Msg from Jonathan Bydlak -- willing to answer questions

As far as not responding to media requests, two points... first, you're right that the campaign was too late formulating a 5 star media team. It should have been in place earlier, and I fault myself in retrospect, as well as others, for sort of seeing it as a problem, but not realizing its magnitude. But, I will also say that many of the criticisms that people raise in this regard are unfounded. By the end of November, we had a system in place to responding to important media calls. But again, we can't respond to every local newspaper and TV station. We were forced to pick and choose appearances that were most important, particularly because the media did not care about surrogates for Ron Paul like they did for a Hillary Clinton. That meant that Ron had to do all of these appearances, which was just impossible. Many of the criticisms of the media team were centered on less important media -- not that all media aren't important, but you still clearly have to get Ron in front of the biggest media audience as you can, given time constraints.

I heard that the campaign decline Howard Stern's invitation, a visit to whom would expose Ron Paul's name to untold tens of millions of listeners. It was done because Howard Stern was a shock-jock that was too out of the mainstream. But that didn't stop them from sending him to Alex Jones.

Twice.

Sorry, another bullshit excuse. I'd buy it if Ron Paul was a no show on some local talk radio, because he had Larry King or Oprah to go to, but apparently, the way campaign's head was positioned (up its ass), even if Oprah and Larry King personally knocked on the door and begged on their knees for Ron Paul to come, the campaign would still not send him.
 
Man, I wanted to see that Ron so many times, too! I think that one of the things that Ron has trouble with is that he doesn't want to pander at all. While that makes him so appealing to me personally, it also leads him not to tailor his message to his audience, which in my opinion is very different than pandering. I see that as rule number 1 of giving a speech or writing a paper.

But Dr. Paul doesn't see things that way. He believes issues like monetary policy and flawed Iraq policy are so critical that everyone needs to hear about them, regardless of whether he's speaking to a group of students, South Carolina veterans, or Silicon Valley software entrepreneurs. While that's admirable, I've got to say, it just doesn't win elections.

If he feels we are headed straight to hell with worthless papers that used to be money and with a war over manufactured reasons fueled by now deflated patriotism, and he actually wants something to happen, he should act that way. If he feels that American lives are important, then he should scream from the roof top, literally if he has to, about this. You can be a shit sturrer and still not pander to anyone. You can tell that we will be poorer and poorer in an alarmist tone, you can tell me to wake up and even use some strong language and not be some liar....

:mad::mad::mad:

But I see instead of a walking human DANGER sign only a guy who is mildly interested in getting anything done. I don't need an education campaign, I knew we were fucked before Ron Paul decided to run. I just want him to win. I just want him to fight for himself, just like me and untold thousands all over US fought for him......
 
Bradley worked for the congressional staff, knows a lot of them pretty well.
He did a speech at the Mises Institute about the gold standard.
He has a company that is dedicated to individual liberty and education of it.
He has 8,000 posts.
He and I talk a lot online, he wants young people to get involved and start joining programs to learn more about Dr. Paul's message.

And yet, people doubt it. They'd rather believe a campaign that has proven itself incompetent. Even the Congressional Chief-of-Staff called them out.

Just because you are loyal to Paul doesn't mean you have to be loyal to his staff. Anyone remember Eric Dondero?

well good god damn.

we agree on something!
 
even if Oprah and Larry King personally knocked on the door and begged on their knees for Ron Paul to come, the campaign would still not send him.

Uh.... He was on King, remember? They decided not to air it. Going on Stern would've been a lose-lose. Sure, Jones is not a good outlet, but, hey, Americans don't know who he is. Ron going on Stern would've been treated like a joke, and it would have left a bad taste in many, many mouths.

And you heard that they got the request? My sources say they did not. Do you know for sure? Unless you know for sure, don't blame them for anything.
 
Failure was mismatching skills

1. Hiring a gay Buddhist to run the campaign, when you are running (purportedly) for the Republican nomination which still has a huge Christian conservative base that would never vote for a campaign so led. Allowing several more gays to work out of the Arlington offices and giving the overall impression of a "cliquish" atmosphere.
2. Promoting Joe Seehusen after he messed up the Ames Straw poll and after his "consulting firm" donated $10,000 to the RP campaign. Dissing the "Vote Scam" people totally and doing nothing to insure the Ames results were correct.
3. Having no back up for the computerized supporter lists and no hard copy of the supporter lists so that a "disgruntled employee" could walk out with that crucial info the morning of the crucial IA caucus and totally ruin our chances at a respectable 3rd place finish in Iowa. Firing nobody after this happened.
4. Hiring a former housewife who had never even voted before to take over the State of MI headquarters after Paul Garfield was dumped (for no stated reason) and then hiring a 24-year old college student from Skull & Bones U. who worked on the Bush campaign in 2004 to be her "right hand" gal.
5. Not running a single national TV ad, EVER, thus confirming the MSM-pumped impressions that we were not running a serious campaign.
6. Multiple financial irregularities (that have cited many times here before) that at a bare minimum have a very real "appearance of evil."
7. Dissing national media figures repeatedly, including canceling pre-arranged interviews a few minutes beforehand.
8. Totally shutting out multiple offers from the grassroots of free or reduced-cost assistance for services in a number of professional areas with which the campaign obviously needed help (ex: ad production, delegate training, etc., etc., etc.)
9. Failing to hire a single person with long and proven credentials in the patriot movement either at the national, regional or state levels.
10. Shutting out a billionaire's offer of $100,000,000 because he asked that certain people at national HQ be replaced with competent and truly devoted patriots.

Heck...I could go on all night...but it's bed time...

Steve,

Um, wow.

You know I don't doubt you're in this for Dr. Paul, nor do I think you question my motives. You also know that I've not been afraid to criticize when I thought it would be constructive (and yes, I certainly am human there too).

But, wow. Not to go all Madison on your Patrick Henry ass, but...

On the first question, I don't see it. I'm ignorant of many things, but to the best of my knowledge, Kent hired the first few people then turned all hiring over to others. The more common complaint I heard (third hand, anecdotal) was the hiring of "born agains" or "Evangelicals" or something (sometimes with speculation to compete with Huckabee or something). I, personally, didn't see (and don't believe) any hiring conspiracy with any motivation at all (unless there is some grand gay Buddhist, Jewish, Evangelical, Cato/Koch, neocon conspiracy of which I'm unaware, but I tend to stay out of Hot Topics ;)). I know lots of people hired people they already knew, which is understandable, and can be good or bad.

As critical as I've been of the official campaign staffers where I thought it would be better for the movement, I do think most of them would have been good at something else. Heck, McHugh is working for me now on the Vern McKinley for Congress campaign! Yup. Wouldn't trust him with responsibilities for getting delegates for a Republican presidential primary campaign, but he's got lots of other skills that could have greatly helped Dr. Paul get to the White House.

My point here is that the campaign management took great potential--not only all of the things we know of in the grassroots but among the official campaign staff itself--and squandered it. That is the tragedy. Official campaign staffers who could have been kick ass in one capacity (#2, possibly Seehusen? I have no idea) were then tasked to do something for which they were completely unqualified by experience, temperment, education, knowledge or whatever with no guidance or assistance. Then they floundered. It's a pity, but not a conspiracy. There's a leadership vacuum at the top that created a black hole sucking up all of the skills and potential of the rest of the staff, grassroots ...

3. huge, unquestionable failure--unpardonable that systemic changes still haven't been made for redundancies: look at all of the complaints of the Precinct Leader system losing updated information.

4. Bad premise. Lots of people with no previous experience did great things. I thought Trevor was amazing! Go back to my point about mismatching potentials.

On the rest, I might have ideas but am too ignorant to really speculate publicly.

So, at the risk of returning to the topic of the thread...

Jonathan, do you think there was a (major!) problem of mismatching people to responsibilities at HQ?
 
Last edited:
How does Iowa get messed up twice?

Straw poll and then the caucus.

Either incompetence or someone didn't want Ron Paul to win. I know there was a lot of incompetence at the national level. There was also an odd atmosphere at the campaign HQ.

I noticed that many of the paid staff were somewhat fearful for their jobs and sometimes dreaded the situation they were in. I didn't sense the positive atmosphere of a spirited underdog dark horse campaign.

There were a few exceptions of positive people but not many.

So very few staffers were willing to speak up or create waves inside the campaign HQ.

They felt lucky to just have a job, let alone to presume to tell senior campaign staff how things might be improved on the campaign.

There were many reasons to be positive in the summer and fall, because you could tell that there was not a runaway frontrunner in the GOP and Ron Paul could get victories if if could get 20 percent of the vote because the field was so divided.

There were counties around the country where he got fifteen percent or more.
 
1. Hiring a gay Buddhist to run the campaign, when you are running (purportedly) for the Republican nomination which still has a huge Christian conservative base that would never vote for a campaign so led. Allowing several more gays to work out of the Arlington offices and giving the overall impression of a "cliquish" atmosphere.
2. Promoting Joe Seehusen after he messed up the Ames Straw poll and after his "consulting firm" donated $10,000 to the RP campaign. Dissing the "Vote Scam" people totally and doing nothing to insure the Ames results were correct.
3. Having no back up for the computerized supporter lists and no hard copy of the supporter lists so that a "disgruntled employee" could walk out with that crucial info the morning of the crucial IA caucus and totally ruin our chances at a respectable 3rd place finish in Iowa. Firing nobody after this happened.
4. Hiring a former housewife who had never even voted before to take over the State of MI headquarters after Paul Garfield was dumped (for no stated reason) and then hiring a 24-year old college student from Skull & Bones U. who worked on the Bush campaign in 2004 to be her "right hand" gal.
5. Not running a single national TV ad, EVER, thus confirming the MSM-pumped impressions that we were not running a serious campaign.
6. Multiple financial irregularities (that have cited many times here before) that at a bare minimum have a very real "appearance of evil."
7. Dissing national media figures repeatedly, including canceling pre-arranged interviews a few minutes beforehand.
8. Totally shutting out multiple offers from the grassroots of free or reduced-cost assistance for services in a number of professional areas with which the campaign obviously needed help (ex: ad production, delegate training, etc., etc., etc.)
9. Failing to hire a single person with long and proven credentials in the patriot movement either at the national, regional or state levels.
10. Shutting out a billionaire's offer of $100,000,000 because he asked that certain people at national HQ be replaced with competent and truly devoted patriots.

Heck...I could go on all night...but it's bed time...

Steve, you've gone off the deep end.
 
Yongrel,

Your credibility is shot. You are now readily identifiable with the elements who allowed the hard-earned money of people desperate to save their country if they could to be totally squandered.
 
Yongrel,

Your credibility is shot. You are now readily identifiable with the elements who allowed the hard-earned money of people desperate to save their country if they could to be totally squandered.

I heard that he's a pencil-pushing homosexual Hare Krishna too, from sources inside the official campaign.
 
Yongrel and Amy, Amy and Yongrel...

Don't you two need a room?

Why are you the only two who troll all my posts in such a consistent and punctual manner??
 
Yongrel,

Your credibility is shot. You are now readily identifiable with the elements who allowed the hard-earned money of people desperate to save their country if they could to be totally squandered.

I agree with Yongrel, however, we need a few people in the deep end. Feel free to keep the theories coming, but I'll remain neutral on whether or not I believe them until I see some proof.

Keep in mind that sometimes there is such a high level of incompetence that it seems there must be some kind of conspiracy responsible for the events that took place. Many times, it turns out to just be incompetence. It's hard to say which is worse. If it really was conspiracy, it seems to me that many worse things could have been done that would have stopped the campaign dead in its tracks. The successes of the campaign can't be ignored any more than the failures can.
 
Yongrel and Amy, Amy and Yongrel...

Don't you two need a room?

Why are you the only two who troll all my posts in such a consistent and punctual manner??

Not trolling you toots, I tore my ACL and this forum is one of the ways I keep myself occupado with the movement until I'm all better.

The fact that I happen to call you out on a frequency that is perhaps on par with yongrel is completely a coincidence, and the only similar factor between he and I is that the outrageous stuff you say. I personally can't help but respond, can't speak for him though. It doesn't matter who it is, I have no personal vendetta against you. I would respond that way to anyone who sounded as bigoted and nutty as you sometimes do.
 
You, sir, should be on your knees begging your Creator for forgiveness for being so vane in your speech.

Welcome. You must be a disenfranchised Huckabee supporter. The word is "vain", by the way.

We really are happy to have Huckabee supporters here. However, I fear you're going to have to learn the patience and tolerance The Teacher tried to teach us if you're to do conservatism any good in team with this crowd. Sorry.

It does take all kinds, and that's why He in His infinite wisdom created all kinds of us. We don't really mean to stomp on your finer sensibilities, but I fear some in this crowd will, and will every time. Nonetheless, they aren't as devilish as they seem. Sometimes good has rough edges all over just as evil can be smooth as silk. Please remember the truth of that.

Thanks for joining us, boomcreek.
 
You, sir, should be on your knees begging your Creator for forgiveness for being so vane in your speech.

ozzy and i have a hx of disagreement. but that's really private message material.

so is that ^.

glad to have gotten your attention though.

it's tough in black and white (errr.... pink). i'll take your comments as a compliment.
 
Damn this thread is long...what's up ya'll...everything is really hangin out now that this thing is over....

I guess we'll all believe George next time...oh wait....
 
What will happen if all the remaining money goes into the Liberty PAC controlled by our #1 nincompoop--Kent Snyder?

At some point the supporters are going to rise up and DEMAND to know why all of there hard-earned nickels and dimes were totally frittered away, and when that happens....
 
Back
Top