Rick Perry is Dead Wrong | by Sen. Rand Paul

[69360]

I'm thinking this was a case of too soon junior by Rand. Perry probably isn't running and even if he is, he is not a serious contender. Oops! Why expend political capital and effort fighting him now. But hey it does seem like Rand is coming out ahead in this fight, so oh well.

 

[LibertyEsq]

I'm thinking this was a case of too soon junior by Rand. Perry probably isn't running and even if he is, he is not a serious contender. Oops! Why expend political capital and effort fighting him now. But hey it does seem like Rand is coming out ahead in this fight, so oh well.

He's also getting publicity, and there's no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[twomp]

I'm thinking this was a case of too soon junior by Rand. Perry probably isn't running and even if he is, he is not a serious contender. Oops! Why expend political capital and effort fighting him now. But hey it does seem like Rand is coming out ahead in this fight, so oh well.

If this were about immigration or voting rights or whatever, I would totally agree with you but this is about Iraq. The neo-cons are trying to get us back there and is sending everyone out to spread their message. Rand Paul being one of the VERY few politicians opposing this needs to speak up against it or we'll find ourselves back in Iraq again. If Rand Paul doesn't speak out against our intervention in Iraq, who will? Which non-interventionist has a big a microphone as Rand Paul does right now?

 

[idiom]

Its also a fight to be the spokesman for the Republican Party and its defacto leader. Rand is throwing his hat into the ring. At some point you have to start brawling to wrest power away.

 

[Original_Intent]

Any response to Rick Perry is punching down - WAY down. The only people that want him to run for president again are Texans that think only Texans should run for president.

 

[Vanguard101]

Rand will be the first person I donate and passionately campaign for.

Any response to Rick Perry is punching down - WAY down. The only people that want him to run for president again are Texans that think only Texans should run for president.

They only want Cruz btw. Perry's ratings aren't that good.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

This piece is certainly tailored for the information age. Very blunt, with lots of one liner headline grabbers. Notice how he invokes Reagan yet again. This is how I know he is serious about running for president, constantly alluding to Ronald Reagan in order to draw parallels between Reagan and himself.

 

[newbitech]

This piece is certainly tailored for the information age. Very blunt, with lots of one liner headline grabbers. Notice how he invokes Reagan yet again. This is how I know he is serious about running for president, constantly alluding to Ronald Reagan in order to draw parallels between Reagan and himself.

Hi, I am curious why you think blunt one liner headline grabbers are tailored for the information age. My take was quite the opposite. There really wasn't a lot of new information in there. It seemed to be a rehash of what is already available information wise, and the presentation response was the classical serial position effect in action. In other words the valuable information, albeit rehashed but valuable to folks not familiar with the feud between Rand Paul and the status quo, was buried in the middle of piece. The bluntness and headline grabbers contained no real information and seemed like a distraction from what was really trying to be said.

I am not sure the motivation of this piece. I don't want to ridicule or even criticize really. I just came away from the piece with a similar feeling that many of the anti-Rands have expressed in words. It really almost seems like I am witnessing a propaganda battle of words, and it doesn't impress me. I am trained to tune out the propaganda by now and look for the real information. I also see the effect that this particular piece of pro-Rand propaganda if that is what it is only added fuel to the fire.

If the intent is to simply gain, exposure, bravo! The article just left me feeling icky. Probably just my personal perspective, and of course this doesn't change my mind or anything. Just observing.

 

[LibertyEsq]

Hi, I am curious why you think blunt one liner headline grabbers are tailored for the information age. My take was quite the opposite.

Twitter and Facebook. The average voter probably won't take the time to read the two full articles, anyway.

 

[newbitech]

Twitter and Facebook. The average voter probably won't take the time to read the two full articles, anyway.

Right, I get that. So look at this battle from the perspective of twitter tweets. If we take just the first 140 characters of opeds, including the Bold large font titles.

Rand

America Shouldn't Choose Sides in Iraq's Civil War Obama has made mistakes but so did Bush by invading. There's no good case for U.S. milita

Rick

Isolationist policies make the threat of terrorism even greater As a veteran, and as a governor who has supported Texas National Guard deplo

Rand

Rick Perry Is Dead Wrong There are many things I like about Texas Gov. Rick Perry, including his stance on the Tenth Amendment to the Consti

So if people look at this "debate" (is it even possible to debate like this?) in the short 140 character twitter attention span of the so called "information age", what is the take away?

Seems like Rand Paul says the US should remain neutral in Iraq, all of the leaders in the USA are wrong, he doesn't support the US military and he likes Rick Perry's view on the constitution. Rand Paul calls out by name, 2 Presidents and a governor of Texas.

Rick Perry is concerned, and probably rightly so, that isolationist policies will increase the risk of terrorism domestically. Rick Perry supports local military.

 

[LibertyEsq]

Right, I get that. So look at this battle from the perspective of twitter tweets. If we take just the first 140 characters of opeds, including the Bold large font titles.

Rand

Rick

Rand


So if people look at this "debate" (is it even possible to debate like this?) in the short 140 character twitter attention span of the so called "information age", what is the take away?

Seems like Rand Paul says all of the leaders in the USA are wrong, he doesn't support the US military and he likes Rick Perry's view on the constitution. Rand Paul calls out by name, 2 Presidents and a governor of Texas.

Rick Perry is concerned, and probably rightly so, that isolationist policies will increase the risk of terrorism domestically. Rick Perry supports local military.

But no one is going to arbitrarily tweet the first 140 characters of articles like that...Rand clearly intended to put in 4-5 soundbites in his article that, at best, portray his foreign policy in an appealing light to potential voters, and at worst, make him look like he's willing to fight back - which conservative primary voters probably like to see.

Here's an example:
I ask Governor Perry: How many Americans should send their sons or daughters to die for a country...the Iraqis won’t defend for themselves?

This plus a link to the article makes for the perfect tweet or status update.

Another Example: Overwhelming majority don't want troops back in Iraq - is Perry calling whole country "isolationist"?

 

[William Tell]

Rand will be the first person I donate and passionately campaign for.

Don't forget the local candidates

They only want Cruz btw. Perry's ratings aren't that good.

You are pretty much correct, Cruz is extremely popular, Rick has his fans, but most don't want him to be President at this point.

 

[newbitech]

But no one is going to arbitrarily tweet the first 140 characters of articles like that...Rand clearly intended to put in 4-5 soundbites in his article that, at best, portray his foreign policy in an appealing light to potential voters, and at worst, make him look like he's willing to fight back - which conservative primary voters probably like to see.

Here's an example:
I ask Governor Perry: How many Americans should send their sons or daughters to die for a country...the Iraqis won’t defend for themselves?

This plus a link to the article makes for the perfect tweet or status update.

Another Example: Overwhelming majority don't want troops back in Iraq - is Perry calling whole country "isolationist"?

Why not? Anyone can sift the article and put together pieces that help portray Rand in any light they want, as I have done with just the first 140 characters of BOLD LARGE FONT type at the head of the article.

I understand that in the case of tweets, the article link itself is there only to give some legitimacy to the view expressed in the tweet. But if someone does follow the link to validate the quote or check the source, they will need to read the article from the top down starting with the title, the first part, the middle part and the end.

If the one liner you are tweeting is buried in the middle of the article, you will suffer from serial position effect. Meaning, the people interested in knowing where you "quote" came from in the tweet will remember the first part and end part more than the middle part. Does that make sense?

I have to assume that in the tweet, the majority of the message is the one line blurb you are trying to get people to latch on to. This information should be at the top of the article you link. All the other useless stuff, like saying everyone has the same foreign policy in Iraq, poking fun at Rick Perry's glasses, etc... should be buried in the middle or just completely omitted. Not situated in the top where people are most likely to be impressed upon.

Just a matter of reorganizing the articles to take advantage of what we know about folks attention spans and classic psychology of serial position effect. That's all.