New Strategy for Caucus States: No Rallies or Big Speeches--Just Long Town Hall Q&A's

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Ron's rally and "stump" speeches are good for planting seeds and laying ground work with undecided voters, but they're too high level, non-specific, and repetitive. He has to delve much deeper to convince people to vote for him.

On the other hand, sometimes--but not nearly often enough, he provides much more specific and detailed explanations such as in those 1 hour long editorial board interviews and in some of the Q&A's that are tagged onto the ends of town hall stump speeches when he's not being rushed to leave for the next event.

So for Nevada, Minnesota, and the other caucus states in which Ron is going to spend time in the next month, why not skip the time consuming "rally" events where he gives his standard high level 1 hour speech that touches too many issues on too much of a surface level and then spends hours wasting time taking pictures and signing autographs and instead find nice big locations, sit Ron down someplace up high where everybody can see him and just let him field questions for hours on end from whomever wants to ask?

The key here is for Ron to not get rushed into talking about too much all at once at too high a level. One of the problems with giving libertarian answers to questions is that one is often tempted to try to give the same gigantic whole unified field theory of freedom as the answer to every specific detailed question. And this confuses people who can't see the big picture vision.

So in Las Vegas, for example, we could sit Ron down at a high platform in a giant hotel convention room for like a week straight and invite the world to come and fill up on mega-doses of Ron.

Some marketing expert can figure out how to bill it. But I think the hotel marquees should scroll something like this:

"Ron Paul Takes on All Comers--That Includes You Too Gingrich You Fat Goblin if You Weren't Scared Shitless--We've Got Your 7 Hour Lincoln-Douglas Debate Right Here You Demonic Debaucherous Dimwit"

 

[nyrgoal99]

I think more Q&A may be helpful

 

[SonofThunder]

I agree with this. We need Ron Paul interacting with people. In the debates he comes off as rambling and unpolished. In his speeches he says the things we love to hear and what he believes, but he doesn't sway people who aren't already for him.

In the interactions, people ask him questions from the outsider's perspective. Ron gives excellent answers. We need more of this.

(and please save your keystrokes in telling me RP doesn't pander because he's too high and mighty - this is an election - we need to win.)

 

[hueylong]

How about we let Dr. Paul and his team make these decisions. It's their job. And it's not our job.

And besides -- having town hall meetings is not a "new strategy".

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

In the interactions, people ask him questions from the outsider's perspective. Ron gives excellent answers. We need more of this.

The thing is that Ron's brain is chock full of facts, logic, and all sorts of good stuff that few people get to hear. I remember once hearing him give a speech in the late 1990s where he spoke about all the details about how companies like Halliburton send their people to Washington and tell the congressman how they will spend our money on giant military bases. He went into great detail and I felt that by hearing what Ron was saying I was like a fly on the wall and getting see how things really work.

If Ron isn't rushed and his objective isn't to give a surface level explanation, he can be a fountain of enlightening facts and ideas.

 

[bebliss]

Dr. Paul's speech is awesome. However, it may not get ourselves new supports. If we address issues that concerns the voters, and answers them w/ current policies and what Dr. Paul would do differently will win more voters. Dr. Paul needs to start attacking Obama NOW, b/c it will get media attention and voters.

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

How about we let Dr. Paul and his team make these decisions. It's their job. And it's not our job.

Yes, but its my job to give them ideas upon which to decide.

And besides -- having town hall meetings is not a "new strategy".

Did somebody say that town meetings are a new strategy? I suggested skipping the high-level speech portion of the town meetings and instead of having a few quick questions at the end before going off to another town meeting, Ron should hold court for hours on end in the same location. Capish?

 

[speciallyblend]

the problem is not Ron Paul or the campaign, It is the corrupt gop. NO ONE BUT PAUL with or without the corrupt gop.

 

[sailingaway]

I agree, when he gets into his preaching to the choir mode, he stops explaining transitions and details which are vital. He terrifies some people. He is spectacular in Town Hall mode.

 

[Henry Hazlitt]

I think the Q&A is exactly the right solution to sway people. Get undecideds and others to ask the questions that are keeping them on bay. Paul is so much smarter than the other candidates and he has solutions to most of the problems but he needs to showcase that part.

Then the campaign should cut the important questions and put them on the internet. So sort of a copy of the Eisenhower campaign where he would have clips of people asking him question and answering them except this could be real genuine questions that people have instead of the phony set up that Eisenhower had:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEINBjHHvHE

 

[rpwi]

Like the idea of more Q&A. Should make it less stressful for Ron as he wouldn't have to deliver so many long monologues.

Key is if the local media will attend. The only reason you really delivery stump speeches...is because you get yourself on the 6:00 local news without paying for advertising (that's where the real crowds are at).

Do think Ron should still do a little stumping...if he's not being asked the right questions, he needs to bring up points nobody is being talked about (which can be tricky to do in Q&A...depends on the crowd).

Would be nice if actual voters did the questions instead of the media in these types of forums (media always asks such stupid questions and questions that have already been asked 10 zillion times).

 

[walt]

I think more Q&A may be helpful

Unfortunately, the reality is that ROn's handlers prefer closed events with their kind.

If you can tell me how they'd put a room full of undecideds, some while will ask hard questions, I'm all for it.

I think the public sees the controlled paulbot-like events and they can't make that big of a jump because it doesn't speak to them.

 

[sailingaway]

Unfortunately, the reality is that ROn's handlers prefer closed events with their kind.

If you can tell me how they'd put a room full of undecideds, some while will ask hard questions, I'm all for it.

I think the public sees the controlled paulbot-like events and they can't make that big of a jump because it doesn't speak to them.

that isn't fair. they really tried to get undecideds and even didn't post events in advance in NH so it wouldn't be full of supporters only. But in SC they had no organization because it wasn't really on the radar to target for delegates, and the only strategy was to fire up the base. In caucus states, and states we are targeting, it is different, and we need this.

 

[Jeffster]

I think the most focus should be on getting out the vote and getting people to be delegates. He's got enough people who already believe in the message to make a real difference as long as those people actually come out to the caucuses and precinct conventions and get selected as delegates.

 

[vita3]

You would think Q & A interaction in smaller states like Nevada & Minn could result in a victory. I really liked the event put on in NH that CSPAN covered.. Especially the Q 8 A's. Dr.paul will have these states to himself for a little bit. & that is how Santorum won Iowa.

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Unfortunately, the reality is that ROn's handlers prefer closed events with their kind.

If you can tell me how they'd put a room full of undecideds, some while will ask hard questions, I'm all for it.

I think the public sees the controlled paulbot-like events and they can't make that big of a jump because it doesn't speak to them.

Wow. Very Depressing.

From the perspective that you paint above, the picture is kind of coming into focus and its not pretty.

For example, you remind me of when I was watching one of the NH town halls on CSPAN and after the speech and the couple of short questions, this handler guy comes out on stage and starts rounding up the faithful into the autograph line and explaining the picture rules and it all seemed like a real schlocky waste of time. All the while I was thinking, "Why isn't he sitting up there answering questions? There are democrats and independents who are serious potential buyers out there and we're spending an hour lining up and taking pictures?" It was all very washed-up-baseball-player-at-a-card-signing-ish. It might sell books, but its not going to get votes or turn independents on to libertarianism either.

 

[socal]

Ron's rally and "stump" speeches are good for planting seeds and laying ground work with undecided voters, but they're too high level, non-specific, and repetitive. He has to delve much deeper to convince people to vote for him.

On the other hand, sometimes--but not nearly often enough, he provides much more specific and detailed explanations such as in those 1 hour long editorial board interviews and in some of the Q&A's that are tagged onto the ends of town hall stump speeches when he's not being rushed to leave for the next event.

So for Nevada, Minnesota, and the other caucus states in which Ron is going to spend time in the next month, why not skip the time consuming "rally" events where he gives his standard high level 1 hour speech that touches too many issues on too much of a surface level and then spends hours wasting time taking pictures and signing autographs and instead find nice big locations, sit Ron down someplace up high where everybody can see him and just let him field questions for hours on end from whomever wants to ask?

The key here is for Ron to not get rushed into talking about too much all at once at too high a level. One of the problems with giving libertarian answers to questions is that one is often tempted to try to give the same gigantic whole unified field theory of freedom as the answer to every specific detailed question. And this confuses people who can't see the big picture vision.

So in Las Vegas, for example, we could sit Ron down at a high platform in a giant hotel convention room for like a week straight and invite the world to come and fill up on mega-doses of Ron.

Some marketing expert can figure out how to bill it. But I think the hotel marquees should scroll something like this:

"Ron Paul Takes on All Comers--That Includes You Too Gingrich You Fat Goblin if You Weren't Scared Shitless--We've Got Your 7 Hour Lincoln-Douglas Debate Right Here You Demonic Debaucherous Dimwit"

Good post, I agree. Answering specific questions reduces his ideas to bite sized chunks that the average voter has a greater chance of understanding. I follow what he's saying in his longer speeches, since I've spent a lot of time studying the Federal Reserve system, economics, and foreign policy. But there are lots of voters who haven't obviously, and then when he occasionally skips important details in his longer speeches, it would make it almost impossible for the uninitiated to follow what he's saying. Towards that end, he should allow 1 followup question if he adopts this Q&A format.

 

[FriedChicken]

These events would also be a great example for supporters to see how to best answer questions from friends and family.

The week long hotel thing, I think, is a super idea. Ron could stay well rested with breaks and wouldn't be on a bus everyday and could have a comfortable hotel room in the same venue.

 

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

The week long hotel thing, I think, is a super idea. Ron could stay well rested with breaks and wouldn't be on a bus everyday and could have a comfortable hotel room in the same venue.

When Gingrich gets all snooty about a series of 3 hour "Lincoln-Douglass style debates", he's pretending like somehow people are going to get a more candid, complete, and serious policy discussion than they're used to via this different debate format.

When Obama was running and lied over and over and promised that all of the "negotiations" for his health care proposals would be live on CSPAN, he also was pretending that somehow the people would get more transparent and honest access to their politicians and answers to their questions by way of a media gimmick.

In both of these examples, Gingrich and Obama pretend that they are extra-honest and will conduct a fancy media spectacle to prove it. Of course, they're lying and will never follow through on anything that actually gives the public honest answers to their questions.

But Ron could actually do it over the course of the next month in a media spectacle to end all media spectacles.

He should start out with a 3 or 4 night long extended stay at one of the big easily accessible off-strip casinos in Las Vegas: Just sitting up there on the throne taking questions and hashing out the future of the U.S. with anybody who wants to discuss things with him--morning, afternoon, and evening (with bicycle breaks of course).

Then to a big Reno hotel for a few days. Then maybe to the Indian casino outside of Minneapolis for a few more days...

The objective should not be to kiss babies, eat pie, and get trampled by 200 reporters at Joe's Diner. Nor, should it be to sign fan memorabilia and take pictures for hours at a time. Ron can actually do for real what frauds such as Gingrich and Obama can only vaguely promise to do.

 

[Paul Fan]

I like it. How would you stop people asking the same few questions over and over? Maybe record the answers and categorize them with keywords or something?