URGENT * DEADLINE 7/28 MIDNIGHT* Grassroots Talent Needed for FULL PAGE Iowa ad

[Romulus]

Bearing in mind that the goal is to reach undecideds in a specific market; that of 50+ conservatives who are likely to vote in the caucus. A fellow grassroots supporter who works in advertising did an analysis for us.

So what message do want to send to the 50+ yr old conservative? What are their concerns? We need to speak to them and inspire confidence.

 

[Razmear]

KNice!
Yeah, it needed the K cuz it's sharp like a knife!
eb

 

[Diashi]

Awake's version is great. The other just has too many religious overtones that might turn our audience off.

The text on the left is a little hard to read. Could you try a soft and wide drop shadow or "outter glow" to it? Also consider cutting away the excess text. Shorten your quotes.

Hope nobody takes my criticism to heart. I'm a professional artist and we're used to being honest about other people's work. ;]

 

[awake]

Opps, I don't think Gage took that one...lol

 

[sailingaway]

OK, that was frustrating. I couldn't find a PBS NewsHour transcript so I made my own, then when I was confirming the date, I found the transcript. Here is the pertinent segment from the July 20, 2011 interview I will be creating his economic plan from. I don't want to deviate even slightly from his substance since if I spin it at all wrong, this topic is high enough profile to cause him major trouble if he has to 'correct' something:

I would start with military operations overseas. They hurt us and they hurt our national defense. And we can save hundreds of billions of dollars when you add up all the militarism and all the foreign aid and all the mischief we create, why do we have troops in Korea and Japan - all these things. So you could save a lot. That wouldn't be enough.

Then you'd have to start cutting spending on the programs that aren't essential like the Department of Education. We spend a lot of money; it doesn't improve education. The Department of Energy - we don't need Department of Energy. All those subsidies in Department of Agriculture - we don't need that. We don't need the intervention of the Department of Commerce. You can go on and on.

But you don't have to go and cut health care or medical - or Social Security in order to start getting our house in order.

JUDY WOODRUFF: But you have talked about dramatically scaling down or reforming Medicare and Social Security. And so what would those programs look like if you could wave a magic wand and make it the way you'd like it?

REP. RON PAUL: Well, I haven't talked a whole lot about that. Most of the time, I talk about is, if we'd have acted responsibly, we wouldn't be facing this crisis.

I would like to offer young people going into the workforce the chance to opt out, opt out of Social Security. But that won't work unless you do these cuts I'm talking about, the militarism as well as all these departments that make no sense at all. You could do that, but politically, it's difficult because the other day, when we were voting on this resolution for the budget - the debt increase, I said, there's two groups: One group wants to - won't cut a nickel out of the military and the other won't cut a nickel out of entitlement system. And that's why we're at this point.

JUDY WOODRUFF: You've also spoken of big changes in Medicare, structural changes. How would you change Medicare?

REP. RON PAUL: Well, once again, I haven't emphasized that at all. But I would want people to opt out of the system. I would want people to have medical-savings accounts. Young people should be able to opt out and build up a medical savings account and take care of their own programs.

But that won't work unless you're willing to cut spending. And I think the most popular place to cut is all this spending overseas and the corporate welfare in this country, because most of the money that we spend here that's supposed to poor really helps the large corporations, say, the housing bubble. Who got help?

See, the rich got bailed out. They got bailed out both by the Congress and the Federal Reserve. And they were making all the profits. So it was - it's corporatism that is so bad, whether it's medicine or even in education or the military-industrial complex. It's corporatism. That is the welfare that is huge compared to the welfare of food stamps.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/ronpaul_07-20.html

I include the whole thing so if the PAC does want to use a block of the text I'll be creating they can double check it against what he said. I know I would want to if I were in their place.

I'll be back with modified text for an economic plan, shortly.

 

[Deborah K]

So what message do want to send to the 50+ yr old conservative? What are their concerns? We need to speak to them and inspire confidence.

The ads so far, are on track. Just trying to clarify that if a vote is taken on the forums, to keep the target audience in mind. If and when Tom Woods weighs in on this, he's going to be emphatic about the message making Ron stand out from the crowd. He doesn't want anything that any of the other candidates could just as easily put together. So, the wording that includes facts about his record, expertise, etc., the testimonies, all good, imo. But I'm rather easy, Tom isn't.

 

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Awake, could you try a design more in line with this minimalist approach?

What you've designed is nice, but I think

1) There is too much text
2) The picture of fish bowl Ron has to go
3) It doesn't look like an ad for a presidential candidate. More like for a plastic surgeon. It has a ritzy feel to it that I don't think will connect with our audience.

 

[trey4sports]

i think faith should be used heavily, as this is a conservative christian crowd. Maybe it's pandering but i think it will be much more effective.

 

[V3n]

Ok folks here we go!

We have funding from Revolution PAC to run an Ad again in the Ames Tribune for Ron Paul 2011.

The deadline is Friday the 29th for the Ad to be submitted. So now is the time to get this show on the road.

The mosaic Ad from 2007 was SO beautiful. I sure hope that from ALL the talent here at the Forums we can come up with another beauty to help support OUR guy.

This time around the RPAC would like to go with a NEW ad. They have paid for a Full Page Color Ad.

Remember - Time's a wasting!

[Image specs 10"w x 9.5"h CMYK ]

Concerning ad submission.. What is the process? Simply posting an ad in this thread, PM'ing the ad to the OP, or e-mail to RPAC or to someone else?

I'm increasingly impressed with each sub, I want to make sure RPAC receives them for consideration, and no one is left out because they posted here, but didn't follow up with the right person. Thanks! Good work all!!

 

[Nirvikalpa]

Romulus' is bright, easy to follow and read, and will not be skimmed over - too much text will lose readers. Simple is best.

 

[awake]

Awake, could you try a design more in line with this minimalist approach?

What you've designed is nice, but I think

1) There is too much text
2) The picture of fish bowl Ron has to go
3) It doesn't look like an ad for a presidential candidate. More like for a plastic surgeon. It has a ritzy feel to it that I don't think will connect with our audience.

Ok, I will try a crack at it...

 

[Tarzan]

The ads so far, are on track. Just trying to clarify that if a vote is taken on the forums, to keep the target audience in mind. If and when Tom Woods weighs in on this, he's going to be emphatic about the message making Ron stand out from the crowd. He doesn't want anything that any of the other candidates could just as easily put together. So, the wording that includes facts about his record, expertise, etc., the testimonies, all good, imo. But I'm rather easy, Tom isn't.

The folks footing the bill get to make the decision. I personally understand that with excellent clarity. I don't think folks on the forum should be the deciding factor in the decision as to which ad to run. I hope the PAC will make the best decision based on marketing and advertising information that is available to them. This includes the personal wants of any one person... ie. Tom Woods who is not a professional marketing person.

Again... they have control of the money and its their decision. But, just like any personal desires here on the forum should not be the ultimate decider... neither should personal desires among the PAC members be either. Where there are professionals available put their skills and knowledge to use in those areas.

We need our efforts to be successful. Decisions such as this should be made with those ends in sight and the expertise to make the right choice.

Sorry... I could not figure out how to make this any less harsh without making the point clear

 

[Deborah K]

The folks footing the bill get to make the decision. I personally understand with excellent clarity. I don't think folks on the forum should be the deciding factor in the decision as to which ad to run. I hope the PAC will make the best decision based on marketing and advertising information that is available to them. This includes the personal wants of any one person... ie. Tom Woods who is not a professional marketing person.

Again... they have control of the money and its their decision. But, just like any personal desires here on the forum should not be the ultimate decider... neither should personal desires among the PAC members be either. Where there are professionals available put their skills and knowledge to use in those areas.

We need our efforts to be successful. Decisions such as this should be made with those ends in sight.

Sorry... I could not figure out how to make this any less harsh without making the point clear

Trust me, Tom's not a dictator on this matter. But his opinion carries a lot of weight with the board and the council. And I'm sure it carries a lot of weight here as well. I feel confident that whatever opinion he renders will be acceptable.

 

[sailingaway]

OK, I like the selection being given for review by the pac, with the change 'based on' instead of 'according to' regarding the polls (maybe adding 'Harris Poll' and the dates) to the one Justin did.

BUT I said yesterday I'd draft up Ron's economic plan based on the PBS interview so here's my first shot at it, more to live up to my promise than because I think it is better than what has already been suggested. I'm sure it can be used somewhere, sometime, if not here:

‘Ron Paul’s Budget Plan & Plan For Social Security and Medicare Reform’
​

Ron Paul says ‘You don't have to cut health care or Social Security in order to start getting our house in order.’ His plan would aim to fund Social Security and Medicare for those who have paid in too long to make up that savings, while letting the young opt out. However, this would require significant cuts in spending elsewhere, since the funds the young pay in are currently used to fund ongoing benefits for Social Security and Medicare.

Ron Paul would begin cuts with the military operations overseas. He notes that excess militarism into the internal affairs of other nations actually hurts our national defense. He has targeted hundreds of billions of dollars in potential cuts between cutting excess militarism and foreign aid.

However, Ron Paul notes that this would not be enough, by itself, to fund Medicare and Social Security for those who have paid in, while letting the young opt out of these programs.

Ron Paul would also start cutting spending on the programs that aren't essential such as the Federal Department of Education created in the late 1970s. He would also cut other departments including the Department of Energy, the subsidy ridden Federal Department of Agriculture, and the intervention of the Federal Department of Commerce. Not only would these cuts be fiscally sound, this would return the functions of the Federal government closer to the confines set out in the Constitution.

With regards to Social Security, Ron Paul notes that if Congress had acted responsibly, we wouldn't be facing the current Social Security crisis. Ron Paul himself has never voted to divert Social Security funds to other purposes.

However, in order to address the current problems, Ron Paul would like to offer young people going into the workforce the chance to opt out of Social Security, while keeping it in place for the older generations who paid in for it all of their working lives. Ron Paul also would like to offer young people the chance to opt out of Medicare and build up medical savings accounts to take care of their own programs.

However, neither of these plans will be possible unless alternate funding for the programs is found through implementing the kind of budget cuts outlined above. Ron Paul notes that in the current Washington D.C. mindset, it is mathematically achievable to implement his budget plan, but is politically difficult to make the corresponding budget cuts he suggests. One group of Congressmen won't cut a nickel out of the military and another group won't cut a nickel out of entitlement system. Ron Paul feels that attitude is how our nation has reached the point we are at. And that is the attitude that has to change.

However, Ron Paul would put the people first. He notes that substantial portions of the money earmarked for the poor in this country really helps the large corporations:

"Say, the housing bubble. Who got help? See, the rich got bailed out. They got bailed out both by the Congress and the Federal Reserve. And they were making all the profits. So it was - it's corporatism that is so bad, whether it's medicine or even in education or the military-industrial complex. It's corporatism. That is the welfare that is huge compared to the welfare of food stamps.”

PBS NewsHour interview aired July 20, 2011

 

[Gumba of Liberty]

I am not great with desktop publishing but I do have some ideas. It must be short, to the point, and powerful.


The Time to Stand is Now.

Vote for the Constitution.

Vote for Freedom.

Vote Ron Paul.

 

[LibertyEagle]

All kinds of wonderful ideas. I like this one the best.

But, instead of just "Principle" at the top, I would put Principle o Integrity o Solutions.

I would also choose a much more flattering picture of Dr. Paul. One that does not show every single line in his face. We are going to be combating the perception that he is too old. We do not need to encourage that perception.

One other thing came to mind. Does anyone know if any Iowa Christian leader has endorsed Ron Paul? Because if he/she has, it would be wonderful to quote them in this ad. We have these, but they are not nearly as powerful as someone local. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...th-Coalition&p=3330596&viewfull=1#post3330596

Note: Are these Republican leaders (sans Reagan) that we are quoting in this ad, new to the Republican party and their positions, or have they been in place for awhile? I'm mainly talking about Cory here. If we had an Iowa religious leader who endorsed Paul, I would replace Cory's endorsement with his.

 

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Only one Congressman has never voted to raise taxes.
Only one Republican predicted the financial collapse.
Only one Presidential candidate served in the military.

Only one Conservative can defeat Obama.

There is only one Ron Paul.​

-----------------------------
updated. thoughts?

Or instead of having "There is only one Ron Paul." put the logo right there.

 

[tsai3904]

Only one Congressman has never voted to raise taxes.
Only one Republican predicted the financial collapse.
Only one Presidential candidate served in the military.

Only one Conservative can defeat Obama.

I would switch "Congressman" and "Republican". Republican can mean lots of people. Peter Schiff is a Republican and he predicted the financial collapse.

 

[reillyinraleigh]

^or Candidate.

 

[Nate-ForLiberty]

I would switch "Congressman" and "Republican". Republican can mean lots of people. Peter Schiff is a Republican and he predicted the financial collapse.

Only one Republican has never voted to raise taxes.
Only one Congressman predicted the financial collapse.
Only one Presidential candidate served in the military.

Only one Conservative can defeat Obama.

There is only one Ron Paul.​