Ron should say "government" and "federal government," not "we" and "America"

[Aden]

Ron should say "government" and "federal government," not "we" and "America"

After watching Ron's answers in last week's debate for the sixth time, it dawned on me that he puts most of his audience (primary Republican voter) on the defensive. When he speaks on foreign policy sheeple Republicans feel like they are being personally attacked.

Examples of what Ron says:
"We do not mind our own business..."
"They attack us because we have been over there..."
"They don't attack us because we're rich and free, they attack us because we've been over there..."
"We are only over there to save face. How many soldiers have to be killed for us to save face?"

What Ron should say:
"The federal government does not mind its own business" or "Washington does not mind its own business...."
"They attack us because our government went over there..."
"They don't attack us because we're rich and free, they attack us because Washington has been over there..."
"The Feds are only over there to save face. How many of our soldiers have to be killed for Washington to save face?"

When he speaks on foreign policy he needs to make the federal government, whom primary voters say they dislike, the enemy. Ron can easily make the audience believe they are on his side, and that "we" means them and Ron, if he would start phrasing his remarks like I have outlined.

This actually works. Some of you in sales know this, and may have been taught this. People are able to sell $1,600 Kirby vacuums to housewives in trailer parks because during the presentation they say "the Hoover," instead of "your Hoover," and "our Kirby," instead of, "the Kirby."

People identify with "America." When you attack America they take it as a personal attack on them. This can be avoided by attacking the federal government, not "we" the Americans.

--------------------------


[edit]
This is from the Fox Iowa debate on December 16th.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNfruyVGOe0&

He needs to make the federal government the bad guy. Not “America,” “we” or “us.”

Paul’s answer:
“We ought to really sit back and think and not jump the gun and believe that we are going to be attacked. That’s how we got into that useless war in Iraq and lost so much in Iraq.”

Better answer:
“We ought to really sit back and think and not jump the gun and believe that we are going to be attacked. That’s how the government tricked us into a useless war in Iraq and we lost so much in Iraq.”


Paul’s answer:
“Yes. All we’re doing is promoting their desire to have it… How do we treat people with a nuclear weapon? With a lot more respect. What did we do with Libya? We talked to them we talked them out of their nuclear weapon and then we killed him.”

Better answer:
“Yes. All our government is doing is promoting their desire to have it… How do they treat people with a nuclear weapon? With a lot more respect. What did they do with Libya? The Bush Administration talked to them and talked them out of their nuclear weapon, and then the Obama Administartion killed him.”


Paul’s answer:
“They don’t come here to attack us because we’re free and prosperous. Did they go to Switzerland and Sweden? I mean that’s absurd. If you think that’s the reason we have no chance of winning this. They come here and explicitly explain it to us—CIA has explained it to us—they come here and want to do us harm because we’re bombing them… Why were we flying a drone over Iran? Why do we have to bomb so many countries? Why do we have 900 bases in 130 countries? We’re totally bankrupt. How are you going to rebuild a military when you have no money? How are we going to take care of the people? I think this wild goal to have another war in the name of defense is the dangerous thing, the danger is really us overreacting and we need a strong national defense, and we need to only go to war with a declaration of war instead of just carelessly flouting it and starting these wars so often… And your trying to dramatize this that we have to go and treat Iran like we’ve treated Iraq and kill a million Iraqis and 8,000 Americans since we went to war.”

Better answer:
“They don’t come here to attack us because we’re free and prosperous. Did they go to Switzerland and Sweden? I mean that’s absurd. If you think that’s the reason we have no chance of winning this. They come here and explicitly explain it to us—CIA has explained it to us—they come here and want to do us harm because our government is bombing them… why was Obama flying a drone over Iran? Why does he have to bomb so many countries? Why does our government have 900 bases in 130 countries? The government is bankrupting us. How are we going to rebuild a military when we have no money? How are we going to take care of the people? I think this wild goal to have another war in the name of defense is the dangerous thing. The danger is really our government overreacting and we need a strong national defense, but our government needs to only go to war with a declaration of war instead of just carelessly flouting it and starting these wars so often… and your trying to dramatize this so that our government has to go and treat Iran like they’ve treated Iraq and killed a million Iraqis and 8,000 Americans since they took us to war.”

 

[YumYum]

No, "we" are responsible for what our government does, because "we" as a nation, elected the crooks who are ruining this country. I would be concerned if Ron said in the plural form "You", but he says "we", which includes himself, even though he didn't vote, nor ever agree, with the stuff our government has engaged in. "We" will all have to assume responsibility for "our" governments actions when everything collapses, just like the German people had to pay for what the Nazis did.

 

[MRoCkEd]

I totally agree, aden. Saying "we" just makes people defensive.

 

[Romulus]

x1000 its a subtle change in messaging that goes a long way.

 

[yoshimaroka]

No, "we" are responsible for what our government does, because "we" as a nation, elected the crooks who are ruining this country. I would be concerned if Ron said in the plural form "You", but he says "we", which includes himself, even though he didn't vote, nor ever agree, with the stuff our government has engaged in. "We" will all have to assume responsibility for "our" governments actions when everything collapses, just like the German people had to pay for what the Nazis did.

Not logical.

 

[ds21089]

I completely agree with you and I hope this message somehow gets to Ron. I love the guy, but you are right, putting it in those words DOES put people on the defensive and makes him seem like all of America is at fault instead of just the people in charge who are doing things that the majority of Americans don't want them to do.

 

[The Goat]

No, "we" are responsible for what our government does, because "we" as a nation, elected the crooks who are ruining this country. I would be concerned if Ron said in the plural form "You", but he says "we", which includes himself, even though he didn't vote, nor ever agree, with the stuff our government has engaged in. "We" will all have to assume responsibility for "our" governments actions when everything collapses, just like the German people had to pay for what the Nazis did.

I fully understand your point, but this is a good idea to get people to not go on the offensive and to realize "we" don't have to listen to what "our government" tells us we can make up our own minds. Maybe add a line "we" will have to answer for the actions of "our government" even the ones of us who don't agree with what they do.
also, Ron saying our government would include himself since hes has been in office and considered a part of it. even if many don't want him to be.

 

[hazek]

Ron should change a lot of words and ways he tries to explain certain issues or philosophies but unfortunately Ron is, as much as I love the man, a stubborn old fart who is stuck in his ways and will never change.

I have already come to terms with this and am waiting for Rand's chance.

 

[YumYum]

Not logical.

Why not?

It is called "assuming responsibility". His use of "we" is a stinging message that will light the fires under our butts to wake us up to reality. When Ron Paul says "we", he is actually uniting Americans to take action, rather than dividing us, because "we", means every single American will have to pay for the consequences of what "our" government has done. For me, his message of "we" means taking responsibility for "our" government, rather than placing the blame.

This is one of the reasons I love Ron Paul, because he tells it like it is, whether we like it or not; he doesn't play "mind games".

 

[Havax]

Agree with the OP. This is one of a thousand things Ron can do to enhance his message while remaining completely true to his positions.

 

[erowe1]

No, "we" are responsible for what our government does.

No we aren't. One of the most insidious problems with democracy is the way it creates that impression.

 

[llepard]

Strongly agree with the original post. Even better yet, say "Government Policy" has been to xxxxx........

Drawing a distinction between America, the People, and the Ideals of the Constitution, all of which are beautiful and pure, and Government policy mistakes and misdeeds is critical.

I am sure most of America would not support murdering a President in cold blood in the middle of a parade. But "Government Policy" did.

We need to be much more careful and not include certain people in the "We" that we consider to be America. If someone is a Nazi they are a Nazi. That is not American.

When people say "we" I often respond with Tonto's reply, "what's this 'we' white man".

Also, best bumper sticker I have seen in a while came from a Ron Paul meet up in New Hampshire.

"Support Our Troops. We Need Them To Overthrow The Federal Government"

If anyone knows where to buy this please let me know.

LL

 

[YumYum]

I fully understand your point, but this is a good idea to get people to not go on the offensive and to realize "we" don't have to listen to what "our government" tells us we can make up our own minds. Maybe add a line "we" will have to answer for the actions of "our government" even the ones of us who don't agree with what they do.
also, Ron saying our government would include himself since hes has been in office and considered a part of it. even if many don't want him to be.

You have a good point. Maybe he should be more specific. But for some reason, when he said we I was at first offended, than it sunk in: "we" are going to be left holding the bag.

btw..welcome to the forums.

 

[libertyjam]

Definitely! this is one of those things the right debate coach would probably fix.

 

[Carehn]

I hope Ron Paul reads this. He means it and sometimes i even have to catch myself saying it. Its a huge improvement and not changing a thing about the message.

 

[The Goat]

You have a good point. Maybe he should be more specific. But for some reason, when he said we I was at first offended, than it sunk in: "we" are going to be left holding the bag.

btw..welcome to the forums.

Thank you, very happy to be here! I'm a long time Paul supporter, already voted for him in 08 and want to do what i can to help him in 2012.

 

[llepard]

I hope Ron Paul reads this. He means it and sometimes i even have to catch myself saying it. Its a huge improvement and not changing a thing about the message.

I just sent Ron and Rand an email with the first post and a link to the thread. Hopefully they will consider the idea. LL

 

[YumYum]

No we aren't. One of the most insidious problems with democracy is the way it creates that impression.

In theory, you are correct, in reality, every American will be held accountable. If not, how will those who didn't contribute to this mess get out of paying down the debt? How will those of us who are against these wars go unpunished for not being drafted into the military? The list goes on.

Our government is defined as "We the people". Is that a "cliche" that is only convenient when we want things our way? No, it means that we have to assume the responsibility of our government's crimes against its citizens.

I was ridiculed because I wanted the rich Republicans who wanted these stupid wars to be held accountable for their promotion of Bush's preemptive strikes. Is it it because I believe in higher taxes? No!! It is because people should be held accountable for their actions, and when it is all said and done, the little guys and gals of America will be left holding the bag for all the crap that our politicians have done.

If "we", upsets members of this forum, it must be really be heaping "fiery coals" on those who are either in denial, or don't have a clue. "We" have to wake up to reality.

When it comes to accountability, "we" all have to "pay".

 

[erowe1]

In theory, you are correct, in reality, every American will be held accountable. If not, how will those who didn't contribute to this mess get out of paying down the debt? How will those of us who are against these wars go unpunished for not being drafted into the military? The list goes on.

Our government is defined as "We the people". Is that a "cliche" that is only convenient when we want things our way? No, it means that we have to assume the responsibility of our government's crimes against its citizens.

I was ridiculed because I wanted the rich Republicans who wanted these stupid wars to be held accountable for their promotion of Bush's preemptive strikes. Is it it because I believe in higher taxes? No!! It is because people should be held accountable for their actions, and when it is all said and done, the little guys and gals of America will be left holding the bag for all the crap that our politicians have done.

If "we", upsets members of this forum, it must be really be heaping "fiery coals" on those who are either in denial, or don't have a clue. "We" have to wake up to reality.

I definitely agree that we will more or less all suffer from what they do. But so do bunches of other people around the world whom nobody would consider constituents of the regime in DC.

As for paying for the debt, I don't think the debt will ever be fully paid. At some point it will be repudiated one way or another. In the mean time, we already are paying for it, since the depreciation of our money that it causes is a tax that we pay as soon as that money gets spent, not later when the debts get paid off.

I don't accept the definition of our government as "We the People." I see that as propaganda to legitimize the regime that the Constitution established, similar to the way North Korea refers to itself as a republic.

 

[TheViper]

Are you guys serious?

When he says "we", he means the the government. He's not saying "we" as in the audience in front of him. His use of "we" includes him meaning he takes accepts being part of the fault that creates the problem. That's a sign of humility, humbleness.

You guys wanting to change his message...that changes him. You're wanting him to change his principles just to elevate his electability.