Should Ron be focusing on Michigan, too?

zzzz8

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
99
I guess Ron has decided to focus on Nevada, rather than South Carolina or Michigan... It would seem to me that Michigan might be the most winnable of the three, especially with the open primary and the Democrats skipping the state... What are your feelings?
 
He's been polling pretty decently there. It's a big state so I think focusing his time on Nevada is probably the right thing to do but I think he should be spending money on advertising there.
 
Could the good doctor feel that his numbers in MI are good enough to warrant time better spent in a less winnable primary? I don't know- just a thught. Michigan is a key state though.
 
I think he feels the Michigan race will be dominated by Romney (who's making his last stand) and McCain (who won there before, and has a bounce out of NH). Because the media is paying less attention to it, he can afford a so-so finish there. If he places 3rd or 4th it will still be a covered as a surprising show of strength, which will act as a set up for his REAL strong finish (1st of 2nd) in NV, and 3rd in SC. Then the money bomb two days later will complete the ascent of Paul to clearly establish him as a first tier player.
 
I think he feels the Michigan race will be dominated by Romney (who's making his last stand) and McCain (who won there before, and has a bounce out of NH). Because the media is paying less attention to it, he can afford a so-so finish there. If he places 3rd or 4th it will still be a covered as a surprising show of strength, which will act as a set up for his REAL strong finish (1st of 2nd) in NV, and 3rd in SC. Then the money bomb two days later will complete the ascent of Paul to clearly establish him as a first tier player.


No, it will NOT be "covered as a surprising show of strength". It will be another next to last place. Romney, McCain, and the "H" thing are ALL OVER TV here. This state would have been an easy win but it was ignored.
 
I guess Ron has decided to focus on Nevada, rather than South Carolina or Michigan... It would seem to me that Michigan might be the most winnable of the three, especially with the open primary and the Democrats skipping the state... What are your feelings?

Well, to me it is simple. Even a matter of mathematics.

If you are not capable of conducting a solid campaign (advertising + SOME retail campaigning) in THREE states that have a primary in a single week...

How in the WORLD do you think you will be able to accomplish ANYTHING in the Feb 5th Super-Duper-Tuesday event when 20+ states vote on one DAY?

Likewise, it is not simply that Iowa and NH are "minor primaries" -- they are a TEST... a test of whether your campaign staff are competent, whether your advertisements are working, and your resources are solidly and wisely used.

THAT is why Iowa and NH matter.

It is one thing to public call them "minor primaries" (after the fact) to kind of dull the impact of losing -- it is quite another to actually BELIEVE that and NOT make the changes in "diagnosis" and "treatment" necessary to save the life of your campaign. But it seems we are taking the GWB route and "staying the course" with the current team and current treatment program, despite the empirical evidence, and the bleating alarms coming from the monitoring equipment.


Which is why I believe the campaign is planning a "blowout" expenditure of basically whatever money has left on a national media "bltiz" right before February 5th... it's the only thing they have left, and it's the "easy way out" -- maybe they think applying the "paddles" with nearly 20 Million Volts will awaken the patient and restart the heart.
 
Well, to me it is simple. Even a matter of mathematics.

If you are not capable of conducting a solid campaign (advertising + SOME retail campaigning) in THREE states that have a primary in a single week...

How in the WORLD do you think you will be able to accomplish ANYTHING in the Feb 5th Super-Duper-Tuesday event when 20+ states vote on one DAY?

Likewise, it is not simply that Iowa and NH are "minor primaries" -- they are a TEST... a test of whether your campaign staff are competent, whether your advertisements are working, and your resources are solidly and wisely used.

THAT is why Iowa and NH matter.

This is a primary year where many states held their contests in January, thus providing many opportunites to test a campaign's competency. Paul called it correctly to note IA and NH's diminished status in this election year. The other factor to consider is FL and many of the Super Tuesday states are not winner take all, meaning Paul can pick up lots of delegates by picking his spots in FL, CA et al, which is what really matters in the long run.

If the best you will likely do is 3rd in a race the media is not really covering, where you believe your opponnents are UNwisely bleeding money over to win, when there is another state that you COULD do very well in, why not pass over Michigan? I repeat, the story of Michigan will likely be Paul's strong showing in a contest he DIDN'T prematurely pour resources into.
 
This is a primary year where many states held their contests in January, thus providing many opportunites to test a campaign's competency. Paul called it correctly to note IA and NH's diminished status in this election year. The other factor to consider is FL and many of the Super Tuesday states are not winner take all, meaning Paul can pick up lots of delegates by picking his spots in FL, CA et al, which is what really matters in the long run.

If the best you will likely do is 3rd in a race the media is not really covering, where you believe your opponnents are UNwisely bleeding money over to win, when there is another state that you COULD do very well in, why not pass over Michigan? I repeat, the story of Michigan will likely be Paul's strong showing in a contest he DIDN'T prematurely pour resources into.

I agree with you, and we need to have more faith that Dr. Paul know's what he's doing. He's done this before, and has been in politics much longer than most of us have even been alive. Even if "we" don't understand it all, you have to admit, he's a smart man.

The media is saying that Michigan doesn't have much pull on this presidential race, and I, myself, don't understand all the "delegate" talk, but I did hear that Michigan has a low number of delegates, so it would make since to me, to focus his money on the states that really count. Romney pulled his ads from SC so he could spend his money in Michigan where he is spending MILLIONS, but now he's going to be broke for the better states. I think that goes for most of the other candidates too, and that's when Dr. Paul will shine, and THEN we will all understand the strategy.
 
Strong showing in Michigan

This is a primary year where many states held their contests in January, thus providing many opportunites to test a campaign's competency. Paul called it correctly to note IA and NH's diminished status in this election year. The other factor to consider is FL and many of the Super Tuesday states are not winner take all, meaning Paul can pick up lots of delegates by picking his spots in FL, CA et al, which is what really matters in the long run.

If the best you will likely do is 3rd in a race the media is not really covering, where you believe your opponnents are UNwisely bleeding money over to win, when there is another state that you COULD do very well in, why not pass over Michigan? I repeat, the story of Michigan will likely be Paul's strong showing in a contest he DIDN'T prematurely pour resources into.

Yup, especially when the "homeboy" Mitt and another favorite McCain will be doing most of the dueling and they have a strong "oldschool" republican base here in western MI. I would have liked to see at least one ad running on TV though because people I talk to, do not know he is still running, when the media do not bring up his name with the other candidates and they are used to seeing candidates vying for their vote.

Ron Paul has some of the most ferverant, devoted grassroots supporters here in MI. We have and are still working hard to get the votes for Ron Paul.

PP
 
Hey guys, I live in Michigan and I've actually been pleased with the advertising that's been done here. The campaign has been running a series of radio ads and I've received 4 different Ron Paul mailers which I thought were put together very nicely and could be very effective.
 
Nevada is being forgotten by the rest of the Republicans. I think its a great opportunity for Ron Paul to gain traction here. I think it's a wise choice.
 
yeah - I was in the pharmacy the other day and heard a Ron Paul ad over the radio (I live in MI) - I don't like radio ads because it's so easy to tune them out - but i suppose if you were driving or something you would actually listen to it.

Also, I've received 4 mailers from the campaign - wish they didn't bother sending them to me, but at least I know they're doing something.

And...yesterday I went to a friend's house on the west side of the state (Grand rapids area) and there are huge RP signs everywhere in people's yards. i saw a small stray romney or huck sign here and there. Also, just today I saw that someone put up a couple huge RP banners next to I94 near Jackson -- brilliant!
 
I am wondering whether the RP mailers went to everybody who is on the GOP's voter list?? Or just people such as myself that have contacted the campaign previously..
 
My husband (sheeple) came home from work tonight and said, "Man! Every overpass from here to Clarkston has Ron Paul signs! It's crazy! It went on for miles!" I started laughing and telling him, "Told you"!
 
Mu understanding is the mailings were targetted where they were determined to be most impactful, but were not 100% coverage of the state. The radio ads were also targetted.

Folks, there is little cause to complain about what has happened to date now, we're 1 day away from the primaries. It's too late for commercials.

Now is the time for every Ron Paul supporter to make a last minute push to get the word out. I hit 350ish houses today.
 
Back
Top