NH Results Thread

Why the fuck would you piss off GOP voters and tell them you will vote for Obama if Ron Paul doesn't make it? DUDE.
 
rprprs said:
The worst part was that the guy said"when Ron Paul went negative"...in reference to his anti-war statements. UGH!
Click to expand...

Yeah BUT did you see when he simply said "bring them home" it pegged out positive?

It's not the message, it's the phrasing.

The don't want to hear how many mistakes America HAS made

They want to hear what wonderful things we are GOING to do.

This is critically important.
 
GunnyFreedom said:
Yeah BUT did you see when he simply said "bring them home" it pegged out positive?

It's not the message, it's the phrasing.

The don't want to hear how many mistakes America HAS made

They want to hear what wonderful things we are GOING to do.

This is critically important.
Click to expand...

They reacted even more positively when the wars were framed as war-profiteering at the expense of the citizens. Ron definitely needs to mention that the MIC is getting stupid rich off this perpetual war mantra.

Fwiw, CNN panel guy isn't too bright for suggesting he will vote for Obama if RP doesn't win the nomination, right in the middle of a bunch of GOP voters. I respect his honesty but we need to have some discretion with comments like that on national tv.
 
Last edited:
Where is teh Collins on this? this is such an important distinction I think it needs to be driven home to the PCC.

Paul said the same damn thing twice in a row. 1st time it was way neg, 2nd time it was pegged out positive.

The only difference was the 1st time focused on the mistakes we made in the past, 2nd time focused on the proper things we will do in the future.

2nd approach wins. 1st approach loses

said the exact same thing.

PCC needs to have this driven home. Ron Paul needs to hear this.
 
GunnyFreedom said:
IKR?

Say, "If we don't restore the Constitution we are in real trouble, only one of them wants to do that so I can only vote Paul"

But the "I'll vote Obama" no. that hurts us in SC.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. He's telling the truth and that's better than saying he'll vote for their corporate schill. They were trying to create a picture of a republican party that will fall in behind a guy that has 70% of the party in his backyard unwilling to vote for him. They were trying to make Romney look more viable.
 
GunnyFreedom said:
Where is teh Collins on this? this is such an important distinction I think it needs to be driven home to the PCC.

Paul said the same damn thing twice in a row. 1st time it was way neg, 2nd time it was pegged out positive.

The only difference was the 1st time focused on the mistakes we made in the past, 2nd time focused on the proper things we will do in the future.

2nd approach wins. 1st approach loses

said the exact same thing.

PCC needs to have this driven home. Ron Paul needs to hear this.
Click to expand...

the message has been fine tuned quite a bit, so I have no doubt it can be tuned even more!
 
devil21 said:
They reacted even more positively when the wars were framed as war-profiteering at the expense of the citizens. Ron definitely needs to mention that the MIC is getting stupid rich off this perpetual war mantra.
Click to expand...

Yes, agree.

put the criminals outside of "amurrika" if you want to point to criminals.

Focus exclusively on future positive. lay off on the past negative.
 
GunnyFreedom said:
Yeah BUT did you see when he simply said "bring them home" it pegged out positive?

It's not the message, it's the phrasing.

The don't want to hear how many mistakes America HAS made

They want to hear what wonderful things we are GOING to do.

This is critically important.
Click to expand...

That was stupid. Of course they would rate it negative. Would someone rate something about our wars and our troops as positive? I don't think it would matter who was talking, if the subject was war, positive ratings should go down.

Dumb CNN. The only reason I'm watching is my C-Span feed keeps freezing up.
 
Dr_SCN said:
I don't agree. He's telling the truth and that's better than saying he'll vote for their corporate schill. They were trying to create a picture of a republican party that will fall in behind a guy that has 70% of the party in his backyard unwilling to vote for him. They were trying to make Romney look more viable.
Click to expand...

So telling the truth in a way that loses us votes is more important than telling the truth in a way that wins us votes?

I'm afraid I fail to comprehend you.

ETA -- answered the wrong question stand by...

All he had to do was say the same thing in a more 'gentle' way that earns more respect and helps Paul win.

"I can ONLY vote the COnstitution, and Paul is the ONLY guy"

says the same thing. Has the same impact, but without the negs.
 
Last edited:
opinionatedfool said:
That was stupid. Of course they would rate it negative. Would someone rate something about our wars and our troops as positive? I don't think it would matter who was talking, if the subject was war, positive ratings should go down.

Dumb CNN. The only reason I'm watching is my C-Span feed keeps freezing up.
Click to expand...

All of America is not you though.

We already have YOUR vote. ;)
 
holy crap msnbc just said that Ron Paul could win the nomination and that he is the only one that can against Romney....i love this night
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
“Are Banks a Threat to Your Freedom? | Guest: Phillip Patrick”
Replies
2
Views
329
TheTexan
TheTexan
Anti Federalist
NH - Record number of Free Staters elected to Concord in an historic GOP sweep
Replies
1
Views
852
nobody's_hero
nobody's_hero
PAF
Who Killed Charlie Kirk?
Replies
2
Views
358
James_Madison_Lives
J
Voluntarist
Immigration Detainments That Make You Say WTF
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
552
nikcers
nikcers
Occam's Banana
Thomas Massie introduces "No Funds for Foreign Abortions Act"
Replies
10
Views
91
TheTexan
TheTexan
Back
Top