Have we lost the eye of the tiger?

[Joey Fuller]

The Eye of the Tiger still burns..

You can choose pure politics... dress nice, yes sir/no sir, and "act" like a Republican to reach a base of people who are comfortable with a more vanilla version of Ron Paul's message

OR you can be an activist... get a megaphone... post signs everywhere.. do sign waves... get an RV and start a gang called the Ron Paul Grannies.. etc.

OR

you can walk in both worlds... meet people where they are... if their minds can't comprehend monetary policy and the Federal Reserve.. then don't megaphone them.. instead give them a pamphlet about Ron Paul's antiabortion stance.

 

[KingRobbStark]

Not really sure why asking people to be more professional is "ball busting."

You cannot influence our country to to head in the right direction if you do not win in our democratic-representative system's elections. People running around naked do not help us accomplish that.

I beg to differ. Girls running around naked can still win us this election.

 

[AlexAmore]

Pffft I would suppress my spirit. I would shake hands with the big boys and indoctrinate myself with the elite bankers. I would spit out all their rhetoric and soundbites. I would do all this because it would mean I'm going to be president and now I can beat this machine from the inside out. I would make sure even if I got killed I would have gotten the important stuff out to the public prior in some manner.

Of course there is room for both sides. We need educators like Ron Paul and people reaching out with the message.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

"Sale the sole"? Really? Perhaps myself and others would have taken your message more seriously if you had considered packaging it in a more grammatically and orthographically correct fashion. I'm not really bothered by that, I'm just saying it more to make a point. Thinking about how you appear to others is not fun, things would be easier if we didn't have to worry about marketing, but there is no avoiding it. Its just a practical requirement you have to learn to accept. Cost-benefit analysis is also not a very fun or spontaneous practice, but it is absolutely required in a depressed economy that has most people feeling frugal. So while a blimp may be fun to you, is it worth all the money it takes? Can't you have fun spreading the message in a more cost effective fashion? I don't see why not.



Instead of voting based on passive aggressive sentiments, it would be better if you just didn't vote. That would be a more tangible "fuck you" message to the establishment anyways.

I'm interpreting this thread to be more of a vent than a policy recommendation. But you are at least vaguely right in the sense that it is better to have fun spreading the message. Spreading the message effectively and having fun are not mutually exclusive, but one must consider which of the two is the more important end goal (the former). We can have fun in our everyday lives if we can't get all our fun out of spreading the message.

But, you see, we're not trying to win over the "big party guys", we are trying to win over the Republican VOTERS. If we react to them like they are the enemy, just how many votes do you think we are going to win over for Ron Paul?

The Eye of the Tiger still burns..

You can choose pure politics... dress nice, yes sir/no sir, and "act" like a Republican to reach a base of people who are comfortable with a more vanilla version of Ron Paul's message

OR you can be an activist... get a megaphone... post signs everywhere.. do sign waves... get an RV and start a gang called the Ron Paul Grannies.. etc.

OR

you can walk in both worlds... meet people where they are... if their minds can't comprehend monetary policy and the Federal Reserve.. then don't megaphone them.. instead give them a pamphlet about Ron Paul's antiabortion stance.

+111

 

[BUSHLIED]

Ron brought into so many people that have been out of mainstream politics that there is a learning curve for many of them. On the other hand, many of these people are just "different.." rebels if you will. The mainstream is always going to reject these rebels as long as they act like rebels. Believe it or not, many of the rebels in the 60s are now the suit/tie people of the 2000s...you learn that if you want to change the system, you make some super-fiscal compromises to be accepted by the group....if you don't want to do that, well good luck...I'll do whatever I have to win without compromising "policy" Meaning I won't sell out my fundamental beliefs but short of that, one should do whatever it takes..if Ron really believes what he is saying, he should be fighting hard...otherwise his message is undercut by a passivity that doesn't reflect the urgency of his claims...which is why I am still on the fence, and that is why many have lost the eye of the tiger when it comes to Ron's Candidacy, but not the message of liberty.

 

[sailingaway]

No one but you has suggested they lost enthusiasm for Ron's candidacy, they were talking about campaigning modes. And I think most of us know how to wear a suit and tie. To me, the issue is outreach, and for outreach we have to work to those other people's concerns, and respect their sensibilities. If you think of it as sales, it's easy. You don't boo people and shout when you are trying to persuade people to buy something....

 

[BUSHLIED]

No one but you has suggested they lost enthusiasm for Ron's candidacy, they were talking about campaigning modes. And I think most of us know how to wear a suit and tie. To me, the issue is outreach, and for outreach we have to work to those other people's concerns, and respect their sensibilities. If you think of it as sales, it's easy. You don't boo people and shout when you are trying to persuade people to buy something....

To me the suggestion by the OP "lost the eye of the tiger" translates into lack of enthusiasm for Ron's candidacy...how else would explain it?

 

[sailingaway]

To me the suggestion by the OP "lost the eye of the tiger" translates into lack of enthusiasm for Ron's candidacy...how else would explain it?

If you read the post, he is saying that people saying supporters shouldn't be excited and creative and shout etc makes it less fun, and more ordinary. THAT is what he calls losing the eye of the tiger. Us blending in. I do understand what he means, and I am all for creativity, but there is never need for rudeness, which I think is all anyone has really been cautioning against.

 

[BUSHLIED]

Ok, I get that part too. I disagree with the OP...perhaps he is young or doesn't understand politics enough to realize that politics is BORING and BLAND...all you have to do is watch CSPAN for a week to see what really takes place within the halls of government. Besides there is a huge generational clash going on, which the baby boomers largely still in charge of government...just take a look who works in Washington DC and the federally bureaucracies. the closest place one can relate to government is colleges..particularly internal college meetings..

 

[MartyMoose]

The spirit of a revolution, of the rebirth of an entire nation, has been awakened by the careful footsteps of tyranny.

 

[sorianofan]

Ron Paul has not changed...but I do miss seeing the Ron Paul signs everywhere.

 

[Sentinelrv]

You don't have to give up your enthusiasm or sacrifice your beliefs in order to get Ron Paul elected. You do however need to go about things in a much smarter way. You can't ignore reality and think you can still win. Marketing and appearance are important, fact. In order to get people to vote for Ron, you need to show them that he has the ability to win and that his presidency will benefit them. Trying to convince people by calling their preferred candidates big government shills and opposing them by telling them flatly that they're wrong and trying to explain why Ron is right will do nothing to help us win the election. We need to understand sales and marketing and how to persuade people into voting for our candidate.

Unfortunately, this requires toning down the high energy and attitude and becoming more similar in appearance to the people we're trying to win over. This is what you're rebelling against, but it's also what will win us the most votes. In order to gain rapport and trust with the voters you intend to convert, you need to give off the appearance of similarity. You need to show them that you understand them, their beliefs, values and concerns. Opposing them creates conflict, lack of rapport and tust. Only by appearing similar to the voter will they trust your judgement enough to vote for Ron. You can still have enthusiasm for what you're doing, but you need to take reality into consideration and how you're coming across to other people in order to be most effective. It has nothing to do with giving up on your enthusiasm or sacrificing your values and beliefs. It's about working smarter so that you reach the maximum amount of voters.

 

[Travlyr]

The economic stimulus has kicked the can down the road, but it has not created an employment boom. It is awfully tough to predict the future, but by this time next year we will likely see more unrest than we see now.
Next year's presidential election will be about the economy and the wars.

The eye of the tiger? The tiger is just resting up during the calm before the storm.
Onward and forward however works for you. The truth is on our side.

Ron Paul 2012!
If the GOP rejects his principled stands, then Ron Paul anyway no matter what.

 

[SilentBull]

My guess is that you are one of those supporters that is happier when we are losing, because it makes you feel better to be the outcast. You are more comfortable when everyone hates our ideas, so you can have them all to yourself and feel good about the fact that you are smarter than those who do not accept liberty.

What is it about winning that scares you?

 

[Revolution9]

If the OP's post was just to be a monologue, I guess he shouldn't have ended it with "What say you?".

No one suggested anyone should lose their spirit. That said, we were political neophytes last time around. Hopefully, since then we've learned a few things. Personally, I think it would be pretty fantastic if we did the things necessary to win. But, that's just me.

Folks certainly did in a back handed manner. This back handed crap is killing folks enthusiasm big time. So you win the repub nomination and turn off independents because it looks just like establishment repub politics. No win there..not even ideally or philosophically as it was a sell-out. Nobody can say at this point what the necessary things to do in total to win are. Individually, each of us has to win with whatever trips the trigger. And i did not infer the OP was a monologue, however the answers to it at first made it appear he asked a simple question instead of posing a multi-faceted analysis based on his perceptions. They were simply votes to the negative with no explanation as to why and alot of "me three".

Best Regards
Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

but there is never need for rudeness, which I think is all anyone has really been cautioning against.

And that cautionary can be maddening in its implications in the manner it is always tossed into the mix. Pure absolute redundancy is the key to its annoying qualities.

HTH
Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

My guess is that you are one of those supporters that is happier when we are losing, because it makes you feel better to be the outcast. You are more comfortable when everyone hates our ideas, so you can have them all to yourself and feel good about the fact that you are smarter than those who do not accept liberty.

What is it about winning that scares you?

Now this here is a frakking crock of steaming liberal psychobabble.

HTH
Rev9

 

[speciallyblend]

And that cautionary can be maddening in its implications in the manner it is always tossed into the mix. Pure absolute redundancy is the key to its annoying qualities.

HTH
Rev9

enjoying

KBK
Agent Orange

 

[Chieppa1]

Its pretty simple. We can try all we want to make Dr. Paul look like everyone else. But if you watch his interview in NH, the recent one. You can see right there that he has NO intention of pandering to his "base". So drop it and support the man.

 

[Gary W Trott]

I think in some circles part of the problem is not letting brainstorming take its course. If someone comes up with a different idea, it may be nixed or discouraged before the brainstorming process has run its course. Something completely ridiculous, if allowed to be discussed, arrives at a valid, useable idea. Think airplanes.We've got to have enough confidence that ideas will progress to thier best form if we allow the discussion.

I agree, and that is a mindset that we can all succumb to in some degree or another. It's the old, "We've always done it this way." syndrome which assumes that there cannot be other good ways to do something, and that by trying the new ways it will harm the effort. Get right down to it the blimp could fall into this category because while it is a method that was effectively used to foster name name recognition for Ron Paul, and very well could do a good job of that again, there is no saying that someone out there has an equally unique idea that could achieve the same purpose in 2011/12. We don't ever want to lose the belief in individual effort that set the Ron Paul campaign apart from the others four years ago because the belief in the individual is what Ron Paul's message is all about to begin with.