43 votes

Re-Focusing on Getting Ron Paul the Nomination

Santorum is a train wreck waiting to happen; Romney is melting down. Whether or not the GOP insiders likes it, Ron Paul will be the last man standing in August. His plan to collect delegates and show up at the convention strong is coming together. Now is the time to re-focus and dedicate even more effort to getting the nomination.

3 Effective Groups
The first and only thing we must focus on is getting Ron Paul nominated. That means we shouldn’t trouble ourselves with the discussion of third party runs, or beating other candidates’ supporters in online debates, or in any activity that doesn’t work towards getting Ron Paul the nomination.

There are three important steps to achieving victory in the 2012 GOP primaries. Together those three steps allow each of us to leverage our personal influence to be as effective as possible.

#1. Ask pro-peace Democrats that you personally know to vote Republican in the primaries for Ron Paul and make sure that those who agree to vote for Ron Paul actually show up on election day.

#2. Work the rest of your “social precinct.”

#3. Activate your own network of Ron Paul supporters.

With these three techniques successfully implemented, Ron Paul will end up the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. There is nothing further that any of us should worry about until we have completed these three tasks.

#1 focuses on pro-peace Democrats because those who are truly pro-peace are open to voting for Ron Paul seeing that he’s the only pro-peace candidate running from either major party. They are likely swing voters that are easily reachable and open to a Paul vote. Even if they are not interested in voting for Paul in the general election, they are still voters who want to see Paul hold Obama’s feet to the fire on the wars and civil liberties and who are therefore willing to support Ron Paul in the primaries.

In #2, "social precinct" is a term I use to describe what was once called a “Christmas card list.” Ron Paul supporters tend to have extensive online connections. Your Facebook friend-list is one component of your social precinct. Before you reach out to strangers, every friend of yours should be contacted asking for a vote for Ron Paul. Celebrities with 4,996 friends will probably have a harder time doing this than people who actually know all of their Facebook friends. This is where you and I have an advantage over any celebrity – we can actually have short personal discussions with each of our friends.

In #3, activating Ron Paul supporters means motivating Ron Paul supporters around you, keeping up their morale, and getting after them when they don’t follow through. Call the Ron Paul supporters you know in order to invite them along when you make phone calls, or knock on doors, make sure you personally invite and encourage them to give money during money bombs. If you think Ron Paul supporters around you are starting to feel down, then send lots of good news to them in order to keep up their spirits, since so many other news sources have exclusively dismal things to say about our movement. Keeping a fellow supporter active and motivated in implementing this plan will magnify your effect many times over. We do these three things and we win in 2012 for Ron Paul.

What About Strangers?
Each one of us can spend time approaching strangers to talk about Ron Paul, but it’s almost guaranteed to be less effective than talking to our friends, family, and others with whom we already have developed a rapport outside of politics.

Additionally, all of us know that there are knuckleheaded people across the political spectrum. Some of whom are in our social precincts as friends, family, or acquaintances. Those knuckleheaded people are generally a waste of our time.

The people who are not a waste of time are the members of the anti-war movement who coalesced around Obama and are still scratching their heads trying to figure out what happened to that anti-war movement. It’s time to reach out to them in a more concerted fashion to let them know that the anti-war movement is coalescing around Ron Paul. The anti-war issue is but one example. You have likely also had experience with folks who hold other core views that make them very receptive to Ron Paul.

Within two minutes of communicating with a person in your social precinct, you should be able to identify who is going to be open to this idea of voting for Ron Paul and who is going to be a waste of time. In this way, an open minded pro-peace friend who voted Obama in 2008 is probably going to be more helpful than a neo-con hawk. Until you have gone through your entire list, please spend no more than 10 minutes convincing anyone to vote for Ron Paul. If your goal is to win the nomination for Ron Paul, then that person would simply be a waste of your time.

Three More Steps
I’m going to add three more important details about getting votes for Ron Paul. Discussions aren’t enough.

Step I. Communicate with your friend or family member.

Step II. Get a promise from him to vote for Ron Paul.

Step III. Make sure he gets out to vote for Ron Paul.*

*The third step is twofold:

A. See to it that your friend or family member is registered properly in his state to vote for Ron Paul.

B. See to it that your friend or family member gets out to the polling place or caucusing location to vote for Ron Paul on election day.

Our movement has been fantastic at the first part, but the more Ron Paul supporters I’ve encountered over the past two elections, the more I see how bad we are at the later two. We need to get a promise from our friends to vote for Ron Paul and to get them out to vote for Ron Paul.

To point to just one example - this post on the Daily Paul shows a situation where Ron Paul supporters sadly did not get out to vote. Imagine the possibilities had more supporters in Nevada just gotten out there and voted. The campaign chair says in that link the supporters existed; they just weren’t voting. Getting Ron Paul’s supporters to the polling place is necessary to win this.

Ron Paul’s getting a lot of support at rallies, but we, the members of the grassroots can do a better job getting our social precincts out to vote for Ron Paul – supporters included. I can’t stress the importance of this enough – identify supporters (Steps I + II); get them out to vote (Step III).

Many of the readers of the Daily Paul are already doing exactly that. They are reaching out to every member of their social precinct, getting promises to vote, and making sure people get out to vote. If all of us were doing that, no amount of voter fraud would be able to stop us from winning.

I understand that it’s hard work and it’s easier to focus on issues tangential to winning. However, following through with those people you speak to is vital to victory. That means making sure they are properly registered and out to vote for Ron Paul. Heck, pick them up in your car to vote on election day if you have to.

If we turn it up a notch and make ourselves more effective, we can win the nomination for Ron Paul August 27 in Tampa at the RNC, after which he will beat Obama on Novmeber 6. We just need to amplify our efforts.

We don’t do that, we lose. We do that, we win.

Allan Stevo is a writer from Chicago who is currently pounding the pavement for Ron Paul. He is the author of How to Win America for Ron Paul and the Cause of Freedom in 2012.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

If there is one tiny thing I disagree with...

that's a deal breaker then I can't imagine voting for any candidate at all. EVER. I've seen candidate after candidate in my life who I believe is wrong on most issues and only in one instance, this one, I agree with most everything. For me, Ron Paul is a deal made in heaven and after 63 years I don't expect it to get better. I know that if I focus on the solution the solution gets bigger and if I focus on the problem the problem gets bigger.

re: working your social precinct


i agree with your article in general.

however, my social precinct questions the sincerity of Dr. Paul's message of liberty when he can't seem to resist the abortion debate as happened once again in the AZ debate. further, he commented on morality. Well, if he's truly for liberty then he can't say I'm only for liberty in certain cases ie not in the abortion case.

in my opinion, he needs to emphasize forcefully that obviously he has a personal view on the issue but it's not up to the government to decide and definitely not up to the president to decide. He mentions state rights and how the Constitution doesn't comment on social issues but then he vehemently attacks Santorum's funding of Planned Parenthood and can't resist commenting on the "morality" of birth control. thus, his opposition to Federal meddling in the personal lives and liberty of citizens is lost. Last I heard he's not the morality candidate.

These comments on morality are similar to ones he made in the 2008 campaign including a disastrous 30 min video released in Iowa in December of 2007 where he was portrayed as vehemently pro life first and foremost while completely ignoring his pro liberty voting record, sound money, stay out of foreign entanglements, etc. What happened to if you're a "constitutionalist" then everything else takes care of itself.

Further, at my caucus in 2008 the most vocal Paul supporter had his own anti abortion placards complete with pictures of dead fetuses. That completely misses the point and turned off people i brought to the caucus! Meanwhile, some hack from McCain's group comes along saying he's the true fiscal conservative and guess who won the caucus.

Now, Paul rightly points out that the other GOP candidates and the current President are not defenders of the constitution. however, his message is lost in the typical divide and conquer strategy of the GOP establishment, the media, the DEms etc of using social issues to prevent comprehension of the real issues.

Just saying

Re: Abortion // PP // BC

You raise 3 distinct public policy issues that you see as Ron Paul being inconsistent by carving out an exception from the Liberty principle to indulge his conservatism. I would submit to you that it is not. I'm going to address Planned Parenthood & Birth Control first, because to me they are more straight forward.

1) Planned Parenthood - Raising this is perfectly consistent with Dr. Paul's limited government stance for two reasons. First, he was trying to point out Santorum's deceitfulness. Here's "Mr. Morality" dropping taxpayer dollars on an organization that performs abortions. More of his phoniness.

Second, If you believe freedom means a woman has a right to choose, it does not follow she has a right to use the "fruits of my labor" to practice her choices!! My money - my say. That's part of what Paul has been saying, that expanding the state politicizes matters that need not be political.

2) Birth Control - Similar situation, but there's a factual caveat: Ron Paul flat out said (I mean virtually word for word), "birth control does not cause immorality". He then went on to compare that specious argument to assertions that guns kill people, not the person pulling the trigger. So, I'm not sure I follow how he "can't resist commenting on the 'morality' of birth control." He separated the technology from the accountability. Surely you agree that promoting individual responsibility is crucial to weening dependence and promoting limited government.

3) Abortion - He believes it is a state matter. We cannot force 50 different communities into one set of mores. We don't even do that on murder! In some states, there is a duty not to shoot an intruder in your home if it's avoidable - somewhat shifting the burden - while in Texas we have a Castle doctrine.

In Illinois, Obama opposed feeding babies that survive abortion. That's treating them like a fly you swatted that got back up again. If it's outside the womb completely, it's no longer a question of a woman's privacy right or right to control her own body. No "right of egress" in the womb is being solicited by the baby gasping for air - just nourishment. Hospitals would give you or I nourishment-on-demand, but Obama says no to BAIPA.

At the state level, Ron Paul does not oppose all abortions - but he thinks elective abortions cross the line where your liberty ends and another life's liberty begins. He said as a doctor he was taught, "you have two patients" in the case of pregnant women. He said in an interview with Piers Morgan that in the case of a rape victim, he would administer a large dose of estrogen (which would abort the pregnancy, I believe by preventing implantation to the uterine lining). He said, though, that saying a life 1 day before birth has zero rights and 1 day post-birth has its own interests seems arbitrary.

If you conceive a child - voluntarily - do you not grant it a right of egress for its period of gestation? Does the child not then have a property right essential for its survival?

Liberty vs.....

life. Ron Paul has said that liberty is his message, but liberty is meaningless without life being protected. This is why he is against abortion, and he is entirely consistent.

There's a reason the Declaration of Independence lists life before liberty.

Morality *IS* important. A nanny state is needed when people are irresponsible sexually, and you end up with a dependent class of single mothers on the dole. As Rep. Mike Pence said, in a Ron Paul-esque statement:

"We will not restore this nation with public policy alone. It will require public virtue and that emanates from the traditional institutions of family and religion. ... To those who say that marriage doesn't matter, I say: You would not be able to print enough money in 1,000 years to pay for the government you would need if the traditional family continues to collapse."

Allan Stevo's picture

Ron Paul's Got Imperfections

I agree that Ron Paul has his imperfections, but it should not stop each one of us from getting a minimum of 10 votes for him. Please get your social precinct out for him and deliver no fewer than 10 votes without excuses about Ron Paul being imperfect. He's by far the best candidate from either party.

Thank God

Awesome imperfections! And even better he knows it!! Keeps one humble!!! A real "man of the people". Many a politicians would be wise to make sure others know that they put their pants on the same way we all do.

Whenever there is, in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural rights. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on......Thomas Jefferson

Step II Part B. Get them this

Step II Part B.

Get them this list of steps and get them to do the same.

Allan Stevo's picture

Magnify your impact

I agree entirely!
Thank you.


the ONLY thing that matters!

great info to act on.

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Allan Stevo's picture

Thank You AnCap

Thank you for your support. If we are in this to win an election, and that's what I'm in this for, then winning the election must be the primary focus right now. Thank you.

Know the Ropes

I would encourage Allan to refine his advice to include something along the lines of making sure each of the people he's targeting with his essay (Ron Paul organizers or activists or cadre, etc) "know the ropes" for their state.

For example, in Penna the primary vote is merely a beauty contest that has no legal bearing on delegates. So as well meaning as the advice is to RP supporters to get their social precinct (nice turn of phrase BTW!) out to Vote for RP in the Primary, this in reality accomplishes nothing. OTOH, an RP activist who knew the ropes would get their friends to the polls AND s/he would say, "Vote for Ron Paul AND vote for these three names, they are our Ron Paul delegates." If those three get elected they go to the Tampa convention and cast their delegate vote for Ron Paul.

Otherwise, great essay....you can never have enough emphasis on VOTES VOTES VOTES :-)

Allan Stevo's picture


I agree. Being informed is necessary. For the sake of simplicity, I focused on the most important issue that we are currently overlooking - getting Ron Paul supporters out to vote. You make a very good point.
Thank you.


Great advice specific to PA.


Well written, well put. Thankyou. A nice shot in the arm for every reader on DP. Many if not most individuals prefer a strategy or a strategic plan, if you will. For example, understanding Robert's Rules of Order in reference to the delegate process. It's very important for those individuals who are or will become delegates (whether it be at the district, county, state or national stage). Respectfully, SableArms

Allan Stevo's picture

Thank you, SableArms

Thank you, Sable Arms. I agree, strategic plans help make a person more comfortable in what they are doing and usually make it easier to see purpose in what they are doing, and help make it easier to measure results, thereby making the work more effective.