs and Paul was teaching a graduate school class on tv using complicated jargon and logic.

No matter Paul's problems, at least he does not stoop down to retarded sound bites (i.e. Huckleberry says, "We should be the United States of America, not the Divided States of America.")




I mean listen to the drivel:

*Momma always says...
*"We bought it because we broke it.  We have a responsibility too the 'honor' of this country..."
*Troops deserve 'honor'
*America is one nation "under God," can't be the "Divided States" mind you

We want our candidate to sound like that?

----------


## SamuraisWisdom

> At this point Ron is not going to change.  Yesterday Glenn Beck was throwing him softballs and Paul was teaching a graduate school class on tv using complicated jargon and logic.
> 
> No matter Paul's problems, at least he does not stoop down to retarded sound bites (i.e. Huckleberry says, "We should be the United States of America, not the Divided States of America.")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean listen to the drivel:
> 
> ...


No, but I want him to communicate his message more effectively so we can win over more people and actually have a chance at winning this election.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> At this point Ron is not going to change.  Yesterday Glenn Beck was throwing him softballs and Paul was teaching a graduate school class on tv using complicated jargon and logic.
> 
> No matter Paul's problems, at least he does not stoop down to retarded sound bites (i.e. Huckleberry says, "We should be the United States of America, not the Divided States of America.")
> 
> I mean listen to the drivel:
> 
> *Momma always says...
> *"We bought it because we broke it.  We have a responsibility too the 'honor' of this country..."
> *Troops deserve 'honor'
> ...


NO, none of us here suggesting Ron to simplify his message want him to sound like THAT. When we say, we want him to simplify HIS message, we want him to simplify HIS message. I think that much should be pretty obvious.




> No, but I want him to communicate his message more effectively so we can win over more people and actually have a chance at winning this election.


^^

I'll repost the earlier line from Bushlied - "What good is the message if you don't articulate it well?"

One can't expect to spread the message without articulating it in a manner that people can understand it.

While it may well be true but I'm not willing to buy that Ron wouldn't simplify (NOT "change") his message if he could but I think he just can't, a lot of intelligent people have this problem, they understand things in their own way but they can't always bring it down to the level of the regular Joes & Janes but if Ron had someone who could instruct him on how to communicate the message in order for masses to understand it then I'm sure Ron would be willing to do that for liberty, & hopefully, Wead is the guy who can help him with this.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

We've been doing it, non-stop, one by one over the past three years....it's *not* how you do it, unfortunately. It's just too much.

I've swallowed my pride and bitten the bullet more than a few times for this candidate and campaign. I'm honestly disappointed Ron won't do the same. 

Again, no amount of flying to events will make up for poor debate performances and interviews.




> that is how you do it -- one by one by one!  good work~  
> 
> I think I converted a cab driver in Las Vegas recently -- hope so anyway (that is someone who talks to others every day!)  Question is will he vote in the primary?  Takes people planting seeds and others watering and others getting them to the polls on election day.
> 
> Go team!

----------


## Bossobass

> That's no reason.  Virtually NO ONE believes in ethanol subsidies of those who ARE competing.


You really need to get out more:




> Iowa is certainly the leader in fleecing the rest of the nation with their corn welfare.  Romney definitely gets points for honesty and for his cognizance of the political climate in Iowa.





> I support the subsidy of ethanol, he told an Iowa voter. I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country. Iowa leads the nation in the production of corn, a main source of  ethanol.


Just for emphasis... who's the GOP front-runner in iowa?

Bosso

----------


## sailingaway

> You really need to get out more:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just for emphasis... who's the GOP front-runner in iowa?
> 
> Bosso



Romney is the only one, so far and he will not be at Ames.  'Virtually no one' stands. 

And we are not trying to be Romney but the anti Romney.  THAT is the competitive race, with everyone hoping the conservative followers of other candidates will rally behind the conservative front runner, against Romney.

----------


## sailingaway

> i agree that we are 'messengers' and that we should all continue to learn the issues and speak well to our fellow voters. It's not easy to be on live TV but this is Presidential politics in the 21st Century and any candidate that expects to WIN, must be a good public speaker and know how to tailor their message to each respective audience.  What good is the message if you don't articulate it well? Ron ranks last out of the candidates in this category (image and public speaking) and one of the main reasons Michele has jumped to the top of the heap and is now the 'tea party' candidate. She worked to brand herself as the 'tea-party' candidate. She rails against Obama...
> 
> anyway, this primary is the establishment vs. the 'tea-party.' Ron is clearly not going to win over many establishment voters. His natural constituency are 'tea-party' voters and gop-leaning independents. With Bachman and Cain currently in the race, he has to work hard to reach them. Let's hope Cain's fund-raising numbers are sub-par and the media starts their hack jobs labeling Cain as second-tier or without 'legs.'  Then maybe Cain supporters will look elsewhere. Then it boils down to Bachmann vs. Paul for the heart of the 'tea-party.' Paul's next fund-raising ticker could be sometime about the 'tea-party' or against Bachmann...it should be let's fill up this 'cup of tea.' and show Michele that we are the tea party or something like that....
> 
> It is important to point out that the Democrats and other groups are buying ads attacking Romney and the Republicans. I doubt they are going to waste money attacking Ron Paul. Therefore, we have to capitalize on this and grab voters who are dissatisfied with the field and/or have lost interest. If Ron is gaining in favor-ability but not polling, there is a gap between people who like him but won't vote for him. This gap has got to be shortened. He has to change his image quickly before Michele solidifies her herself as the one to battle Romney for conservatives. Quite frankly, the strategy is that simple right now. Go after Romney for his lack of conservative credentials, flip-flopping, health-care bill, not signing the pro-life pledge...that's what the conservatives want to hear. That is what is up in the air for this primary presently.


I think we need to let Bachmann's steam wear down a bit, then people will be looking to her record.  I say DON'T 'attack' her, just be ready to explain her votes for the Patriot Act and the police state generally, for the middle east wars, for the Ryan budget which raises the deficit for years before some fairy tale date in the future when it is supposed to be cut....for the interim budget plans the tea party was against (except the last one).  Also, when I was looking into who I should vote for between conservatives (i.e. not McCain) last time, I found Huckabee first, and liked him. I was just a little uneasy about the way he discussed religion and government and the Constitution.  It may not be the best message for those in IOWA, but I bet a lot of people would be uneasy with Bachmann's statements on that front, as well.  I'm personally conservative, but the idea that the government should determine "moral behavior' and enforce it is a terrible one.  Look at how badly they do with the schools.

----------


## sailingaway

> It's NOT always about shaping one's product to the market, a revolutionary product is one which CREATES A NEW MARKET which is what Ron is in the sense that he's drastically different from the other candidates & is very different from what the "market" is used to. Hell, he's already created a libertarian market or at least significantly consolidated it & this market doesn't care about his "old face" because they know that he has the answers; in the same way, he needs to get the new voters to realize that he has the answers & then they'll stop expecting him to be an "alpha-male" & stop caring about his "old face" so instead of worrying about what he isnt', he should try to sell who he IS & thereby expand the new market he's created. He doesn't need to be the alpha-male, he needs to play the old wise guy that has been right on everything & has all the solutions to the problems that this country is facing.


this^^^ +1 and +rep

Ron is spectacular.  Some are trying to make him over to seem what others are used to instead of giving them the breakthrough moment many of us had, of realizing there actually is out there the principled Constitutionalist who is what we need.  I was arguing with some folks in Huff Po comments and after the guy (who seemed worth spending time on) had run out of arguments and started to sound like he was listening, he said that Ron doesn't exactly capture the casual TV watcher in a debate.  I didn't get into all the debate moments when Ron was the only light on the stage, I just said "I know, but I don't know what to do about that. It doesn't make me any more attracted to the central casting candidates who show no integrity, understanding nor consistency once elected, however. "  

No one really wants the 'central casting' candidate when they realize the real thing is there.  Will they look deep enough to appreciate Ron?  I don't know, and would like him to work on delivery of his concepts in a way they can understand, so they are drawn to look deeper.  But I don't what him to change in substance, at all.

----------


## sailingaway

> Spot on on tea party vs establishment.  One think to note is that we're 6 months away, at least, before the first votes.  A lot can happen.  Palin could join the race.
> That would completely reconfigure the tea party side.  Watch out for Perry.  They're trying to call him tea party.  We don't want that.  Based on the polls out of 
> Iowa, it looks like tea party wins there.  Bachmann plus Cain plus Paul is greater than Romney plus everyone else.  
> 
> I'm not sure that Bachmann is battling Romney for conservatives, but that Bachmann is the tea party conservative vs the establishment RINO (or liberal/moderate, not conservative) Romney.
> 
> But definitely tea party vs establishment.  There was a tea party convention or something having to do with freedomworks.  Some reporter asked for audience reaction to
> various candidates.  Bachmann got the best reaction, Paul and Perry got the 2nd best reaction, Romney the worst reaction.   It's beneficial to firmly establish that Ron Paul is a fully legitimate tea party candidate.  Much in the same way that we would like to push Cain and Perry out of the tea party, others would like to push Ron Paul out of the tea party.  So,  I'd try to gather up as much of the footage from the tea parties as possible.  Apparently there's footage of Ron Paul dumping tea on 12/16/07.


Freedomworks seems to be trying to back Perry.  Freedomworks was trying to convince Ryan to run, and Ryan voted for TARP and for No Child Left Behind, etc etc etc.  Freedomworks is showing its true colors and when it comes to a president real tea party is not what they are interested in, apparently.

----------


## sailingaway

> No matter Paul's problems, at least he does not stoop down to retarded sound bites (i.e. Huckleberry says, "We should be the United States of America, not the Divided States of America.")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean listen to the drivel:
> 
> *Momma always says...
> *"We bought it because we broke it.  We have a responsibility too the 'honor' of this country..."
> ...


We do not.  I gagged even at some of the stuff Rand said, frankly, and I was following him closely enough that I _knew_ the substance was there. 

And that raises a particular issue when people recommend 'attacking' other candidates, or even the president.  Policy is one thing, but a lot of what is thrown around is distasteful to those who find Ron's 'speaking to adults' style refreshing.

Some say the newsletter junk was because someone on the staff of the newsletters was trying a 'technique' of 'engaging' different groups.  That sort of 'outreach' isn't attractive in the cold light of day, and I frankly see gratuitous red meat of all kinds as in that category, some more mild than others.

----------


## acptulsa

> How do you think Bachmann can come from nowhere and hit straight to the top? She's a smooth speaker. She presents herself well.


People are angry.  In fact, they're so angry that they're only going to put up with so much business as usual.  And then they're going to turn away.  They're going to turn away so often that Ron Paul is the last man standing.  Unless the powers that be miraculously heal the economy (something these brats obviously have neither the desire nor the clue how to do), this will happen.

She's a smooth talker.  Well, you know what?  It isn't that hard to smoothly use your prepackaged line of crap to not answer a question.

How do you feel about farm subsidies like the ones your family takes?  Limousine for bureaucrats are up 73%.  People are tired of being insulted this way.  And we're going to make fun of this crap until no one in this nation believes anything any presidential candidate says but Ron Paul.

Is it the conventional wisdom?  No.  But the conventional wisdom says we are impossible, we don't happen, we don't exist.  So to hell with the conventional wisdom.  We exist, we're making a difference, and we haven't even begun to fight.

----------


## S.Shorland

PPP Oregon poll: Achmann 29% RomCom 28% Ron Paul 10% (alone in third)

----------


## rockandrollsouls

The only thing I need to deconstruct your logic is the fact people have been "fed up" and "angry" every election cycle for the past 60-70 years and it's still traditional politicking that wins out.




> People are angry.  In fact, they're so angry that they're only going to put up with so much business as usual.  And then they're going to turn away.  They're going to turn away so often that Ron Paul is the last man standing.  Unless the powers that be miraculously heal the economy (something these brats obviously have neither the desire nor the clue how to do), this will happen.
> 
> She's a smooth talker.  Well, you know what?  It isn't that hard to smoothly use your prepackaged line of crap to not answer a question.
> 
> How do you feel about farm subsidies like the ones your family takes?  Limousine for bureaucrats are up 73%.  People are tired of being insulted this way.  And we're going to make fun of this crap until no one in this nation believes anything any presidential candidate says but Ron Paul.
> 
> Is it the conventional wisdom?  No.  But the conventional wisdom says we are impossible, we don't happen, we don't exist.  So to hell with the conventional wisdom.  We exist, we're making a difference, and we haven't even begun to fight.

----------


## acptulsa

> The only thing I need to deconstruct your logic is the fact people have been "fed up" and "angry" every election cycle for the past 60-70 years and it's still traditional politicking that wins out.


How old are you?

My pissymeter has never been pegged like it is now.  And I have gray hair and a good memory.

----------


## rockandrollsouls

You're going to base our odds primarily on the subjective notion of the voting populous being "angry and fed up?" And, that somehow, this will translate into the overwhelming majority of them voting for Ron?

Where has any scenario remotely similar to this ever played out in history? It's just not that simple, I'm sorry.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the tide moving in that direction. It's so entirely opinionated and biased I can't believe that's been your reasoning this entire time....

Not polling, not politicking...some abstract idea that you see playing out in your head.




> How old are you?
> 
> My pissymeter has never been pegged like it is now.  And I have gray hair and a good memory.

----------


## acptulsa

> You're going to base our odds primarily on the subjective notion of the voting populous being "angry and fed up?" And, that somehow, this will translate into the overwhelming majority of them voting for Ron?
> 
> Where has any scenario remotely similar to this ever played out in history? It's just not that simple, I'm sorry.


Where's the Whig Party today?  Did the Bull Moose Party affect an election to any degree?

No one said it's that simple.  What I said was, if we can strike while the tempers are hot, and if we can learn to be effective, we're not as limited in what we can accomplish as certain conventional thinkers seem to believe we are.  That's what I said.

----------


## Paul Or Nothing II

> The only thing I need to deconstruct your logic is the fact people have been "fed up" and "angry" every election cycle for the past 60-70 years and it's still traditional politicking that wins out.


Very true that. Just because people are pissed doesn't mean they'll pick the right candidate, the right candidate still has to come forward & sell himself as the right candidate & do it well enough otherwise people will just choose another status quo candidate who's PRETENDING to be the right candidate.

----------


## Bossobass

> Romney is the only one, so far and he will not be at Ames.  'Virtually no one' stands. 
> 
> And we are not trying to be Romney but the anti Romney.  THAT is the competitive race, with everyone hoping the conservative followers of other candidates will rally behind the conservative front runner, against Romney.


Haven't said anything about who 'we're' trying to be or not to be.

Romney is skipping Ames because he can. He leads in Iowa because of his commitment to subsidies for Iowa... unless you have a better explanation for his poll numbers? (the whole 'it's his hair' BS is annoying)

Remember 2008?:




> F*ormer Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee won the Republican Caucus, while Illinois Senator Barack Obama took the top prize on the Democratic side.
> 
> Both winners support expanded ethanol production mandates. While that doesn't necessarily translate into Caucus success, the position did not go unnoticed in the nation's top corn and ethanol producing state.*


To ignore the diametrically opposed views on this single point of Romney vs RP is pure denial. As far as what other candidate(s) will be outspokenly for or against farm subsidies, the day ain't over yet. But, we (and every Iowa voter) can be positively certain that RP will never change his stance on this issue.

IMO, this election, more than any recent one, is 'it's the economy, stupid'. With all the talk of slashing the federal budget, Iowans will love hearing that their farm welfare checks will still be in the mail. It's a very high hurdle for RP. Numero uno, IMO.

Bosso

----------


## rockandrollsouls

The average voter isn't that smart. Giving them too much credit.

You were around for the last election. They were angry as could be and chose the guy that best marketed himself as "change," not the real change.




> Where's the Whig Party today?  Did the Bull Moose Party affect an election to any degree?
> 
> No one said it's that simple.  What I said was, if we can strike while the tempers are hot, and if we can learn to be effective, we're not as limited in what we can accomplish as certain conventional thinkers seem to believe we are.  That's what I said.

----------


## parocks

> Romney is the only one, so far and he will not be at Ames.  'Virtually no one' stands. 
> 
> And we are not trying to be Romney but the anti Romney.  THAT is the competitive race, with everyone hoping the conservative followers of other candidates will rally behind the conservative front runner, against Romney.


Well, conservative followers will rally behind the last conservative standing.  Are people hoping that everyone drops out except for the tea party front runner and the establishment front runner before the primaries even start?

It's possible there could be a "tea party convention" before the primaries start, where the tea party candidate is named.  Doesn't really sound like the thing the tea party would do, though.

----------


## sailingaway

> Well, conservative followers will rally behind the last conservative standing.  Are people hoping that everyone drops out except for the tea party front runner and the establishment front runner before the primaries even start?
> 
> It's possible there could be a "tea party convention" before the primaries start, where the tea party candidate is named.  Doesn't really sound like the thing the tea party would do, though.


I was thinking people will start making judgments about who is their best chance to beat Romney, based on indicators like polls (and, we hope, straw polls)

----------


## acptulsa

> The average voter isn't that smart. Giving them too much credit.
> 
> You were around for the last election. They were angry as could be and chose the guy that best marketed himself as "change," not the real change.


Voting for the Bull Moose candidate wasn't exactly brilliant, either.

It's our job to smarten them up.  We can do it, or we can whine about how we won't know if we can do it unless we try, and by then it will be too late to try something else.

Save me some cheese.  I'll have it when I'm not so busy.

----------

