As a supporter that is in this to see him win the nomination, I have made it no secret that I don't believe this line of thinking is working. I'm hoping I'm wrong, but anybody that beleives we are going to get the nomination with 6-13% of the primary vote is seriously misguided. Even to be considered we must take 5 first place finishes. We can place 2nd in every remaining primary and it would make no difference- we lose.
If Dr. Paul doesn't start to show some real desire to fight for first in this thing, the window of this opportunity will only get smaller. It's great to be loyal and positive and I respect those that are. It may also be that those of us looking for a "spark " are just not seeing something in this strategy that the campaign is seeing. I can only look at the facts- and they concern me.
I've said this before, just like empires, most campaigns are forced out of a race for financial reasons. How many times has Huckabees and Giuliani's leaving been discussed due to their finances? Continued Financial backing comes from a growing support base. As that support base grows, usually the finances also grow. But if that base shrinks or stagnates, so does financial backing. I think it's clear that while our finances are better than some others, it is in recession compared to last quarter largely becuase our base isn't growing enough. The contributions decline becuase they rely upon the same pool that donates. But the pool has its limits. Some will reach their $2300 limit, others just reach the limt of what they can afford. Still others will give up on the cause if they beleive the casue will not succeed regardless of their contibution. This is why an expanding base is so important. This is why every opportunity to swing voters to our cause is so crucial. Yes, I thought Dr. Paul, when he was allowed to speak was great, but by restraining his time, our impact was minimized if not negated. If we take existing Paul supporters out of the equation and ask undecided voters or supporters of other candidates how he did, the overwelming majority of opinions would be unchanged. I have asked my peers and the only ones touting anything about this last debate are already Paul fans. What we're doing as a whole (grassroots and camapaign) does not appear to be working fast enough to get us the nomination.
There are people in this movement that will support this compaign regardless of performance. But it's a fact that there are others that will not. I believe this campaign will fail if it relies only upon the first group. As great as we are (and we are great and having some impact)- there just aren't enough of us to win this. I believe we the grassrotts can only do so much. It's one thing to get out there and sell something that sells itself. It's quite another to try and sell something that the masses have been conditioned to question. I don't think there is a person on these forums that doesn't beleive the MSM and the GOP have done a good job of conditioning the sheeple that our guy is at best- questionable.
The analogy I like (and it isn't mine) is that this is a dog fight. We probably have the nicest, sweetest, most trustworthy, time proven, loyal, best freind in this fight. He is the BEST dog in so many ways. BUT, in a dog fight- those traits only take you so far. To win, he must have some fire in his belly and the willingness to bite when required. He can be the best dog in the world, but without those 2 qualities, his has very little chance of winning against a viscious feild of mutts.
I am an advocate of changing what isn't working. I think he should have walked off that stage with some stearn, authoritative and perhaps even controversial sound bytes that begged further explanation. I think that type of event is too juicy not to cover and the resulting interviews and sound bytes should be equally as factual and "stirring". That approach would not alienate anyone that already beleives- it would energize us. I also beleive it would have done more to sway the non believers than the 6 minutes of air time they gave the poor little old grandpa (not my words).
