This is what the campaign needs to do to improve

[pastore1215]

I posted this in another thread...but in the hopes that someone from the official campaign will read this -and be open-minded and humble enough to accept it as constructive criticism - I post the following:
***********************************************************

MSM is eating Ron's lunch and he just stands there and takes the abuse. As for Mr. Wead, and whoever else is advising Ron, they have done a poor job.

Here is where we are losing...

1. Failure to brand Ron as "the true conservative", thus allowing the toxic (in a GOP primary) "libertarian" label to stick to him.

2. Failure to close the deal with a million dollar anti-Romney attack in Iowa when we were up in every poll at one point.

3. Failure to publicise the numerous polls that showed Ron as the most electable when matched up against Obama.

4. Failure to target senior voters - choosing instead to harp on and on about "the young people"...and the "college campuses"

5. Failure to confront the MSM head on as Newt did. Tough talking Newt is winning cuz GOP primary voters hate MSM!

6. Pandering to liberals too much (thus alienating conservatives) by:

A. Erroneously claiming that blacks are given the death penalty disproportionately.
B. Claiming that illegal mmigrants are being scapegoated & opposing a border fence.
C. Appearing to support men marrying men and women marrying women. ("gay marriage')
D. Saying that the Bin Laden killing (which is a fairy tale anyway) was done improperly.
E. Failing to bash Obama as a socialist.

These are the critical mistakes and oversights that are killing us. Rand Paul would never have made these fatal errors.
I am so upset over how this campaign has been mismanaged!

 

[doronster195]

Post titles are tweeted. Please change your title...

 

[pastore1215]

Post titles are tweeted. Please change your title...

Hell no!....This is important analysis and we need to understand this stuff!

 

[JasonM]

I approve this message

 

[floridasun1983]

For what its worth, I agree pretty much with the OP, the campaign has done a questionable job of framing the narrative of their candidate. Yes I know, the MSM is doing all it can to paint him in a negative light, but they've got to take what opportunities they get and get maximum impact. So far, they really haven't.

 

[noxnoctum]

I totally disagree with A, B, C, D, and E.

He's not "pandering to the left", he's speaking the truth.

1-5 though I can agree with.

 

[The One]

 

[timosman]

You do not need to be a "Professional Campaign Strategist" to recognize there is something wrong with the campaign. I agree that pandering to the youth who do not show up to vote has been a waste of time plus it ostracized older voters, who unlike the young actually are able to find their polling places. It is simply poor ROI to pursue this group, unless as the rumor says, Ron is running an educational campaign. Also "Professional Campaign Strategists" make horrid mistakes and lose elections most of the time ;-)

 

[tttppp]

I disagree with A,B,C, and D. Ron Paul is stating the truth.

I agree with E. He should brand Obama and his policies socialist, I would prefer Paul calling Obama a communist. If you listen carefully to what Obama says, he's basically stating the argument for communism. He feels as though private enterprises should not be trusted to make their own decisions and that the government can do it better. This is pure communism.

One thing I have noticed lately is the Newt is trying to steal Ron's support. Ron Paul needs to distance himself from Newt in these debates and make it clear Newt has a long way to go to get his support.

 

[guysenjem]

On A and B you are right on - his is inaccurate and pandering. His argument on D was incredibly poorly worded even if correct. On E bashing Obama as a socialist is what
the other guys are doing - why would Paul? In fact, why bash Obama at all since there ain't a dimes worth of difference between Obama and the rest of the Republican
field. He should bash his current opponents.

 

[zeloc]

I disagree with many or most of the OP's arguments, especially the A-E section.

Anti-other candidate ads simply do not work and I doubt that an Anti-Romney ad in Iowa would have done anything. Santorum won Iowa anyway, an anti-Romney ad, even if it did work, could have helped Santorum or Gingrich.

About polls showing Ron Paul as most electable compared to Obama, I believe that these polls have showed statistical ties with Romney as well, so Ron Paul is not the only or the most electable compared to the other Republicans.

Others have pointed out things in the A-E section.


See my posts below for some other thoughts on where the campaign is going wrong. I think the main issue is Ron Paul's debate performances. I watched the one last night and did not see anything different from the previous debates. If Ron Paul DOES THE SAME THINGS during the debates, the OUTCOME CANNOT BE DIFFERENT. He takes every opportunity he has to try to educate everyone on his message while the other candidates talk about why they should be President. I really think his primary agenda is to educate Americans and not to win the nomination and election. There has been a lot of publicity claiming that Ron Paul is not serious about winning the election and even if it is not true, what I have seen has not done anything to change the issue or put this accusation to rest.