1
1836
Guest
This is a question I've been pondering for more than a month now as we've seen Ron Paul fight the good fight and encounter more difficulty than even many of our own pessimists expected.
As someone who has donated a lot, been involved (going to New Hampshire on my own dime to help out HQ before the primary), and as someone who understands politics reasonably well (Republican politics in particular) I think the Grassroots has to think about this. Before you criticize me for not having posted on the forum, I've been out in the field, and I've supported Paul for years. Therefore... What has hurt us? Really, honestly, objectively, what has?
Don't think of it in terms of "We love Ron Paul!" but in terms of the undecided or uninformed voter, or the conservative Republican who would probably support Ron Paul for economics but is turned off by something we've done.
Because Ron Paul himself makes a point of speaking about "blowback" and unintended consequences of foreign policy, let's have a REAL discussion about the "blowback" of our own Grassroots efforts that have gone poorly or turned off more voters than they've won.
If I had to make a list of the things I think that we could have done better or not done at all, it would look something like this:
1. The "R3volution" logo. I like it, personally. And I know most of you like it, too. But face it, folks: it turns off voters, especially older Republicans, who ought to be the people we appeal to with Old-Right calls to cut spending and end departments.
So, I think I personally can surmise that in creating a logo, our revolution failed miserably. Few who are honest with themselves will deny this; many of us have heard negative reactions from all kinds of voters about the logo. Catchy? Sure, but it's a niche. It only works among supporters and the die-hards. It doesn't win votes.
2. The Blimp. I know that there are many here who love or have loved the blimp. Despite my not posting here in the past, I have been a lurker on the forum for some time, infrequently. I can recall reading posts from people who felt that, literally, the blimp was the NUMBER ONE priority for Grassroots efforts. And yet, when we look at it from a standpoint of the average voter, what effect did it have?
Well, it generated free media coverage. That's good, right? But what kind? We have to remember that the blimp was covered in two uninspiring banners: "Ron Paul Revolution" and "Who is Ron Paul? Google Ron Paul." Why not something like "Save Social Security: Vote Ron Paul!"
I wouldn't be wild about it, but do I need to be? Do you? We are reaching out to other voters, not placating our own desires to be important.
Beyond that, the Blimp sucked nearly a half-million dollars from the Grassroots. The Grassroots could have won the state of Alaska for less than that spent on local ads. Hell... If we had spent just a fraction of that in the states we've come very close in: North Dakota, Minnesota, Washington, the outcomes might have been very different.
I'm an economist. We call that opportunity cost - what COULD we have spent it on.
3. Moneybombs.
Now. This is a testy subject, I know. I actually support the moneybombs and donated solidly for the first two. The problem is that our exclusive reliance on them thereafter (MLK day, New Year's Eve, 51st Anniversary) really short-changed the campaign when we could have helped them. If we take just the MLK day and 51st Anniv. moneybombs and move them each back a couple of weeks, the campaign would have had much more money to spend on South Carolina and Nevada, and Super Tuesday. Remember, you have to buy advertising at least two weeks in advance in most cases, perhaps more. We give the campaign money days before Super Tuesday and they can't use it for Super Tuesday.
The last thing I'm going to say is one I want you all to ponder, because I'm guilty of it too. Simply: I think that this grassroots effort has been too quick to jump on this or that idea, just because it came from one of our own. There's nothing wrong with brainstorming.
But. We have to remember that once we get a few people on board to tackle one small project that fails to be anything worthwhile, they just wasted their energy on that... and not on something else useful.
We all have limited resources... money and time. It's how we spend these that define success. Ron Paul's Freedom Revolution has barely begun. We have to rally around each other to come up with significant, big ideas that will transform this movement and the country.
The biggest idea yet? A freedom march on Washington. Let's storm the National Mall with cries of liberty, and they won't ignore us any longer.
Before, however, we must consolidate our efforts. That's what I hope to get us talking about here.
As someone who has donated a lot, been involved (going to New Hampshire on my own dime to help out HQ before the primary), and as someone who understands politics reasonably well (Republican politics in particular) I think the Grassroots has to think about this. Before you criticize me for not having posted on the forum, I've been out in the field, and I've supported Paul for years. Therefore... What has hurt us? Really, honestly, objectively, what has?
Don't think of it in terms of "We love Ron Paul!" but in terms of the undecided or uninformed voter, or the conservative Republican who would probably support Ron Paul for economics but is turned off by something we've done.
Because Ron Paul himself makes a point of speaking about "blowback" and unintended consequences of foreign policy, let's have a REAL discussion about the "blowback" of our own Grassroots efforts that have gone poorly or turned off more voters than they've won.
If I had to make a list of the things I think that we could have done better or not done at all, it would look something like this:
1. The "R3volution" logo. I like it, personally. And I know most of you like it, too. But face it, folks: it turns off voters, especially older Republicans, who ought to be the people we appeal to with Old-Right calls to cut spending and end departments.
So, I think I personally can surmise that in creating a logo, our revolution failed miserably. Few who are honest with themselves will deny this; many of us have heard negative reactions from all kinds of voters about the logo. Catchy? Sure, but it's a niche. It only works among supporters and the die-hards. It doesn't win votes.
2. The Blimp. I know that there are many here who love or have loved the blimp. Despite my not posting here in the past, I have been a lurker on the forum for some time, infrequently. I can recall reading posts from people who felt that, literally, the blimp was the NUMBER ONE priority for Grassroots efforts. And yet, when we look at it from a standpoint of the average voter, what effect did it have?
Well, it generated free media coverage. That's good, right? But what kind? We have to remember that the blimp was covered in two uninspiring banners: "Ron Paul Revolution" and "Who is Ron Paul? Google Ron Paul." Why not something like "Save Social Security: Vote Ron Paul!"
I wouldn't be wild about it, but do I need to be? Do you? We are reaching out to other voters, not placating our own desires to be important.
Beyond that, the Blimp sucked nearly a half-million dollars from the Grassroots. The Grassroots could have won the state of Alaska for less than that spent on local ads. Hell... If we had spent just a fraction of that in the states we've come very close in: North Dakota, Minnesota, Washington, the outcomes might have been very different.
I'm an economist. We call that opportunity cost - what COULD we have spent it on.
3. Moneybombs.
Now. This is a testy subject, I know. I actually support the moneybombs and donated solidly for the first two. The problem is that our exclusive reliance on them thereafter (MLK day, New Year's Eve, 51st Anniversary) really short-changed the campaign when we could have helped them. If we take just the MLK day and 51st Anniv. moneybombs and move them each back a couple of weeks, the campaign would have had much more money to spend on South Carolina and Nevada, and Super Tuesday. Remember, you have to buy advertising at least two weeks in advance in most cases, perhaps more. We give the campaign money days before Super Tuesday and they can't use it for Super Tuesday.
The last thing I'm going to say is one I want you all to ponder, because I'm guilty of it too. Simply: I think that this grassroots effort has been too quick to jump on this or that idea, just because it came from one of our own. There's nothing wrong with brainstorming.
But. We have to remember that once we get a few people on board to tackle one small project that fails to be anything worthwhile, they just wasted their energy on that... and not on something else useful.
We all have limited resources... money and time. It's how we spend these that define success. Ron Paul's Freedom Revolution has barely begun. We have to rally around each other to come up with significant, big ideas that will transform this movement and the country.
The biggest idea yet? A freedom march on Washington. Let's storm the National Mall with cries of liberty, and they won't ignore us any longer.
Before, however, we must consolidate our efforts. That's what I hope to get us talking about here.
Last edited:
