Have we lost the eye of the tiger?

[LibertyEagle]

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.

How could it be a sellout, when he has not changed his message?

I guess I'm confused, Rev. I thought we were trying to get Ron Paul elected. His message hasn't changed, so I'm not sure how that could kill independent enthusiasm. Maybe it's the fact that there are certain things that have to happen to get someone elected; like get them to the voting booth, that seems like it would be a turnoff. I'm talking about things like voter id, canvassing, GOTV. Boring stuff, yeah, but it has to happen, or all the blimps in the world, etc. are not going to matter a hill of beans, because our guy will LOSE.

Fact is, you approach different audiences, different ways. Last time around, some of us scared the crap out of the blue-haired Republican voters and closed their ears to even listening to Ron Paul. No, not everyone has to focus on the tried-and-true ways of getting someone elected, but some of us sure better. And those others who want to go down a different path, cool, but I hope while plans are being made the thought is always there to do no harm to Dr. Paul's chances of getting the Republican nomination. Regardless of how fun the plan may sound.

We also have another issue. We are lucky enough to have an overall youthful grassroots for Ron Paul. But, that also brings its challenges. I think that is one of the reasons why you see reminders about not being rude when we're at a Republican convention of any kind. Things like booing other Republican candidates or listening to Ron Paul and then walking out. Those types of things do not help our cause.

It's hard not to be kinda mad at people who haven't seen the light yet and refuse to support limited constitutional government. Because they, and people like them, are who has allowed this to happen to our country. But, if we treat them as enemies, we have lost the battle.

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.

True.

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".

Gotcha.

 

[BUSHLIED]

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.

I don't advocate pandering to HIS "base" which I assume you refer to Ron Paul supporters? The bottom line is IF he is running to WIN, as he has said, THEN he should be pandering to THE AMERICAN people. HIS ideas are GREAT and they make a lot of sense, BUT he has to make AMERICANS make sense of them...HE doesn't have to the NEWT of the party..BUT in his interview, I felt that he failed to adequately to connect the dots for people.

For example, he talks about property rights and say that if someone wants to pollute, property rights would take care of that...He goes from an abstract idea of property rights to stopping pollution. I just think that he doesn't effectively communicate his ideas in a way that the average American can understand...that is the problem and I am not being critical of him because I am sure that many people get what he is saying BUT he has to expand his bse of support and so he has to stop and connect all the dots for people...or I am wrong? am I totally not getting this?

Another example would be "states rights" it is not sufficient to just say let the states handle this and these problems are better settled at the local level. He has to make the case in more details by providing more connections and giving simply examples that people can understand. His answer on this was slightly better on this issue. But do you think that the average american who has never heard of these ideas is getting Dr. paul. Furthermore, what would he do as president that will magically allow the states to tackle these issues. Would he veto all bills that addressed these issues? Would he override executive orders? Would he sign an executive order?

As President how would he facilitate that these issues be dealt with at the state level?

As President how would he facilitate that property rights dealt with issues of environment pollution?

It is one to take a philosophical position on these issues and there is another thing to use the Presidency to help actualize these policies.

 

[IndianaPolitico]

Just remember that "The Eye of the Tiger" got us 5th in Iowa last time.....

 

[BUSHLIED]

Just remember that "The Eye of the Tiger" got us 5th in Iowa last time.....

so you mean that it didn't get us that far? and are you questioning if we even had the "eye of the tiger" please elaborate

 

[Carehn]

This has been fun. I will have to remember not to vent wile drinking cocktails.

I will need to go back and read my post and most all of yours but i think i just want to see a turning point really f-ing bad. Winning NH or the Bible state would be nice. This cannot be done without naked people and expensive blimps.

 

[V3n]

I think it's just early in the process. There's only been 2 televised debates. I think a lot of the folks here were around for the last bout, and we might have lost some enthusiasm, or maybe we lost some available time or money in the last 4 years.. I believe after some more air-time, a new generation of Liberty Lovers will step forward with the enthusiasm to pump-up us veterans and get us all excited again, it's just too early right now. (and I mean 'new generation' as in 'newly "awake"' regardless of age)

edit: of course it's never too early to start outreach projects - but like someone mentioned seeing signs everywhere - I don't want to put a yard-sign up until we get closer to the primaries - the election is still a year and a half away - unless you're avidly following politics you would think the sign is referring to something happening this November, and most of our neighbors do not follow politics as close as the people we talk to here.

 

[Chieppa1]

I don't advocate pandering to HIS "base" which I assume you refer to Ron Paul supporters? The bottom line is IF he is running to WIN, as he has said, THEN he should be pandering to THE AMERICAN people. HIS ideas are GREAT and they make a lot of sense, BUT he has to make AMERICANS make sense of them...HE doesn't have to the NEWT of the party..BUT in his interview, I felt that he failed to adequately to connect the dots for people.

For example, he talks about property rights and say that if someone wants to pollute, property rights would take care of that...He goes from an abstract idea of property rights to stopping pollution. I just think that he doesn't effectively communicate his ideas in a way that the average American can understand...that is the problem and I am not being critical of him because I am sure that many people get what he is saying BUT he has to expand his bse of support and so he has to stop and connect all the dots for people...or I am wrong? am I totally not getting this?

Another example would be "states rights" it is not sufficient to just say let the states handle this and these problems are better settled at the local level. He has to make the case in more details by providing more connections and giving simply examples that people can understand. His answer on this was slightly better on this issue. But do you think that the average american who has never heard of these ideas is getting Dr. paul. Furthermore, what would he do as president that will magically allow the states to tackle these issues. Would he veto all bills that addressed these issues? Would he override executive orders? Would he sign an executive order?

As President how would he facilitate that these issues be dealt with at the state level?

As President how would he facilitate that property rights dealt with issues of environment pollution?

It is one to take a philosophical position on these issues and there is another thing to use the Presidency to help actualize these policies.

I understand what you're saying. "He HAS to" "He SHOULD" "If he WANTS to win". Well, it doesn't seem like HE WANTS to. He wants to do it his way. And us arguing on an internet board about what he SHOULD do isn't going to do anything to change his mind. That's my point. We can debate back and forth how Ron Paul should spread his message. Only Ron Paul can decide that. Emailing his campaign and complaining won't change HIS mind if HE doesn't want to. I for one liked the way he spoke in the interview. He sat there and educated everyone in that room. Its why I support him. Because he talks to people like people. He genuinely wants them to understand so they can independently think for themselves. You can't fix stubborn. No method of spreading the message will change that. So he soldiers on.

Look at his response to the questions "What are 3 things you would do as President to fix the economy?" His answer: "Well it depends on what I can do, I'm not a dictator." That's awesome. At the same time, its the opposite of how any other candidate or politician would answer the question. They would rattle off a bunch of stuff they legally have no authority to do just to get votes. Dr. Paul on the other hand is educating the interviewer and audience with that type of answer. Problem is that most people are looking for the other type of answer. They won't get it from Ron. We as supporters can't expect him to give it. He is who he is. He's where he is today because of it.

Good questions that you asked at the end of your post. But I have a question for you. How is it Ron's fault that he hasn't addressed them? The interviewers he gets ask the same, simplistic questions they would ask all the other plastic candidates. You don't think if Ron was asked your questions in a televised debate/interview he could answer them?

 

[Revolution9]

How could it be a sellout, when he has not changed his message?

I guess I'm confused, Rev. I thought we were trying to get Ron Paul elected. His message hasn't changed, so I'm not sure how that could kill independent enthusiasm.

I was not referring to Ron who always sticks to his guns/principles. I was referring to the dampening of spirit amongst the grassroots by stricture and straw man broad brushes that leaves one to assume they have already or are going to do something wrong..so why bother.. This gambit is a mark of passive aggressive attacks. I would suggest folks stop the broad brush and use caveats as it generally sounds like the RP grassroots is just an irresponsible bunch of clowns who have to be reined in by the "grups" around here. It would be a much better method to approach your teammates with enthusiasm and caution specific behaviors. I am sure many take me for a wild card around here but I work with very well connected folks who walk in gilded halls and always remain myself. They are respected as Divine Creations and I am respected as an artist. I can always get them to laugh and the ones I didn't have always been a financial ripoff or a nickel and dime you to death kind of client. What I mean by that is that do not judge and broadbrush folks who are working with you based on slim reports and forum posts. They are, after all your teammates in the endeavor. Your part may be offense..may be defence..may be goalkeeper...may be cheerleader...maybe waterboy... But everyone playing the field in the same way will get the team defeated by even the most haphazard strew of opposing players.

Best Regards
Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

Just remember that "The Eye of the Tiger" got us 5th in Iowa last time.....

Pretty good for a guy "that came out of nowhere" in popular perception. I think the grassroots did an excellent job given the media regime and other mitigating factors such as throwing a wild card into the middle of the cabals hundred year plan and their response.

Best Regards
Rev9

 

[Maltheus]

The energy once seemed driven by the fact that nobody knew Ron Paul. We were able to play off of people's curiosity. Now he's a known element and associated with a co-opted Tea Party that has vehement opposition in this country.

The other big difference is that the first time around, he was a Republican challenging one of his own. Now Obama might not be the consummate liberal (some might debate this), but the left will naturally rally around him (the flag) and be less disposed to aid us in our cause.

Given that core members have been through the process, it's made us less naive and more cynical. And that attitude does clash somewhat with the more enthusiastic nature of the new members coming in. Where's the balance? Is this about trying to win/infiltrate the party or is it about building a larger group of liberty minded supporters?

I kind of think the answer is the latter, which means people like me should let the new members drive this and just pop out of the shadows every once in a while to make sure people are registered and know their precinct numbers, etc. This will be a long haul kind of battle. It's important that we make this campaign exciting enough to attract more youth.

 

[Romulus]

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.

Well said Joey.

No long faces - just DO SOMETHING that YOU are passionate about.

 

[ChrisDixon]

I think people need to realize that politics is a game. You're not restraining your freedom when you step back and act more presentable, you're managing your freedom. People need to stop whining about requests to get things together at times when it is needed. It's fine to be excited and energetic, I haven't seen anybody say stop entirely. But people need to stop being rude and obnoxious at major conventions or events, making us look like a parade of sixteen year olds at a live showing of American Idol. Does anyone here realize how many people out there have said they don't like Ron Paul, not because of Ron Paul, but because of Ron Paul supporters? I seldom go a day without dealing with someone who says that.

If people don't want to play the game and realize, that to some degree we have to be diplomatic, then we've already lost. Ron Paul has lost. And all of the attempts by our brilliant grassroots movement are futile.

Your choice, though.

 

[V3n]

Looking at the fervor over "Morning Joe" leaving off Ron Paul's contribution figures assures me we've still got "the Eye"!
We're still alive and strong, just looking for the project that will unify us all! The eye will find it's focus before the end, this is only the beginning.

 

[Karl]

I think I hear something?
Duh! Duh, Duh, Duh! Duh Duh Duh! Duh Duh Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

 

[acptulsa]

I don't say the OP is right or wrong--until after I ask who we're talking to today. There is no good collectivist approach to selling the ideal of individualism. Tailor the message.