We need to do something to give Ron exposure and momentum

I'm just arriving and haven't read through all 6 pages on this thread, but one thing the Campaign needs that's FREE is EFFECTIVE SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING.

My business partner (she has 10+ years of marketing/ad experience) reviewed the Ron Paul Facebook page, YouTube and ronpaul2012 website the other day and then sent this to Doug Wead and Jack Hunter. We have corresponded with Doug several times on this matter and he has acknowledged that they are trying to work on the Social Media Marketing aspect:

"I have reviewed the current as well as previous activity on the RP Official Page and before I begin dissecting, let me ask:
*
RON PAUL IS IGNORED/MARGINALIZED BY THE MEDIA, BUT LEADS IN ALL ONLINE FORUMS (twitter/Facebook/YouTube, etc). THE CAMPAIGN MUST USE EFFECTIVE SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING TO REACH A BROADER AUDIENCE!! This is free Media usage that nobody can marginalize or black-out!!!*
*
There is no twitter app installed on the Facebook page, or if there is, it's not working.
The articles and blogs on the ronpaul2012 website should be pushed out to the Ron Paul Twitter/Facebook pages
He has a few videos on the page and a Youtube channel, yet now YouTube Channel app installed to promote it on Facebook?
Minimalistic graphics..why no custom banners EVERYWHERE?? *Timeline is upon us, why not make the change & install a custom Timeline cover?
Use memes or a picture every chance possible.*
Calendar app is installed but not being utilized?
Questions app is intalled but not being utilized?
Donate Ron Paul app is not "Donate Ron Paul"...this is a gate page that should be set in another area!!!
NEEDS MORE APPS!!!! *Preferably polls, user engagement apps, etc
Some of the most recognized "social media guru's" all agree on these topics, yet as a whole this is not happening:
*
Write about a current event and tie it to your brand or industry. (**see below for more detail)
Find and share a funny YouTube video loosely related your brand or industry.
Ask your audience to post questions, pictures or stories about your brand to your wall.
Repost the most interesting content back out as an update.

Regularly post/share articles and videos (such as Romney's 5 relatives endorsing Paul or Santorum saying "vote Ron Paul")*
*
**On January 17, 2012 RP posted a compelling statement on FB regarding SOPA and had the HIGHEST amount of shares (9K+) and the post recieved 46k+ likes in what appears to be a record breaker. That day, the Ron Paul Facebook page was receiving 1000 new likes per hour! That was effective social media marketing!*
*
*
These are just a few critical things I noticed and wanted to pass along. SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING. - LEARN IT, KNOW IT, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT."
 
I'm just arriving and haven't read through all 6 pages on this thread, but one thing the Campaign needs that's FREE is EFFECTIVE SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING.

My business partner (she has 10+ years of marketing/ad experience) reviewed the Ron Paul Facebook page, YouTube and ronpaul2012 website the other day and then sent this to Doug Wead and Jack Hunter. We have corresponded with Doug several times on this matter and he has acknowledged that they are trying to work on the Social Media Marketing aspect:

Yeah. Maybe when we get a slew of ideas we should start taking the more popular ones people are working on and start separate threads. There were a couple people willing to work on his media for free at one point, but I don't know if they are committed to other projects by now. I'm trying to come up with stuff WE can do, not digging into the campaign's attention and funds, which I suspect are lower than we'd like.
 
Yeah. Maybe when we get a slew of ideas we should start taking the more popular ones people are working on and start separate threads. There were a couple people willing to work on his media for free at one point, but I don't know if they are committed to other projects by now. I'm trying to come up with stuff WE can do, not digging into the campaign's attention and funds, which I suspect are lower than we'd like.

We volunteered to donate our time and energy with the SMM. I will continue to emphasize it until I see improvements. It's a horse worth beating.....

The Media and TPTB can't take it away from us. Yet.
 
Man, the lyrics in that song REALLY fit!

step outa line, the man come and take you away

as a side note, I got myself on a moveon.org :rolleyes: mailing list and the latest e-mail from them said that OWS is expected to be bigger than ever this summer; they are gearing up now, with more than 500 training events scheduled.
 
We need something funny.

Can someone make ... I don't know, a daily editorial cartoon focused on Ron Paul? Or near him?
Funny videos. Really short. But funny.

Funny gets circulated a lot faster than a 5 minute treatise on economics.
 
All of the debates are archived here..


We need to look in the mirror for a way to give Ron momentum. There are huge numbers of registered voters who aren't paying attention, don't vote in the primaries, and would go vote for Paul if a Paul supporter simply asked them to. What would give Paul momentum is if every Paul supporter in Missouri challenged themselves and other Missouri Paul supporters to bring 10 friends or family members to caucus with them.

Look at the results by precinct of any caucus so far and you'll see lots of cases where there are only 1 or 2 votes for Paul in an entire precinct. Look at the results for most of those caucus states and you'll see that if there were just one more vote for Paul in each of those precincts then Paul would have won the state.

People of Missouri - you're up tomorrow. Get on the phone and find 10 apathetic voters who will go caucus with you. You don't have to convince them that Paul is the savior - just beg them to go vote for him as a favor to you. Some will do it because they want to protest the media telling them that the race is between Romney and Santorum. Some will do it because they can't stand Romney and Santorum. Some will just do it because they know it's important to you. Here's the info you will need.
 
The only thing that could help is winning a state outright. We should make these videos and choose a state and target voters there...

There was an article on Drudge that said it may be CA that decides...
 
Last edited:
Hey, I kind of like my idea.
What if we have a sticky'ed thread where lots of people could post ideas for a funny editorial cartoon. It might need to be moderated to prune the arguments but not the ideas (even poor ideas) With that we would need only a couple (even one) person with artistic talent to draw them and then post them to the same or another thread. Where the masses of us here could disseminate them via email and facebook and twitter or whatever.

At least I assume the artwork would be easier than coming up with good ideas.

We need something funny.

Can someone make ... I don't know, a daily editorial cartoon focused on Ron Paul? Or near him?
Funny videos. Really short. But funny.

Funny gets circulated a lot faster than a 5 minute treatise on economics.
 
We volunteered to donate our time and energy with the SMM. I will continue to emphasize it until I see improvements. It's a horse worth beating.....

The Media and TPTB can't take it away from us. Yet.
Agreed. I'm no pro like you and your partner seem to be but I've been trying to use this angle as best I know how (talking about Pauls NDAA stance on CivLib pages/profiles, talking about his SOPA stance during and before 'blackout day' etc.) I have more internet time than other time due to my context so if there are things I can do in support of this let me know (I can even very likely get some other people on it if there were a 'hot list' of things to do)
 
All of the debates are archived here..


We need to look in the mirror for a way to give Ron momentum. There are huge numbers of registered voters who aren't paying attention, don't vote in the primaries, and would go vote for Paul if a Paul supporter simply asked them to. What would give Paul momentum is if every Paul supporter in Missouri challenged themselves and other Missouri Paul supporters to bring 10 friends or family members to caucus with them.

Look at the results by precinct of any caucus so far and you'll see lots of cases where there are only 1 or 2 votes for Paul in an entire precinct. Look at the results for most of those caucus states and you'll see that if there were just one more vote for Paul in each of those precincts then Paul would have won the state.

People of Missouri - you're up tomorrow. Get on the phone and find 10 apathetic voters who will go caucus with you. You don't have to convince them that Paul is the savior - just beg them to go vote for him as a favor to you. Some will do it because they want to protest the media telling them that the race is between Romney and Santorum. Some will do it because they can't stand Romney and Santorum. Some will just do it because they know it's important to you. Here's the info you will need.

Tsk...Tsk...Tsk....GOTV is a dirty four letter word on this forum.
 
All of the debates are archived here..


We need to look in the mirror for a way to give Ron momentum. There are huge numbers of registered voters who aren't paying attention, don't vote in the primaries, and would go vote for Paul if a Paul supporter simply asked them to. What would give Paul momentum is if every Paul supporter in Missouri challenged themselves and other Missouri Paul supporters to bring 10 friends or family members to caucus with them.

Look at the results by precinct of any caucus so far and you'll see lots of cases where there are only 1 or 2 votes for Paul in an entire precinct. Look at the results for most of those caucus states and you'll see that if there were just one more vote for Paul in each of those precincts then Paul would have won the state.

People of Missouri - you're up tomorrow. Get on the phone and find 10 apathetic voters who will go caucus with you. You don't have to convince them that Paul is the savior - just beg them to go vote for him as a favor to you. Some will do it because they want to protest the media telling them that the race is between Romney and Santorum. Some will do it because they can't stand Romney and Santorum. Some will just do it because they know it's important to you. Here's the info you will need.

+rep
 
What in the world are you guys talking about stopping GOTV efforts? Phone-from-home ring a bell? And this is not to mention all of the localized efforts. We have counties with hundreds decidcated to stuff like this in GA, and got 60,000 to cast a vote for Dr. Paul, so sorry if I take that as an insult that you think people here are stifling that.

Anyways, please keep your apathy to yourself. That's the opposite of what this thread is about, and if your will is that weak, then well, all we can ask for is your vote, because no one said this was going to be easy... Please leave alone those with real work to do though, whether you agrree with it or not is irrelevant..

I often wonder how many of these "realist" posts are just trolls intentionally trying to distract, divide and dissuade.
 
Yes, it's almost like there are sock puppets here for the specific task of stopping GOTV efforts.

... and how has focusing on youtube videos, online polls, and overall ruling the Internet campaign wars while ignoring GOTV efforts worked out so far? Maybe for a change the grassroots should focus on encouraging personal GOTV efforts?

Here's a quick fact along those lines. In Colorado there were only 6 votes for Paul for every Paul donor. Romney had 26 votes per donor. Most of the votes for Paul are coming from hard core Paul supporters and they aren't bringing many casual voters with them to vote. Change that, and you've changed the game.

so go start a GOTV thread, don't derail this one.

(moved some posts to a new GOTV thread, which is a great idea, also.)
 
Last edited:
Ideas to get Ron PR...:

* Get on TV shows that are not network news (eg daytime shows)...lots of fresh new ears there
* Go mega-negative...only negative campaigns really work which is the ugly truth. There is tons of dirt that 'we' know about that the public doesn't about the remaining three. eg How many know Jack Abramoff bribed Santorum on the legislation affecting the Mariana Islands?
* Do a shocking or unexpected ad that goes viral and gets free tier-2 media exposure (like bigfoot)
* Make rumblings about a third party run (like announce an exploratory commission into seeking the LP nomimation)...PR guaranteed
* Publicly challenge the other candidates to a debate...and denounce them as cowards if they don't attend (debates are soooo valuable for Ron)
* More truth bombs in Ron's speeches...Ron tends to speak in generalities and repeat the same stuff...but that won't get the headlines. He needs people to have "I didn't know that was happening" moments.
* Go after independents/lefties...they're sleeping giants. Attack Obama publicly on libertarian-left issues that he's weak on. Go after his support of bailouts and the banks. Nail him on his 2014 goal for removing troops from Afghanistan. Talk about how the drug war is creating economic havoc and how Obama doesn't care even though he was a druggie. Talk about how hemp is at least 4X as efficient than trees at producing pulp for paper. This type of stuff will work well in Wisconsin that has an open primary and is left leaning. Paul has to be careful about singling about labor unions, education, EPA and tax cuts (for the wealthy) when he campaigns for independent votes.
* Appeal to women...that's Ron's biggest weakness. Go after Santorum and his multitude of crazy social conservative quotes. Openly bring up the birth control issue and state how he supports a women's right to use this (polls show this is a big issue).
 
Pictures for videos etc

Missouri University 3/15
428984_10150652415996686_6233046685_9446503_917724  701_n.jpg


University of Illinois 3/14 (different pictures)
418557_10150651395631686_6233046685_9443836_189727  7699_n.jpg

419216_10150651395556686_6233046685_9443835_200466  7215_n.jpg

KkTIU.png


Michigan:
422187_10150621008366686_6233046685_9337607_200542  1617_n.jpg

425434_10150620628211686_6233046685_9336000_769655  47_n.jpg

video of Michigan


Boise Idaho
407040_10150600972541686_6233046685_9263822_161241  9519_n.jpg


Springfield Missouri 3/10
428985_10150642870656686_6233046685_9412864_101250  2963_n.jpg

IMG_0360-2.jpg

more springfield here: http://iroots.org/2012/03/10/ron-paul-live-stream-from-springfield-mo/
 

Attachments

  • 428985_10150642870656686_6233046685_9412864_1012502963_n.jpg
    428985_10150642870656686_6233046685_9412864_1012502963_n.jpg
    126.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
How about a concert festival in the summer that goes city to city. Like Ozzfest type thing. It could be a liberty and freedom festival. Supported by bands that believe Ron Paul would be the best president. I would like to have skateboarders and bmx free style there too. People hand out flyers for Ron and explain his ideas at the booths. It could be a traveling festival.
 
How about a concert festival in the summer that goes city to city. Like Ozzfest type thing. It could be a liberty and freedom festival. Supported by bands that believe Ron Paul would be the best president. I would like to have skateboarders and bmx free style there too. People hand out flyers for Ron and explain his ideas at the booths. It could be a traveling festival.

those are fun for us, but do they get those who don't follow Ron to pay attention? Not that we shouldn't do those, but for this thread I'm thinking more of something we can circulate with our web presence, which the other candidates would love to have, but which is useless if we don't use it.

That sounds like a fun thing to plan in your town, though!
 
Last edited:
In case you want text on the NDAA thing, a whole bunch of people who can't read, like Alan West, are saying the bill as passed excludes American citizens from the indefinite detention provisions, however the exemption only applies to one part of the bill and one indefinite detention provision, and there are more than one. Here is text you could scroll, with section numbers, as well as my description of why that is baloney that Americans are exempted, in case you want it:

That 'as passed' [analysis below]

H.R.1540

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] - ENR)
Subtitle D--Counterterrorism

SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.
(f) Requirement for Briefings of Congress- The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be `covered persons' for purposes of subsection (b)(2).
SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN AL-QAEDA TERRORISTS.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1021 who is determined--
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1021(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1028.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The President may waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the President submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
(c) Implementation Procedures-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall issue, and submit to Congress, procedures for implementing this section.
(2) ELEMENTS- The procedures for implementing this section shall include, but not be limited to, procedures as follows:
(A) Procedures designating the persons authorized to make determinations under subsection (a)(2) and the process by which such determinations are to be made.
(B) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not require the interruption of ongoing surveillance or intelligence gathering with regard to persons not already in the custody or control of the United States.
(C) Procedures providing that a determination under subsection (a)(2) is not required to be implemented until after the conclusion of an interrogation which is ongoing at the time the determination is made and does not require the interruption of any such ongoing interrogation.
(D) Procedures providing that the requirement for military custody under subsection (a)(1) does not apply when intelligence, law enforcement, or other Government officials of the United States are granted access to an individual who remains in the custody of a third country.
(E) Procedures providing that a certification of national security interests under subsection (a)(4) may be granted for the purpose of transferring a covered person from a third country if such a transfer is in the interest of the United States and could not otherwise be accomplished.
(d) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the existing criminal enforcement and national security authorities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or any other domestic law enforcement agency with regard to a covered person, regardless whether such covered person is held in military custody.
(e) Effective Date- This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to persons described in subsection (a)(2) who are taken into the custody or brought under the control of the United States on or after that effective date.
SEC. 1023. PROCEDURES FOR PERIODIC DETENTION REVIEW OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA.

(a) Procedures Required- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report setting forth procedures for implementing the periodic review process required by Executive Order No. 13567 for individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note).
(b) Covered Matters- The procedures submitted under subsection (a) shall, at a minimum--
(1) clarify that the purpose of the periodic review process is not to determine the legality of any detainee's law of war detention, but to make discretionary determinations whether or not a detainee represents a continuing threat to the security of the United States;
(2) clarify that the Secretary of Defense is responsible for any final decision to release or transfer an individual detained in military custody at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, pursuant to the Executive Order referred to in subsection (a), and that in making such a final decision, the Secretary shall consider the recommendation of a periodic review board or review committee established pursuant to such Executive Order, but shall not be bound by any such recommendation;
(3) clarify that the periodic review process applies to any individual who is detained as an unprivileged enemy belligerent at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at any time; and
(4) ensure that appropriate consideration is given to factors addressing the need for continued detention of the detainee, including--
(A) the likelihood the detainee will resume terrorist activity if transferred or released;
(B) the likelihood the detainee will reestablish ties with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners if transferred or released;
(C) the likelihood of family, tribal, or government rehabilitation or support for the detainee if transferred or released;
(D) the likelihood the detainee may be subject to trial by military commission; and
(E) any law enforcement interest in the detainee.
(c) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined- In this section, the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
SEC. 1024. PROCEDURES FOR STATUS DETERMINATIONS.

(a) In General- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report setting forth the procedures for determining the status of persons detained pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) for purposes of section 1021.
(b) Elements of Procedures- The procedures required by this section shall provide for the following in the case of any unprivileged enemy belligerent who will be held in long-term detention under the law of war pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force:
(1) A military judge shall preside at proceedings for the determination of status of an unprivileged enemy belligerent.
(2) An unprivileged enemy belligerent may, at the election of the belligerent, be represented by military counsel at proceedings for the determination of status of the belligerent.
(c) Applicability- The Secretary of Defense is not required to apply the procedures required by this section in the case of a person for whom habeas corpus review is available in a Federal court.
(d) Report on Modification of Procedures- The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on any modification of the procedures submitted under this section. The report on any such modification shall be so submitted not later than 60 days before the date on which such modification goes into effect.
(e) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined- In this section, the term `appropriate committees of Congress' means--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:7:./temp/~c112dVxo5g:e870673:

I will say it was very hard to get to this, it wasn't in the general index I had to 'locate search' text from the conference report into the 'as passed' version, however, the conference report was linked at Thomas in the 'Congressional Actions with amendments and links' parts of Thomas

Now, here is the part of section 1022 above people cite to say indefinite detention isn't in there for US Citizens:

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.


note that both ONLY refer to MILITARY custody not being held in other custody, and that they only apply to 'under this section' (Section 1022).

Now go to section 1021:

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.
(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84))
.

This is a different section, so the exceptions for American citizens DOES NOT APPLY. And while these sound like terrible people, murder sounds terrible too, and we might all think murderers should be locked up..... BUT TO FIND OUT IF THEY ARE MURDERERS YOU NEED A TRIAL!!!

Otherwise you are locking up SUSPECTS.
 
Back
Top