WD-NY
Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2011
- Messages
- 1,787
Sorry for repeating the same thing a few times now, but there's no excuse for the campaign not having their own media center with YouTube hosted videos of rallies (and interviews if necessary because of copyright issues), and posted in a convenient, easy to search format on their website. If they can afford 2 security men, they can afford 2 or 3 media people to professionally record every one of their events, with crowd shots, and a very part-time programmer to maintain the web page.
Some of the other complaints like RP's claimed lack of speaking ability I have no problem with, because he's not superman and I think his speeches are getting better and better. Plus the turnout he's getting would seem to invalidate that complaint.
I agree with the 1st point 100% - every event should be broadcast live via youtube, ustream, whatever! Completely unacceptable considering the fact that it would cost them very little to produce.
Regarding the 2nd point, for me personally, the call for prepared/formal speeches has never been because I think reading from prepared text would make Paul a better speaker.
It's about presenting his message in the clearest and most coherent language possible. It's about offering a legitimate alternative to the progressive, big govn't vision put forward by Obama below.
[video=youtube;lT1516iJ57U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lT1516iJ57U[/video]
(n.b. he's reading a telepromter even though his delivery is 'loose' and off-the-cuff-esque)
A formal speech means Ron thought long and hard about how he wanted to construct his 'argument' and/or present his position. How the f**k does that not equal 100x better than the meandering muck he's been delivering since Iowa? Sure each speech is awesome/incredible at moments, but as a whole they're all a complete MESS.
With a formal speech, Ron would be able to stitch together all of the amazing/incredible moments & ideas into a single, unified and coherent VISION.