Glenn Beck has "had it up to here" with us (Ron Paul Supporters)

[CaptLouAlbano]

Ok, so how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans have you two converted with this approach?

And how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans remain Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans precisely because the host mocks opposing ideologies?

Give us a list of successful converts, or else the evidence is against you. Until you can show us numbers, I'm going to remain convinced that you secretly like it when we take hard stands on issues like this because it means you get to come to this site and try to shove everyone around for it.

Well in my precinct we had 481 voters turnout for the primary. Paul received around 10 percent of the vote, which is lower than his statewide total by 3 points, but is m4 points greater than his percentage in my county. Paul's support in my community as a whole was dampened, I believe, by the fact that he was the only one of the presidential contenders that did not visit our community. We have a total of 13,000 residents in our gated community, and it is generally considered as a "must visit" stop for anyone running for elected office. I think if Paul actually campaigned here, he may have had better results.

But to answer your question more specifically, I personally knocked on about 250 doors with literature in hand. I was well received since I have personal contact with every one of these folks, through my other community activities. But I don't seek to "convert" people, all I do when canvassing is find out the issues that are important to them, address those issues with the solutions the candidate is providing, and ask for their support on election day.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Excellent point, and something that I think needs to be emphasized over and over. You don't grow a movement by mocking everyone who doesn't agree with you 100%, and I see so much of that on this and other sites like it. I think there are three possible reasons:

1) Those who do so are socially/politically immature and do not realize that their actions will cause people to reject them.

2) Those who do so incorrectly think that there are plenty of other people out there that can be reached and therefore we don't need to reach average GOP voters. There are not.

3) Those who do so really don't want the movement to grow because they prefer to be part of a fringe movement, therefore if the fringe movement grows it is no loner fringe and fails to meet their desire.

I disagree...Rush Limbaugh has made a career out of mocking those with whom he disagrees, and he has been fairly successful in growing his radio audience by doing so.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I disagree...Rush Limbaugh has made a career out of mocking those with whom he disagrees, and he has been fairly successful in growing his radio audience by doing so.

Well then I imagine time will tell whether this movement will be able to grow from the point it is now with that tactic.

 

[No1butPaul]

You know, when I think about it, it really makes may day that we are pissing him (them) off so much! The must have missed that early life lesson - actions have consequences.

 

[jeremiahj13]

I had it up to here with Glen Beck.... like a boss!

 

[phill4paul]

Seems to me that would be the same as the second one I posted. If you don't think these people can ever be reached, then you must assume that there are a lot of other people that can be reached. I disagree. In order for candidates we support to win elected office, we need the support of not only hardcore libertarians, but the average Republican as well. That is how Rand, Massie, Amash, Cruz, and every other candidate that Paul has endorsed has won their races. Unless of course you think that of the 755,000 people that voted for Rand, not a single one of them was a listener to Glenn Beck's show.

Personally, I think the liberty message is a persuasive one when presented correctly. If we find areas of common agreement with people, we then have the opportunity to demonstrate our solutions for issues where we might have disagreement, and we can do so without mocking or insulting them.

8.5 million listeners. Yes, there are plenty of others that can be reached. I don't pander. It's part of that integrity thing that attracts people to Ron Paul. Glen Beck is a shill and I have no problem calling him or those that follow him out on it.

 

[Barrex]

Sorry guys I simply dont see it.... I simply dont see Glenns sex-appeal...I see that a lot of you want to have some sexual relationship with him but I dont...

Why did you guys skipped ignoring him and jumped to ridiculing him?

 

[July]

Well then I imagine time will tell whether this movement will be able to grow from the point it is now with that tactic.

This kind of tactic may work fine for entertainers and media personalities--being controversial and polarizing is good for ratings...and it works in that format. It doesn't always work that well for politicians though, in my opinion. When the polarization gets so intense, people become afraid to think outside the box, and it encourages this sort of dogmatic thinking where people don't want to listen to what the opposition has to say. They just start to look at the other side as an opposing team.

I'm not saying it's bad or wrong to criticize, don't get me wrong. But it should perhaps be tempered a bit with some openness and diplomacy.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Ok, so how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans have you two converted with this approach?

And how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans remain Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans precisely because the host mocks opposing ideologies?

Give us a list of successful converts, or else the evidence is against you. Until you can show us numbers, I'm going to remain convinced that you secretly like it when we take hard stands on issues like this because it means you get to come to this site and try to shove everyone around for it.

You are seriously saying that to ME? GET TO COME TO THIS SITE? ROFLMAO.

 

[fisharmor]

You are seriously saying that to ME? GET TO COME TO THIS SITE? ROFLMAO.

shove, shove

 

[LibertyEagle]

Ok, so how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans have you two converted with this approach?

And how many Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans remain Beck/Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly fans precisely because the host mocks opposing ideologies?

Give us a list of successful converts, or else the evidence is against you. Until you can show us numbers, I'm going to remain convinced that you secretly like it when we take hard stands on issues like this because it means you get to come to this site and try to shove everyone around for it.

Actually, most of the people that I introduced Ron Paul to were people in this crowd. There is no way for me to know actual numbers, because I don't sit there and browbeat people to the point of exhaustion. But, of the people I run into, yes, many of them voted for Ron Paul, if not in the first election, this latest one. Some it took awhile and for the stuff to simmer.

 

[LibertyEagle]

shove, shove

I was here before you, fishy. So, you're not "getting me to come to this site".

And interestingly, it was the reputation of some rude Ron Paul supporters that had kept many of them from looking into Ron Paul much earlier.

There is nothing wrong with taking hard stands on things, it's good in fact, but unnecessarily bad-mouthing Beck's listeners, for example isn't taking a "hard stand" on an issue. It's just being rude and unnecessarily driving a wedge that doesn't need to be there. I have noticed the same in some of the articles from Mises, and their wedge-building between conservatives (real ones are libertarian-conservatives) and libertarians. It's short-sighted and stupid, and does nothing to further spread the message.

In case people didn't realize it, this isn't now, nor has it ever been, just a libertarian movement. It has been a movement for everyone who wanted liberty.

 

[Okie RP fan]

Mhmm...
Why are there 10 pages devoted to this guy if he is a "nobody" and doesn't have an audience?

You know, myself and just a few others on here have always said that Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, and Beck have TENS OF MILLIONS of listeners. And most of those are registered Republicans. They are very influential in what they say.
But, people mocked and said not to worry about anything. I beg to differ.

Had two, or perhaps even one of those goons endorsed Ron, we probably would have outright won one state's popular vote. Seriously. Beck's endorsement of Santorum is what kept Santorum going for a little while, in my opinion. Just sayin'...

Anyway, our people need to be calling in today and try to set the record straight. I can't because I will be in classes throughout the morning.

You know, I really respected and enjoyed Beck when he was on FNC. He was exposing a lot of the high profile banking and political influencers. I think that's what Murdoch didn't like (because many problems could be traced back to him with his connections), and fired Beck for it. I even enjoy some of Beck's books.

Since then, though, it's like he and his family were threatened and he has completely flip flopped on what he supposedly stood for. His angst for Ron Paul has been apparent since day one, and I can't understand why besides Beck's shilling for Israel (I'm assuming there has to be something else at play).

 

[LibertyEagle]

I disagree...Rush Limbaugh has made a career out of mocking those with whom he disagrees, and he has been fairly successful in growing his radio audience by doing so.

Must I say the obvious? YOU are not Rush Limbaugh.

 

[LibertyEagle]

8.5 million listeners. Yes, there are plenty of others that can be reached. I don't pander. It's part of that integrity thing that attracts people to Ron Paul. Glen Beck is a shill and I have no problem calling him or those that follow him out on it.

It's interesting, Phill. I don't think anyone is either ALL bad, or ALL good. Beck did get to a lot of people to make them understand that there is little difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. For awhile there, he was actually pretty good. He even had an hour long interview with G. Edward Griffin about the Federal Reserve bank. If you don't think that one hour opened the eyes of one hell of a lot of people, you are very wrong.

Over time, Glenn seemed to go back to the red team vs. blue team paradigm and I never really trusted him. But, that doesn't mean he cannot be useful to some degree and it certainly doesn't mean that his listeners are not low-hanging fruit for Ron's message.

You say he's a shill and you probably are right. But, most people here know that I honestly think the same thing about Alex Jones. But, to the extent that they can open the eyes of their listeners on even a few issues, it's my opinion that it is a net gain.

When all is said and done, even us here do not agree on every issue.

 

[Liberty74]

Beck is a FAKE just like his Satan fascist Santorum who wants to control how you live.

Beck talks a good talk about being against the FED, promoting gold, and abolishing the IRS. But talk is talk, his support for fake conservatives and his constant, never ending hate bashing of Ron Paul and his supporters speaks volumes. Beck is a fake for sure used by the elites to herd the Republican party into the fires of hell just like Levin, Hannity, Rush do. That hell is the criminal NWO where there is no such thing as a free person. Now go into debt you slave and pay the central bankers who control everything.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Must I say the obvious? YOU are not Rush Limbaugh.

Aw, that's the nicest thing you've ever said to me, LE.

 

[Spikender]

I was here before you, fishy. So, you're not "getting me to come to this site".

And interestingly, it was the reputation of some rude Ron Paul supporters that had kept many of them from looking into Ron Paul much earlier.

There is nothing wrong with taking hard stands on things, it's good in fact, but unnecessarily bad-mouthing Beck's listeners, for example isn't taking a "hard stand" on an issue. It's just being rude and unnecessarily driving a wedge that doesn't need to be there. I have noticed the same in some of the articles from Mises, and their wedge-building between conservatives (real ones are libertarian-conservatives) and libertarians. It's short-sighted and stupid, and does nothing to further spread the message.

In case people didn't realize it, this isn't now, nor has it ever been, just a libertarian movement. It has been a movement for everyone who wanted liberty.

Precisely. Beck was the one who brought me to Ron Paul in the first place, and, while I'm disappointed that Beck ended up being against Paul and his supporters, I appreciate that he did in fact change the way I look at politics forever.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Precisely. Beck was the one who brought me to Ron Paul in the first place, and, while I'm disappointed that Beck ended up being against Paul and his supporters, I appreciate that he did in fact change the way I look at politics forever.

Beck was never FOR Paul and his supporters. He didn't just "end up" there.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Beck was never FOR Paul and his supporters. He didn't just "end up" there.

Who cares? This isn't a popularity contest we are in. It is about issues and principles.