How Well Has HQ Managed This Campaign?

[ronpaulfan]

Vote before you read any posts. Keep this thread bumped for a bigger sample.

 

[ronpaulfan]

Be honest

 

[Austin]

6.

They cost us Iowa, and they are costing us Michigan.

 

[Zeteo]

Dr. Paul appearing on TV (debates, interviews) and the spontaneous grassroots actions have been the essence of the campaign so far. All I've seen the official campaign staff do was to run some rather unprofessional looking (and, as it turned out, rather ineffective) commercials and issue some rather uninspiring press releases.

The TV ads could have been placed more fortunately, too. I was watching TV in NH the hour before midnight on New Year's Eve. Saw several Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Romney ads (even attack ads). Nothing about Dr. Paul.

 

[leglock]

3

They have INCREDIBILY horrible PR.

 

[srp]

3 for effort

 

[Dlynne]

Thank you for putting up this poll. I hope the results makes somebody sit up and take notice.

 

[zzxf]

What bothers me is they don't make him look professional. The difference in appearance between all the other victory/concession speeches and Ron Paul's was striking. Why do you think the media loves Huckabee? Because even though he doesn't have any money or experience whatsoever, he always looks polished. He knows how to cater to the media.

Would it really have been so hard to put people behind Ron Paul on the stage, have someone formally introduce him, play popular music, and show him how to give good sound bytes for the media instead of encouraging the "end the fed" chant?

He has enough money now -- he needs to choose an experienced campaign manager. I mean, please, he can give random speeches on the gold standard all he wants, but when he's on national tv, he needs to emphasize the things America understands -- like ending the Iraq war and the income tax. And whenever he appears on tv, he needs to look presidential.

After all, as we've seen today, most voters are idiots. They think McCain will end the war in Iraq and Huckabee will lower taxes and Romney will end abortion. They're stupid. As depressing as it may be, Ron Paul needs to keep that in mind when he's delivering his message. Appearance is everything!!!

 

[ClayTrainor]

not well unfortunately.

The ads are amateurish, and the money is not being spent in the right places, imo.

I think a new staff would be a wise decision for the good dr.

 

[Jae0]

3.

 

[RPFTW!]

3

our commercials were horrible, our infomercial sucked, and the campaign had no idea how to sell rp, they tried way to hard to play by the rules and be politically correct and were to afraid to say anything controversial.

next time we should just take control and do chipins for good commercials and do more stuff like the blimp etc

 

[ronpaulfan]

3.

 

[arctica2]

I voted 3 before I read any posts, it's amazing how much of a consensus there is at 2-4. Respect for RP got my 3. But seriously, HQ needs to launch some aggressive-ish policy ads, because RP isn't going to attack other candidates in person (ala McCain, Romney, Huck, Thompson, Ghouliani...).

 

[Liberty Star]

Not very well.

Ads sucked and undermined RP's message in case of recent 'terrorist nations' ad and hurt support. Grassroots ads on YT were much better.

 

[Feelgood]

Fuck you Frank!

 

[walt]

anyone who voted 10 must be an illegal alien.

 

[colin1]

0-3

Five people voted a 10? And people say the campaign staff doesn't post here

Say what you will but we've blown the early primaries, and the polls I've seen over at realclearpolitics (which were pretty accurate for the Repubs in IA and NH) have us dead last in Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina and Florida.

Assuming that the primary purpose of a campaign is to win an election, I think the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt, that they suck.

 

[Paul4Prez]

I voted 7. With limited resources early on, facing a biased media and an apathetic voting public, they've slowly and steadily increased Ron Paul's visibility and viability, with a lot of help from us, of course.

How much better could they have done, really? 13% in Iowa would have been nice, to match McCain and Thompson, and 11% in New Hampshire, to match Huckabee, but it's just not easy when the media keeps focusing on the top two candidates in each state.

I think their only significant mistake so far is hiding Ron Paul's anti-war position in their mailers and ads. It's his key differentiator in the race, and even in the Republican party up to 30% want out of Iraq. Ron Paul has spoken boldly about it in the debates, but very few people actually watch those.

I say it's time to really pull out the stops, and go full out for the freedom message. Americans may not be ready for it yet, but it will get people a lot more inspired to vote for Ron Paul than just making him out to be a nicer and more conservative Republican than the other guys.

Instead of "Hope for America", how about changing the theme to "Save America, While You Still Can!"

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

There could of been an immense amount of avenues and branches to take this campaign to winning... traveling down a quiet 2 lane road to nowhere... doesn't mount to much SUCCESS.

The GRASSROOTS' single individual efforts & RESULTS were a majority of the time SUPERIOR to anything the "Paid Campaign Staff" released.

 

[CTAC]

I'm in California, so it is hard to tell. But FoxNews debate was a real success. I tell about that at every door I knock into. Fuck you, Frank!