Ron Paul's low polling evidence that a constitutional republic can't be maintained?

[bygone]

 

[lucius]

Solon from 2600 years ago:

“Only enlightened humans can sustain enlightened leadership. In a democracy, the very survival of the state depends upon the intelligent cooperation of its people. They must live according to all aspects of the statutes which they have framed; no one is above the law. The ideal state, laws are few and simple, derived from certainties. In the corrupt state, laws are many and confused, because they have been derived from uncertainties. These corrupt laws are like the web of a spider which catches small insects but permits the stronger creatures to break through and escape.”

When I look at my fellow American, I usually think we are doomed as a culture. There is tremendous hope & strength on this forum. Dr. Paul gave us the answer: we must educate our fellow American.

 

[Shatterhand]

Idea

This is the time for education of the self. Discovering Dr. Paul has helped in my education. Only a few on this forum can claim that they learned nothing new from Dr. Paul. It's time to delve into history, economics, science . . .

Everyone needs to become a true revolutionary, i.e. a master of Paul's ideas. How else can the message be spread to others even less informed than ourselves?

 

[dircha]

Can we really push RP without coming up with some dumbed down tag-lines that maybe rhyme or can be chanted? Perhaps Ron Paul has to be dumbed down to the point where his face is on concert t-shirts and popularized like Che Guevara or Malcolm X. I'm being serious.

You can't sell RP without people being educated or emotionally-favorable to him in some way.

The goal is not to sell your audience on every issue in Ron Paul's platform. The goal is to bring them to believe that Ron Paul will move us in the right direction on the issues that are most important to them.

Do not get mired in the details of debating individual issues or defending Ron Paul's policies. When you are defending you are losing. Never defend. Never accuse. Always be on the offensive. Always be positive. If someone tries to pull you down in the mire, verbally, figuratively, just keep on walking (talking).

The goal is not to defend Ron Paul. The goal is not to argue with them. The goal is not to debate them. Factual debate does not win arguments; this isn't high school debate club.

First, use your personal knowledge of your audience, demographic assumptions, and common sense to identify the issues that most matter to them and of which they are most likely to agree with Ron Paul's positions. And take note of any "misconceptions" you believe they may have.

Second, frame the issues for them using personal anecdotes and situations they can relate to. Do not tell the what the problem is, never tell them that they are wrong, and never tell them that you are correcting their misconceptions. Instead, let them see what the problem is by expressing tangential personal opinions with which they are likely to agree, and asking non-aggressive, non-personal rhetorical questions in an affable and genuine way.

Third, present a narrative on these issues as you have framed them about who Ron Paul is, about what others believe about him, about what he believes and what he thinks we should do, and about where we will be 4 years from now. Never tell them what to believe. Instead, show them what they can believe, having narrowed, framed, and presented the issues and the candidate giving your audience every possible opportunity to assent to the narrative you are presenting.

People do not want to be told what to believe, and do not want to be told they are wrong. They want to be shown what they can believe, and they want to feel good about believing it.

Never defend. Never accuse. Never "debate". Always be on the offense. Always be positive.

 

[bygone]

Well said, dircha. That's the one size fits most answer.

 

[derdy]

Don't flame me on this one, but let's play devil's advocate for a moment.

I try to convince people every day about Ron Paul, but I find that the reason I can't connect with them is because they lack knowledge in a few core areas:

- History
- Geography
- Economics
- Math

History: They (my target audience) don't understand the full actions of our CIA in other countries in the past. They don't know how Iran was created, and many just quote lines about how they hate Israel and how the president denies the holocaust. They seem to think this sort of hate is created in a vacuum. They don't even know what forces led to the creation of the US.

Geography: 20% of Americans can't find the US on a world map, yet several of those people have an opinion on whether we should be bombing other countries. They base their entire opinion off of what is emotionally appealing to them that comes from the mainstream media. It's no surprise that the content in the news is delivered at roughly a 4th or 5th grade level on CNN or FOX News

Economics: People do not understand how the free market works. They really believe when the government creates a program, it's "free" because the costs aren't up front. They think other "greedy" people who deserve to be ripped off are the ones who will be forced to pay. They think this is okay, but don't realize that the people who pay are them.

Math: They don't understand that all of the objectives and policing of the world costs money. If the cause is noble, they believe the money will just appear and that we should do it. They have no concrete representation of finance in their minds.

Now, given the above -- I can't sell people on Ron Paul's positions within 5-10 minutes because they have to have some pre-equisite knowledge to see why there is so much sense in Ron Paul.

At the same time, this begs the question: Can a place like the US ever maintain adherence to the constitution if the voting masses simply lack the education to understand its logic? My experience so far: it is much easier to convert college graduates to Ron Paul's position than it is people who never went to college. The further down the education spectrum I go, the more difficult it is to shake people off of what the MSM told them.

Can we really push RP without coming up with some dumbed down tag-lines that maybe rhyme or can be chanted? Perhaps Ron Paul has to be dumbed down to the point where his face is on concert t-shirts and popularized like Che Guevara or Malcolm X. I'm being serious.

You can't sell RP without people being educated or emotionally-favorable to him in some way.

I know what you're saying and I experienced that first-hand at an event some local Ron Paul supporters and I attended for seven hours. I ended up talking to some people for 15-30 minutes explaining a lot about the history of Iran, ecnomic policies, our debt, our money, the Constitution, but it was well worth it. If you people are willing to talk and listen you can convert them easily. I got a 55-year old Democrat sold on Ron, took me 30 minutes but when I first started talking to him he was saying how we needed to go to war with Iran and he wasn't aware of our national debt, the weakining dollar or anything. It's great to be able to inform and educate the citizenry; makes you feel good to know you're doing something good for your country.

So, if they are uneducated, educate them and convert them! Most all people I've encountered are thankful for the information you provide them that is not being talked about in mainstream outlets.

 

[Thurston Howell III]

The Message

Don't put so much pressure on yourself. Put all the pressure on the Message. That's where the magic is. That's what Dr Paul does. Just keep putting out the message. It's like throwing mud at a wall. Not all of it sticks, but eventually the wall is covered.

 

[BillyDkid]

i have always believed that the Founding Fathers made a major screw-up when they turned over their masterpiece to the sheeple. It's not the idea of the constitutional republic that was bad...but the act of encharging its safe keeping to the people was doomed at the start.

In hindsight, Washington should have been named King, and the other founders should have set themselves up as a council of learned elders who would pick their own like minded successors as well as the new king. The duty of the elders would be to make sure the republic was preserved.

this is what plato envisioned. As paradoxical as it may sound, liberty can only be maintained by the strong hand of benevolent and wise rulers. The surest route to destroying liberty is to turn its safekeeping over to the soccer moms and nascar fans.

I'm not sure I can agree with that completely. The flaw with the Constitution was that no real mechanism was put in place to enforce it. Any breach of it should be considered a criminal act just like robbery or murder and the response of our representatives should be automatic and without equivocation. I'm not sure I would be holding my breath waiting for a wise and benevolent ruler and certainly it would be absurd to expect to get a succession of them.

 

[bygone]

 

[LibertyEagle]

Not that many people go to the effort to vote in the primaries. IF we would all get VERY active in going after college students, we actually could pull this off. The question is whether we will do it.

 

[johnscr]

Most? As a percentage? Or in total dollars? Who do you think of as wealthy? The middle-class? The top 50%? The top 2%?

Who makes the best use of loopholes and tax-evading techniques? How about the under-ground economy of people who don't report income?

Q-Who pays the most in taxes?
A-The honest people.

Income taxes are not "fair", and never will be. The Oligarchy influences tax-code to create and maintain loopholes just for them. You will never stop them from doing that. The underground economy will always exist. Thus, it will never be fair to the "honest" taxpayer.

Abolish income tax. Abolish the IRS...

Total dollars, total percentage - name it:

* The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
* The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.

http://www.sugisorensen.com/taxes/index.html

 

[Syren123]

I love this thread.

 

[bygone]

 

[Syren123]

Abolishing the IRS actually would not benefit me financially; that doesn't mean it isn't worth the cost.

Maybe it wouldn't benefit you in a tax sense...and I don't want to know any more...but it would be in conjuction with abolishing the Fed and going to a more stable monetary system which would most definitely benefit you.

 

[bygone]

 

[noxagol]

Which is worth the cost. Believe it or not for some people a tax return actually returns more money than they paid into it. And yes, even including other taxes (all witholding).

How the hell does it pay out more than was paid in?

 

[wgadget]

Don't flame me on this one, but let's play devil's advocate for a moment.

I try to convince people every day about Ron Paul, but I find that the reason I can't connect with them is because they lack knowledge in a few core areas:

- History
- Geography
- Economics
- Math

History: They (my target audience) don't understand the full actions of our CIA in other countries in the past. They don't know how Iran was created, and many just quote lines about how they hate Israel and how the president denies the holocaust. They seem to think this sort of hate is created in a vacuum. They don't even know what forces led to the creation of the US.

Geography: 20% of Americans can't find the US on a world map, yet several of those people have an opinion on whether we should be bombing other countries. They base their entire opinion off of what is emotionally appealing to them that comes from the mainstream media. It's no surprise that the content in the news is delivered at roughly a 4th or 5th grade level on CNN or FOX News

Economics: People do not understand how the free market works. They really believe when the government creates a program, it's "free" because the costs aren't up front. They think other "greedy" people who deserve to be ripped off are the ones who will be forced to pay. They think this is okay, but don't realize that the people who pay are them.

Math: They don't understand that all of the objectives and policing of the world costs money. If the cause is noble, they believe the money will just appear and that we should do it. They have no concrete representation of finance in their minds.

Now, given the above -- I can't sell people on Ron Paul's positions within 5-10 minutes because they have to have some pre-equisite knowledge to see why there is so much sense in Ron Paul.

At the same time, this begs the question: Can a place like the US ever maintain adherence to the constitution if the voting masses simply lack the education to understand its logic? My experience so far: it is much easier to convert college graduates to Ron Paul's position than it is people who never went to college. The further down the education spectrum I go, the more difficult it is to shake people off of what the MSM told them.

Can we really push RP without coming up with some dumbed down tag-lines that maybe rhyme or can be chanted? Perhaps Ron Paul has to be dumbed down to the point where his face is on concert t-shirts and popularized like Che Guevara or Malcolm X. I'm being serious.

You can't sell RP without people being educated or emotionally-favorable to him in some way.

Okay, so some people have poor educations...But in Ron Paul we have the BEST TEACHER around, and who do you know that wants to be considered DUMB?? I mean, do you know anyone who is proud of their ignorance? Ron Paul can play on the human craving for wanting to be in the know, and he can do it in his superbly gracious style like no one else.

Viva la Ron!

 

[SeanEdwards]

i have always believed that the Founding Fathers made a major screw-up when they turned over their masterpiece to the sheeple. It's not the idea of the constitutional republic that was bad...but the act of encharging its safe keeping to the people was doomed at the start.

In hindsight, Washington should have been named King, and the other founders should have set themselves up as a council of learned elders who would pick their own like minded successors as well as the new king. The duty of the elders would be to make sure the republic was preserved.

this is what plato envisioned. As paradoxical as it may sound, liberty can only be maintained by the strong hand of benevolent and wise rulers. The surest route to destroying liberty is to turn its safekeeping over to the soccer moms and nascar fans.

I'm totally not surprised that you would hold this opinion.

 

[fj45lvr]

i have always believed that the Founding Fathers made a major screw-up when they turned over their masterpiece to the sheeple. It's not the idea of the constitutional republic that was bad...but the act of encharging its safe keeping to the people was doomed at the start.
.

Whoaaa!!!

Let's not forget that someone since the founders decided to let the vote fall outside of male land owners....

I am positive that we'd see a much different Congress if this were still true today!!!

 

[michaelwise]

I disagree a bit, the people who pay the MOST are the wealthy.

The wealthy own 80% of everything, therefore they should be paying 80% of everything.