I am convinced that people who hate the official campaign do so out of ignorance of it.

[BUSHLIED]

Here is an article that came out today bashing Paul's comments on bin Laden. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/268647/bin-laden-ron-paul-and-founders-marion-smith

So, the concern is real BUT finding the right approach is MOST important to getting these matters resolved.

 

[miracleintexas]

Our biggest problem is the candidate himself. Dr Paul just let's it all hang out. Dr RAnd Paul didn't. He got neocons to vote for him. Ron doesn't care as long as he let's it all out. He should defer drug....prostitution.....and yes even foreign policy answers. Stick to the economy. You want ideals......fine....right books. But if you want to win.......think winning strategy. Osama being arrested is not a winning strategy. Defer......put up your shield and swing the sword of the economy like Rand did. RAnd would do better than Ron. His winning record is already much better than Ron

 

[devil21]

How long do we wait to see if the official campaign has improved? After Super Tuesday?

Im in the boat that see the official campaign with a sideways look. So far Ive seen the campaign lag behind the grassroots in nearly everything. Benton isn't even the spokesman anymore. He's the friggin campaign chair! He made so many of us cringe during the 2008 campaign and now he's the captain of the boat. I see the comparisons to Rand's campaign but let's be real here, Rand won because of what he was saying and our support. His official campaign mostly just stayed out of the way. I need to see big improvement and quickly. Where's the event calendar on the website? I signed up to volunteer a month ago and haven't gotten a word other than fundraising emails.

 

[anaconda]

Consider me singled out: Here's Ron with pancake, pink lipstick, badly in need of a professional haircut, probably still getting over a cold, distracting multi-colored books in the background, and mixed with excerpts from one of his more poorly delivered speeches during the campaign. I disagree with the auto mechanic analogy. It doesn't take great expertise to decide if a television ad is compelling and effective or not. I agree that we should not be divisive or bitterly negative. But there is a saying that goes something like: "You can kill the official campaign with kindness or save the official campaign with criticism." The production quality for television promotion was beyond poor and it probably needs to be said.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Consider me singled out: Here's Ron with pancake, pink lipstick, badly in need of a professional haircut, probably still getting over a cold, distracting multi-colored books in the background, and mixed with excerpts from one of his more poorly delivered speeches during the campaign. I disagree with the auto mechanic analogy. It doesn't take great expertise to decide if a television ad is compelling and effective or not. I agree that we should not be divisive or bitterly negative. But there is a saying that goes something like: "You can kill the official campaign with kindness or save the official campaign with criticism." The production quality for television promotion was beyond poor and it probably needs to be said.

I'm not singling anyone out. I admire you, anaconda, why would I do that?

For what it's worth, television ads are way different than actual campaign operations from a grassroots supporter's position. You can judge on commercials because they are directed AT YOU. Actual campaign operations probably do take a good amount of expertise, which is the source of the complaint in the first place (beside paranoid people casting doubt on the intentions of the campaign staff), but like I said, we don't really have the know-how to make judgments on all of these little things that we want to see but don't. The campaign can't be expected to fulfill our every whim and wish.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Consider me singled out: Here's Ron with pancake, pink lipstick, badly in need of a professional haircut, probably still getting over a cold, distracting multi-colored books in the background, and mixed with excerpts from one of his more poorly delivered speeches during the campaign. I disagree with the auto mechanic analogy. It doesn't take great expertise to decide if a television ad is compelling and effective or not. I agree that we should not be divisive or bitterly negative. But there is a saying that goes something like: "You can kill the official campaign with kindness or save the official campaign with criticism." The production quality for television promotion was beyond poor and it probably needs to be said.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but as I recall that infomercial was created by a grassroots supporter. We had been wagging about how we could do it better and this was the result. Just sayin'...

 

[anaconda]

Correct me if I am wrong here, but as I recall that infomercial was created by a grassroots supporter. We had been wagging about how we could do it better and this was the result. Just sayin'...

Interesting. I did not know that it was a grassroots production. Yet, I certainly am not making the claim that the grassroots is any better prepared to create video promotions. This infomercial was poor quality. Yet, with regard to PaulConventionWV's thoughts, it may very well be that the official campaign was able to save a bundle on creating a video at that time. And PaulConventionWV might very well suggest that the official campaign put the savings toward some other use that had greater benefits for the campaign. And furthermore we are not privy to what those decisions were. Which is a valid point. I may be completely wrong in assuming that slick TV spots are a good investment when compared to other tactics, such as mailers, radio, hiring staff and funding offices, transporting Ron to campaign locations, and so on.

 

[anaconda]

I'm not singling anyone out. I admire you, anaconda, why would I do that?

For what it's worth, television ads are way different than actual campaign operations from a grassroots supporter's position. You can judge on commercials because they are directed AT YOU. Actual campaign operations probably do take a good amount of expertise, which is the source of the complaint in the first place (beside paranoid people casting doubt on the intentions of the campaign staff), but like I said, we don't really have the know-how to make judgments on all of these little things that we want to see but don't. The campaign can't be expected to fulfill our every whim and wish.

Your OP was well written and worthwhile. I did not mean to suggest that you were singling me out. You stated clearly that you were not singling anyone out. Rather, I "singled myself out" and suggested that there is room for healthy criticism of the campaign. My choice of words was poor when I said "consider me singled out." My apologies.

 

[BlackTerrel]

+1 to the OP.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

This.

Why is it wrong to point out that other campaigns are handling themselves professionally and well and the Paul campaign isn't anywhere close to the same league?

If the moneybomb does well (and I think it will) I'd like to see Ron hire more (or better) media/PR consultants. If he doesn't, and the campaign keeps chugging along at the same pace (albeit with more $$$) with no significant changes in Ron's (and the campaign's) image, I'll be reluctant to donate again to a campaign that isn't willing to make a professional PR effort.

For example, even though Cain gets free media coverage, whoever is calling the shots behind the scenes knows what they're doing. For example, his new campaign song features vocals by the winner of American Idol. It's obvious it was a professional effort done by professional musicians in a studio. And he's a Christian, and he sings primarily country music. This is brilliant PR. I heard it all over talk radio yesterday. I know, I know, Cain is establishment, has connections to powerful people, etc., but Ron needs to at least try and compete with this or we have no chance to connect with the average voter.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

This. Another series of miscues by the campaign that is basic, working order to any other professional campaign.

And, don't expect the official campaign to respond to any of the pieces bashing Ron's bin Laden stance.

Rand also won because the political tide was simply right for a candidate like him. Not to mention a Senate race has much smaller fish. I believe in this case, the name recognition worked well in his favor. The presidential race is a totally different ball-game.

How long do we wait to see if the official campaign has improved? After Super Tuesday?

Im in the boat that see the official campaign with a sideways look. So far Ive seen the campaign lag behind the grassroots in nearly everything. Benton isn't even the spokesman anymore. He's the friggin campaign chair! He made so many of us cringe during the 2008 campaign and now he's the captain of the boat. I see the comparisons to Rand's campaign but let's be real here, Rand won because of what he was saying and our support. His official campaign mostly just stayed out of the way. I need to see big improvement and quickly. Where's the event calendar on the website? I signed up to volunteer a month ago and haven't gotten a word other than fundraising emails.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

This. Another series of miscues by the campaign that is basic, working order to any other professional campaign.

And, don't expect the official campaign to respond to any of the pieces bashing Ron's bin Laden stance.

Rand also won because the political tide was simply right for a candidate like him. Not to mention a Senate race has much smaller fish. I believe in this case, the name recognition worked well in his favor. The presidential race is a totally different ball-game.

There's no convincing you. I gave you a bunch of points, and so did many others, but you ignored them and instead talked about your own misgivings. I am just curious and wanted to ask you what you think you're accomplishing by spreading negativity about the campaign? It's an honest question.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Young one, you've failed to recognize the number of already apparent missteps by the campaign I and others have pointed out for you.

You started a thread about "ignorance" and a number of individuals have chimed in to explain to you exactly why they take this campaign with a grain of salt.

But, like I said at the beginning, you certainly have room to make that claim, considering you're in college. I'm sure you're paying that entire tuition by yourself, too, right? Kid, I think you're too young to make the brash and generalized assumption you made with your original post. When you're entirely on your own dime, then feel free to call people ignorant. You haven't even stepped into the real world yet and you have the nerve to criticize people that donate money when it's a stretch for them, only to see it pissed away.

I'd like to see you defend the the issues about the campaign brought up by the last 5 or so posters. Please, try it.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Young one, you've failed to recognize the number of already apparent missteps by the campaign I and others have pointed out for you.

You started a thread about "ignorance" and a number of individuals have chimed in to explain to you exactly why they take this campaign with a grain of salt.

But, like I said at the beginning, you certainly have room to make that claim, considering you're in college. I'm sure you're paying that entire tuition by yourself, too, right? Kid, I think you're too young to make the brash and generalized assumption you made with your original post. When you're entirely on your own dime, then feel free to call people ignorant. You haven't even stepped into the real world yet and you have the nerve to criticize people that donate money when it's a stretch for them, only to see it pissed away.

I'd like to see you defend the the issues about the campaign brought up by the last 5 or so posters. Please, try it.

I love it when people try to pull the age thing on me. Don't patronize me. You're not my superior, and I can damn well tell you I'm as smart as you are. We are all in the same boat when it comes to knowing how to campaign. At least most of us are. We don't know jack squat about how to run a campaign, and you don't know either. Beside that, you are only reinforcing my point that your only argument comes from an emotional stance, not a logical one. I never said the campaign does nothing wrong. I said you are overly critical and focus only on the negative, and gave a lot of examples of positives which you completely ignored.

Then I asked you a simple question: what do you think you are accomplishing by spreading negativity and hostility toward the official campaign? You completely ignored it, and so I ask again. What is it?

 

[libertarian4321]

The problem with the grassroots is that every dipshit who has ever voted or gone to a RP sign wave thinks he's a political expert, and every time the official campaign does something the self appointed expert dipshit disagrees with, the dipshit goes on RPF or Daily Paul, or whatever, and raises Hell about how he could have done a better job (or, if said dipshit is a conspiracy theorist, he will claim that the official campaign has been taken over by Bilderbergers or the CFR or Trilateral Commission or or the NWO or {insert name of conspiracy theorist paranoiac delusion here}).

Is the campaign staff perfect? No, of course not- far from it. I disagree with some of their decisions (both now and in '08). The fact is, RP isn't going to be able to get the best people- the top guns will all work for the better known candidates who have more money.

So if I see something I disagree with, I'll mention it, but I'm not going to make a blanket statement that the official staff is incompetent or involved in some conspiracy.

To the self-appointed experts out there (the dipshits I mentioned above): you are NOT political experts. At best, you are reasonably well versed amateurs, and, at worst, you are dumb asses who don't know a damned thing. Feel free to voice your opinions on issues, but please don't try to pretend you have all the answers.

The great thing about the RP campaign is that the grassroots are free to pretty much do as they please, so if you don't like what the official campaign is doing, you can try something different (blimp? ). That is certainly better than bitching and bellyaching about the official campaign staff.

 

[amonasro]

The problem with the grassroots is that every dipshit who has ever voted or gone to a RP sign wave thinks he's a political expert, and every time the official campaign does something the self appointed expert dipshit disagrees with, the dipshit goes on RPF or Daily Paul, or whatever, and raises Hell about how he could have done a better job (or, if said dipshit is a conspiracy theorist, he will claim that the official campaign has been taken over by Bilderbergers or the CFR or Trilateral Commission or or the NWO or {insert name of conspiracy theorist paranoiac delusion here})

This is the reason the campaign just needs to hire experienced professionals that can advise him. It's really that simple. When you want to improve your public image, you hire a PR specialist. His image, manner and talking points are going to be analyzed to pieces. If he does well in Ames, he'll be under the media microscope even more, and that will give them so much more ammo to gun him down should he misstep. If he is in this to really win, he needs to think more about his public image and how he can appeal to the average Joe with an IQ of 100. The message can be dumbed down and still be effective.

Look at former mayor Blagojevich in IL. He's on trial now, he's probably a criminal, but his PR agent is amazing so everyone is sympathetic toward him. It's amazing what they can do.

 

[libertarian4321]

Yes, he's already performing a number of blunders. Ron's been featured on TV frequently since 2008 and he can still only garner 8% in a PPP survey. The campaign is full of morons, plain and simple. They haven't won a damned thing. Most, if not all of the support and success has come from the grassroots, which, let's face it, while organized is 1-dimensional, argumentative, and off-putting as a whole. There's a reason people roll their eyes when they hear "Ron Paul," and it's not because of him.

If you'd been around early in the last campaign, you'd have known that Dr. Paul was registering at "*" (less than 1%) well into the summer of 2007. He wasn't even on the radar screen, if he was mentioned at all, he was usually called a "crank" or "gadfly." He couldn't get ANY time in any of the major media. We were happy if the newspaper in Victoria, TX (in his home district) would write a positive article about him. The fact that he is showing up at 8-10% this early is a HUGE IMPROVEMENT- so what we have been doing has had an effect (I'm talking both the grassroots and the official campaign and CFR/Liberty PAC/etc).

I know you fancy yourself a genius with all the answers and think everyone who disagrees with you is a fool, but that just isn't the case (sorry to burst your bubble).

So lets stop listening to the self appointed "experts" like rockandrollsouls who just bitch and moan, and lets get out and do something positive for the campaign!

As I type this (at 2 am, I guess I'll be a bit tired at work tomorrow, lol), I'm printing some labels to put on envelopes that direct people to RonPaul2012.com - small things like this are what the grassroots can do to help- it's far more effective than a full time bitching and moaning campaign against the official campaign staff.

 

[amonasro]

We have every reason to be optimistic. I remember in 2007 I stumbled upon RP by accident and then found these forums. We were nothing back then! Look at us now!

 

[libertarian4321]

This is the reason the campaign just needs to hire experienced professionals that can advise him. It's really that simple. When you want to improve your public image, you hire a PR specialist. His image, manner and talking points are going to be analyzed to pieces. If he does well in Ames, he'll be under the media microscope even more, and that will give them so much more ammo to gun him down should he misstep. If he is in this to really win, he needs to think more about his public image and how he can appeal to the average Joe with an IQ of 100. The message can be dumbed down and still be effective.

I don't disagree. RP should hire the best people that 1) will agree to work with him 2) who support his political philosophy (this takes a lot of them out of contention) and 3) he can afford to hire. I think most of the top flight hired guns are not going to work with RP, however, because despite his massive increase in notoriety over the past 4 years, he's still seen as a bit of a fringe candidate (though far less so than in '07).

If you know of any good people out there who fit the requirements, go ahead and forward them to the campaign.

 

[libertarian4321]

We have every reason to be optimistic. I remember in 2007 I stumbled upon RP by accident and then found these forums. We were nothing back then! Look at us now!

We were less than nothing, we were "+", lol.

RP is continuing to gain support (he's catching on, I'm tellin' ya! ). I just wish he as a little younger, so that he could run in 2016 if he doesn't win this time. Though I guess Rand could fill in for him in the future.