What would be YOUR strategy for a Ron Paul Victory?

Ron Paul introduces articles of impeachment and tells the truth about 9-11.

1. America's FUNDAMENTAL problem is that the public has abdicated its role as the overseer of the government. Therefore, the primary and irreplaceable remedy is to change the aggregate character of the public. Ron Paul must address his CURRENT supporters, wrestling with their paradigms and converting them from supporters to influencers of others. If he's going to win, he'll need fans who are active in many more ways than simply keeping up with the news about the election. As it is, however, Ron Paul supporters aren't even interested in getting America to read its own Constitution or in restoring the Rule of Law to our governments. http://www.dailypaul.com/212252/read-it-america-getting-one-... http://www.ruleoflawrestoration.com
This represents a very SERIOUS deficit in this "movement". It's really just a "watchment" at this time---or perhaps a "hopement", but not a movement, for it is not moving anywhere. The votes won in each successive primary and caucus are getting lower and lower, and not higher and higher. This is DIRECTLY related to the fact that the supporters are generally passive and not proactive.

2. Stop being content to be the loser on the foreign policy argument. Stop retreating from it, and stop giving minimal answers as if you expect everyone to run home and do their own study, confirming your conclusions. You must take this nation by the lapels and talk some sense into it, leaving them no vestige of an argument with which to try to counter you. (And so must your supporters, since this task is way too big for one person.) Also, you've got to lose the whining/complaining tone when you discuss these things, and adopt instead a commanding tone of adamancy and certainty. You probably don't realize it, but your tone of voice quite often sends its own subliminal messages--that I expect to lose, that I'm frustrated because people aren't listening, and so forth.

3. By running as a Republican, you immediately alienate a bajillion Democrats and independents who have figured out that the Republican Party is patently and incorrigibly corrupt---they assume, and reasonably so, that you, too, must be corrupt. So drop all this excuse about how you need to be in the debates and so forth, and get out of that corrupt party right now. Denounce it as corrupt, and denounce the Democratic Party as corrupt, too. Stop being a "politician" in this regard and just be a man. Call a spade a spade and become known for it. This is a huge moral deficit in your current position for you are associating with known tyrants, scoundrels, demagogues, and sociopaths. As with the foreign policy issue, the need here is to become MORE like Ron Paul, and not LESS. That is, let your convictions be uncompromised in EVERY way and drop this pragmatism that glosses over the corruption of your party because of the flawed idea that you must participate in it if you are to win. I, for one, don't want a president who presumes upon himself the job of "reforming the Republican Party"; I want one whose job is to reform the nation. You need to decide which job you are applying for.

4. Drop the "libertarian" bit on the "social issues". Hardly anybody agrees with you (statistically speaking), and it is the quintessential matter of OPINION. It is enough simply to insist that any unconstitutional federal laws be repealed. Whether right or wrong, you needlessly offend a bajillion religious folks when you share your opinion on the matter. When you say that there shouldn't be ANY laws (federal, state, or local) against, say, marijuana, you might as well be fighting God himself as far as the dogmatic opinions of the populace go. But if you would stick to a strict 10th Amendment stance and leave your own opinion out of it, then you have the force of law behind you, and the whole God battle is easily averted.

5. Akin to #1 above, stop being a candidate and start being a LEADER of PEOPLE. Your stance now is to "let your little light shine" in hopes that the world will see its warm glow and gather near to you. This simply will not do; it IS NOT doing. Not that I'm a Reagan fan, but he had this strength of confidence that could flatly refuse the status quo and insist on going another direction in order to do what was right. In this way, he exuded a strength that people found reassuring. You don't have that same strength of personality. Yes, you have superior positions to Reagan's, but you don't comfort people nearly as effectively as did he....and he was just a MINIMAL reformer, where you seem actually to want to fix a LOT of things. The fact of the matter is that Laissez-Faire and actual leadership are mutually exclusive paradigms. Hence the downfall of the Libertarian Party. (Indeed, they even boast about themselves that "getting Libertarians together to do something is like trying to herd cats". They are too dull to realize that this is a weakness of theirs, and not a strength.) If you think it morally presumptuous or inappropriate to lead people, then you cannot win the presidency.

Lincoln, whose lawlessness I despise, was at least a clever man. General McClellan was known to avoid taking his troops into battle, opting to drill them instead. Lincoln is reported as having complained in 1862:

"If General McClellan isn't going to use his army, I'd like to borrow it for a time."

This comes to mind quite often as I consider how many supporters you have, and how little you expect and train them to do for the cause. You are failing to realize and to make full use of this, the greatest and most powerful weapon on earth: the collective willpower of a well-informed and proactive populace.

To sum it all up, you need to drop this idea that winning the presidency is the "first step" in national reform and admit that the office of the president is far too weak to accomplish much without the ardent collaboration of the people. After all, the primary task of a reforming president will be to make Congress behave---and they don't work for you; ostensibly, they work for the people.

You need to further admit what the primaries are saying---that America generally does not want Ron Paul. So whether you continue your campaign or not, you must ALSO build a public movement, restoring the citizen to his rightful and responsible role as overseer of the government. This is the FUNDAMENTAL need. Until you deal with this, you will be hacking merely at the branches, and not at the root.

If America does not want what you have to offer, then you must MAKE it want it; you must influence them to change their paradigms, deliberately and unapologetically proving yours to be better and emboldening them to make the change. Further, you must influence them to become influencers of others, because they, too, play the ineffective "let my little light shine" game, rather than wrestling their neighbors into seeing the light for themselves. Telling a "Libertarian" this is like petting a cat's fur in the wrong direction, I'm sure, but these are the facts and they can be affirmed by direct observation.

To put it all in a one-liner, your focus on the presidency is myopic and you're leaving the greater (and indispensable) battle un-fought.

When the call to action is merely, "vote for me" or "please donate", one should not be surprised that people are not particularly inspired to act, for this is exactly what all the other candidates are asking for. If you're going to present an alternative, then go all the way with it and trade in the politician hat for a leader hat.

You are making the tactical error of leading where others are not equipped to follow. Probably 99% of your supporters don't "get" your entire doctrine. If you want their full and EFFECTIVE support, you must slow down and lead them through it until they get it. Instead, you are in a hurry and they can't keep up with you. And they're certainly not going to be effective recruiters during this "hurry-up offense". So unless you can figure out how to run a campaign AND lead a philosophical movement at the same time, you won't be able to succeed in the campaign.

This is your dilemma, and so far, there's no indication that you even realize it. It's very hard to build the second story when the foundation isn't yet finished.

Jack

Judge Napolitano,Michael Scheuer, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer and Lt. Colonel Douglas MacGregor to talk about Iran and Ron Paul's foreign policy in the Southern "red states". I'd also sue Bill O'Reilly for slander and make a BIG effort to prove voter fraud in Iowa and Nevada.

commercials are a wasteful way to spend money, when RP buys 15 seconds for $100k in a Bill O commercial, that's not money well spent.

A massive crusade of guerilla canvasing billboards and other advertising (perhaps an actual movie about the Revolution of '76, take that hollywood)is what it would take. And I'm not talking about just asking them to support the good doctor.

Short and simple sentences so everyone can digest

YOU ARE A DEBT SLAVE FOR YOUR GRANDFATHER

FREE SOCIETIES KEEP THE FRUITS OF THEIR LABOR

YOUR PRESIDENT HAS THE POWER TO BOMB YOU IN YOUR CAR ... RIGHT NOW

1 BOMB COSTS $XXXX .. HOW MUCH BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS FOR YOUR TAX PAYMENTS?

ARIZONA KNOWS BEST FOR SCOTTSDALE, NOT DC

ITALY AND GREECE ARE BROKE. BANKERS ARE THE PRESIDENT THERE, WE'RE NEXT

60 MILES / HOUR = 1 MILE PER MINUTE ... 1 MINUTE = $60 BILLION THAT YOUR PARENTS BORROW AND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN OWE

One liners are easy to do and Paul is terrible at soundbite stuff. Billboards and other sudo~guerilla style marketing are viewed by everyone and last a month (quarter?).

So sure, there are other things that I'd like to change about the way things are run. Overall, I think they're doing incredibly well though, this is old school politicking and it's how Ron rolls.

1. RP campaign or supporters should organize collection of the evidences of media bias against Ron Paul. These need to be compiled and disseminated through all possible channels. Data collection could be done at Daily Paul, where an icon on the front page should lead to the thread for data collection. I enclosed below some evidences that I collected.

2. In the same way as in 1. supporters should collect evidences of irregularities and/or rigging of the voting procedures. These evidences also need to be disseminated broadly, and, possibly, brought to the courts.

3. Campaign needs to utilize more local and alternative media. Even web page of WikiPedia about elections is biased against Ron Paul, and nobody did anything against this even though WikiPedia is easy and open for editing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_p...

*************************************************
Evidences of media bias:

-Endorsment of Tom Davis was almost blacked out. Endorsment of Ron Paul by three SC senators was blacked out, only two press releases could be found on the Internet, CNN streaming of it was cut off due to technical reasons:

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-washington-dc/bigges...

-Fox cuts off Ron Paul when he starts explaining media bias, before SC primary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyhTrWNk-aA

-Fox twitter analysis after SC debate not giving to Ron Paul a credit that he deserves since he was the best

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnzUKkFMjD0

-CNN journalist is not very happy with the choice of undecided SC voters who are attracted by Ron Paul

http://www.dailypaul.com/202584/cnn-focus-group-moving-towar...

-MSNBC denies Ron Paul's second place in NH primary, calling it a fraud

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP_7ePK773Q

-CBS does not mention Ron Paul's second place in Suffolk University poll, before NH primary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS9PkWls6j8

-CNN cuts off the soldier who voted at Iowa Caucus for Ron Paul due to technical reasons, after he starts explaining to Dana that Ron Paul is not dangerous as she suggested that "many" say

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzeowlqmBI&feature=related

-Dana Bash, CNN, explain that "many republicans" are worried that Ron Paul will stay for a long time in the elections before Iowa Caucus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXuceZO4YTM

-Rick Santorum is getting big media attention because they "anticipate" his win, while his events are not popular. Does media anticipate or provides his high score?

http://www.dailypaul.com/198730/santorums-surge-fishier-than...

-Before Iowa Caucus, "republican apparatus" "concerned" that Ron Paul will push Iowa fall into oblivion...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgXKFGdf03c&feature=youtu.be

-Politico, if "Ron Paul wins Iowa we just take it out"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WcysL7VeCw

- Chris Wallace, FOX, "if Ron Paul wins Iowa, it will be discredited":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i31iQC1Pn2E

-Ron Paul gets 89 seconds in 1h CBS debate. Ron Paul was polling among the top three, and there were 8 candidates, so candidate on average should get 360s..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tZDdWf3fIg

-CNN recognizes that they ignore Ron Paul. Explanation is that he is "unelectable".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpjWeBdBXyU

-John Stewart classics, reporting on Ames straw-poll, in which Ron Paul was the second differing from the first place (won by Michelle Bachmann) within the error margin

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-15-2011/indecis...

-Media reporting on straw polls differently

http://runronpaul.com/mainstream-media/fox-exposed-undeniala...

but persuasive amongst the popular vote

1) privately identify the ghost writer of the newsletters and dissociate with them until a public apology is made: this wins the political 'Left'

2) decline monies donated from any self-identified racist group and publicly denounce their ideology

3) advance beyond the discussion of just repealing Jim Crow laws by promoting other Constitutional Amendments (ex.15th) which forcefully defend the innocent

4) if asked, denounce Iran for irresponsibly funding militant groups abroad while still promoting principled diplomacy and non-intervention: this wins the political 'Right'

5) publicly clarify responsibility for any Tweets issued in the Campaign's name: this wins the character of RP's popular reputation

Explain why we should.

Explain how we could.

Explain the freedom and prosperity that would result.

Make it a part of every interview and debate.

Let Ron Paul have that memorable bike race with the other 3.

Gingrich will keel over or break his bike in half or will complain he can't get a bike seat that's big enough.

Santorum will have a heart attack.

Romney won't race as he doesn't want to mess up his hair.

Explain to the American people the number one job of the Federal Government is to protect the American People. Our first responsibility is use the tax money to have the best military in the world that no country would try to attack our country.

Senior citizens would receive what the government promised them and in the future the choice to do what you feel is best to save for your future.

The only military troops left in other countries that should not come home right now, would be troops that are there for our countries safety.

Gold added to our money system and slowly do away with the federal reserve.

Hands off from the government to the individual's religion beliefs.

I would like to see that the government would never get more than 10% from a person's income.

Keep pushing the one trillion cut the first year in office.