Chip Englander? Blue State Guru?

AuH20

AuH20

Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
28,739
We're running in the Republican primary. Yes, Republicans. Un-republican groups are of no use to us unless we make it to the next level.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/what-s-behind-rand-paul-s-staffing-strategy-20150120

On January 13, The Washington Post reported that Paul's camp had hired Chip Englander, a "youthful outsider" with a history of reaching out to different demographic groups, as Paul's likely campaign manager. Doug Stafford—Paul's chief political guru—told The Post that Englander will manage the nascent campaign's "day-to-day execution." Englander just worked to elect Republican Bruce Rauner as governor of Illinois, a blue state. Part of his strategy was reaching out to traditionally un-Republican groups, like younger and less affluent voters.
Click to expand...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...22/rand-paul-campaign-troubles-2016/30456847/

The eye-catching video came at a time when some experts suggest that, though still at an early stage, Paul's campaign has drifted, with the man labeled by Time last October as "The Most Interesting Man in American Politics" growing, well, a bit dull.

"Rand Paul is not as prominent as I expected him to be," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

"When he first got in, and even before that, he was very prominent," Sabato said. "Now, much less so. It's still very early, but he needs to get some gas in the tank."

Speaking before the Paul campaign's video release, Stuart Rothenberg, founding editor of The Rothenberg & Gonzales Political Report, said: "I'd have to think hard to figure out the last time I saw a big story about Rand Paul."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
AuH20 said:
We're running in the Republican primary. Yes, Republicans. Un-republican groups are of no use to us unless we make it to the next level.
Click to expand...

Strongly disagree. Without independent voters and Democrat crossovers, Rand has no shot at the nomination.
 
LatinsforPaul said:
Strongly disagree. Without independent voters and Democrat crossovers, Rand has no shot at the nomination.
Click to expand...

He didn't rely on independent and crossover voters to win the Kentucky Primary. In fact, he did a better job of galvanizing conservatives and regular Republicans than almost any candidate running in the 2010 primary cycle. Rand is more popular in Kentucky than McConnell, but you're trying to tell me he can't be more popular nationally than Jeb Bush? Sorry, but that makes no sense.
 
RonPaulMall said:
He didn't rely on independent and crossover voters to win the Kentucky Primary. In fact, he did a better job of galvanizing conservatives and regular Republicans than almost any candidate running in the 2010 primary cycle. Rand is more popular in Kentucky than McConnell, but you're trying to tell me he can't be more popular nationally than Jeb Bush? Sorry, but that makes no sense.
Click to expand...
There is alot of people in Keentuck that is more popular than McConnell
 
RonPaulMall said:
He didn't rely on independent and crossover voters to win the Kentucky Primary. In fact, he did a better job of galvanizing conservatives and regular Republicans than almost any candidate running in the 2010 primary cycle. Rand is more popular in Kentucky than McConnell, but you're trying to tell me he can't be more popular nationally than Jeb Bush? Sorry, but that makes no sense.
Click to expand...

What did being the "most conservative" candidate get Ron Paul twice in 2007 and 2011. Nothing from the Republican Party and nothing from the Republican base. Rand needs the same voters that crossed over for his dad. Maybe not all of them but MOST of them to have a shot at the nomination and being the "anti-Bush" candidate.
 
LatinsforPaul said:
What did being the "most conservative" candidate get Ron Paul twice in 2007 and 2011. Nothing from the Republican Party and nothing from the Republican base. Rand needs the same voters that crossed over for his dad. Maybe not all of them but MOST of them to have a shot at the nomination and being the "anti-Bush" candidate.
Click to expand...

There isn't a chance in hell Ron Paul could have won the Kentucky Senate Primary. Unlike his father, Rand Paul knows how to appeal to Conservative voters and "Regular" Republicans. It is how he became a Senator in the first and why in the first two years of his term he became the most high profile Senator in the GOP caucus. Hell, the Republican Senate Leader basically had to go begging to Rand in order to get his endorsement and save his re-election hopes. The idea that Rand needed to follow some desperate (and completely hopeless) "crossover" strategy is pure nonsense. You know all those folks that are pumping Trump up to 28% in the polls? Those are exactly the sort of disaffected working class GOP voters that should have been natural Rand voters.
 
RonPaulMall said:
You know all those folks that are pumping Trump up to 28% in the polls? Those are exactly the sort of disaffected working class GOP voters that should have been natural Rand voters.
Click to expand...

Funny how those that pumped him still see him as losing the nomination to Jeb (36% vs. Trump 10%). This tells me that even though he is popular the GOP adherents will go all in for Jeb when the time comes. Don't think for an instant that Rand doesn't need his dad's grassroots to vote in the primary for him and to get the vote out for him. Anyone that thinks that Ron's numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire came from GOP adherents are...batshit crazy.
 
phill4paul said:
Funny how those that pumped him still see him as losing the nomination to Jeb (36% vs. Trump 10%). This tells me that even though he is popular the GOP adherents will go all in for Jeb when the time comes. Don't think for an instant that Rand doesn't need his dad's grassroots to vote in the primary for him and to get the vote out for him. Anyone that thinks that Ron's numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire came from GOP adherents are...batshit crazy.
Click to expand...

What do Ron Paul's numbers have to do with anything? Rand isn't running an "educational" campaign. He's running to win, and if you want to win, you need to get actual GOP voters to vote for you. Rand showed an exceptional ability to do exactly that in his Senate run, but this past year he has really lost his way.
 
RonPaulMall said:
What do Ron Paul's numbers have to do with anything? Rand isn't running an "educational" campaign. He's running to win, and if you want to win, you need to get actual GOP voters to vote for you. Rand showed an exceptional ability to do exactly that in his Senate run, but this past year he has really lost his way.
Click to expand...

For an "educational" campaign it sure made a good showing in Iowa and New Hampshire. Even in the midst of a media black out. Do you deny this? Part of getting GOP voters to vote for you is by engaging them. Who engaged GOP voters in Iowa and New Hampshire? Rand cannot engage every GOP voter. It takes a grassroots of committed individuals to do this. IMHO, this is what his campaign is lacking. His positions are more in tune with the GOP than were his fathers. So he should be polling at least equally. He's not. So there must be another reason.
 
RonPaulMall said:
You know all those folks that are pumping Trump up to 28% in the polls? Those are exactly the sort of disaffected working class GOP voters that should have been natural Rand voters.
Click to expand...

That's the floating idiot vote.

These are people who caused the successive "surges" last time, and then ultimately rallied around Romney.

They have no particular ideas or positions on any issues.

It's all about momentum, the hot topic of that news cycle, etc.

You don't design a platform around these people.

You design a platform to garner enough of the slightly-more-thoughtful voters to appear electable to the floating idiots.
 
r3volution 3.0 said:
That's the floating idiot vote.

These are people who caused the successive "surges" last time, and then ultimately rallied around Romney.

They have no particular ideas or positions on any issues.

It's all about momentum, the hot topic of that news cycle, etc.

You don't design a platform around these people.

You design a platform to garner enough of the slightly-more-thoughtful voters to appear electable to the floating idiots.
Click to expand...

Exactly. As I stated before these same voters still saw Jeb as the eventual nominee (36%).
 
phill4paul said:
For an "educational" campaign it sure made a good showing in Iowa and New Hampshire. Even in the midst of a media black out. Do you deny this? Part of getting GOP voters to vote for you is by engaging them. Who engaged GOP voters in Iowa and New Hampshire? Rand cannot engage every GOP voter. It takes a grassroots of committed individuals to do this. IMHO, this is what his campaign is lacking. His positions are more in tune with the GOP than were his fathers. So he should be polling at least equally. He's not. So there must be another reason.
Click to expand...

2010 version of Rand, no doubt that was true. But Rand's "outreach" to the liberal MSM and others who will never in a million years vote for him has resulted in most of those voters abandoning him. Rand has positioned himself in a no man's land. Too wishy washy and apologetic for conservative voters, but not establishment enough to compete with the Jeb voters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top