Ron "Trumps" the Huckster, again! (will skip Huckabee Forum)

[cheapseats]

This is not a new phenomenon. He has consistently not getting coverage for years. He could light his farts on fire during a speech and we'd never hear about it. he others create news because they are so full of shit everyone's jumping over each other to prove them wrong. Ron's honest, level headed and a nice guy. No one wants to report on that. It has nothing to do with his campaign not being newsworthy. It has everything to do with the media being owned by big government banking interests.

That #MainstreamMedia, which is owned by #GiantCorporations, carries water for #BigMoney is ALSO not a new phenomenon.

Don't get me wrong, I'm ALL FOR not playing the game. I'm one of the people who took a LOTTA SHIT for arguing that Ron Paul and the Moovement should SEIZE THE MOMENT to run on an Independent ticket. I argued that precious time would be wasted trying to clarify for still-barely-engaged Voters which are GOOD Republicans and which are BAD Republicans.

He decides to run/stay Republican because the System/Game is rigged against Third Party Candidates.

PART OF THAT RIGGING is the aforementioned corporate-owned, INVESTED Media.

Play the game, or don't. But don't NOT play ball, WITHIN the ballgame.

Saying HIS CAMPAIGN / OUR MOOVEMENT is newsworthy is akin to saying that PHILOSOPHY is newsworthy. It just doesn't PLAY IN PEORIA.

Which came first...MAKING NEWS or WIDESPREAD POPULARITY?

 

[klamath]

Here are all the prepared speeches delivered by Ron Paul between October 2011 and March 1, 2012:




Here are all the prepared speeches delivered by President Obama between October 2007 and March 2008:

via: http://www.asksam.com/ebooks/releases.asp?file=Obama-Speeches.ask

What if Ron had decided to use this final moment in the spotlight, to present his case in the most controlled and thoughtful language possible?

Would Santorum be "winning" the war of ideas using nothing more than divisive, fear laden rhetoric?? This supporter certainly thinks not.

You are selling me on this prepared speach angle. RP writes really really good pieces and there are hundreds of these pieces already in print he could pick from.

 

[azxd]

Umm... this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about when I say RON NEEDS TO DELIVER REAL SPEECHES...

I'm so tired of the "rah rahs" telling me that Ron's meandering stump speech = more presidential/persuasive/clear than poetic + eloquent language like this:



Clear, concise, coherent.





And to close:


The people against making it loud and clear that the grassroots is no longer "ok with" Ron mailing in stump speech after stump speech are, in my opinion at least, ENABLERS. I know they mean well and simply believe that engendering a positive, non-critical "attitude" towards Ron is the best support we can give him ... and up to a certain point they are correct.

But Ron has clearly passed that point. And it's up to us to help him see that his stubbornness towards serious speeches is completely unacceptable given the amount of money, time and energy so many have put into this campaign.

Unfortunately,
He needed to come out swinging, and keep on swinging until the stage was cleared ... I think it's much to late for such tactics at this point in the game.

 

[azxd]

My point is that winning Washington won't even matter if he just steps up to the mic on Saturday night and delivers the same meandering stump speech he's been giving since Iowa.

Great speeches have spiritual import and game-changing consequences. Saul Bellow once said to a pack of newspaper reporters the difference between their written work and his was that he “wrote for eternity.” Why isn't Ron writing for eternity right now?? Why isn't Ron stepping up while the world is still watching/listening/paying-attention. Do any of you realize how close to being over this race is. A bad showing on Super Tuesday could = lights out.

And the only way we keep the interest going is by confronting the "rhetoric" of the other candidates (and Obama) and winning the 'war of ideas' through superior logic and thought. Think that’s overblown? How many newspapers do you keep on a shelf in your home or share with friends? Read to your children? Great political speeches can change elections... and that was BEFORE THE INTERNET.

Think about how quickly and widely a game-changing idea/speech can be distributed within the facebook/youtube/political-blogosphere/social-web networks that dominate the media landscape today.

I had a lot of hope when he gave his "cut a trillion in the first year" speech ... Then he slid back into his normal self.

Side A is worn out ... He needs to play side B !!!

 

[kathy88]

I had a lot of hope when he gave his "cut a trillion in the first year" speech ... Then he slid back into his normal self.

Side A is worn out ... He needs to play side B !!!

So write the speech yourself and submit it to the campaign suggestions.

 

[azxd]

This is not a new phenomenon. He has consistently not getting coverage for years. He could light his farts on fire during a speech and we'd never hear about it. he others create news because they are so full of shit everyone's jumping over each other to prove them wrong. Ron's honest, level headed and a nice guy. No one wants to report on that. It has nothing to do with his campaign not being newsworthy. It has everything to do with the media being owned by big government banking interests.

What you're really saying is that this is his fault ... The "Pants on the ground" guy draws more attention , but you want to blame it all on the media

That's what my mom was telling me when she agreed with my wife ... He's right, but he'll never get elected, because his demeanor is not worthy of coverage and exposure.

Perhaps I should run ... I'd be the first POTUS candidate to actually curse out a member of the media, and claim that I'd run the place ike a dictatorship for 4 years, and then go back to tending my plow in the fields.
Now STFU and get ready to vote, because I'm sending all of both the House and Senate home, and you're all gonna have to decide during your special elections IF your representation is worthy of keeping or replacing.

I'm still voting for Ron, but an entire block of society will call it a wasted vote that rallies Obama another 4 years.
BFD on them
I value the principles of the movement !!!!!!!!!!

 

[azxd]

That #MainstreamMedia, which is owned by #GiantCorporations, carries water for #BigMoney is ALSO not a new phenomenon.

Don't get me wrong, I'm ALL FOR not playing the game. I'm one of the people who took a LOTTA SHIT for arguing that Ron Paul and the Moovement should SEIZE THE MOMENT to run on an Independent ticket. I argued that precious time would be wasted trying to clarify for still-barely-engaged Voters which are GOOD Republicans and which are BAD Republicans.

He decides to run/stay Republican because the System/Game is rigged against Third Party Candidates.

PART OF THAT RIGGING is the aforementioned corporate-owned, INVESTED Media.

Play the game, or don't. But don't NOT play ball, WITHIN the ballgame.

Saying HIS CAMPAIGN / OUR MOOVEMENT is newsworthy is akin to saying that PHILOSOPHY is newsworthy. It just doesn't PLAY IN PEORIA.

Which came first...MAKING NEWS or WIDESPREAD POPULARITY?

And even thought I agree with him, that third party exclusion is an excuse that could be overcome.

 

[azxd]

You are selling me on this prepared speach angle. RP writes really really good pieces and there are hundreds of these pieces already in print he could pick from.

And this is what NOW has me wondering if he ever actually wanted to win the election.

 

[azxd]

So write the speech yourself and submit it to the campaign suggestions.

He writes very well ... But he could NEVER deliver the kind of speech I would write for him.
IMHO,
He's to logical, and lacks the emotion necessary to make an effective delivery of what I would say IF I were in his position ... See above.

 

[kathy88]

Well, I can't run. Misspent youth. So do it.

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

It would be most enlightening to see of Poll of out all those who voted for Paul, how many did so, because of what they learned about him on FOX.

Then, I would want to see a poll of out of all the potential voters, how many decided NOT to vote for Paul because of what they learned of him on FOX.

I can't help but beleive based on all people I have talked with for and against him, that FOX has hurt his bid more then it has helped.

I wish I could get hard data to prove it.

 

[azxd]

Well, I can't run. Misspent youth. So do it.

FWIW I have a challenge out to friends who actually think it's a good idea, if they can get the signatures, it might someday come true ... A nobody on the stage, that's how it's supposed to work.

I sure wish I had millions to waste on the effort, like Romnutz !!

 

[azxd]

It would be most enlightening to see of Poll of out all those who voted for Paul, how many did so, because of what they learned about him on FOX.

Then, I would want to see a poll of out of all the potential voters, how many decided NOT to vote for Paul because of what they learned of him on FOX.

I can't help but beleive based on all people I have talked with for and against him, that FOX has hurt his bid more then it has helped.

I wish I could get hard data to prove it.

I can guarantee you they skewed my mom's perspective ... I told her to shut the box off, and do some research.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Umm... this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about when I say RON NEEDS TO DELIVER REAL SPEECHES...

I'm so tired of the "rah rahs" telling me that Ron's meandering stump speech = more presidential/persuasive/clear than poetic + eloquent language like this:



Clear, concise, coherent.





And to close:


The people against making it loud and clear that the grassroots is no longer "ok with" Ron mailing in stump speech after stump speech are, in my opinion at least, ENABLERS. I know they mean well and simply believe that engendering a positive, non-critical "attitude" towards Ron is the best support we can give him ... and up to a certain point they are correct.

But Ron has clearly passed that point. And it's up to us to help him see that his stubbornness towards serious speeches is completely unacceptable given the amount of money, time and energy so many have put into this campaign.

Ron can't read off of a teleprompter. He'd be pilloried for reading a speech from his podium.

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

I can guarantee you they skewed my mom's perspective ... I told her to shut the box off, and do some research.

I personally converted everyone I know who supports Paul. I know they did not get turned onto him by FOX. My father, no matter how well I make my case for Paul, using everything I know my dad agrees with, I can't get him to budge, because of the FOX brainwashing. My dad chose FOX as his final authority and to him, FOX said Paul was a radical loon who has no chance. That is what my dad stubbornly beleives and that's that with him.


Why so many think it is critical for Paul to get airtime ala FOX is beyond me as nothing in my experience supports it being a good thing.

 

[azxd]

Ron can't read off of a teleprompter. He'd be pilloried for reading a speech from his podium.

Therefore NO State of the Union speeches.

Love the man's message, but have always had a hard time with his delivery.

Now back to the topic,
He's making a calculated move that might win WA, but at what cost nationally ?

I think he's gonna loose over this skip Huckabee move.

 

[azxd]

I personally converted everyone I know who supports Paul. I know they did not get turned onto him by FOX. My father, no matter how well I make my case for Paul, using everything I know my dad agrees with, I can't get him to budge, because of the FOX brainwashing. My dad chose FOX as his final authority and to him, FOX said Paul was a radical loon who has no chance. That is what my dad stubbornly beleives and that's that with him.


Why so many think it is critical for Paul to get airtime ala FOX is beyond me as nothing in my experience supports it being a good thing.

It's actually very simple ... He's skipping an INTERNATIONAL BROADCAST to play in Washington State.

You don't skip that kind of exposure IF you intend to win.

It's like a has been rock & roller chosing a small bar Saturday, when a popular name is offering to let him go on a World tour with their band.

 

[WD-NY]

Ron can't read off of a teleprompter. He'd be pilloried for reading a speech from his podium.

Why can't Ron read off a teleprompter? He has read hundreds of prepared speeches on the House Floor?

You're not agreeing with the people who claim that "reading off a teleprompter - even words you have written yourself - is FAKE/INSINCERE!" are you??

I don't think it matters how he reads it... no one is expecting him to put on an Obama-esque acting performance. The only thing that matters is the eloquence of his prose and soundness of his ideas. And since he's never had an issue achieving either, I honestly don't get why the focus of the campaign wasn't prepared speeches on every single topic that Ron Paul wants the WORLD to hear about.

There have been something like 8 "election night" rallies so far and each time he's muddled through an off-the-cuff variation of his Iowa stump speech. That's 8 different nights where millions of people across America could've been exposed to a more measured and thoughtful explanation of his platform.

For example, what if each election night speech looked something like this:

• Iowa - "Crony capitalism & the federal reserve vs free markets & sound money"
• NH - "The conservative solution to our economic depression"
• SC - "A conservative foreign policy"
• FL/NV - "Federalism vs Central Planning"
• MN/CO - "An alternative to Obamacare"
• Maine - "The conservative response to social issues" (why Santorum's demagoguing = fake + wrong)
• MN/CO - "Cutting spending vs cutting taxes"
• Michigan/NV - "The Morality of True Conservatism"
• Washington - "LIBERTY" (why the Patriot Act is wrong, and equal rights for all brings people together)

 

[azxd]

Why can't Ron read off a teleprompter? He has read hundreds of prepared speeches on the House Floor?

You're not agreeing with the people who claim that "reading off a teleprompter - even words you have written yourself - is FAKE/INSINCERE!" are you??

I don't think it matters how he reads it... no one is expecting him to put on an Obama-esque acting performance. The only thing that matters is the eloquence of his prose and soundness of his ideas. And since he's never had an issue achieving either, I honestly don't get why the focus of the campaign wasn't prepared speeches on every single topic that Ron Paul wants the WORLD to hear about.

There have been something like 8 "election night" rallies so far and each time he's muddled through an off-the-cuff variation of his Iowa stump speech. That's 8 different nights where millions of people across America could've been exposed to a more measured and thoughtful explanation of his platform.

For example, what if each election night speech looked something like this:

• Iowa - "Crony capitalism & the federal reserve vs free markets & sound money"
• NH - "The conservative solution to our economic depression"
• SC - "A conservative foreign policy"
• FL/NV - "Federalism vs Central Planning"
• MN/CO - "An alternative to Obamacare"
• Maine - "The conservative response to social issues" (why Santorum's demagoguing = fake + wrong)
• MN/CO - "Cutting spending vs cutting taxes"
• Michigan/NV - "The Morality of True Conservatism"
• Washington - "LIBERTY" (why the Patriot Act is wrong, and equal rights for all brings people together)

Great way to point out his failure ... It SUCKS, I know, but it is what it is.

 

[WD-NY]

Great way to point out his failure ... It SUCKS, I know, but it is what it is.

It's never too late to change course. That's why we need to all push the campaign, via emails to [email protected] and comments on the DailyPaul (since Ron doesn't read RPF).

Ron will step up if he sees enough of us shouting about how we want real substance over "more authentic/real" off-the-cuff stump speeches. That's why all of the people shouting down those with legitimate concerns/complaints are so bad for the campaign at this point. I know they're hearts are in the right place but Ron can only respond to what he sees as "widely agreed upon" opinions/suggestions/concerns from the grassroots. If I go and post a comment on the dailypaul, and then 8 people down-vote it... Ron's going to think that the majority don't agree (even though it's really a minority who are astroturfing anyone who says anything remotely negative).

The other reason why the formal/prepared speeches can still be delivered is that he doesn't even need to come up with a bunch of new speeches from scratch. Jack Hunter and Doug Wead can easily and QUICKLY sift through all of Ron's old speeches and simply tighten up any overly wordy section and update the examples he uses in some cases to keep things current.