Msg from Jonathan Bydlak -- willing to answer questions

[~P~]

Jonathan~ Thank you SO much for taking the time to clarify so many things for us. Your posts have helped a lot of people, myself included, understand the campaign's inner dynamics a little better.

It's funny how 'everyone's the expert' on this despite the fact that so few have any actual experience running a national campaign.

I have been in this *industry* (I own a company that specializes in political campaign mail and voter data in Washington State) for almost 10 years and I still find that most people are completely in the dark about HOW to run a campaign office. It's VERY HARD (when you aren't the media's darling) to get elected even if people know you! You might as well take up bee wrangling if you are looking for an easier job to do.

I just wanted you to know that there is at least one person out here that understands the very late nights, the sacrifices, and the over-all actual ridiculousness of running a national campaign and still thinks you guys did one hell of a job! My hat - off. Here's to you- sorry to see you go. Best of luck in the future!

Don~ Hope you hear from the Rossi camp soon. Washington needs him. Bad. It would be great to know that a like minded individual, such as yourself, was a staffer at the future governor's campaign office. Thank you for all your efforts. Thank you for caring about the freedoms of others enough to actually DO something about it. Good luck to you as well.

 

[charjan64]

the gay remarks are politically incorrect and a mudslinging excursion.
the campaign observations are a politcal maven's delight and informative.
these two things, because 35 pages of this thread are politics proper
and extremely polite and mature. unlike the more recent postings...

I thought Ron Paul's whole campaign and philosophy were based on the importance of freedom of speech and not allowing ourselves or other Americans to be sucked into "politically correct" behavior or speech. Who knows if such remarks are appropriate or not? There was a time when the U.S. Department of State excluded gays from employment due to the fact that they could be very easily compromised and become security risks. Then came SecState Henry Kissinger who removed that restriction.

Getting to the heart of what happened to Ron Paul's campaign is vital. No questions should be "off limits".

 

[Banana]

No questions should be "off limits".

To demonstrate the absurdity of such premise:

Have you stopped beating your significant other? Answer yes or no, please.





The issue was that question was entirely unwarranted.

 

[acptulsa]

Viva political incorrectness!!

Yes, we do have two camps, the politically incorrect camp and the theologically irreverant camp.

I don't think either is helpful in enlarging our tent. Can't we all just get along--and stay off each other's toes?

 

[amy31416]

Jeezus Tapdancing Christ on Crutches! This thread has become a cesspool of lunacy!

Jonathan, don't let the recent moonbattery and downright rudeness scare you away. The overwhelming majority of us appreciate your efforts, as well as that you've taken the time to answer our questions.

I'll second that. And thanks for the laugh. And the interjection of some semblance of sanity.

Somebody at Wonkette or another place is getting a good chuckle over this thread decay. Can you mods tell where it's coming from?

 

[yongrel]

snipped bigoted diatribe

You need to think before you post. You've taken the thread that was once arguably the best thread on this board ever, and turned it into a quagmire of paranoia, finger-pointing, paranoid finger-pointing, bigotry, and general asshat behavior.

So just calm down a little.

 

[spacehabitats]

Well it was nice while it lasted.

Its too bad that this thread had to devolve into another preschool brawl. There were some excellent questions and observations made. But Jonathan, if you ever get back this way again, thanks for the time, your thoughtful answers, your patience with this forum, and for your contribution to the campaign.

 

[Aratus]

folks he just might be back if we all are polite and cyber-space behave
otherwise we all sorta look like the opening scenes of "blackboard jungle"!!!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * !!!* I*!!!* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/mccain_sacks_campaign_staffer_who_sent_out_obama_video/
meanwhile, in the mcCain campaign universe, this story just broke...
you sorta feel sorry for the staffer as mccain does a damage control on his
own media image. GOTO Anti-Federalist's posting on the next page or two...

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

OK, the title/topic of this thread is:

Msg from Jonathan Bydlak -- willing to answer questions

If JB explains that he is not going to answer a question and other people want to have a conversation in that vein, then START ANOTHER THREAD. I am disgusted with people who choose to use a popular thread as a soapbox for their particular pet-peeve. Especially people who are normally ignored/ridiculed due to a reputation of rumour-mongering

Posts on this thread should be confined to questions/comments for JB/HQ and responses by JB/HQ.

Thanks

 

[New York For Paul]

RollOn2day, I respectfully disagree, unless you mean in this century (as in, the one that started eight years ago). Ronald Reagan had movie star looks (even if they had become wrinkled and goitered, he still had charisma), basically the same message (even if he never kept his promises) and arguably a better organization at all levels (he'd run for president two or three times prior and Ron Paul was part of his grass roots). I think your rose colored glasses are making you see red.

I was there to see the Reagan 80 campaign take place. While I was young, I was observant.

Reagan had many talented people, some who had started helping him in 1968 with that short presidential run. By 1980 Reagan was hated and liked by many and had much to prove.

Some of his campaign workers may have been the best of the century. Other campaign directors were some the worst of the century and almost cost him his campaign victory.

While I was in the Reagan grassroots, there were doubts among his supporters fueled by the media about his age, his issues etc.

I think the Ron Paul grassroots were much more fervent as a whole, although there were hardcore dedicated Reaganites, there were not as many as the hardcore Ron Paulites.

Reagan had a top down campaign structure, with Reagan being the number one spokesperson for himself.

Ron Paul was bottom up and had very creative talented people who made Ron Paul look great.

But Reagan's organization came apart during the period of the Iowa and New Hampshire primary. Problems had been happening months before, but now they had to be confronted.

After the Iowa loss, literally Reagan had to ignore his own campaign manager and bring in a second replacement campaign team without alerting the first team that they were going to be fired.

Reagan had spent 18 million dollars by around Jan 1 before Iowa had even started and was allowed to spend 24 million under campaign finance laws. Meanwhile George Bush was on the upswing winning Iowa.

So Reagan was broke, lost Iowa, had to fire top level staffers and bring back old staffers who had lost out to infighting, engage in town hall and street level campaigning in New Hampshire at age 69 to stage a comeback.

The stories of sneaking certain campaign operatives into the Reagan HQ to check the campaign books with out letting the campaign manager know what was going on were interesting.

Reagan had to hold other secret meetings with the California old guard as they prepared to come back into the campaign while the East coast people were going to be let go.

And Reagan had to present a friendly demeanor to the voters while all this was going on. Maybe all this stress contributed to Reagan getting mad at the debate which propelled him up in the polls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHve9iQymqE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTX27pmZGLk&feature=related

Campaigns are always difficult, but you sure want to have experienced people with you when you do run for president.

 

[RollOn2day]

Mods please reconsider your decision to move this thread to the Vent and return it to Grassroots Central where it belongs as it is practically the only thread worth reading anymore on the RPF. Grassroots Central has about all the worthwhile information as the tabloids at the local check out.

THE VENT
8:00am CST 4 viewing
3:00pm CST 2 viewing

But since we are here....all alone in The Vent...I'll take the time to go off topic for a bit to keep this thread alive if for no other reason.

RollOn2day, I respectfully disagree, unless you mean in this century (as in, the one that started eight years ago). Ronald Reagan had movie star looks (even if they had become wrinkled and goitered, he still had charisma), basically the same message (even if he never kept his promises) and arguably a better organization at all levels (he'd run for president two or three times prior and Ron Paul was part of his grass roots). I think your rose colored glasses are making you see red.

No I mean last century and this one too.

Ronald Reagan having good looks and charisma is about the same as what Barack is running on now. It doesn't make them a good candidate....in the largest sense of the word (i.e. good for the country)

Same message?? I must have missed the Reagan speeches calling for the:

End of the Drug War
End of the CIA
End of FEMA
End of the Federal Reserve
End of the Military Complex
End of the Big Pharma Complex
End of the National Debt

I must have also missed the rally's where the Conservative Republicans were joining forces with the:

Hippies
Tree Huggers
Gold Bugs
Gun Nuts
White Militants
Black Militants
Democrats
etc

Ronald Reagan's message was not Ron Paul's message...not by a very long shot.

Ronald Reagan's grassroots support was not as strong as Ron Paul's grassroots support either.

Like you said, Reagan had 3 election cycles to generate his support. (Can you imagine where Ron Paul would be with that kind of time!!)

But in a fair comparison you would have to ask: What kind of grassroots did Reagan have within the first few months of his FIRST try at the nomination?

What we did was unprecedented. (Unless of course you know of other campaigns that had grandmothers and teenagers spray painting hand made signs from one end of this country to the other)

Are you sure I'm the one wearing the rose colored glasses?

And now back to the topic: JB and Don please hang with this thread !!!

 

[LibertyEagle]

Mods please reconsider your decision to move this thread to the Vent and return it to Grassroots Central where it belongs as it is practically the only thread worth reading anymore on the RPF. Grassroots Central has about all the worthwhile information as the tabloids at the local check out.

Ok. The thread has been cleaned up now, so I'll move it back to Grassroots Central.

 

[SteveMartin]

It's been "cleaned up" alright...lol...

 

[RollOn2day]

Ok. The thread has been cleaned up now, so I'll move it back to Grassroots Central.

Thanks LibertyEagle for cleaning this thread up and returning it to it's rightful place in the sun!

I know you walk a fine line doing your job and appreciate your efforts.

 

[KevinInMI]

Thanks to ronpaulhawaii!

Hopefully, Jonathon & Don will continue to post.

I very much appreciated their perspective. Not much appreciation on the recent trash IMO.

 

[yongrel]

Ok. The thread has been cleaned up now, so I'll move it back to Grassroots Central.

Thank you, Mods! You performed CPR on a great thread!

 

[LibertyEagle]

Thanks LibertyEagle for cleaning this thread up and returning it to it's rightful place in the sun!

I know you walk a fine line doing your job and appreciate your efforts.

Thank you, but the thanks belong with RonPaulHawaii. He spent a great deal of time cleaning up the thread and did a great job in doing so.

 

[RollOn2day]

Thank you, but the thanks belong with RonPaulHawaii. He spent a great deal of time cleaning up the thread and did a great job in doing so.

Kudos RonPaulHawaii !!

 

[The Lantern]

Questions for Don and Jonathan

In trying to keep this thread on track, I have a couple of questions for Don and/or Jonathan.

Don, I guess since you went to most of the debates, this question is for you.

What usually happened before the debates? Did you get to prep Ron and suggest questions and answers? Or was there any preparation done at all? I guess with that many debates there was probably a lot of OJT.

Jonathan,

As far as the fundraising and FEC reports went, did you and the campaign use any specialized software to keep track and communicate with donors and to file FEC reports?

I was also curious when you organized the competition among meetups for donations how much money was raised?

 

[Andrew76]

If, as Ron believes, it's all about the "message" rather than winning the Presidency, isn't that an even bigger argument for running as an Independent?

Millions of people are clamoring for real change but will never hear about the Ron Paul message because they didn't pay much attention to the Republican primaries in the first place. They will see the economy collapsing but they won't know what's happening to them and they'll never realize there was an alternative. Their lives will be ruined, their spirits weakened, their hopes for the future smashed. They will readily agree to more wars and loss of liberty, and all that only because Ron Paul didn't run as an Independent and use that platform to tell them what's really going on.

As for winning, to really succeed as an "educational campaign", you have to run it as if you actually wanted to win. If Ron hadn't stared down Stephanopoulos and made clear that he was in it for the win, he would have never attracted the massive grassroots attention that he got. If he had said from the beginning, "Let's be realistic, the chance is close to zero, but it's all about the message anyway", I'm sure that most of us wouldn't even have bothered.

Many of us here are young (or young at heart), and though we appreciate the education, we want a courageous hero, someone we can look up to, whose memory will inspire us for the rest of our lives, who was far from perfect but who nevertheless overcame his personal shortcomings and took the battle to the enemy against all odds.

Right now, Ron Paul will be remembered as an armchair revolutionary who happened to start a movement but then didn't know what to do with it. His recent waffling leaves a bad taste, has alienated many supporters and will have the effect of practically throwing away the chance of inspiring millions more about the message of freedom.

If he runs as an Independent and doesn't win, at least the "message" will have been heard by a larger part of the population than it would have been otherwise. And I do believe that Ron could actually win if he applies the lessons learned from the primaries. Here's a couple of things he could do:

1. Relentlessly attack Obama, Clinton and McCain and expose and analyze their lies and shenanigans. Instead of the "Daily Dose" it should be the "Daily Attack". Get this to the point where when Americans hear one of the "big three" make some promise or pronouncement, they will instinctively think, "I wonder what Ron Paul has to say about that?"

2. Tailor his messages to the audience he is speaking to. He must be brought to realize that this is the only way to actually educate them. Right now he just throws out facts that average people simply won't understand, nor will they care much because he doesn't explain how it affects them anyway.

3. Stop justifying his actions with weak expressions like "my supporters would be disappointed if I dropped out...", or "endorsing McCain would go against what I've talked about for the past 30 years, and nobody would understand it" and so on. Be a man and say "I'm doing that because I choose to and because it's what's best for America, period".

4. Meet with foreign leaders as the inofficial representative of his voters, a small but growing part of the US population that wants "peace, commerce and honest friendship" with all. Meet with Chavez, Castro and Ahmadinejad and expose them to the wonders of free markets and gold-backed currencies. There's some free worldwide publicity for ya.

5. Apply any and all the other lessons learned from the present campaign, including interactions with the press, etc.

What are your thoughts on this, Jonathan? Based on your personal knowledge of Ron Paul, do you think he would be open to reading a letter by supporters that would outline some of these points and persuade him that he should put the interests of the country first and "jump over his shadow" so he can reach new audiences rather than continuing to preach to the increasingly discouraged choir?

I believe that running as an Independent won't hamper the effort to retake the Republican party in any way. On the contrary, pursuing both paths at the same time could make things happen so much faster.

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000

Couldn't have said it better: If this is about the message, then there is NOTHING to lose with an independent run. New audiences will be reached, and this *CRITICALLY* important message will find fresh ears. For the love of Zeus, what is taking so long for this to come about?
And again, the point about whether he'll win or not as an indy, or how hard it would be is officially MOOT in light of the fact that this was apparently an "educational" campaign anyway. People, wake up, there is nothing to lose, and everything to gain. Ron Paul must run as an independent. What? He might lose? It'll be HARD? Are you kidding me? These are the reasons against him running independent? Unbelievable.