My thinking on why 2nd is better than 1st at Ames

[ronpaulhawaii]

• The media/establishment bias is being heavily exposed. The people of Iowa, the other campaigns, and all of the watchers have been shocked by the way the winner was announced. That shock causes everyone to look closer and this confirms our longstanding claim of bias. The continuing "blackout" is causing LOTS of people realize this. The dinosaurs still do not see the power of the internet to spread true information, and the fact that people are not as stupid as they think they are. Further, as always, this type of behavior from the establishment motivates us
  
• The SRLC factor - The close call will motivate supporters to "do more" - They can more clearly see the importance of doing more. If we had won, there is a percentage of supporters who would think, "We got this in the bag" and be more complacent.
  
• Many donors on the fence will see that we are truly fighting to win, and that the campaign is doing all of the things necessary to win. They will know that the campaign needs money to do what they are doing and will be more willing to give. It is obvious that we are in it to win it, and many people were waiting to see what we did at Ames.

PRESS HARDER!

 

[Bruno]

Agree. I was second-guessing that belief until I saw the backlash against the media.

Add to it that fact that because she and Randy Travis took 1st place, it is therefore a "legitimate" event, and Ron Paul took a very close second in that legitimate straw poll.

 

[belian78]

I'm sorry, I'm not as optimistic. Yeah there's been a popcorn fart's worth of backlash over the Ames blackout, but even that is being spun to justify further shunning of all things Ron Paul. The line now is 'yeah, he was left out of coverage but its not a big deal because he never really had a chance anyway'.

We can combat this day in and day out on our own, and jack hunter can blog relentlessly on the campaign website, but if Ron will not shape his message to win and go directly at the other candidates it will all be for naught.

At the rate we are going now Ron could be excluded from the next debates, and the MSM would take the minor indigestion we give them and keep on trucking.

*Maybe I'm a bit down right now I apologize for being a Debbie downer, but still my point stands.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

I'm sorry, I'm not as optimistic. Yeah there's been a popcorn fart's worth of backlash over the Ames blackout, but even that is being spun to justify further shunning of all things Ron Paul. The line now is 'yeah, he was left out of coverage but its not a big deal because he never really had a chance anyway'.

We can combat this day in and day out on our own, and jack hunter can blog relentlessly on the campaign website, but if Ron will not shape his message to win and go directly at the other candidates it will all be for naught.

At the rate we are going now Ron could be excluded from the next debates, and the MSM would take the minor indigestion we give them and keep on trucking.

*Maybe I'm a bit down right now I apologize for being a Debbie downer, but still my point stands.

Methinks you need to get out more. Your "popcorn fart" seems to be referring to the same media that is making the blackout. In my circles, LOTS of actual people are noticing...

 

[RonPaul101.com]

I think it worked out quite well for Ron Paul. Yes, it keeps his supporters optimistic AND hungry to do more; which is a hard mix to create, and a good one.

Also, we'd all be kidding ourselves to think that if Ron Paul winning and Bachmann coming in close second would have had anymore positive spin from the media for Ron Paul. It would have just been a different angle from the media, probably one they've even rehersed, to downplay or discredit Ron Paul and give light to Bachmann. Bachmann had all these talk shows booked well ahead of the poll results, and trust me that wasn't being risky on her part, not at all. They we're not booked to say, "Its a shame you lost to Ron Paul". You would have heard stuff like, "Bachmann you got the most votes of any 'electible' candidate at Ames, congrats!" or "Bachmann you came in a very close second which is powerful news considering you are relatively new to the race when compared to you competition." We'd all be that much more pissed off.

Trust me, never underestimate the level of BS the media is willing to make up on the spot to push their agenda.

 

[trey4sports]

im not nearly as optimistic.

 

[d1sCo]

im not nearly as optimistic.

We have no choice but to be optimistic. Losing hope this early in the race is exactly what the establishment wants. We must push harder and fight more than we ever have. Our cause is righteous and it deserves a righteous battle.

-d1sCo

 

[Hotchney]

Don't kid yourselves. It's always better to come in first than second.

 

[Nate]

Methinks you need to get out more. Your "popcorn fart" seems to be referring to the same media that is making the blackout. In my circles, LOTS of actual people are noticing...

I have quite a few acquaintances who are e-mailing me & saying that it's "not right what they are doing to your guy". I then use it as an opening to tell them why the corporate media is so scared of him. People don't like being lied to & manipulated.

It also solidifies Ron Paul as the TRUE outsider, anti-establishment candidate in this race & if you look at the approval ratings of just about every branch of the federal government you'll see that people aren't exactly happy with the status quo. This treatment of Paul by the MSM will end up biting them in the ass, blowback is a bitch.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

Don't kid yourselves. It's always better to come in first than second.

I'm not kidding myself. Why do you think I am, and what benefits would we have gotten coming in first?

 

[MRoCkEd]

It's tough to say, because we don't know how the media would be treating a first place finish.

 

[Napoleon's Shadow]

We can fly under the radar avoiding some of the attacks while Perry Bachmann and Mitt duke it out raising each other's negatives.

 

[Aratus]

ms. bachmann has been getting positive and negative coverage.
JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE had a sideview photo of MB + corndawg! she
has been getting an uptick AND ridicule. stress that T~paw spent
TWICE what dr. ron paul did and got LESS THAN HALF the votes!

 

[rp08orbust]

• The media/establishment bias is being heavily exposed. The people of Iowa, the other campaigns, and all of the watchers have been shocked by the way the winner was announced. That shock causes everyone to look closer and this confirms our longstanding claim of bias. The continuing "blackout" is causing LOTS of people realize this. The dinosaurs still do not see the power of the internet to spread true information, and the fact that people are not as stupid as they think they are. Further, as always, this type of behavior from the establishment motivates us
  
• The SRLC factor - The close call will motivate supporters to "do more" - They can more clearly see the importance of doing more. If we had won, there is a percentage of supporters who would think, "We got this in the bag" and be more complacent.
  
• Many donors on the fence will see that we are truly fighting to win, and that the campaign is doing all of the things necessary to win. They will know that the campaign needs money to do what they are doing and will be more willing to give. It is obvious that we are in it to win it, and many people were waiting to see what we did at Ames.

PRESS HARDER!

I can see the logic of the first two points, but not the third. How does failing to win the easiest contest of the entire election cycle, the Ames straw poll, make people want to donate more? If anything, seeing Ron Paul get 2nd at Ames, and hearing that Jesse Benton was bragging about how little money they spent on getting straw poll votes, makes me question whether they are in it to win.

 

[rp08orbust]

I'm not kidding myself. Why do you think I am, and what benefits would we have gotten coming in first?

There would no doubt have been a flurry of hit pieces against Ron Paul if he had won the Ames straw poll, but at some point, Ron Paul has to get first place at something if he is going to win the Republican nomination, and when he does, those hit pieces are going to come. Better to get them out of the way now with a straw poll win than later when voters are really paying attention.

I would take the negative attention of a first place at Ames over the current nationwide blackout any day.

By your reasoning, is it better to get 2nd place in the IA caucus than 1st? And 2nd in NH instead of 1st? And 2nd in SC instead of 1st? The Ames straw poll was the first and easiest opportunity for Ron Paul to score an actual win. It only gets more difficult from here on.

 

[Hotchney]

It's always better to win. Don't let people spinning this fool you. Sure, some media outlets would have spun the straw poll as irrelevant but the discussion would have been: is the straw poll irrelevant or is Dr. paul gaining relevance?

The narrative thus far in the campaign has been: Ron paul is gaining relevance and his ideas are being embraced. A win would have continued to solidify this narrative.

 

[dusman]

There would no doubt have been a flurry of hit pieces against Ron Paul if he had won the Ames straw poll, but at some point, Ron Paul has to get first place at something if he is going to win the Republican nomination, and when he does, those hit pieces are going to come. Better to get them out of the way now with a straw poll win than later when voters are really paying attention.

I would take the negative attention of a first place at Ames over the current nationwide blackout any day.

By your reasoning, is it better to get 2nd place in the IA caucus than 1st? And 2nd in NH instead of 1st? And 2nd in SC instead of 1st? The Ames straw poll was the first and easiest opportunity for Ron Paul to score an actual win. It only gets more difficult from here on.

I agree with you, but I think this sets a stage for the future of the campaign. The media blowback, might get significant. We are yet to see the full-scope of it and how it plays out. This early in the campaign, I'm all for a 2nd place finish with FORCED positive coverage now from the BAD media vs. 1st place finish and JUSTIFIED (from their perspective) more of the same discrediting that has worked pretty well, to be honest.

In the '08 campaign, I think the base did a pretty good job of raising awareness about media censorship. We are the only ones that can fix it. Ron Paul, regardless of a top notch message, given as good as Reagan himself, can't change the perceptual dynamic the media creates. We now have precedent in the bias. We now have history on our side on this notion. We should ride this bad boy all the way to the nomination.

If this is a chess game and ignoring a candidate is the Queen, well they just sacrificed her too soon into the game. After this one, I don't think they get another shot at a blackout. The support is just getting too strong for them to ignore and the growing pains are bursting their little "non-electable" bubble, right before our eyes.

A tree will grow against all odds, my friend. Keep the fight up, we are doing good.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

I can see the logic of the first two points, but not the third. How does failing to win the easiest contest of the entire election cycle, the Ames straw poll, make people want to donate more? If anything, seeing Ron Paul get 2nd at Ames, and hearing that Jesse Benton was bragging about how little money they spent on getting straw poll votes, makes me question whether they are in it to win.

This is certainly not the easiest contest to win. I didn't hear Jesse's statement, but it sounds like your disappointment, at not coming in first, is coloring your view. I sam seeing lots of people who were on the fence, or just not aware, coming on board.

There would no doubt have been a flurry of hit pieces against Ron Paul if he had won the Ames straw poll, but at some point, Ron Paul has to get first place at something if he is going to win the Republican nomination, and when he does, those hit pieces are going to come. Better to get them out of the way now with a straw poll win than later when voters are really paying attention.

I would take the negative attention of a first place at Ames over the current nationwide blackout any day.

By your reasoning, is it better to get 2nd place in the IA caucus than 1st? And 2nd in NH instead of 1st? And 2nd in SC instead of 1st? The Ames straw poll was the first and easiest opportunity for Ron Paul to score an actual win. It only gets more difficult from here on.

There is a huge difference between the Straw Poll and the caucuses. I can appreciate that an actual win would have put us in a different place, but I am not convinced it would be a better place. Mostly in regards to the points I've made

 

[realtonygoodwin]

We've actually got a decent amount of press on our lack of press. I think it is the best possible outcome as well.
We see what they do with a 1st place win (see CPAC).

 

[Bruno]

It's tough to say, because we don't know how the media would be treating a first place finish.

Frank Luntz told me at the straw poll it would be a "big deal" if he came in first or second. Obviously he lied.