Second Draft of USA Today Ad

[Naraku]

I personally agreed with the idea of having the Founders being the speakers, since it does make a more profound statement. It may seems presumptuous, but advertisements tend to be presumptuous and sometimes that's their biggest hook. Without them as the dominant speakers the actual strength of the ad becomes weak.

I also think the Tea Party block is now much too wordy. The old version was fine the way it was.

I think one additional warning would also be important, though perhaps one that's simple a re-wording of the media version that focuses more on flip-flopping politicians. I think attacking the media in a newspaper ad about policy is silly.

Other than that I think the changes are great.

 

[troyd1]

The pictures can be put in any order that they need to be and still have them facing each other, you just need to do a mirror image in any editing software, it is simple.

 

[smither]

Source Document Available?

I am considering doing this in our local paper - much more affordable! Is the original, editable document available anywhere?

Thanks!

 

[slantedview]

This is so good. I have no critique to ad to what's been said.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Awesome! Can't wait to see it on the newsstand. I told people here at work to check it out, and asked the cashier in our cafeteria to make sure they come in that tuesday and wednesday. I have personally never bought a newspaper in my life.:o
With inflation, I thought they would cost more, but it's only $.75. I might buy a few and place them strategically around the cafe tables. People like free newspapers and will read them when laying around too.

Good idea. I can't wait to get one too.

 

[LibertyEagle]

..

 

[thomj76]

The phone number is 1 877 Ron 2008. The line about never accepts money from special interest groups is not accurate. If someone does a FEC search it shows that he has received money from special interest groups, though in extremely small amounts.
In the top line, humbly I recommend asking a question.

'They warned us it was our responsibility to keep it that way. Have we strayed from their wise counsel?'

Then, 1st Warning, 'Ron Paul will bring our troops home in an orderly fashion, and strive to keep us out of entangling alliances'

3rd Warning, 'Ron Paul will stop spending beyond our means, restore fiscal sanity and balance the Federal Budget.'


Congressman Ron Paul...

Year after Year is voted "Taxpayer's Friend" by the National Taxpayers Union, and has never voted for an unbalanced budget

Will protect Social Security for seniors while allowing young people to transition out.

Will stop spending US Taxpayers dollars to build and police nations.

Voted to go after terrorists responsible for 9/11.

Stood against the UN Authorization of Force regarding Iraq, instead making appeal that if we went to war in Iraq, it should be a formal declaration of war, and not another extended War Powers Act Operation.

source: http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2002/pr100402.htm

"I don’t believe in resolutions that cite the UN as authority for our military actions," Paul stated yesterday after a committee hearing. "America has a sovereign right to defend itself, and we don’t need UN permission or approval to act in the interests of American national security. The decision to go to war should be made by the U.S. Congress alone. Congress should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors."

"Sadly, the leadership of both parties on the International Relations committee fails to understand that the Constitution requires a congressional declaration of war before our troops are sent into battle," Paul continued. "One Republican member stated that the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war is an anachronism and should no longer be followed," while a Democratic member said that a declaration of war would be ‘frivolous.’

***************

I like the ad a lot. If we have people reading down to the bottom, lets try to clarify that Ron Paul is not weak on National Defense, he just wants to follow it according to the US Constitution. The small amount of time in going into Afghanistan demonstrates a situation where the "War Powers Act" is applicable, where as the Iraq situation, with months, if not years of preparation falls squarely into a "formal Declaration of War area"

I also like this quote from Ronald Reagan, though am not sure if it has a place in here.

'Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows full well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.'

-Ronald Reagan-


As the primaries get closer, in closed states (such as Florida) we have to tailor the message to appeal to Republicans.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I hope that they will be of benefit...I'm sure I will have more

 

[Ridiculous]

The revision is great in its current form with the exception of a few copy errors mentioned.

 

[LibertyEagle]

My advice to anyone who think they have a good idea...dont even post it in these forums...just run with it because the naysayers are generally unimaginative downers who will demorlaize u and water down your original concept.

That would certainly work in the case of Llepard, as he's paying for the ad all by himself.

For others though, who are trying to get others to pay for the ad, not so well.

 

[hillertexas]

"Personally I don't think its wise to have the Ronpaulstopdreaming.com url on the ad. Everytime I read that I think its a hit piece on ron paul. AND actually i'm not sure for that matter that these forums or daily paul are the best place for someone to go to first. "

I agree...I waited for the longest time to even watch "Ron Paul stop dreaming" because I though it was anti-Ron

 

[LibertyEagle]

The phone number is 1 800 Ron 2008.

Actually, NO, this is not a valid number for the campaign.

The numbers that work are:

1-877-RON2008 and 1-877-RON-PAUL.

.... and I have verified these with the campaign.

 

[Zimmychonga]

Should his picture be at least as big as the founding fathers' pictures?

 

[DJ RP]

Amazing Ad! I really like it! I second changing 'legions' to 'millions' re illegal immigrants.

also, bottom right section "or special interests", the 'or' and the 'special' look like one word, maybe increase the character spacing there.

A small thing but I guess that means the ad is almost perfect!

Thanks for all your hard work guys

 

[Ridiculous]

That would certainly work in the case of Llepard, as he's paying for the ad all by himself.

For others though, who are trying to get others to pay for the ad, not so well.

+ Llepard specifically asked for constructive criticism....

I assure all of you, before any major company takes out a high profile ad they show it to focus groups, have people play devils advocate, make lots of revisions etc...

 

[Ninja Homer]

Yes, it would give it more balance, but do you really think Benjamin Franklin should be up at the top with Washington, and Jefferson put off to the side?

I'm just sayin', sometimes there are more important things than the way the pictures are balanced.

In an ad, balance can be really important. As it currently is, Franklin's pic directs the eye off the page to the right, and Washington and Jefferson's pics direct the eye off to the left.

If I, personally, was doing this from scratch, first of all I'd use a pic of Jefferson where he was looking you in the eye, like this one:

Then I'd switch around the pics of Jefferson and Washington.
Then I'd mirror the pic of Franklin so he was facing to the left.
So from left to right it would be Madison, Jefferson, Washington, then Franklin, and they'd all be facing the center.

When they're all facing the center, the eye is directed to the text, "An Open Letter To The American People". If people are flipping pages, and don't read that opening line, they will completely ignore the rest of the ad. It has to catch people's attention and get them to start reading it at first glance.

 

[Naraku]

I think the Founder should be the ones to endorse Ron Paul. I think that is a very nice hook to the ad that really gives it punch.

 

[ButchHowdy]

Confession: I have been a voter since 1988 and never knew the existence of, nor the importance of a primary election until this past summer.


Comment: This very expensive ad is not telling me that I need to get off my azz and vote in the primary within 5 - 8 weeks.

 

[Mav]

As a conservative independent who is relatively new to Ron Paul, I would HIGHLY encourage you to eliminate the word SLAVES.

You may be right but it is highly offensive.... especially when you're calling my children slaves.

Please take this criticism as constructive. As I said, you may be right... but your average American will be disgusted by the suggestion that his children are slaves.

You're not being literal, I know. But to me, it sounds like an INSULT. And you won't win ANY support by insulting people, especially their children!!!!!

 

[hillertexas]

Llepard,

I think you should make it even more obvious that you, a concerned American, did this with your own money. I think that it would be effective to include the exact $ amount you paid...if you are comfortable with that. Someone posted something like "I paid $$$$ to be able to tell you this..." as an idea. I think the info about you should be at the top. Small, but at the top so the viewers know from the beginning that this is coming from a fellow citizen. I think that is the most incredible part and should be shared with the readers. I don't think it would read as "egotistical". I think it would read as "credible".

Also maybe emphasize the statement about voting in the primaries more.

My 2 cents.

 

[Federalist]

Great Ad But....

Don't use "Americans First". This will link us to historical groups like the nativists and I don't think Ron Paul is a nativist.

We have no problem with legal immigration but with illegal immigration.

Instead say something like Ron Paul will put "all lawful American residents first."