I finally understand

skgai

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
217
I finally understand Ron Paul's 2012 campaign strategy. In essence its working. They're racking up delegates in the caucus states and winning over Republican State committee's and rules all over the country. The stage is set for 2016. Now all of this is fantastic if Rand is running. Here's hoping. Nonetheless controlling these Republican State Party's will pay huge dividends immediately. So I must say that I was wrong. This strategy is working. HOWEVER, and this is a big HOWEVER, we could have won or at least attained more delegates in the primary states. I think that was a mistake to not hit those hard.

I live in Iowa and I know if we had won there we probably would have come closer in New Hampshire and definitely been boosted in South Carolina, but really I still think we would have been overshadowed everywhere else because of the media. Now let me say, the campaign really, really tried in Iowa. Santorum just came out of nowhere and took it. He really is Paul's bane. Stealing his new votes left and right. What would this race have been without him?

I look forward to these upcoming primaries and caucuses. I think with Santorum finally out we can pick up some delegates with 10-25% popular vote totals. The problem was we scared everyone to death when we led in the Iowa polls just weeks before the vote. If only we had peaked at voting time.

This isn't a blanket praise of the campaign thought. His message still has to be clearer. He has to get his message through to senior citizens and women. He will have to change his message to suit them. Not the "message," but the focus. He must focus on why social security and medicare won't be there for them in the future and skip past monetary policy because they are entrenched in it. He must focus on freedom in medical care. These people want their local nurse practitioner and don't won't doctors from Washington telling them what Medicare will cover. They're willing to listen on foreign policy he just has to reinforce that with defense. Our troops here at home provide more protection than overseas.

I rambled a bit there, but I just want him to be PRESIDENT!!!! I know we all do and its frustrating to see him beating Obama in the polls and yet Romney is the Republican candidate. I've often wondered whether the Founders should have included in the Constitution the mandatory requirement that all citizens be educated in the Constitution, its reasoning's and influences at the time of writing. I truly think that in a society that hasn't had war at home in over 60 years that you can't have freedom if you don't teach your kids about it in the first place! Otherwise apathy grows and festers.
 
I finally understand Ron Paul's 2012 campaign strategy. In essence its working. They're racking up delegates in the caucus states and winning over Republican State committee's and rules all over the country. The stage is set for 2016. Now all of this is fantastic if Rand is running. Here's hoping. Nonetheless controlling these Republican State Party's will pay huge dividends immediately. So I must say that I was wrong. This strategy is working. HOWEVER, and this is a big HOWEVER, we could have won or at least attained more delegates in the primary states. I think that was a mistake to not hit those hard.

I live in Iowa and I know if we had won there we probably would have come closer in New Hampshire and definitely been boosted in South Carolina, but really I still think we would have been overshadowed everywhere else because of the media. Now let me say, the campaign really, really tried in Iowa. Santorum just came out of nowhere and took it. He really is Paul's bane. Stealing his new votes left and right. What would this race have been without him?

I look forward to these upcoming primaries and caucuses. I think with Santorum finally out we can pick up some delegates with 10-25% popular vote totals. The problem was we scared everyone to death when we led in the Iowa polls just weeks before the vote. If only we had peaked at voting time.

This isn't a blanket praise of the campaign thought. His message still has to be clearer. He has to get his message through to senior citizens and women. He will have to change his message to suit them. Not the "message," but the focus. He must focus on why social security and medicare won't be there for them in the future and skip past monetary policy because they are entrenched in it. He must focus on freedom in medical care. These people want their local nurse practitioner and don't won't doctors from Washington telling them what Medicare will cover. They're willing to listen on foreign policy he just has to reinforce that with defense. Our troops here at home provide more protection than overseas.

I rambled a bit there, but I just want him to be PRESIDENT!!!! I know we all do and its frustrating to see him beating Obama in the polls and yet Romney is the Republican candidate. I've often wondered whether the Founders should have included in the Constitution the mandatory requirement that all citizens be educated in the Constitution, its reasoning's and influences at the time of writing. I truly think that in a society that hasn't had war at home in over 60 years that you can't have freedom if you don't teach your kids about it in the first place! Otherwise apathy grows and festers.

Thats an excellent point. Heres hoping that all gets changed!
 
Ya well even if he doesn't win, getting a few states would be a big accomplishment in terms of preparing the Rand Paul candidacy in 2016 if that occurs.
 
We need a way to teach people the difference between Collectivism, and Individualism. I honestly see that as the largest issue for us to overcome.
 
Ya well even if he doesn't win, getting a few states would be a big accomplishment in terms of preparing the Rand Paul candidacy in 2016 if that occurs.

IF Ron does not win the GOP nomination he should run as an Independent just for the fact of pushing the ideas of liberty, freedom, and the constitution. I get worried when so many of us are overly expectant of a Rand Paul presidential run in 2016. Look at all the barriers we have had with Ron running for POTUS and I have no doubt it would be just as hard for Rand. Also if you believe that we are on the verge of an economic catastrophe as I do then 2016 doesn't really mean much. I hope this doesn't come off as harsh just a different way at looking at things I guess.
 
IF Ron does not win the GOP nomination he should run as an Independent just for the fact of pushing the ideas of liberty, freedom, and the constitution. I get worried when so many of us are overly expectant of a Rand Paul presidential run in 2016. Look at all the barriers we have had with Ron running for POTUS and I have no doubt it would be just as hard for Rand. Also if you believe that we are on the verge of an economic catastrophe as I do then 2016 doesn't really mean much. I hope this doesn't come off as harsh just a different way at looking at things I guess.

I'm a firm believer in the new trending phrase . . .

Ron Paul - or - Lock & Load
 
The founders at the time of the constitution only allowed some people to vote. Usually, this was white male landowners. A literacy test was tried in the 1960s. Unfortunately, the racist application of that test effectively ruined any future attempt to do that.
 
I agree, it really shows how many TRUE Americans that's left....For God sake!!!, It's about restoring the Constitution and pressing the reset button. Ron Paul is 1 in a million for sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry but I could give an F about 2016 and Rand. If the Paul people wanted to win they really need to make new commercials stating Paul is the only one that can beat Obama. And they need to stop making 10 versions of the "he will cut 1 trillion from the budget year one" junk. Less is more Ron and right now people want to vote for someone that they think he can win and has backers (show crowds/polls).
 
We need a way to teach people the difference between Collectivism, and Individualism. I honestly see that as the largest issue for us to overcome.

TRUTH. This. Right up there ^ . Collectivism breeds an "Us vs. Them" mentality. Instead of voting for somebody because of their views/stances/beliefs and record/actions in office, people vote for somebody because of the letter next to their name - hence why the "anybody but Obama" crowd will vote for any half-retarded piece of shit just because he has an -R next to his name.
 
I finally understand Ron Paul's 2012 campaign strategy. In essence its working. They're racking up delegates in the caucus states and winning over Republican State committee's and rules all over the country. The stage is set for 2016. Now all of this is fantastic if Rand is running. Here's hoping. Nonetheless controlling these Republican State Party's will pay huge dividends immediately. So I must say that I was wrong. This strategy is working. HOWEVER, and this is a big HOWEVER, we could have won or at least attained more delegates in the primary states. I think that was a mistake to not hit those hard.

What the hell? DR RON PAUL 2012!!!!
 
The founders at the time of the constitution only allowed some people to vote. Usually, this was white male landowners. A literacy test was tried in the 1960s. Unfortunately, the racist application of that test effectively ruined any future attempt to do that.

I understand this point. However, this was one of the Founder's biggest mistakes. Charles Pickney of South Carolina saw that this county was something new. A new American nation that didn't have to act like all the others. Now he wasn't in favor of voting for all citizens, but he did see that changes were coming. The Founders needed to realize this, that citizens would eventually get voting rights. How could they? I don't know. That being said they left us with the ability to change the Constitution at will and the moment we gave all citizen voting rights we should have added an understanding of the Constitution as a prerequisite. I understand that limits freedom, but I'm not asking for a pledge to the Constitution, but an understanding. We need education as to what was actually written and intended. People can still make up their own minds.
 
TRUTH. This. Right up there ^ . Collectivism breeds an "Us vs. Them" mentality. Instead of voting for somebody because of their views/stances/beliefs and record/actions in office, people vote for somebody because of the letter next to their name - hence why the "anybody but Obama" crowd will vote for any half-retarded piece of shit just because he has an -R next to his name.

Whoa, this is a big misconception. These people aren't voting because there is an R in front of somebody's name. They're voting for the "R" because of what it represents. The "R" represents a ton of things that it will never actually deliver on, but people don't get that. That's how we must attack it. It's not the "R," but the misconception behind it.
 
Whoa, this is a big misconception. These people aren't voting because there is an R in front of somebody's name. They're voting for the "R" because of what it represents. The "R" represents a ton of things that it will never actually deliver on, but people don't get that. That's how we must attack it. It's not the "R," but the misconception behind it.

Honestly, I must entirely disagree. People think Mitt Romney is a Republican, because "Any Republican is better than Obama." Remember? How does someone be a Republican, but not act according to those views? People don't research. They become part of the 2 mobs we witness on a daily vicious circle, bashing each other. They resent the opposing party, and spew vitriol, or hate on a consistent basis in compliance with that. They already evolved this country into a mob rule, and it's the people's apathy which allows it to continue.
 
The strategy is simple - deny Romney the delegates needed for a first-ballot nomination, at which point it's Paul's game to lose.
 
We don't have four more years to wait. At the rate Washington is eroding the constitution this could be our last free election.
 
I hope Rand is planning to run as a Democrat, then.

Because after the rules changes and bull-shit the GOP is going to pull between now and 2016 to keep newcomers from just walking in and becoming a delegate, there's not going to be a 'delegate strategy' in the future.

Now or never. "Do or die."
 
We need a way to teach people the difference between Collectivism, and Individualism. I honestly see that as the largest issue for us to overcome.

They would need more than a vocabulary building lesson. If you want to go this route, then they need to understand why individualism is something they want.
 
The founders at the time of the constitution only allowed some people to vote. Usually, this was white male landowners. A literacy test was tried in the 1960s. Unfortunately, the racist application of that test effectively ruined any future attempt to do that.

I think it is a great idea to only allow those to vote who are not sucking at the government teat in any way. Otherwise, the suckers will just vote themselves a bigger share of everyone else's hard-earned money.
 
Last edited:
I hope Rand is planning to run as a Democrat, then.

Because after the rules changes and bull-shit the GOP is going to pull between now and 2016 to keep newcomers from just walking in and becoming a delegate, there's not going to be a 'delegate strategy' in the future.

Now or never. "Do or die."
The party will become an irrelevant anachronism, if it becomes too exclusionary. GOP chapters would be folding left and right like the Elks and Moose lodges. Some kind of Internet-only based party would take its place.

A big problem with political parties is that one of their original reasons for being is undermined. 40 years ago you needed a network of people to call, pass out voter cards, etc. Today anybody under 50 has access to the Internet. They can go to the GOP's website and note who the preferred candidates are. Every election cycle there is a new generation of voters who see no need to be called or pestered.
 
Back
Top