Dear, Dr. Paul The funds will dry up if you dont seperate yourself from the amateurs

Sure, let's get some real Ivy League / CFR blood into this campaign. Just what we need to succeed...at being one of them!

Telling the truth is the right thing for RP to do, and I am very encouraged that there is 8-10% of the public who has embraced the truth. Our goal is to grow this number while not compromising the message, not to win elections.

This is an educational campaign, not a presidential campaign.

WOW! Please speak for yourself. Try running an ad with those words and see how much money pours in.

And if we're really all about honesty- why is every heading, website and advertisement based on the " Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential Campaign"? Please take look above... in the title bar. If this is an "educational campaign", many have been deceived to get them to contribute.

I assure you, the minute I beleive the majority here believe as you do, or that the campaign supports those thoughts, I and many others will leave you to your plan.
 
they want to hear what a President Ron Paul is going to do to fix the problem as oppsed to what the other candidates have actually DONE but are now SAYING:

1. Huckabee: used taxpayer dollars to help a Mexican Consulate come into Little Rock to aide the illegals already there. Wanted to give scholarships and in-state to tuition to illegal alien minors;
2. John McCain co-sponsored the amnesty bill with TED KENNEDY (how quickly people forget);
3. Fred Thompson voted for at least two bill while in the Senate that would allow employers to fire or lay off American workers and replace them with H1- and L1 visa holders;
4. Mitt Romney hired that landscaping company that he and his brother used for YEARS that hired all those Guatemalan illegals (MAYBE he didn't know about but the fact is that he still did it);
5. The Ghoul SUED in federal court to keep his sanctuary city and has made public statements about 'undocumented workers' being WELCOME in NYC.

Dr. Paul could SINK these other candidates IF he and the campaign would just do some really good ads and USE the above material, especially in South Carolina where numerous polls show that this is the NUMBER ONE issue to voters (especially the Republican BASE).


For McCain, I'd add: McCain/Feingold and do NOT forget the Gang of 14 stunt! If the base has forgotten that they should be SHOT!
 
I think you guys just need to take a break and get a perspective on things.

I can understand feeling down, but to some of us you guys look like you just enjoy whining.

How much money have you sent HQ so far? What meetup group do you belong too, how much have you spent on campaign materials and how many hours have you put into campaigning for paul off of the internet?

Some of us have been at it since last Spring, also out in the streets, sending money to HQ and grassroots projects and buying our own material, with money we don't have- charged on credit cards.

We expected to see Paul spend more on Iowa and NH like his web-site said he would

It said. 12 Million to Win Iowa and NH. We sent him the 12 and them some, and find out he only spent 2 million between them.

We know Paul didn't create his won web-site. We are saying that if he expects to compete in the Big leagues, he needs to use the big league cash we gave him on Professionals.

If the strategy has been to save it for a sweep on super tuesaday states, instead of some low delegate early primaries, they should've been up front about it like Rudy's campaign has been so we know whats going on and how to best compliment and support the plan.
 
yes its not worth donating unless the campaiign is run to make ron win

i dont think they are serious abot him becoming president
 
We need a professional campain manager and BETTER ADS. Ron only spent 1.5 million in NH on some really crummy ads that don't even mention his main issues. He should have spent 10 million in NH to win it.
 
Ron naively believes that if he just gets the chance to speak before any group, he can "convert" them in 5 minutes. It simply isn't true.

For every new person who says "where has Ron Paul been all of my life," there are 4 others who think he is an eccentric nutcase.

i don't know how persuasive he thinks he is, but i do know that he is not persuasive, unless given generous time and very open-minded audience willing to dig deeper. which is to say, he is not persuasive at all in circumstances of presidental election.

he advocates great political positions, most of which can be successfully defended and substantial proportion of which resonates with the republican base. but he is terrible when it comes to articulating these positions and defending them against counter-arguments, even when those counter-arguments are common-place and when vast numbers of his own supporters could successfully defend them.

in addition, he is very bad in listening to questions actually posed and concerns actually raised and insists on talking about his favorite topics regardless of what the actual topic is. as a result, he is very repetitive which allows other candidates to prepare for his attacks and "steal" whatever buzzwords happen to be working (the constitution, founding fathers etc). when i saw him in one the first debates i thought that was merely a beginning of a serious discussion of foreign policy that we will finally be having. but as time passed by, he kept repeating a few phrases and examples from that first debate and there was no such discussion at all.
 
I am also saddened by these latest 'non'-outcomes. I honestly don't think RP got into this race expecting to still be in after the first couple of debates. I think that just as Tom Tancredo jumped in just to make the others address the illegal immigration problem, Dr. Paul jumped in to make the others address foreign intervention and monetary policy. Then, a funny thing happened, the money started pouring in, the grassroots numbers sky-rocketed and he found himself at the head of a real movement in favor of Constitutional princples. He's said himself several times that we're cured his pessimism (translation: he pretty well expected to go nowhere with his campaign other than waking a few more people up). Now that the support and the money are actually there to continue, he nor the official campaign actually seem to have a game plan in place to effectively use either one. Will correcting this require a complete re-thinking of his campaign strategy? I think it does. Problem is, as has already been pointed out on this thread, the top guns in campaigning are either already taken or wouldn't be willing to come on board with a campaign with two fifth place finishes.

Our only hope, as I see it, is to run some top-notch campaign ads that concisely deal with issues AND solutions targeted to the top concerns in each of the upcoming states. One issue, whether some folks here like it or not, that has people all across the nation jumping up and down IS illegal immigration. People don't want to hear about how these poor illegals are being 'scape-goated' due to a bad economy - they want to hear what a President Ron Paul is going to do to fix the problem as oppsed to what the other candidates have actually DONE but are now SAYING:

1. Huckabee: used taxpayer dollars to help a Mexican Consulate come into Little Rock to aide the illegals already there. Wanted to give scholarships and in-state to tuition to illegal alien minors;
2. John McCain co-sponsored the amnesty bill with TED KENNEDY (how quickly people forget);
3. Fred Thompson voted for at least two bill while in the Senate that would allow employers to fire or lay off American workers and replace them with H1- and L1 visa holders;
4. Mitt Romney hired that landscaping company that he and his brother used for YEARS that hired all those Guatemalan illegals (MAYBE he didn't know about but the fact is that he still did it);
5. The Ghoul SUED in federal court to keep his sanctuary city and has made public statements about 'undocumented workers' being WELCOME in NYC.

Dr. Paul could SINK these other candidates IF he and the campaign would just do some really good ads and USE the above material, especially in South Carolina where numerous polls show that this is the NUMBER ONE issue to voters (especially the Republican BASE).

Bottom line, if HQ doesn't get the people in place who are capable of doing some professional and slick targeted ads, we'll be lucky to even get fifth in the states in the South and, without the South, the campaign is doomed to failure.

Do I LIKE having to say this? Hell no! Is it realistic? You BETCHA. Thing is, how do we convey our thoughts to HQ about this and actually get a response from someone with the power to actually address it?


I really hope someone from the HQ reads this post. Excellent stuff.

And the format could be used with many issues. Simplicity: Remind people of the problem, offer the solution. And, as in many cases it is, point out if Dr Paul is the only guy saying it.

As for the debate about getting more professional campaign managers I think it is a sad but undeniable fact of modern politics. Look at Bush - we all know the brains belong to others to whom he is just a puppet, told what to say. Look at Hillary - focus-grouped to within an inch of her life - I keep now seeing "ready for change" signs lol. Look at England - a man as ignorant and uninterested in politics as Tony Blair was prime minister for a decade thanks to having a guy called Campbell as his press chief - he would be utterly ruthless in suppressing bad stories and discrediting the journalists. And then bully people to run the favorable stories. All Blair could do was smile and sound good giving speeches written by other people. The truth is that many - easily a majority - of voters don't look online for hours about a candidate, having spent years reading poltical thought. They go with common sense, who seems honest and likely to appeal.

Now we all know Ron has well thought out policies, is honest, a kind man, that he was a doctor and in the Air Force and that he has repeatedly been proven correct on his predictions in economic policy and foreign policy. Yet people talk about Obama and Huckabee?? It's all about presentation. And the HQ should not shy away from it. It is sad but Ron needs to prepare answers better for TV. No two ways about it for mass appeal. And some ruthless, hard-headed political strategists are needed. There must be some up and coming ones or some with a maverick streak who would relish the chance to work for Paul: A guy all they have to do with is get the truth out.


On a related note - what is the situation with money? Does anyone understand what's going on? I assumed RP wanted the money to go "all in" for Iowa and NH, get 1st or 2nd then come away as a front-runner. Yet from the stats I've seen they hardly tried in these two states compared to other candidates. Is he going to save every cent then try to totally dominate national TV the week leading up to super tuesday? Or some other plan?
 
Last edited:
The election in NH was stolen - there's EVIDENCE just starting to come in of vote fraud.

http://blackboxvoting.org/

Do people like you deliberately look for vote fraud or what? If Ron Paul had been the winner in New Hampshire would you be so vigilant in looking for fraud? Of course you wouldn't because you would have thought it was sweet that Ron Paul had won and you wouldn't have questioned the vote at all. Give it up ... we lost ... period.
 
Back
Top