SOMEONE tweet Wead or something!

[cstarace]

Ron will flounder at around 20-30% for the rest of the election without a major paradigm shift in the dialog. Somehow.

And if he mentioned anything about an inside job he'd flounder at ~5%.

 

[BKom]

Ron will flounder at around 20-30% for the rest of the election without a major paradigm shift in the dialog. Somehow.

I would give a lot for Ron to "flounder around 20-30 percent" for the rest of the election. That would mean some coverage and lots of delegates. He would be very lucky indeed to flounder around those numbers.

 

[BKom]

And if he mentioned anything about an inside job he'd flounder at ~5%.

I think the original inside job post was a joke. Probably the biggest difference in this campaign and it's success is the fact that the truthers have either moved on, or learned to keep it to themselves. They've done Ron a big favor.

 

[anaconda]

I think the original inside job post was a joke. Probably the biggest difference in this campaign and it's success is the fact that the truthers have either moved on, or learned to keep it to themselves. They've done Ron a big favor.

I was almost halfway serious. I think he needs to hammer on some of the establishment's conspiracies and frame them in a more diabolical manner. And outright lambast the others as willing obedient puppets. Wars, Fed, police state should all be fair game. He needs to turn the tables on these guys and call a spade a spade. Furthermore, if the government gets a complete pass forever and ever on 9-11 it continues to be difficult for people to realize the Muslim terrorist threat is a manufactured lie. It is a terrible disadvantage to overcome in public opinion. There should be many ways to undermine the government's integrity without shouting out "inside job" directly.

 

[BKom]

I was almost halfway serious. I think he needs to hammer on some of the establishment's conspiracies and frame them in a more diabolical manner. And outright lambast the others as willing obedient puppets. Wars, Fed, police state should all be fair game. He needs to turn the tables on these guys and call a spade a spade. Furthermore, if the government gets a complete pass forever and ever on 9-11 it continues to be difficult for people to realize the Muslim terrorist threat is a manufactured lie. It is a terrible disadvantage to overcome in public opinion. There should be many ways to undermine the government's integrity without shouting out "inside job" directly.

And we're back to reality. It was a beautiful dream while it lasted.

Btw, the "Muslim" threat is real. But it's small and not worth giving up our liberty for. Just as the insane of every religion are dangerous, so are the Muslims. Fundamentalists of every religion are more a death cult than a life affirming force for good. And it's been that way all through history. That's why you get supposed Christians booing the golden rule.

 

[seawolf]

Tomorrow night is the last Debate for 27 days!!! That should motivate Ron to outperform expectations!!!

He can basically take the the first three weeks of February off of Debate Prep and to what he loves, spreading the message of Liberty and Freedom.

 

[Tod]

He needs to roll out some examples to help people envision life with President Paul. Things that people are most concerned about, he needs to take head on and paint a picture of how things will be different. Right now Obama and the other candidates are mainly knocking him by engaging in fearmongering (the environment will go to h*ll under Paul because he believes in no regulations, etc)

 

[floridasun1983]

A win would do wonders for the campaign.

 

[Brett85]

He needs to say what he WILL do, not just what he WON'T do on foreign policy and he needs to point out he is the ONLY ONE who would not cut Social Security and medicare yet would balance the budget in 3 years WITHOUT using the words 'transition plan' which leads the elderly to think he won't pull the rug out THIS year but will NEXT. He won't harm it for those who paid in and will let the young opt out, is a very different thing.

The elderly won't vote for Ron because of his foreign policy views and his view on drug legalization. It has nothing to do with Social Security and Medicare. When Rick Perry came into the race, he had the support of about 35% of voters, which included a large percentage of elderly voters. This was a guy who wrote a book basically saying that Social Security and Medicare should be done away with, and yet he had massive support from older voters.

 

[LibertyEagle]

The elderly won't vote for Ron because of his foreign policy views and his view on drug legalization. It has nothing to do with Social Security and Medicare. When Rick Perry came into the race, he had the support of about 35% of voters, which included a large percentage of elderly voters. This was a guy who wrote a book basically saying that Social Security and Medicare should be done away with, and yet he had massive support from older voters.

And you are feeding into "the problem". Dr. Paul would NOT "legalize" drugs. He only would decriminalize them at the federal level. Which basically means get the federal government out of the drug business and allow regulation to take place at the state level. All 50 states have drug laws right now and they still would after a President Paul decriminalized them at the federal level.

 

[Muwahid]

And we're back to reality. It was a beautiful dream while it lasted.

Btw, the "Muslim" threat is real. But it's small and not worth giving up our liberty for. Just as the insane of every religion are dangerous, so are the Muslims. Fundamentalists of every religion are more a death cult than a life affirming force for good. And it's been that way all through history. That's why you get supposed Christians booing the golden rule.

The Muslim thread is real as a result of interventionism in the middle east, the cure for it, is withdrawing. Once that happens there is no significant Muslim threat, just as ending the drug war renders drug related violence (associated with criminal organized crime, trafficking) a thing of the past.

 

[anaconda]

And we're back to reality. It was a beautiful dream while it lasted.

Btw, the "Muslim" threat is real. But it's small and not worth giving up our liberty for. Just as the insane of every religion are dangerous, so are the Muslims. Fundamentalists of every religion are more a death cult than a life affirming force for good. And it's been that way all through history. That's why you get supposed Christians booing the golden rule.

94% of the world's terrorism is committed by non-Muslims. I would venture a guess that most of the 6% Islamic terrorism is coddled, nurtured, and stoked by western intelligence agencies.

 

[Brett85]

And you are feeding into "the problem". Dr. Paul would NOT "legalize" drugs. He only would decriminalize them at the federal level. Which basically means get the federal government out of the drug business and allow regulation to take place at the state level. All 50 states have drug laws right now and they still would after a President Paul decriminalized them at the federal level.

Yeah, but the thing is that Ron doesn't usually explain his position the way that you just did. In one of the earlier debates this year, he gave a defense of legalizing heroin without really arguing the issue from a states' rights perspective. I realize that the President doesn't actually have the authority to legalize drugs, but the perception among Republicans is that Ron supports drug legalization.

 

[kuckfeynes]

The thing is, he does support legalization, and he's not going to act like he doesn't.
And it does have practical application, e.g. states that legalize cannabis.
It would probably encourage more states to follow suit, and encourage further exploration of legalization of other substances.
He's almost a pure voluntaryist, we know that's the underlying reason Republicans hate him, and that's the whole point.

 

[sunghoko]

He needs to say what he WILL do, not just what he WON'T do on foreign policy and he needs to point out he is the ONLY ONE who would not cut Social Security and medicare yet would balance the budget in 3 years WITHOUT using the words 'transition plan' which leads the elderly to think he won't pull the rug out THIS year but will NEXT. He won't harm it for those who paid in and will let the young opt out, is a very different thing.

I think Ron could win on this platform alone. He would beef up Social Security by cutting overseas spending. Most AARP'ers want SS to be left alone

 

[mport1]

Why do we all see this.. but the campaign doesn't? I am not understanding it.

I have never understood this. We have been telling them stuff like this for years.

 

[freneticentropy]

Somehow, we need to get Paul angry for the debates. Maybe put a swarm of bees in his car on the way to the debate.

 

[GraspingForPeace]

Somehow, we need to get Paul angry for the debates. Maybe put a swarm of bees in his car on the way to the debate.

 

[TheTexan]

The other candidates ignore the constitution. He needs to be aggressive and cite specific examples.

The size and scope of government has increased with every presidency of the past 100 years... he needs to explain this, and how he is the only one on that stage who can be counted on to reverse that trend

 

[dagnybell]

1. Social Security : My plan keeps your social security in place. I am a senior (laugh), I understand your issues. I also predicted the economic collapse while all these others were shaking lobbyist hands. They want endless debt, endless war - you wont have Social Security with them. It will all come crashing down. My plan protects you.

2. Call out the media for their obvious biasness. "Many of these networks get subsidies from the government and/or are part of larger parent companies who are part of the Military Industrial Complex. A few even received bailouts. You think they want me to have an equal voice in this election? I want to stop all of this cronyism and special treatment at your expense..."

3. FOREIGN POLICY : The media & radio talking heads have twisted my foreign policy, and perhaps I haven't clearly stated it. "IF OUR NATIONAL SECURITY IS THREATENED AND I go to congress for a declaration of war!! WE GO IN AND WE WIN IT AND WE GET OUT!! This is why there was no "declaration of war". The intent was never to leave these places.. but to occupy them. This has made us less safe. We all know it. My way. We mind our own business. You want to tangle with us. Lets do it constutionally and get in/win it. Get out"

Great post!