3 votes

Just an Observation

It is my opinion that during the debates Ron Paul gets a little too technical. What I mean by this is some of what he is saying is probably going over most of the people's heads. I wonder if he or his campaign staff have ever thought about this before? Ron Paul knows so much about economics, etc., but people listening to him for the first time may not be able to follow him. I teach first grade and many times I have to stop myself and say wait a minute the children may not know this terminology. I have to back up and explain things in a way that they might understand. I know he doesn't have a lot of time but getting a few good points in is better than leaving the audience saying to themselves I don't really understand what he's saying. Sometimes he has explained things where the average person can understand like when he has said how do you think we would feel if China came over here and built a military base.

We on the Daily Paul have listened to Ron Paul enough that we understand and know exactly what he is saying. Average Americans who get their news from the mainstream media are clueless. This is just an observation I had while watching the debate. What are your thoughts?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Everybody is always trying to say what RP could do better...

...even me.

But fact of the matter is, he's the one who grabbed OUR attention... even with his rambling style and grumpy 'ol man looks.

Besides, if you really listen, he plays to both audiences pretty well given that he usually only gets 30-60 secs to work with. He uses high brow terms like "Keynesian bubble" and simple explanations like "printing money out of thin air" in the same answer. That way, the people who know about Keynes and his theories will understand, and so will Joe the Plumber.

Here's the deal...

He wins the debates hands down every time if you look at the honest polls. That doesn't mean you're going to win the election though. There are a huge number of idiots who don't decide until they day before and usually they get their choice from someone else. "My mom is voting for McCain, so I guess I am too."

I don't know if anyone can win a presidential election without special interest money and help from the media. But at the very least, RP is educating enough people to where we can hopefully put a stop to all this madness eventually. He's spreading the message of liberty. That's really all we can ask of him.

Agreed, he needs to explain his Foreign Policy a bit better....

And explain how the Federal Reserve endlessly printing money IS what drives foreign policy.

We're not actually doing anything productive with the military, IE: sending out the Seal TEAMS to take down the obvious terrorists in Turkey. This is due to your Central Bank.

Ron Paul has always said we need to have a "Defense" first foreign policy, I think he should articulate it just like Rand. When Rand does it, everyone really 'gets' it because they are so familiar with Rand or Justin Amash.

Their record of voting is clean so we know we can make sure they stay on the right course, as well. Foreign Policy is a complex issue that needs to be taken away from these alphabet soup agencies.

Ron Paul just needs to explain he would never allow them to start a war, without the War Powers act being voted upon and declared by Congress. And he would definitely stop them from any illegal foreign intervention. It's always been this way anyway.

example please?

Maybe it's just me, but I thought he did a good job of keeping it simple. Can you give some examples of lofty terminology or complicated answers?

Some of the things I was

Some of the things I was thinking might go over the top of someone's head are Keynesianism, malinvestment, ect. Many people probably don't even have an understanding of the FED. I think Ron Paul does a great job too. I was just thinking that during debates it might be helpful to keep things as simple and understandable as possible. I may be worrying too much. In my line of work I am contantly thinking about my audience (first graders) and what exactly they know and what they don't have a clue about.

He can explain it in soundbytes..Theft= Taking property by force


(Anyone who wants a system where you are forced to steal and take from someone else, to promote another's Welfare and/or corporate Welfare may as well live in Russia. As Ron Paul must explain, that is the exact system we live with.)

ANALOGIES communications superpower.

I agree with you, BUT its not Ron Paul's fault, or his campaign's fault, WE the supporters the grass roots, must educate our friends neighbors and families, remind everyone to simplify the issues at hand to a personal level, i.e: what would you do if your house was robbed? A:get a security system a fence and a weapon to protect yourself? or B: go around the neighborhood while leaving your doors unlocked and and spend your personal money on hiring security guards to occupy every house that you suspect of "hiding" the perp. while you cant afford to eat? that is a great analogy to clarify for a lot of people the flaws of US foreign policy. Another good one is this. about the fed and how it has corrupted washington.

who is the boss in a company? the true boss is the owner of the company you own a company or business when you BUY the business so the money controller is the boss, the boss hires managers to manage his work force. managers being politicians and wokers the taxpayers, when you complain to a manager all he can do is present the complaint to the boss (the Fed:Money controller) if it is not in the bosses best interest to act on that complaint he quite simply wont, everything starts and stops with the boss, therefore your voice, and your manager are powerless, against the boss because the boss pays you not the manager. this analogy seems to work well with helping people understand the roll of the FED and why it should end.

I think Ron Paul does just fine at debates.

He sets himself apart from others, he wins the debates, etc.
It's the 24/7 naysaying by the MSM that is the problem. The solution is to register at the naysayer websites and attack the heck out of them with logic and reason, just as Tom Woods, Judge Napolitano and I do. I tend to get more personal, pointing out when a naysayer has AIPAC or Fed connections. When they know we are watching and are prepared to hurt their reputations they are a lot more likely to behave.


I wish Ron Paul would pretend he's speaking to an audience of ten-year-olds at debates. Literally. I think it would go a long way toward helping average Americans follow what he's saying and get the big message - without sacrificing his honesty and wisdom. It's literally what they need. I'm with you on this.

But this is one of the problems with Palin

It drives everyone I know and myself crazy due to speaking to the audience like they are in a kindergarten class."Come to Auntie Palin and I will make the hurt go away".The bar needs to be set to at least after puberty age.I'm not kidding,It drives my friends and myself crazy to listen to her.I absolutely agree with you Lao but the target age group should be just a little higher?

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

OK, Thirteen? Fourteen?

Agreed about Palin... you're right, she does speak that way (I think it's cause that's really where she's at mentally!)

I think if he imagines he's speaking to intelligent thirteen-year-olds he will simplify it just a bit - just enough to go slowly enough for people to catch on and catch the foundation of what he's saying. I've said it before (to not so great reviews) but I think most people think with their "guts" or "hearts" - whatever you want to call it. I know that's a contradiction in terms. But most people are not all that rational - in my experience anyway.

Actually thats not a bad idea!

Thirteen and Fourteen year olds are going through puberty and hormonal issues.They are very influential at this vulnerable moment in their lives.Some never grow out of it.LOL!

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

Redefine the question

so that you can leave with a concise answer.
That is how Clinton does it.

I was just wondering if

I was just wondering if anyone else had ever thought of this or am I not giving enough credit to the average American's understanding?

I hear you

I think it is this: When RP is in a debate he has to listen to 6 others who get to go ahead of him on questions that are right up his ally. When he finally gets to speak on a question, it is often a question that may be asked to trip him up, or on something that is not significant, so he has to lead his answer back to his key stances and what he feels needs to get said. Sometimes, in this type of setting, he seems like he is trying to explain a whole bunch in a short time, and this makes him look like he is rambling. However, if you understand his policies, and you are not a sheep who is looking for the next Colgate toothpaste candidate, his message will resonate. The non Ron Paul people who look at his clothes, posture, and lack of smiling, and use that as the deciding factor if he is doing well, are the people that do not really understand what is going on to begin with. He has room for improvement in these areas, but the mainstream overplays this, and sometimes people here wish they good give the good doctor a little help.

I have friends who I encourage to watch and who are your average Joe's and Jane's that get so overcome by someone's delivery and not the substance. It is frustrating.

Us supporters have to find a way to make his message more mainstream for him. In many ways, I hate to say it, but I almost have to teach a Ron Paul for dummies class with my friends and they are all professionals. I can not tell you how many people I have spoken to on his behalf, but the hardest thing to overcome is not his message or if they like him, it is if they believe he has a shot to win. The mainstream is always putting him down, and that is hard for many who do not understand what is going on to overcome.

i thought so too

but I've listened to him so much at this point, it's hard to remember what it is like to hear him for the first times.