0 votes

Electability should be THE focus for SC and beyond

With the first two tests behind us, the most important lies just ahead...South Carolina.

My advice to the campaign (I hope they are listening):

1. From what I read and hear, a large (and I mean LARGE) percentage of Romey's support is based entirely on his perceived electability. Nothing else. The campaign needs to figure a strategy to not so much call Romney's electability into question, but to emphasize Paul's true electability. I would particularly emphasize the issues of civil/privacy rights, war, and domestic fiscal policy. Paul can make stark contrast between himself and Romney with these three issues. In the third, in particular, it needs to be hammered home that Romney does not put forth any specifics to balance the budget...EVER. Just nice talking points...what politicians have been saying for years.

2. Stop talking about the Fed and monetary policy, except in the broadest terms. Talking about wanting a sound currency is fine, but he starts losing people when he gets more detailed than that. It's not his fault, but we need to realize that those who are interested in monetary policy are already supporters. We are now trying to reach into the "general electorate", and they don't think about such things except in the broadest terms. Explaining in general terms why monetary policy is important to the average joe should be a focus.

3. South Carolina has a lot of retired military, and the campaign should focus on that. The whole "chickenhawk" topic in the last debate was great, but needs to be expanded. I think that Paul needs to stress that there is nothing wrong morally or legally with taking the deferment, both for Gingrich AND Romney. Where the moral component comes into it is when those who CHOSE not to fight WHEN ASKED BY THEIR COUNTRY decide they can require others to fight, especially in wars NOT DECLARED by Congress.

There is some great footage going around right now of Romney demonstrating SUPPORT FOR THE DRAFT in Vietnam while he himself got a deferment for being a missionary. That could be a huge issue...supporting FORCING others to fight and die while at the same time finding an excuse not to fight himself.

These are just three things I think the campaign should focus on. There are surely others, but there is not a lot of time.

Comment viewing options

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

I agree with everything but #2. I've seen more jaws drop among

people who are easily considered "general electorate" when I hold up a FRN and a Dollar next to each other, and say "this is a Dollar, this is a piece of paper with the word 'dollar' written on it. Printing the word dollar on this piece of paper doesn't magically turn it into one of these. (the real dollar)" This real SINGLE dollar can buy a coffee pot, or a restaurant dinner, tip included, or a pair of pants, a nice shirt, a pair of sneakers (cheap of course), or a tank of gas. It takes 30 of these pieces of paper to do that. 10 years ago, it took only 15. Which would you rather be paid in and use and have to save, dollars? or pieces of paper with the word "dollar" on it - issued by BANKERS."

It's no contest after that.

It isn't hard to do.

That one paragraph covers so much ground in so simple and every day understandable terms, it still amazes me.

The best part - it works.

People get it after that.

So, I disagree. Ron does need to get off the FED track other than to put it in context of sound money. His big #2 needs to be a simple push for sound money. (which by implication includes abolishing the FED) That's the real goal of abolishing the FED anyway, so why stop halfway? Why not go for what you want?

Paul's Electability

The only time the Republicans win decisively, it's with "unelectable" platforms of American Conservatism. When the Republicans lose decisvely, it's always with a "moderate":

Paul would win a in landslide akin to the TEA Party, the Contract with America, and Ronald Reagan.

Romney will lose in a landslide akin to John McCain, and Bob Dole.

Here is a good article summarizing this argument:

Ron Paul in the General Election

robot999's picture

I agree

but it should be a two-pronged approach:
1. Ron Paul's electability because of his diametric position on key issues (freedom v. govt.) and his incorruptible nature (you can trust him)
2. Romney's positions have in many cases very closely aligned with Obama. This fact would allow the 2012 elections to be used to further divide the nation because it will become about which candidate is LESS DESTRUCTIVE to the people.

It boils down to REAL v. MEMOREX (read fake conservatism)

P.S. Now that I think about it, Ron Paul's liberty-wing of the Party is the thing that these RINO's really fear. They can "eliminate" Paul (via vote fraud etc.), but they cannot stop the message once it takes hold, and the people really wake up.

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

very good points,however,Romney's "Electability" is an issue...

According to the latest CBS poll,Ron is running competitively with Obama at the same level as Romney...And that is WITHOUT Mitt being vetted(unlike Paul).....The Media has treated Romney with kid gloves...once he gets the nomination he will be savaged....Paul HAS been vetted and is still standing...The rest of your points are excellent.

Ron Paul'08


I believe that Romney is unelectable. I think when one candidate says another is unelectable; however, it doesn't hold much weight. That is why I think we need to focus on RP's electability.

Our big issue is that the MEDIA says RP can't win, and is unelectable, and he needs to push back hard...