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

[nyrgoal99]

i would Ron stay in Wash St and try to win then go to Ohio

 

[Warmon]

My .02. Both would be important, but he needs to be on the ground in Washington way more than he needs to be on a FOX news program - tired as hell and not 100%. My understanding is that he's going back to Idaho and then to Alaska where we have the best chance at states 2 & 3. We are not going to get momentum from a TV program.

 

[tbone717]

My understanding is that he's going back to Idaho and then to Alaska where we have the best chance at states 2 & 3. We are not going to get momentum from a TV program.

Campaign website has him in ID for three stops on the 5th, nothing in AK. Paul has only visited 3 of the 10 states that vote on Super Tuesday. And 2 of those three (VA & OK) I believe he only had one event in each.

WA votes at 10AM on Saturday, while I can understand being there Friday night, I don't think the advantage of being there on Saturday morning and staying for a post-caucus party is of more benefit than being in front of a national TV audience. For some of the people voting on Tuesday this may be the first time they sit down and pay serious attention to what the candidates have to say, so this very well might have been his only opportunity to reach out to some people.

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

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.

Have you been aware of how Paul gets treated by FOX? It sounds like you have no clue. Your analogy doesn't even fit. For it to fit, the popular band would have to be first telling the audience, that the he plays looney tunes and he will go no where with his music career. They would have to plant the audience with people that will boo him and throw rotten vegetables. Then, they also will decide to play the popular band at the same time, while setting him up off to the side, in dim light, with lower volumn and the mic always cutting out. You might have a somewhat fair comparison in this way.

Yes, he would get more exposure. It is not as simple as that. The exposure FOX gives him, turns people OFF to him. I have been out there converting people since early 2007. FOX has hurt him more then it has helped in my experience. I stand by my view that says, it's not a loss to Paul to not be there.

Yes, it would be a loss to Gingrinch, Romney or Santorum possibly as they all have been given favorable press, respect, support as being able to win it and airtime by FOX. Paul has never gotten those things from FOX. He gets the complete opposite and then some.

REALITY CHECK-

FOX didn't let up on the newsletters and they call him a racist, FOX helped to promote the slanderous LIE that Paul made the China Huntsman video and ran it a comercial ad, they falsely paint him as an isolationist, they say his foriegn policy is dangerous and radical, the've said he is not a newsworthy candidate, they bring on people that say he should be treated nicely on his way OUT the door, they call him a libertarian and imply he doesn't belong in the republican party and that he will not be our next president.


What makes you think THAT ^, is good press for millions to see that will get him votes?

I am open to considering a different perspectiver, backed by something other then- millions will see it.

( I doubt millions watch the Huck forum) Does anyone even know what sort of ratings his show gets?

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

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)

He gave a prepared speech as a response to a state of the union address, which was read off a teleprompter. And when I say read, he was straight up reading, and it was stilted as all get up. He'd have been way better off reading from a paper in his hand, as he does in prepared House floor speeches.

And if you think he wouldn't be criticized for reading a speech from his podium as opposed to acting like he's giving a grand speech while reading from two teleprompters, I don't know what to tell you.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, Ron doesn't accept prepared speeches from someone else. Gary North and others have tried to get him to do so, and he's rejected their speeches.

I'd also like to point out to those of us criticizing Ron for not appearing on this forum: Pat Bondi up and up yelled at him during the last forum. That'd be great for earned media, having the viewers think Ron Paul is worthy of being yelled at during a presidential forum.

 

[BKom]

he is getting more publicity from taking Bernanke to the woodshed

No he is not. Absolutely not.

 

[azxd]

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.

All based on the assumption that he hears the individual voice ... IMO he follows no one.

 

[azxd]

Have you been aware of how Paul gets treated by FOX? It sounds like you have no clue. Your analogy doesn't even fit. For it to fit, the popular band would have to be first telling the audience, that the he plays looney tunes and he will go no where with his music career. They would have to plant the audience with people that will boo him and throw rotten vegetables. Then, they also will decide to play the popular band at the same time, while setting him up off to the side, in dim light, with lower volumn and the mic always cutting out. You might have a somewhat fair comparison in this way.

Yes, he would get more exposure. It is not as simple as that. The exposure FOX gives him, turns people OFF to him. I have been out there converting people since early 2007. FOX has hurt him more then it has helped in my experience. I stand by my view that says, it's not a loss to Paul to not be there.

Yes, it would be a loss to Gingrinch, Romney or Santorum possibly as they all have been given favorable press, respect, support as being able to win it and airtime by FOX. Paul has never gotten those things from FOX. He gets the complete opposite and then some.

REALITY CHECK-

FOX didn't let up on the newsletters and they call him a racist, FOX helped to promote the slanderous LIE that Paul made the China Huntsman video and ran it a comercial ad, they falsely paint him as an isolationist, they say his foriegn policy is dangerous and radical, the've said he is not a newsworthy candidate, they bring on people that say he should be treated nicely on his way OUT the door, they call him a libertarian and imply he doesn't belong in the republican party and that he will not be our next president.


What makes you think THAT ^, is good press for millions to see that will get him votes?

I am open to considering a different perspectiver, backed by something other then- millions will see it.

( I doubt millions watch the Huck forum) Does anyone even know what sort of ratings his show gets?

For many years ... FAUX has treated him like a red headed stepchild, and he is treated like a "Looney Tune" by most ... I wonder why that is ?

And his treatement by FAUX is his own fault ... He does not control the situation.
It's a major fault which he alone possesses.

 

[azxd]

No he is not. Absolutely not.

Truth is hard to swallow.

 

[phil4truth]

Lot of moaning sorts hanging about here.

This is really quite simple to grasp. Ron Paul decided that his campaign has a great chance of winning in Washington and has decided to stay there and work the state. He didn't poo poo any show and wasn't/isn't making a statement to FOX or anyone else by not going on. He seen that none of the other candidates paid Washington much attention and as they decided to go on to the Huck show as Washington voted Ron decided to take avantage of this and stay and campaign whilst asking to be allowed on the show via satellite. The show refused.

What appears to be the issue that has warranted 17 pages of mostly moans and huffs? To me it is very straight forward.

Dr Paul knows that we need the momentum of a win and sees Washington as possibly providing that. A win here is worth 10 show appearances to our campaign and besides Hucks show isn't anything to get excited about under the circumstances.

Channel all this negative energy into being productive guys as we won't win anything by sitting around here crying.

 

[azxd]

Lot of moaning sorts hanging about here.

This is really quite simple to grasp. Ron Paul decided that his campaign has a great chance of winning in Washington and has decided to stay there and work the state. He didn't poo poo any show and wasn't/isn't making a statement to FOX or anyone else by not going on. He seen that none of the other candidates paid Washington much attention and as they decided to go on to the Huck show as Washington voted Ron decided to take avantage of this and stay and campaign whilst asking to be allowed on the show via satellite. The show refused.

What appears to be the issue that has warranted 17 pages of mostly moans and huffs? To me it is very straight forward.

Dr Paul knows that we need the momentum of a win and sees Washington as possibly providing that. A win here is worth 10 show appearances to our campaign and besides Hucks show isn't anything to get excited about under the circumstances.

Channel all this negative energy into being productive guys as we won't win anything by sitting around here crying.

Crying ?
Were you around in 08 when he quit ?

 

[blackbird12]

Can just one of the cheerleaders for the campaign answer this very simple question?!?!?

How does Ron Paul staying in WA Saturday morning help at all?? The bloody caucuses start at 10am. How many votes do you think he can get that morning????

I'm sorry, but I'm PISSED OFF about this decision! I really don't mind working my arse off to help the campaign. But its really aggravating when they fumble the ball like this. The media is already jumping on the opportunity to make Ron Paul look inflexible.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/01/ron_paul_to_skip_huckabee_forum.html

 

[blackbird12]

Besides, its not about how much good being on Huck's stupid program is, it's about how much damage it will do if he's not. This just gives the media all kinds of fodder to further the narrative that he's not a top tier candidate.

 

[sportsfan4paul]

Here's a video of Huckabee interviewing Paul, Huck seemed fair to me.
I have looked at Hucks tv ratings for his show, and he consistently has the most watched tv show every weekend.
I wish Dr Paul would of attended this.

 

[WD-NY]

Here's a video of Huckabee interviewing Paul, Huck seemed fair to me.
I have looked at Hucks tv ratings for his show, and he consistently has the most watched tv show every weekend.
I wish Dr Paul would of attended this.

Plus, Huck dominates the "evangelical" block ... If Rassmussan's latest poll is right, Santorum is crashing. And unless Ron DOES SOMETHING TACTICAL to fill in the void, they'll all just drift back to Newt (or worse, solidify behind Santorum).

Not that we need at least a sliver of the born-again vote or anything...

Or the fact that 2 of Ron brothers are... wait for it... MINISTERS!!

 

[LibertyRevolution]

OMG, I am really pissed off at this. Why are we skipping out on free national Tv time!!!!!!
I don't wanna hear that the host will ask loaded questions.. they all do it.. this is a poor decision.
I have been a supporter since 2007, and this might be the final straw, I may have to go just find my apathy again.

I am done donating to the campaign...
You are a waste of my money.. yeah lets stay in washington and get a few votes...or be on national TV and convert MANY.
I mean it. Turning down a debate ... this late in the game ... before super-tuesday...
FIRE SOMEONE over this or I am not donating another penny.

 

[devil21]

We need to win a state before we worry about Huck's forum. Huck's forum is good exposure but we need a state win and Huck's forum will not win a state by itself. Paul staying in WA and addressing a big caucus site before voting could be the difference in him winning a state leading into super tuesday. (assuming the vote isn't stolen....ymmv for real)

 

[tbone717]

We need to win a state before we worry about Huck's forum. Huck's forum is good exposure but we need a state win and Huck's forum will not win a state by itself. Paul staying in WA and addressing a big caucus site before voting could be the difference in him winning a state leading into super tuesday. (assuming the vote isn't stolen....ymmv for real)

Just as an update: There is nothing on the campaign site that suggests that Paul is "addressing a big caucus site before voting". He has two events today, but there are no events scheduled for tomorrow on the official calendar.

I also want to address a point that was made several pages back that Huckabee planned this event to interfere with the WA Caucuses. I think this is a huge stretch. Huck's show is broadcast on Saturdays, and since this is the Saturday before Super Tuesday I don't think there was some plot to interfere with the WA Caucuses. Tomorrow is simply the best date for him to schedule this forum prior to Super Tuesday.

 

[Noblegeorge]

I just don't see the logic behind this. Alot of regular people voting on Super Tuesday probably haven't paid much attention to what the candidates have been saying one way or the other. They will look to this to make their final decision. Unlike debates which are more easily manipulated Ron will get equal air time and have one more chance to spread truth to the masses before they vote. Not being there just makes him look more and more like a fringe candidate outside the GOP Party and not worth voting for unless you're making a protest vote.

All that being said, if Ron wins Washington that will change things and I do respect the fact that he has loyalty to the people there. But in terms of winning an election I have to say i think is a terrible mistake by the campaign.

 

[tbone717]

I just don't see the logic behind this. Alot of regular people voting on Super Tuesday probably haven't paid much attention to what the candidates have been saying one way or the other. They will look to this to make their final decision.

You are correct with this. There are many people who make up their mind at the last minute, and a forum like this may very well be the means by which some voters come to their final decision.

Just for example, 24% of Michigan voters were late deciders, the same for Nevada. Oddly enough that number was only 9% in AZ for some reason. But from the data we have seen so far it usually is in the mid teens. That is potentially a lot of votes.