I'm a Canadian that's been watching the primary run with great interest.
I first became interested in Ron Paul's candidacy after watching the "Ron Paul: A New Hope" video by eLIB3RTY and would love to see him elected.
I understand that Llepard and others have invested a great deal of time, money, energy, and care into making this. I applaud them and wish more than anything to see this rock the country.
The degree of exposure that this receives will make it a double edged sword. While it is clear that Ron Paul doesn't have a say in the ad (not having authorized it), any positive or negative impressions people get while reading it will be associated with him and his campaign nonetheless (which is the point).
Because of this, it is essential that every line is absolutely "bulletproof" because people who have a vested interest in seeing Ron Paul fail will be looking for things to latch on to and use against him (even if he had nothing to do with it).
I find the general theme of the ad being written by the Founding Fathers to be a problematic for a several of reasons…
It's a little awkward with the switches between the Founding Fathers speaking and the writer. For example, "An Open Letter to the American People" is supposedly written/spoken by the Founders. The lines after that, "In 1776 our Founding Fathers… but we have strayed from their wise counsel" is spoken by the someone else. The introduction to the list, "We The Founders" is written by the Founders.
As others have already mentioned, I think some caution needs to be taken in speaking with the assumption that the founders would endorse somebody. There are some people who might glance at the ad, get turned off by the premise, and stop reading. If even a few people reading this forum take it this way, it's guaranteed that maybe thousands of readers of the newspaper will feel the same way (if you think 1 person in 50 might be turned off by it, divide that by the number who will be reading the paper). Consider too, that readers of this forum will have a positive bias while reading the ad, so those reading the newspaper who are neutral or are currently leaning towards another candidate are more likely to interpret it negatively than readers here.
The problem with changing the wording of the endorsement by saying "For these reasons, The Founding Fathers would support the Ron Paul Revolution" is that it returns to the awkwardness of changing the speaker again. After that, the speaker changes again back to the founders where it says "We advise you to support Ron Paul for President with your time, fortunes and sacred honor" (which wouldn't work if you changed the previous line too)
Third thing - the method of using warnings, describing the current situation, and then saying what RP would do.
Saying "We the Founders warned of…" invites debunkers to go searching on the internet to see if they really warned of these things. Not having studied US history, I don't know what they warned about, but it's a good idea to make sure you can find a quote by one of the founders that relates to every single warning listed.
Regarding the overall tone, I feel it is important that the ad uplifts and inspires. Something that connects with people's emotions and gets them excited about the possibilities. Where they'll think "WOW, I didn't know someone like this was out there!!" and jump on the internet to look him up. At the same time, care needs to be taken that the message isn't presented in a way that people might interpret as being emotionally manipulative.
This is easy though, because the message is exciting and, for the most part, sells itself. I think people just need to be reminded about these wonderful ideals. After that, it's easy to sell RP by mentioning his consistent voting record. Stressing how he has voted in the past helps to build trust and shows his integrity even in the face of tremendous opposition (the many times he was the only person voting against when 450 or more were in favor).
This trust and his integrity counts for a great deal. It's one of the reasons he has been reelected so many times even though he doesn't cater to the special interests of his voters (like subsidies).
Here's an example of an ad that gives the gist of the kind of tone I mean (I just made it up, and have no attachment to it, so feel free to take whatever you wish from it, whether it's a few words, everything, or nothing at all)...
------------
Imagine
Imagine an America…
That is a shining example of peace, prosperity, and freedom.
That is a friend to all nations,
And is loved, admired, and respected by all.
With a stable, growing, and powerful economy.
An economy that not only enriches its our lives,
but also uplifts and empowers all the world's countries.
Whose government is a fierce protector of its citizen's freedom and liberty.
This government is wise, for it understands that this starts within its own borders,
and that it is not possible to preserve freedom through the removal of liberties.
I imagine that this is the vision our Founding Fathers had when they created our Constitution.
There is a man who has stood unwaveringly his whole life for these principles and has not lost sight of this vision.
He defended them in the Air Force, and protects them now as a Congressman.
Today he is running for President of the United States under the Republican Party.
Ron Paul is a steadfast defender of the Constitution and the ideals upon which this country has been founded.
[and continue describing his policies]
If this vision of America inspires you as much as it does me, please support Ron Paul in the Republican Primaries.
----------------------
To keep the tone positive and consistent, I would not mention what is wrong or make any pointed remarks about other candidates or current administration.
For example with the war in Iraq, I would mention he voted against it every step of the way and is the only Republican candidate (Kucinich would also bring them home on the Democratic side, so it wouldn't be accurate to say "the only candidate") who would bring the troops home immediately.
It's sort of along the lines of an interview I saw recently where the interviewer was saying he was "anti-this, anti-that, etc." and RP countered saying, each of those things can be turned into a positive - I'm pro-small government, pro-liberty, pro-non-interventionist foreign policy, pro-sound finances, etc.
I don't think it's necessary to lay out every single thing he stands for - the major points, definitely (rewatch some of his interviews to see what issues he brings up the most), but I think the aim of the ad should be to generate interest/excitement. Once they have that, they'll look him up and be hooked. So don't be afraid to leave some things out to give make the ad easier to read with more open space.
