Serious misgivings about this march idea

[Channing]

It would prove to the world and to ourselves how large and dedicated the movement actually is.

Especially since the MSM and polls are trying to tell us that we're only a small group of supporters.

So, even though there is a risk - namely that not enough people would show up - I definitely think we should do this.

Also AFAIK this would be a first for a presidential candidate.

 

[Luft97]

1. If the event is held at the end of May (RP suggested 3-4 months from now) only four states would remain in the primary schedule and we would have no effect in the states that have already voted.

I am glad there is someone else with a voice of reason here. IMO May is to late but it is still ALOT better than 4th of July AFTER the race has already been decided.

2. I don’t see a clear purpose to this march. Are we trying to affect government change… help elect Ron Paul… get media exposure? I am truly at a loss as to the purpose and the results we expect to achieve. The media has done a terrific job of ignoring us… I expect they will do a similar job in ignoring us with such a march.

Any date after June 3rd has no real significance. To keep this a peaceful protected rally it needs to be a group of political supporters with a showing to support our candidate, who would still be running for elected office at that time.

If you really want any shot at positive coverage, you will want it done DURING the primary season. The media, if they reported at all, would show a devoted group of Ron Paul supporters and show people that yes Ron Paul really does have REAL people supporting him and his cause.

Anytime after the primaries they will have carte blanche to call this whatever they want. Those people that just won't go away, a group of Anti-War Protesters, sore losers... The list goes on they can spin it any way they want.

I am very sure Ron Paul will think about all of this and make the right decision. To those of you that questioned Tarzan on his support you need to realise that he is concerned about the image and safety of the Ron Paul movement.

 

[roguepatriot]

1. Primary's don't matter anymore
2. The purposes is to get definitive media attention. I question your supporter status for asking.
3. Ron Paul said we should march, there will be a march. 100k on the meetups but I think 500k+ will show.
4. Organizing? Call a date we will show. This is a ridiculous statement. This message is the most important message in the world. Get a grip. I question your integrity to spread the message.
5. We will all have to agree to disagree. But more importantly, we will agree on the purpose of showing up to the march. For god's sake its Ron Paul calling it on, so if you don't support his message don't show. I question your support again.
6. Doesn't matter what groups show up. I hope that all show. This is why RP didn't give white supremacy groups back thier money from donations. Its the message.
7. Only marches that you participate in are not historical.
8. Money is not an issue. A presidential candidate ordered a march. Thats history and will generate more coverage than any old rally. But you see... this isnt a rally. Its a MARCH. Not some little rally.
9. IF the message is strong enough people will show. You questioning it probably means you wont show... THANK GOD! Work, family issues, costs wont matter when were all in the FEMA camps.

There is no risk in this march. Im glad your so patriotic inwhich that you dont believe in this movement, this soon to be historical March in Washington is not in our best interests. Thanks.

You are a naysayer by even bringing them up. Im seriously questioning your Trust in Ron Paul.

What he said.

 

[hyoomen]

For what it is worth, all of the responses that any naysaying, thoughtful criticism, or tentative misgivings are unwelcome or "unPaulian" are missing the mark a bit, don't ya' think? If our movement isn't based upon critical thoughtfulness, then we are either blind followers or simple contrarians.

I think we are neither.

I agree w/ many of Tarzan's concerns, though this isn't about the primaries at this point. There is the potential we could have a last ditch effect on delegates (at least in a second vote) at the national convention, but a march would inevitably alter the GOP (and probably the Democratic) party principles.

That having been said, I don't think the current voting failures adequately support the idea of anywhere near 100,000 people showing up in support of Congressman Paul unless his book is hugely inspiring. We'll need a viral marketing campaign across campuses where copies are assigned for free, preliminary events are established to indoctrinate students and others, Oprah gets on the wagon (kill me now, please), etc. I do not think enough "everyday people" feel like their country is on the brink of anything other than the next summer movie season.

 

[rbmcdonald]

1. Primary's don't matter anymore
2. The purposes is to get definitive media attention. I question your supporter status for asking.
3. Ron Paul said we should march, there will be a march. 100k on the meetups but I think 500k+ will show.
4. Organizing? Call a date we will show. This is a ridiculous statement. This message is the most important message in the world. Get a grip. I question your integrity to spread the message.
5. We will all have to agree to disagree. But more importantly, we will agree on the purpose of showing up to the march. For god's sake its Ron Paul calling it on, so if you don't support his message don't show. I question your support again.
6. Doesn't matter what groups show up. I hope that all show. This is why RP didn't give white supremacy groups back thier money from donations. Its the message.
7. Only marches that you participate in are not historical.
8. Money is not an issue. A presidential candidate ordered a march. Thats history and will generate more coverage than any old rally. But you see... this isnt a rally. Its a MARCH. Not some little rally.
9. IF the message is strong enough people will show. You questioning it probably means you wont show... THANK GOD! Work, family issues, costs wont matter when were all in the FEMA camps.

There is no risk in this march. Im glad your so patriotic inwhich that you dont believe in this movement, this soon to be historical March in Washington is not in our best interests. Thanks.

You are a naysayer by even bringing them up. Im seriously questioning your Trust in Ron Paul.

This post is very counter productive, and a very good example of the type of thing that will ruin the movement. For the Revolution to succeed, we need everyone. We will not all agree on everything, there will be a very few absolutes that bind us together. For you to reply to someone who appeared to be asking what they felt were very legitimate questions, and rip them is ridicules. If the reality is that the movement projects itself as only being people who believe that unless they give every single ounce of blood and sweat they have or we will all be “in the FEMA camps”, then we have already lost.

One of the single most valuable tool people in power have, to stay in power, is division. As long as they can continue fostering divisiveness, such that no single group or idea can reach the critical mass necessary to force real change, then real change will never happen.

 

[Laja]

Guys, I'm a Ron Paul supporter 1000% and would never, ever vote for anyone else. I'm dedicated to him full time. BUT I don't agree with having a march. The media didn't cover a HUGE peace march on Washington last year. I said this in another post on here that the marchers got sprayed with some chemical that made them all very sick with a respiratory ailment. We can't afford to have any of our numbers downed by crowd control chemicals.

Why can't we do something other than converging on the corrupt cesspool of D.C.?

 

[Perry]

I have some concerns about this march. Before I get absolutely flamed please keep in mind that Ron Paul said in his message that “I’m throwing this out as an idea”.

Here are my concerns, in no particular order:
1. If the event is held at the end of May (RP suggested 3-4 months from now) only four states would remain in the primary schedule and we would have no effect in the states that have already voted.
2. I don’t see a clear purpose to this march. Are we trying to affect government change… help elect Ron Paul… get media exposure? I am truly at a loss as to the purpose and the results we expect to achieve. The media has done a terrific job of ignoring us… I expect they will do a similar job in ignoring us with such a march.
3. To have any sort of success we would have to have some very large numbers… probably 100,000 or more. If we fail in having a very large group the effort will look like a failure and could spell the end of our efforts. Such a failure could be so disheartening as to spell the end of this budding movement… to restore a constitutionally based government.
4. Organizing such an event is hard work and a difficult task. Thus far, we have not seen any such ability from the official campaign or the grassroots. Take a look at the anti-Vietnam rallies… organizing and coordination of such an event is quite challenging.
5. Avoiding usurpers will be a major challenge. Without a clearly defined purpose we are already seeing varying causes and speakers being proposed. The mix includes a range from Socialists to Libertarians. This presents the very real danger of the march being appropriated for groups with interests I do not share.
6. Using the anti-Vietnam rallies as an example there will be a mix of people and groups. We may not all share the same intentions at such an event. I am concerned that we would not appear as a serious group who’s ideas are worthy of consideration if the event is marred by “single issue” groups or those already planning disruptive and illegal acts.
7. Marches are historically ineffective. Take a look at the history… there have been many marches on Washington and most of them have been forgotten and produced little or no meaningful results. Even the “March on Washington for Jobs & Freedom” did not result in any immediate changes and estimates place the number of marchers at 250,000. Consider the results of “The Million Man March”, the “Lesbian & Gay Rights” marches, the “March Against the Iraq War”. All had limited results in affecting government change compared to the effort and expenditure. I know this is arguable… but go have a look at the actual direct results of previous marches. The only effective results have come after years of continued effort rather than a single big event.
8. The cost versus results does not add up for me. If 100,000 attended and their average cost for travel, food & lodging was $250 each (which I think is very conservative) we would be looking at a total expenditure of $25,000,000.00. I think we could get much better results with 25 Million by focusing on getting Ron Paul “clones” elected to congress or by educating others.
9. For quite a few people traveling to DC is just out of the question. Taking time off from work, family issues, the costs are also major hurdles that many will not be able to overcome.

It would be great to meet other constitutionally minded folks… to know that we are not alone and see the power of what could become an actual movement. I am gravely concerned about the risk versus return and am not convinced a “March on Washington” is in our best interests.

I am REALLY not trying to be a naysayer. I would appreciate it if someone could provide convincing arguments as to why the march would be a good thing.

I think you're overthinking things.
1:Ron Paul will most likely NOT be in the Whitehouse next year.
2:This is the best idea we have on the table at the moment to draw attention to the movement.
3: If there is no plan b stick with plan a.

 

[KevinDW78]

We would have been way better off it it were us ignoring media from the start.

I like this idea! Let's DARE The media to ignore us!

 

[KevinDW78]

a march would inevitably alter the GOP (and probably the Democratic) party principles.

I think we need to make sure we go into this whole thing not being naive. This march will likely not have any external outcome. If we do this, it needs to be for US - because that's the only people we have the power to change - ourselves.

 

[GoldStan]

I think Tarzan is correct. The money sepnt by the folks travelling to this would be far more effectively spent as campaign money.

I also agree that expecting a turnout of even 100k is likely to result in a major disappointment. Just looking at this internet forum's stats (where a visit only requires the effort of web browsing) the most online ever was just barely over 4k.

If this site (and others like it) were seeing even 10's of thousands of folks simultaneously (where the effor bar is so low) then a big turnout at events that require time off from work, cross country drives, and major expenses might be more expected.

As it stands I think this march will likely only serve to highlight some of the crazier groups wihin our ranks. MSM will cover it and what you will see are anti-semitic groups, racist orgs, 9/11 Truthers, and conspiracy fans of all stripes. You won't see anything resembling a serious political movement.

 

[ShowMeLiberty]

These questions are linked. The purpose is to provide a culminating springboard to keep the rEVOLution alive even long after this election is over. It is important to do this even when it will not effect the election because we need to understand that this is not and never was about this election alone, but creating a lasting movement. If we succeed in this march it will create a lasting image that all of us and those who come later can identify with. In Sociology they call "Group Actualization" meaning the group realizes that it is in fact a group. We need to do this now that we have the numbers and before we splinter off into whatever pattern we were all in before.




This is the fear of any battle, no? If we had lost Normandy many believe we would have lost Europe. Same with the battle of the bulge. In social movements, there is OFTEN losses and setbacks, but in the end if the principles are right and the people are dedicated, they have won. Look how long it took for Gandhi to get the Brits to let go of India. Fear of defeat will always bring defeat.




Have you read what the meetupgroups did at the caucuses in Lousiana? The party had to change (and violate) their own rules to stop them from being the ONLY candidate with a full slate of delegates. LA's caucus rules are some of the most complicated in the country and yet through hard work, smart work, and dedication they had the establishment reeling.



You may not share their specific cause, but that is not important. What is important is that they support Ron Paul and and Constitutionalism. No?




Is this not a risk for any march or protest? the key is to police ourselves and to stop troublemakers and possibly report them as soon as we notice them. Bring cameras, document everything. In fact, I think there should be a task force specifically to design ways to stop this. They can then dissemenate the material to the rest of us and also operate during the march itself.



I disagree and suggest that perhaps you simply do not see the effectiveness. Does a march immediately change policy? No. Neither does a single election cycle...so then should we not vote? Marches are all about creating a lasting image both in the minds of the participants as well as on lookers and of course for students of history. I would point you to Gandhi's historical march to the sea to make a handful of salt. The Brits said exactly hat you did, "let him make his little bit of salt." But it ignited a wave of people against the salt tax. It united the people and firmed up their resolve.




not "rather than" but "in addition to". Every journey begins with one step. Every battle begins with one shot. We need to come together in a defining moment that is for the movement, not merely for an election. This is it.



The march, if successful would go a long way to do just that. If we do not do something to continue to bring the Ron Paul supporters together irrespetive of the actual election we are in danger of retreating back to our lives as they were prior to the election. This chance for us to go out and continue the fight together for the simple sake of standing there and heralding the movement. This will go a long way in keeping our movement going.



Sure. Which is why I dont excpect 6-10% of every state's registered voters will show up (Paul's average showing in the primaries). A great suggestion by a person who is looking for solutions (rather than just identifying problems) suggested that if someone couldnt make it to the DC march, they go to their state capital. This might even be more impressive to have 50 state capitals as well as US capital visited by RP supporters.



That is EXACTLY why is MUST happen. If we dont do it soon we will have lost our chance to keep the momentum going.




I hope this helps.

QFT

And anybody who doesn't think it's a good idea 1) doesn't have to go and 2) can really just stop trying to discourage everyone else. Really. (I do not mean the OP who asked legitimate questions, but the other "Debbie Downer" types who have thrown their wet blankets over this thread.)

 

[Joseph Hart]

that's just his personality. he just wants to make sure and want to bring it up..that's all... no need to question his trust in Dr. Paul or if he is patriotic. Some people prefer to analyze the situation before they jump into it.

Thats called anxiety. WHY CANT WE JUST TRUST RON PAUL??????

 

[micahnelson]

There is no risk in this march. Im glad your so patriotic inwhich that you dont believe in this movement, this soon to be historical March in Washington is not in our best interests. Thanks.

You are a naysayer by even bringing them up. Im seriously questioning your Trust in Ron Paul.

This is scary. We are not supposed to be a personality cult. I trust Ron Paul's opinion on issues related to policy. He is a wise man.

That said, we have to plan the right course of action. A march on DC, even if we had over 100,000 people will have absolutely no effect on DC.

Let me repeat that

100,000 Unarmed People accomplish nothing at a DC Rally.

So, either we scrap it- or we don't make the rally to change DC. We make it change us. We organize according to regions and use much of the time to discuss ways to advance our agenda in our local areas.

If anyone is willing to discuss ways to accomplish this, I would love to be involved.

If this rally is going to be some Ron Paul Blimp II, the "Revolution shall rise again", masturbatory, loud music event for us to bitch about how bad it is... count me out...

I'm tired of the whining about the media, the conspiracy, and how they are all out to get us, It was fun for a while, but we need to grow up. This means local elections and networking, not a 25 Million Dollar "show of strength" in the middle of DC.

 

[A Ron Paul Rebel]

The cost versus results does not add up for me. If 100,000 attended and their average cost for travel, food & lodging was $250 each (which I think is very conservative) we would be looking at a total expenditure of $25,000,000.00. I think we could get much better results with 25 Million by focusing on getting Ron Paul “clones” elected to congress or by educating others.

Good point but factually inaccurate.
Many of the 100,000+ who do make it will not be pro-RP and
will not have donated. So, to say that 100,000 peeps could
otherwise generate 25,000,000 for the cause of freedom is...
nieve.

If planned, approached and presented right, many of these
NEW RP fans will become donars and supporters of our cause.

Hunter

 

[SimpleName]

I loved everything you said there. Great stuff. I have been disconnected from this whole March idea. It is too late now to organize such an event and I still haven't figured out the actual purpose. A bunch of money being spent on basically nothing. All this money could be going to supporting Congressional candidates...seeing a Ron Paul Republican in the Senate would be nice. Maybe a few more governors?

I understand we don't want negative energy, but those who keep talking down these threads need to realize that offering the other side of things is exactly what the whole campaign is about. Silencing opponents is exactly what we are fighting the media for doing, yet we are abundantly taking part in it on this forum. It isn't like those posting negative threads are all trolls (this one isn't, for example). Some are simply explaining how this may be a huge waste of resources. Be open minded guys.

 

[billjarrett]

I loved everything you said there. Great stuff. I have been disconnected from this whole March idea. It is too late now to organize such an event and I still haven't figured out the actual purpose. A bunch of money being spent on basically nothing. All this money could be going to supporting Congressional candidates...seeing a Ron Paul Republican in the Senate would be nice. Maybe a few more governors?

I understand we don't want negative energy, but those who keep talking down these threads need to realize that offering the other side of things is exactly what the whole campaign is about. Silencing opponents is exactly what we are fighting the media for doing, yet we are abundantly taking part in it on this forum. It isn't like those posting negative threads are all trolls (this one isn't, for example). Some are simply explaining how this may be a huge waste of resources. Be open minded guys.

Well, Ron Paul has called for the march, we are just trying to make it happen. I'd say call campaign HQ and express your opinions, they may get heard. Ron Paul could come out next week and say he's had second thoughts on the march then.

However, negative opinions of something from HQ on the grassroots forums doesn't really amount to much than bringing supporters down. Your issue is with HQ.

 

[Joel High]

The plan is to shock the country at the convention. We don't want to fade off into the night and let the rest of the country forget about the revolution. We need to continue to spread the message to all of the other delegates who will be at St. Paul that there is a conservative that still has a chance to take the nomination.

We need to make sure that those Ron Paul delegates we've worked so hard to put in place don't give away their spots at the convention just because MSM has crowned McBomb the nominee.

And when we do shock the country at the convention, we need them to know that it was not just a thousand plus people who made that decision, but that there are millions who desire a better way and a better candidate, that many, not a few chose something better than what we were given.

 

[billjarrett]

I'm not sure if what I'm going to say is a positive or negative question, but:

1. Does anyone know the popular vote total for Ron Paul so far? And if we stretch this number out to the states that haven't voted yet, what is our expected approximate number?

2. We then need to figure that just because they went to the polls to vote for him, that there will be a probably large portion that would not travel to DC for it. Fact of life, people are lazy. Any statistics majors want to take a swing at this one?

3. We then need to figure out the amount of people that will not necessarily be supporters, but will come because its an "event" and something to do during the summer. I don't expect this figure to be large, but I'm not a statistics guy.

How do these numbers compare to the 250,000 MLK got, and the 669,600 to 1,004,400 the "Million Man March" got? And we need to keep in mind, we better hope the "Million Man March" better not beat us, as they didn't allow women in their March which made it smaller than it could have been.

Anyone actually have education in these types of stats and want to take a try?

 

[Joel High]

1. Does anyone know the popular vote total for Ron Paul so far? And if we stretch this number out to the states that haven't voted yet, what is our expected approximate number?

Just looking at the local states, NY, NJ, VA, MD-There have been over 100,000 votes cast for Ron Paul. Other close states that have not voted but look to put up decent numbers include PA, OH, NC, and we don't have a true tally on WV support.

And don't be surprised if thousands of Democrats decide to show up. Could it get any better for them that so many Republicans are unsatisfied with the presumptive nominee. It would be in their best interest to make this rally a huge success. Not to mention that a lot of Obama supporters truly like Ron Paul and his message, but they went with the candidate with the most momentum and what they saw as the best chance.

If you build it, they will come.

 

[billjarrett]

Just looking at the local states, NY, NJ, VA, MD-There have been over 100,000 votes cast for Ron Paul. Other close states that have not voted but look to put up decent numbers include PA, OH, NC, and we don't have a true tally on WV support.

And don't be surprised if thousands of Democrats decide to show up. Could it get any better for them that so many Republicans are unsatisfied with the presumptive nominee. It would be in their best interest to make this rally a huge success. Not to mention that a lot of Obama supporters truly like Ron Paul and his message, but they went with the candidate with the most momentum and what they saw as the best chance.

If you build it, they will come.

I hope so, but if our current "people who got out of the lazy boy and down the street" number is 100k, I'd say we're looking at 10-20k max of our "base supporters" that could make it to DC. Thats just a guess from my very small sample group of known RP supporters after talking to them yesterday about going.

If this is the case, then I agree with Ron Paul that we need 3-4 months. And we will need marketing, GOOD marketing. I'm sure we will include Pauls name, but we also need a message we can grab people from the other groups you mentioned to rally around.