Ron Paul Needs to go for Romney's jugular

[Lethalmiko]

I often feel a little frustrated at how much Mitt Romney is getting a free pass from the media and how weak the attacks on him by the Ron Paul campaign seem to be. Everyone knows Romney is a flip-flopper but his supporters excuse it, thinking he has changed, and that is his message to gullible voters on the fence. The Paul campaign needs to focus a laser-beam style attack on a few key points.

1. The Paul campaign should spend far more time showing that Romney's biggest financial donors are from the corrupt banks that got bailed out. Paul unfortunately hardly ever talks in detail about this issue and he seems to always stop short. He should not only name them (Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, etc) but should emphasize that they were secretly bailed out by $16trillion of money created out of thin air, loaned to them at nearly zero interest and they loaned it back to the Treasury at 3% and made a $13 billion profit. It is not enough to just say Goldman Sachs supports Romney, you have to precisely show that they are corrupt, got bailed out and finance both Obama and Romney. It should also be noted that they gave about $1million to Obama's campaign

2. There should be a huge emphasis that a vote for Romney is essentially the same as Obama. Paul needs to say clearly in interviews that voting for Romney on the basis that he will do a better job than Obama is FALSE. He MAY make some changes (eg tax code) but on the more critical issues like runaway federal spending (driven by the massive size of govt), the wars, auditing the Fed and the the national debt, he will not make any significant changes. Therefore, even if voters accept the premise that Romney is more electable or does better against Obama than any other GOP candidate, it is irrelevant because he is effectively the same as Obama and Bush.

3. Emphasis should be placed on the corruption in government in collusion with the corporations and Ron Paul is the only one that can clean it out. Romney cannot since he is financially backed by the big banking corporations.

4. More emphasis should be spent on the head-to-head matchup polls so that the myth that he is unelectable is debunked effectively.

I believe if these points are effectively communicated to the voters, they will eventually abandon Romney and Paul can win. The only way they can vote for Romney after hearing these arguments is if they become totally dishonest intellectually and most voters prefer honesty.

 

[hueylong]

How about letting Dr. Paul and the campaign make these decisions? This is what they do for a living. And they're doing a solid job.

Right now, the strategy is to bury the other 'anti-romney' candidates to become the main alternative to Romney.

That is a solid strategy. And it's working.

 

[specsaregood]

This is a marathon, not a sprint. Barring a great personal scandal, Romney isn't going anywhere anytime soon. He is too organized and has too much money and influence. The only way you can beat him is to wear him out, going the distance and beating him to the finish line. This is NOT the case for the others. Paul has to keep pace with romney while they work to break away from the pack of pretenders. Then the real race begins.

 

[trey4sports]

not yet.

there is enough anti-Paul people that if we successfully attack Romney then the people could flee to Santorum, Gingrich, or even Perry.


We WILL attack, but we must make it a clear two-man race first.

 

[Havax]

Why did you cite tax code as an example of where Romney is different than Obama? Go to Romney's site, go to issues, go to taxes, and read. It literally says he wants to "maintain current rates".

 

[Lethalmiko]

hueylong, I am only making practical suggestions and I am not sure that burying the other candidates is necessarily more effective because spending time and resources killing them off means Romney has breathing space to consolidate the "inevitable candidate" narrative. The other candidates obviously cannot last because they have little money and are not even on ballots in some states. It would have been more effective to blunt Romney's momentum in Iowa and NH than to bury Newt and Santorum. Now that he won both states and came out unscathed, it makes it much harder for Paul to defeat him.

 

[colbyhowell]

HHOOLLLDDD!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mini-Me]

Copy/paste argument from another thread:

I disagree: I believe the Paul campaign's strategy is to knock the weaker competitors out of the race, so the public clearly sees that this is a race between Paul and Romney. Romney believes he can beat us one on one, so he's doing his own part to see this happen, but I think he underestimates not only our strength but the way our consistency makes his flip-flopping look weak; once we do focus on beating Romney, we may just do exactly that. In the end, we will need Romney's voters to support us, so it's important that we keep our fight with him as above-board as possible, for as long as possible, to promote their respect for us as worthy opponents.

In contrast, attacking Romney now would force him to change his strategy as well, such that it will probably become more aligned with the media's agenda of trying to destroy us ASAP. Any votes Romney loses due to our attacks would probably go to the other candidates as much as to Paul (or more than to Paul); while splitting the establishment vote may sound good, attacking Romney now ourselves would only prolong the other candidates' stays in the race. That's exactly what we don't want: The media is currently doing its best to keep the other players active for as long as possible, because it helps distract from Paul. Newt Gingrich in particular is not going to go away without a fight, and it would be a mistake to break our ceasefire with Romney before Gingrich finally bows out. Romney's and Paul's attacks on Gingrich have proven very effective (and can be repeated if necessary), so he ultimately has little chance at the nomination...but the media desperately wants this race to be between Gingrich and Romney, and Gingrich is hitting Romney hard in his personal attempt to stay relevant. We might as well let Gingrich and Romney tear each other down a bit while we continue making strides in our own way. That will temporarily split the establishment vote (some of which might even go to us) and simultaneously keep Romney's attacks directed at knocking Gingrich out of the race.

Once this race becomes purely Ron Paul vs. Mitt Romney, I believe the media may stop covering it entirely. There will likely be a complete media blackout on the race as Mitt Romney is declared the presumptive winner...but this may backfire if they try it, since we will still be campaigning, phoning, voting, etc. in the remaining states, whereas the establishment's voting base will be lulled into a sense of complacency.

 

[Lethalmiko]

Mini-Me, you are not factoring in the very big possibility that the candidates who get knocked out may endorse Romney in exchange for a spot in his administration. They obviously would rather back Romney than Paul.

You are also underestimating the power of the corrupt media in shaping public opinion and you are too confident about the backfiring theory. Most Republicans watch Fox news and little else. Fox is against Paul and when down to a race between Romney and Paul, trust me they will cut Paul to pieces with more lies and smear. You cannot be entirely sure that the grassroots movement will defeat the media. If Romney wins the first four states in this contest, the states that follow may feel a vote for Paul is a waste even if they agree with his ideas and they will assume that most other people are thinking like them.

I am not convinced that voters really care about Romney's flip-flops. You tout it as a strength for the Paul campaign but it may be largely irrelevant. Romney may well lose votes to the other candidates but I posit that they will be very few because most voters are realistic enough to know that the minor candidates cannot win long term. Therefore I do not agree their stay will be prolonged. How can they do it on shoestring budgets? Besides, it is too easy to attack and destroy them later if need be and they will not be able to effectively respond, lack of money being one of the reasons.

Romney aligning with the media has already happened and they are already trying to destroy Paul so hitting Romney makes no difference to that specific issue. The media keeping the other candidates in as a distraction is moot because people can already see from the results so far that they are going nowhere. Besides, if the other candidates gain a little from Romney being blunted, there will be more attack dogs against him as front-runner, unlike a two man horse race.

 

[jordie]

Romney is the only one staying in the game for sure. To even get a chance at winning, Dr. Paul needs to eliminate all the anti/non-Romney candidates and save his material to go after Romney with until it's just them both.

 

[Deborah K]

HHOOLLLDDD!!!!!!!!!!!

You stole my thunder. Where's Anti-Federalist?

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm not even sure we should strike on Romney unless attacked. We have power and money, but not like Mitt.

Take out the rest, make the choice clear and obvious, win.

 

[BUSHLIED]

How about letting Dr. Paul and the campaign make these decisions? This is what they do for a living. And they're doing a solid job.

Right now, the strategy is to bury the other 'anti-romney' candidates to become the main alternative to Romney.

That is a solid strategy. And it's working.

Not so fast.

The campaign made a huge miscalculation which slowed Ron down. What did they do? They slammed Gingrich so hard and early that Santorum surged as the last man standing in Iowa...Ron was leading in the polls 2 weeks before Iowa, Gingrich was already being attacked by Romney...Gingrich was dropping like a brick. His people DO NOT LIKE PAUL and so they went to Santorum in enough amounts to edge out Paul...costing us either first or second in Iowa which blunted our momentum going in NH...Obviously Newt and Paul have a personal issue with each other, which is apparent which makes me understand the attacks on him but they over did it on Newt, driving people to Santorum and others. Now that's history.

Moving into South Carolina the campaign needs to figure out how to both EXPAND their base of support but more importantly broaden its appeal to different segments.

Right now Paul's base is predominately: younger (less than 44yo), single, relatively poor (less than 30k), non-college educated (no degree), and male. Think of the stereotypical "white, blue-collar working class." They are your car mechanics, plumbers, laborers, clerks, etc...Right now these people are hurting which is due to jobs going overseas and overall lack of demand for construction (housing) and manufactured goods and related services...Furthermore, without a college degree they are denied access to white-collar higher paying jobs.

Then there is another part of Paul's base which are the typical "libertarians": college educated, single, male, entrepreneurs, 50K plus income...they certainly support Ron Paul. But they represent maybe 10% of the entire US population ( I am thinking of the CATO report I read somewhere). Then you have the so-called "fringe" speciality people like "raw-milk advocates, gold bugs etc..." They are probably diverse demographically from all walks of life. Anyway this is not comprehensive BUT entrance/exits polls in both Iowa and NH so a trend: age gaps, gender gaps, and income gaps. Ron has to close these gaps in order to beat Romney.

Ron needs to broaden his appeal more to: older, 45+yo, college-educated, white collar, 50K+, males and females...they are your stereotypical upper-middle class suburban families. They were less likely to have experienced unemployment or any serious threat to their economic well-being...while their housing values may have come down a bit they still can pay their mortgage's and save from their kids college education. They may feel a pinch but are still living comfortable, maybe the wife picked up a part-time job or they are taking less vacations.

What is the campaign going to do to expand their base to make inroads with that demographic? Some people may say that he actually did expand because he got more voters in 2012 than 2008, which is true he got 12% of seniors in 2012 compared to 3% in 2008. But those gains are still not enough to win. Seniors in 2012 turned out 6% higher than 2008 more than any other voting block in NH and they went disproportionately for Romney at 42%. My point is that Ron needs to cut into the blocks that are disproportionally supporting Romney rather than to just try to expand his base and bring in newer, first-time voters...

I hope that makes sense. Sure Ron can "grow" his way to the nomination or he can "cut" his way to the nomination.

He has to do BOTH, broaden his appeal and grow his base simultaneously. He needs to Tweak his message quick.

 

[Lethalmiko]

jordie, by the time the others are finished, it may be too late to effectively attack because Romney gains votes and he saves up resources to go after Paul later. I have already seen articles that say that Paul is Romney's greatest ally because he is clearing the field for him and helping him consolidate his position further. I have also made several other points that need addressing.

 

[The Goat]

don't worry everyone, constant attacks on every candidate in SC.
Except for us of course!

 

[CaptainAmerica]

This is a marathon, not a sprint. Barring a great personal scandal, Romney isn't going anywhere anytime soon. He is too organized and has too much money and influence. The only way you can beat him is to wear him out, going the distance and beating him to the finish line. This is NOT the case for the others. Paul has to keep pace with romney while they work to break away from the pack of pretenders. Then the real race begins.

^THIS

 

[Original_Intent]

patience grasshoppah!

Trey4sports speaks wisely. Force all of the anti-Romney support to us.

Worried that Romney has too much free time to consolidate the inevitable nominee status? Do we let two or even four states choose the nominee and then just fall in line? No! Of course, if Ron does not win, many will come back and say I told you so, just as many have complained about some strategic move of the campaign in the past only to be proven wrong. The current strategy is powerful kung fu. If your kung fu is stronger, run for office!

 

[hueylong]

Jesus dude. That was not a 'huge miscalculation'. It was very effective. The campaign people are professionals. Do you think you are reading things in the polling that they don't see?

 

[Echoes]

We're gonna to do to Mitt what Ali did to Foreman, rope-a-dope his ass then drop the hammer

 

[Lethalmiko]

BUSHLIED, I agree with your insightful analysis and the broader point we are both making is that we Ron Paul supporters should look at the reality of the effectiveness of his campaign and make good suggestions that can sharpen it. Nothing should be taken for granted. Ron Paul says a lot of great stuff in interviews and I am glad he is going more on the offensive against the media as he did on Morning Joe (I wrote to the campaign to suggest this very thing a few weeks ago) but I feel one of his weaknesses is a failure to be more precise and clear to the average uninformed voters and his failure to communicate emphasis. For example, he often says the other candidates represent "the status quo" but this is abstract and largely meaningless to most voters. For some, "status quo" means welfare checks and his message to them means they will lose out. To others "status quo" means medicare.

Therefore, he must be very precise in what he means by "status quo" by saying things like "Romney is backed by the same corrupt bankers that were bailed out with our tax payer money and with secretly created $16trillion of Federal Reserve money that shall bring massive inflation". By emphasizing words like "corrupt", "inflation" and "secretly created", voters will then realize that there is massive government-sanctioned theft going on and will get mad at both Obama and Romney. The media and candidates like Gingrich are very good at shaping public opinion through certain keywords and subliminal phrases they always add to their message against Paul (eg kook, nut, unelectable, long-shot, quixotic, etc). Ron Paul does not like to have to stoop to their level but the reality is that this is a war of propaganda and his campaign must necessarily similarly wage its own propaganda war in which important keywords/phrases are used to sharpen the message.