Lew Rockwell's take on Ron in Iowa

[rg17]

Is that what the 17 stands for?

No

 

[brandon]

What the hell are you blaming Collins for? It's not his fault that Rand is where he is. In my opinion, Rand blew the first 2 debates. Totally blew.

There is plenty of blame to go around.

 

[juleswin]

What the hell are you blaming Collins for? It's not his fault that Rand is where he is. In my opinion, Rand blew the first 2 debates. Totally blew.

I have to just say something about this idea that it is always the politicians fault when they citizens don't buy the message of liberty, free market and limited govt. What about the radical thinking that it is not all the politician's fault but the citizen who is at fault here?. You get this same attitude with liberals all the time who would always blame the teacher/school administration for their student's failures and never ever blaming the children or parents for their lack of success. I am saying this knowing full well that we have many bad schools, many local govt drop the ball when it comes to education and schools should be privately run.

I think this PC way of thinking should stop and we should start putting some of the blame on the citizens who are easily led by what the person on TV says. They are easily swayed by celebrity, money and bling bling. Personally, they are a big part of the reason why Rand is not doing well.

 

[brandon]

I have to just say something about this idea that it is always the politicians fault when they citizens don't buy the message of liberty, free market and limited govt.

Well, you're right, but that's just the way it is and has been. The majority of people don't really care about any ideology. They may have an issue or two they care about. Or they might not. It's just a popularity contest for many. That's why the candidate has to be charismatic and run a strong campaign. There's just simply no way anyone is going to get a substantial amount of people to care about political philosophy.

IMO one of Rand's biggest mistakes was going too negative too soon. His campaign has attacked nearly every candidate since this summer. Should have went positive and built his brand as a rational, likable leader from the beginning.

 

[juleswin]

IMO one of Rand's biggest mistakes was going too negative too soon. His campaign has attacked nearly every candidate since this summer. Should have went positive and built his brand as a rational, likable leader from the beginning.

Yea right, somehow I am supposed to believe that they were turned off by to his candidacy/message because he went negative. I see these elections and they way citizens decide which candidate to vote for like the judging on food network cooking show competitions. Sometimes putting too little sauce wins you praises from the judges and other times doing the exact same things leads to criticisms. The truth is that nobody really knows what makes these idiots tick, in a different election cycle, this exact same move by Rand done by another candidate would be seen as the strong, anti establishment move and the same type of voters who rejected his message because of it would embrace it.

I can think of one boned headed, idiotic move by Rand and that was his blaming of ISIS creation on republicans. Not only was it not true, it was a slap to the face to the people he is trying to court. A close #2 was focusing too much attention on NSA privacy issues. Yes, people wantt heir privacy but they prefer a stable economy over privacy any day. At the end of the day, I am not even sure even without those mistakes, he could have over come the celebrity, the media adulation and attention given to Trump.

 

[Matt Collins]

Yeah, no.... The negative media bias accounts for maybe 90% of the reason Ron and Rand have both suffered poor poll results... EVERYTHING else (you know, the stuff you claim is soooooo important) might account for 10%.

Sorry, you don't have the whole picture here.

 

[Matt Collins]

I think this PC way of thinking should stop and we should start putting some of the blame on the citizens who are easily led by what the person on TV says.

You just made my point but not in the way you are thinking.

You are referring to human nature, and it is the candidate's job to get elected based on whatever the political atmosphere is at the time. In other words the candidate must be willing to tailor their message to connect with voters, wherever they are at.

This notion that we are going to educate people or change people's mind is a fallacy and is not how elections work.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Is all the doom and gloom talk because of the polls we all pretty much agree are bullshit?

I'm going to stick with Rand when he says the only poll that counts is the one where votes are cast.

Those same "bullshit" polls showed Rand as one of the most popular politicians in the Republican Party before he embarked on the drive to destroy his own brand.

Lew has been in this game a long time- a lot longer than Rand. The past few years have seen an unprecedented rise in the overall Liberty movement coupled with Lew's brand of Libertarianism largely deposing the Cosmotarians. LRC and the Mises Institute have never been more popular or powerful. If Rand had run a solid campaign, I'm sure Lew would have provided him tons of support. But Lew is under no obligation to follow Rand off the cliff. If Lew thinks Rand's strategy is a disaster, he needs to do the smart thing and distance himself from it.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

Sorry, you don't have the whole picture here.

You're right... I don't have 10% of the picture since I don't know everything. I do know that 90% (or thereabouts) is THE MEDIA!!!!

Early 2008 -- I saw the message of Ron Paul resonating all over the country. Crowds were gathering in the THOUSANDS to hear the man speak of liberty. It was something they had never heard before. The crowds were ELECTRIC!! The energy was like something I'd never seen or heard before. I call Freetalk Live alot so I called them after I went to the speech Ron gave in Nashville. I was pumped. I made my prediction that Ron was going to be unstoppable. I stated that as soon as the media gets ahold of what's happening in this movement and starts broadcasting clips of Ron delivering the message and showing the crowds eagerly gathering to hear the message of liberty it was over for the elections. The media coverage would feed the frenzy for liberty and Ron would WIN BY A LANDSLIDE!!

We all know that didn't happen. The REASON it didn't happen was because the media not only DID NOT report on the movement... The media did EVERYTHING in their power to BURY all mention of the movement. You see Collins, it was not Ron Paul who lost in 2008, it was the LIBERTY MOVEMENT! Do you get that yet?? There was not a single person or a group of people on the campaign making mistakes that cost us our liberty in 2008. It was a DELIBERATE conspiracy by the media to make sure as few people as possible could hear the message.

Yeah, mistakes were made (they always are) but it wasn't the mistakes that cost us our liberty in 2008 and 2012... It was the evil power of the media driven by who knows what evil men (we can name some names...)

So shut up with the negative comments and start putting some positive energy into the liberty movement or get out...

 

[cajuncocoa]

Let him speak. It is interesting to hear from people in the know like Matt rather than the loud mouths that believe in fairy tales that shout down anyone with a opinion. I am not saying you do that but it is the reason I rarely post here.

The fact that you "rarely post here" explains why you think Matt is in the know.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

What the hell are you blaming Collins for? It's not his fault that Rand is where he is. In my opinion, Rand blew the first 2 debates. Totally blew.

Agreed. Rand has made his own bed to an extent. However, disavowing or minimizing his father's legacy has not helped him. Hopefully he shakes off his arrogance and the bad political advisors for future presidential runs if he can't salvage this one by Iowa.

 

[CPUd]

Agreed. Rand has made his own bed to an extent. However, disavowing or minimizing his father's legacy has not helped him. Hopefully he shakes off his arrogance and the bad political advisors for future presidential runs if he can't salvage this one by Iowa.

Nothing wrong with the advisors he has now, he is in position to win Iowa and NV, and take a share of the delegations in NH and possibly SC. He chose them, let them run the fucking campaign the way he wants them to run it. The only future presidential run for Rand will be for reelection.

 

[Matt Collins]

You're right... I don't have 10% of the picture since I don't know everything. I do know that 90% (or thereabouts) is THE MEDIA!!!!

Early 2008 -- I saw the message of Ron Paul resonating all over the country. Crowds were gathering in the THOUSANDS to hear the man speak of liberty. It was something they had never heard before. The crowds were ELECTRIC!! The energy was like something I'd never seen or heard before. I call Freetalk Live alot so I called them after I went to the speech Ron gave in Nashville. I was pumped. I made my prediction that Ron was going to be unstoppable. I stated that as soon as the media gets ahold of what's happening in this movement and starts broadcasting clips of Ron delivering the message and showing the crowds eagerly gathering to hear the message of liberty it was over for the elections. The media coverage would feed the frenzy for liberty and Ron would WIN BY A LANDSLIDE!!

We all know that didn't happen. The REASON it didn't happen was because the media not only DID NOT report on the movement... The media did EVERYTHING in their power to BURY all mention of the movement. You see Collins, it was not Ron Paul who lost in 2008, it was the LIBERTY MOVEMENT! Do you get that yet?? There was not a single person or a group of people on the campaign making mistakes that cost us our liberty in 2008. It was a DELIBERATE conspiracy by the media to make sure as few people as possible could hear the message.

Yeah, mistakes were made (they always are) but it wasn't the mistakes that cost us our liberty in 2008 and 2012... It was the evil power of the media driven by who knows what evil men (we can name some names...)

So shut up with the negative comments and start putting some positive energy into the liberty movement or get out...

In 2008 we simply didn't have the numbers, the organization, or the skills to get the job done. Of course the media fought us, but we could've done a lot better. In 2012 we did, we came very close in 2012 and got shafted multiple ways, including from the media. But the candidate himself was unwilling to tweak his messaging just slightly enough to get over the top.

If the media hadn't puffed up Santorum at the last minute and /or if Ron had tweaked his messaging slightly for more mass appeal, then we would've won Iowa in 2012. Either one of those things going differently would've produced a different result.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

In 2008 we simply didn't have the numbers, the organization, or the skills to get the job done. Of course the media fought us, but we could've done a lot better. In 2012 we did, we came very close in 2012 and got shafted multiple ways, including from the media. But the candidate himself was unwilling to tweak his messaging just slightly enough to get over the top.

If the media hadn't puffed up Santorum at the last minute and /or if Ron had tweaked his messaging slightly for more mass appeal, then we would've won Iowa in 2012. Either one of those things going differently would've produced a different result.

Still don't get it do you Collins?? You analyze your statistics and look at decisions and dream about how changing this little detail or that would have tweeked the outcome... You're flat wrong. It was the MEDIA that buried liberty in both 2008 and 2012. They are trying to do it again. I hope that in interwebs can be used more effectively this time and maybe make a difference but those little details you keep fussing about would not have changed ANYTHING. Without coverage in the media you can make ALL the right decisions and no one will know about it...

One thing for sure that DOESN'T help is you constantly posting about all the mistakes people in the campaign (or the candidate) are making. If you really think there are mistakes THE PLACE for it is in private to people in the campaign. What good do you think bringing them up here does?? Do you think Ron or Rand are combing Ron Paul Forums to get gems of advice from you?? Give me a break man!! Stop the negative comments that do NOTHING GOOD and start posting what's being done right or just get on the phones and make some calls. Do SOMETHING positive and you will feel better and maybe you can drum up some support that would not be there if you hadn't talked to someone. I'm sure you are doing that already but if you exchange the time bitching here for positive messaging somewhere else, everybody wins...

 

[Matt Collins]

Still don't get it do you Collins?? You analyze your statistics and look at decisions and dream about how changing this little detail or that would have tweeked the outcome... You're flat wrong. It was the MEDIA that buried liberty in both 2008 and 2012. They are trying to do it again. I hope that in interwebs can be used more effectively this time and maybe make a difference but those little details you keep fussing about would not have changed ANYTHING. Without coverage in the media you can make ALL the right decisions and no one will know about it...

You must be bad at math.


If Ron had 3804 more caucus goers in Iowa vote for him in the straw poll on caucus night, he would've been the winner. 112,229 total Republicans caucused that night meaning Ron only needed 3.1% more votes in order to win.

Someone could've farted the wrong direction at the last minute and it would've changed the outcome of that night. It is like splitting hairs with a razorblade. And when things are that close it is inside the margin of error of almost every poll, including internals. This is why GOTV matters so much.


Have you ever won an election? Have you ever worked on a campaign?

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

You must be bad at math.


If Ron had 3804 more caucus goers in Iowa vote for him in the straw poll on caucus night, he would've been the winner. 112,229 total Republicans caucused that night meaning Ron only needed 3.1% more votes in order to win.

Someone could've farted the wrong direction at the last minute and it would've changed the outcome of that night. It is like splitting hairs with a razorblade. And when things are that close it is inside the margin of error of almost every poll, including internals. This is why GOTV matters so much.


Have you ever won an election? Have you ever worked on a campaign?

You don't get media coverage you aint winning nothing... That's the bottom line. Ok, so maybe Ron could've won Iowa. N.H. is not a caucus state and neither are most of the others. The media would have barely mentioned the win and even marginalized any and all caucus results as being "out of date" because it's so clear that the voters would not select someone so far down in the polls... This is why we need to focus on alternative ways to reach the people (phone banking is a good alternative and of course the interwebs are the best tool).

Realize that no matter what you do, THE MEDIA is going to marginalize it and try their darnedest to get the lemmings to follow the chosen one. This is an uphill battle and it's never going to be fair. You say you could have gotten greater results "your way" and maybe you are right. But the difference would have been only a few percentage points and that's not enough to overcome the MEDIA and their power over the simple minded. I will even concede that you, the great and mighty Collins, are smarter than Ron and Rand and me and everyone else in how to run a campaign. I will concede that you, the great Collins, would have made maybe a 5% difference if you had run the campaign and Ron would have won Iowa. I will say however that THE MEDIA would have made sure that win was marginalized and LIBERTY would have lost in most all states after Iowa. Think I'm wrong?? Tell me why...

 

[CaptUSA]

Are we really finger-pointing before the first vote is even cast?!

Talk about being "led by the nose" by the media's interpretation of polls.

 

[Matt Collins]

You don't get media coverage you aint winning nothing... That's the bottom line.

Incorrect. The media matters, but not as much and not in the way that you think it does.

Ok, so maybe Ron could've won Iowa. N.H. is not a caucus state and neither are most of the others. The media would have barely mentioned the win and even marginalized any and all caucus results as being "out of date" because it's so clear that the voters would not select someone so far down in the polls... This is why we need to focus on alternative ways to reach the people (phone banking is a good alternative and of course the interwebs are the best tool).

Yes, somewhat. The media would have discussed Ron's win in Iowa, but you're right the narrative would've been "Iowa doesn't matter". However, that win would've given Ron some serious momentum to push him over top in other states such as NV, MN, Super Tuesday, etc. He would've become the anti-Romney alternative at that point, instead of Santorum.



You're right though on trying to reach voters outside of the media, that is correct. That is why direct marketing is the foundation of any campaign. Marketing 101, otherwise known as the Lincoln 4-step: Identify, segment, target.

Realize that no matter what you do, THE MEDIA is going to marginalize it and try their darnedest to get the lemmings to follow the chosen one. This is an uphill battle and it's never going to be fair. You say you could have gotten greater results "your way" and maybe you are right. But the difference would have been only a few percentage points and that's not enough to overcome the MEDIA and their power over the simple minded.

A few percentage points would have indeed won Iowa as I have demonstrated above.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

As a follow up. View this video about how the media marginalizes everything Ron does or anything to do with the Liberty Movement.

 

[Matt Collins]

As a follow up. View this video about how the media marginalizes everything Ron does or anything to do with the Liberty Movement.

And if Ron handled some things differently, they would not be as effective as marginalizing him.