The message is getting lost (criticism from an independent)

[Eric21ND]

Agree. Also:

HE MUST AVOID BRINGING UP ABOLISHING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

People are dumb Dr. Paul. Please stop bringing this up, it helps no-one.

X10 Everytime he says that phrase without explaining WHY really makes me groan. People are tremendously ignorant. At least add a sentence or two explaining why we need more state and local control of education. Drop in some good examples, No Child Left Behind, etc. People think he's against public education for christ sake!

 

[billybigrigger]

The thing about Dr. Paul is that he'd rather be right than be president.

Whis is exactly why hes the only one to be trusted with the power of the position.

 

[jake]

Agree. Also:

HE MUST AVOID BRINGING UP ABOLISHING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

People are dumb Dr. Paul. Please stop bringing this up, it helps no-one.

Maybe in 1985 abolishing the Dept. Of Ed. was a good thing to have in your platform. These days, its a scary one liner that has the Sheeple thinking "this guy is nuts" or "think of the children!!"

from Wikipedia:
--

The United States Department of Education (also referred to as ED, for Education Department) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government. Created by the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88),
it began operating in 1980.

Its functions were obviously in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare which was divided into the Department of Education and Department of Health and Human Services when President Carter signed the Department of Education Organization Act into law on October 17, 1979. It began operation on May 4, 1980. It is administered by the United States Secretary of Education.

--

 

[PlaytoWin]

Ron Paul does not have to change his positon on any issues or be afraid of stating them as long as he provides a roadmap. He has to make tangible a plan of deliverables to achieve his goals. Without articulating a well thought out platform, he will not garner support from the people we need him to to win this election. Again, the hub of his platform is the economic and financial crisis in this country. It is the key to our country's longevity and status in the world. The spokes/issues collectively feeding this enormous problem are Iraq War/foreign policy, big governemt spending, illegal immigration, etc. PLEEASE articulate an execution plan people can buy into.

 

[Phenom24]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

FOCUS ON THE MONEY.


If we don't get our country's spending under control our FOREIGN POLICY WILL BE AN AFTERTHOUGHT. WE WILL BE BROKE.


Dr. Paul has to "bring it home" to everyman. TO the little people who are paying too much for gas and food, and are fearful of the recession. Dr. Paul doesn't have to say "depression" (although that may happen) but he has to say "AMERICA - WAKE UP!!! Have you read the headlines??? All this talk about what we want to do overseas, and our economy is withering on the vine!!!"

If he wants to get people seriously thinking about foreign policy and the cost of waging war, he only has to point to Afghanistan - the world's second largest military, the Soviet Union, was defeated by freedom fighters. The same could happen to us if we leave our military around the world indefinitely.

But when you tell people that "staying the course" is going to end with them paying more in taxes or watching inflation spiral out of control, that gets their attention.

 

[pmbug]

I agree with the OP. I posted similar sentiments (and specfic suggestions) here :

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=74808

 

[Ron LOL]

I find myself largely in agreement with the OP. I can't quite get myself on board with some of it as indeed it does seem like implementing all of those ideas would result in a "Ron Paul Lite" as another poster suggested. But I agree 100% that the message is getting lost.

I think the biggest issue I have with Ron Paul as a candidate is that while I'm receptive to his criticisms, he doesn't talk about what he would actually do as president very much. In other words, he is a problems guy, not a solutions guy. I suspect this is a big reason why people are (it seems) not receptive to his ideas.

 

[JMann]

I felt months ago Paul should stop being negative and go sticky gooey positive. Instead of talking about bring our troops home, talk about all the money that will be in the pockets of Americans with a sensible foreign policy. Don't talk about abolishing the Dept of Education but rather returning control to local leaders and parents. Leave out abolishing the Fed instead talk about creating sound monetary policy.

I know that is difficult for Dr. Paul but it is the reality of a presidential campaign. People don't want to hear about what is wrong but how he will make it right. The purist out there hate these kind of post because many are filled with hate and can't see how to run a campaign. It is why the Libertarian Party is a farce. These are the one's that complain about the radical 'Neocons' taking over the Republican party while they are going around preaching radical libertarianism.

Paul just needs to learn how to present his ideas more effectively, not change his beliefs. You don't have O! and Hill and Edwards going around talking about creating government health care they say health care for all. Same plan but one would gain about 10% support the other wording gets you 30-40% support.

 

[Paul/Belichick08]

No offense but it seems like you want just another politician. If he drops his "extreme libertarian positions" like bringing the troops home, abolishing the Federal Reserve, etc. than what do you have left? I don't know about everyone else but the reason I support Dr. Paul is BECAUSE he is willing to say things that everyone else isn't saying. He shouldn't criticize Lincoln because it might upset people? Give me a break! In all actuality his chances of becoming President are very slim, if you want better odds go support one of the media-ordained candidates. A revolution doesn't happen overnight, or even in one election, but it has to start somewhere. The fact that people are actually discussing the possibility of eliminating the IRS is already a victory as far as I am concerned. This movement is about a message, and getting that message out is the most important thing.

 

[pmbug]

I felt months ago Paul should stop being negative and go sticky gooey positive. Instead of talking about bring our troops home, talk about all the money that will be in the pockets of Americans with a sensible foreign policy. Don't talk about abolishing the Dept of Education but rather returning control to local leaders and parents. Leave out abolishing the Fed instead talk about creating sound monetary policy.
...
Paul just needs to learn how to present his ideas more effectively, not change his beliefs. You don't have O! and Hill and Edwards going around talking about creating government health care they say health care for all. Same plan but one would gain about 10% support the other wording gets you 30-40% support.

+1

 

[pmbug]

No offense but it seems like you want just another politician. If he drops his "extreme libertarian positions" ...

You missed the point. We are not advocating that Ron Paul drop any positions. The point is to refine the communication so that it resonates with voters.

... A revolution doesn't happen overnight, or even in one election, but it has to start somewhere. The fact that people are actually discussing the possibility of eliminating the IRS is already a victory as far as I am concerned. This movement is about a message, and getting that message out is the most important thing.

Having Ron Paul win the nomination would do more for the rEVOLution than just having his platform promoted for a few months and then largely forgotten by the majority of America.

 

[Ron LOL]

Paul just needs to learn how to present his ideas more effectively, not change his beliefs.

Q. F. T.

 

[Spirit of '76]

While I agree that Dr. Paul needs to polish his presentation and spell out a clear vision for the future (something like his Six-Point Plan for ending illegal immigration, only make a similar plan for the economy, one for foreign policy, etc.), I disagree with the OP in that the OP apparently hasn't been paying much attention to Ron at all.

If you think Ron has been "ranting about how Lincoln shouldn't have tried to end slavery", then you're letting the media do your thinking for you and not listening to Ron at all. You may be a good example of the kind of shallow thinking we're up against, and what you've said here stands more as an example of the public's misunderstanding of what's being said, not problems with what Dr. Paul is saying.

 

[reverse]

Agreed.

Sadly, when told 'Abolish the Dept of Education' without explanation, most Americans will pick up on the words 'Abolish' and 'Education'.

 

[ghemminger]

I like it. I think that you're right on in your messaging. But I don't think that you're going to get anywhere with Dr. Paul asking him to drop the issues he's been talking about for 30 years. Seriously... Find video of him from before 9/11. He's saying the exact same things then as he is now. Word for word in many cases.

Also, talking about the income tax is a seller. Maybe not for Democrats and government cheese types... But among Republicans, it's gold. That's why Huckabee started up with his "put a closed for business sign on the IRS" rhetoric. Stolen striaght from the Paul platform.

I definitely agree that Ron Paul needs a speech writer / coach. He likely doesn't think he needs one. He talks about his "trademarks." I'm not sure where he draws the lines on these trademarks... I think that he believes that he needs to get America past television politics, and into issue and idea driven politics...

The thing about Dr. Paul is that he'd rather be right than be president.

Bump - well thought out

 

[PubliusPublicola]

to say that he needs to start downplaying the libertarian views is nonsense. That's the whole appeal for his campaign.

Says who?

It's easy to rally people AGAINST something. It's a lot harder to rally people FOR something.

My point is that Ron Paul barely articulates what he's actually for... in ways the majority might relate to. Some may call that "pandering" but i call that communicating a political vision. He needs to shatter the terms of the discussion and paint a vision of what he is FOR, rather than thinking he's going to get elected by just trashing stuff.

I'm not saying he has to downplay libertarian points of view.

I'm saying that his radical TALKING POINTS are absurd... politically. These cute zingers are killing his broader message... in my opinion.

 

[PubliusPublicola]

Agreed.

Sadly, when told 'Abolish the Dept of Education' without explanation, most Americans will pick up on the words 'Abolish' and 'Education'.

Exactly.

There's absolutely no point for him to keep saying stuff like this when we all know precisely how all the grandmothers, mothers and students hear it.

It's really a point about just picking the right way to articulate his vision, rather than changing his beliefs. He would have a 0% chance to abolish the Dept of Education, so what on earth does he think he accomplishes by continuing to make this point?

 

[PubliusPublicola]

If you think Ron has been "ranting about how Lincoln shouldn't have tried to end slavery", then you're letting the media do your thinking for you and not listening to Ron at all. You may be a good example of the kind of shallow thinking we're up against, and what you've said here stands more as an example of the public's misunderstanding of what's being said, not problems with what Dr. Paul is saying.

Or maybe i've been watching what he says really carefully and your snide comments about my "shallow thinking" isn't very rational or constructive.

 

[frasu]

how about this: DO YOU GUYS KNOW ANY GOOD POLITICAL STRATEGIST OUT THERE THAT COULD HELP OUT THE CAMPAIGN? We usually operate like this, find the helper ourselves. I am thinking there has to be somebody that could give some new ideas to the HQ, an established name that is in sync wiht RP's ideas, more or less.

Any names?

 

[Richandler]

This topic is filled with lots of anti-constitution thinking. Anything Paul has said sticks to who he is. I think the topic creator may have decided to support the wrong candidate. That, or he just hasn't dug deep enought into the vast history of constitutional violations.

Ron's presentation isn't going to change. The ground support however can greatly counter that by educating themselves better on all positions and presenting themselves with their ideas to other people.

The ideas are most important here. Simply because if Paul doesn't when it's all we got and if we abandon them now most people will not go back to them after this election.