Three Suggestions for Dr. Paul
I hope that someone - maybe a relative of Dr. Paul, or maybe Michael Nystrom, or other some other person - will show these suggestions to Dr. Paul.
1.) You can be President of the people right now. Why wait?
.
Using your existing web sites, and the millions of supporters, you can influence pending legislation in the House and Senate. I have received "action" emails, which direct me to a page which has a letter all prepared (which I can change) supporting or opposing a particular bill. All I have to do is to fill out my name and address, send it, and and it will notify my legislator of my wishes. I did this with your H.R. 2117, to block the FDA from banning supplements. With the millions of Ron Paul supporters taking an active role in government, this would have a fantastic impact. So, using your web site, provide a variety of bills and "fill-out" forms for your supporters. This will have an immediate impact.
2. Create clips for commercial/YouTube film-makers.
.
All the aspiring Ron Paul video and commercial-makers would benefit by having good quality clips to use for their projects. If you want to help your supporters, this is one way. Book 2 hours of studio time and record 40 or 50 short clips, from 10 seconds to 25 seconds. Just sit in front of a studio camera, with good lighting, audio, wardrobe and a stylist (important!) and say things like, "The government isn't there to take away your liberty, it is there to protect your liberty!" A bunch of those would be great. Then they could be made available for download, or (for a campaign contribution) on CD or DVD. Big help!
3. Avoid 60 Minutes and similar Big Media programs.
.
With the exception of short spots, such as Tucker Carlson, the Big Media are not in your corner. 60 Minutes is especially manipulative. They will be very nice to your face; but then, when the piece airs, it will slam you, hard. That is what they do best. They are owned by Westinghouse, a defense contractor, and the last thing they want is to end the war or to cast it in an unfavorable light. FOX, CNN, ABC, and NBC are all about the same. Charlie Rose also. What must be remembered is that these are all CFR outlets; influenced by the ruling elites. Your message of freedom--despite its obvious merits--is not in step with their agenda. You are doing just fine without them.
The debates are unavoidable, and we have all seen the favoritism, especially at CNN, FOX and MSNBC. They don't like you, and will marginalize you as much as possible, as they have done. And I would strongly advise you to steer clear of future interviews with Bill O'Reilly, George Stephanopolous, Tim Russert, et al. You do not need them.
.
MSM not so bad now
So Zen
With the great exposure that has been capitalized on by Dr Paul in the last 24 hours you must be rethinking point three. Dr Paul has truth on his side and generally his delivery is sharp. It is those that are phonies that have to worry about being exposed.
The value of the exposure easily meets the value of the donations and Dr Paul is doing a fantastic job of capitalizing.
Joe
You are right
.
Recent posts have been favorable, and Chris Matthews really surprised me with his comments.
All I can surmise (lacking any evidence or information) is that the Big Guys (CFR) either do not think that Paul is enough of a threat to keep conspicuously avoiding him (and that Hillary will win); or that there is something else in the wind.
Doesn't matter. Our guy is doing really well, the press is noticing and you are correct. Man, I hope it continues. This is really encouraging.
Reality bites
As much as I hate to say it, it's the mainstream media that makes or breaks a candidate because 75% of the public is swayed and believes everything they read in the papers or see on TV. The media sets the public's attitude, just like the curriculum in the public schools does to the kids its supposed to teach.
So, having folks look at videos with people talking well of him like Andrew Napolitano, Tucker Carlson, Pat Buchanan, John McLaughlin, and Joe Scarborough because those are the types of things that are what makes him acceptable.
When I was in the Luntz focus group, the people there were being egged on to make fun of him and every comment I made about the others that wasn't nearly as damning was cut...notice my comments were not aired at all? That was because what I was saying was NOT what they wanted to hear. They wanted the superficial stuff and were being led. It was a total farce.
So the trick is yes, get on 60 minutes and give 'em hell, and don't let them marginalize you by being strong, convincing, unwaivering, and CORRECT. Show the public what fools they are for listening to the spinners.
My 2 cents
-The Ron Paul Committee should make a DVD. Sell in bulk for cheap (like these). This would be huge. There is not a better from of communication than the DVD. People don't like to read. Some people don't use the internet. They can watch him in the comfort of their home at the time of their choice. You have to see (or hear) Ron Paul to really appreciate him. I can't emphasize enough how helpful this would be. Bulk CDs would also be a good idea.
-Make available Phone Number lists and Voter Lists (or links to where you can request them)
-Link to each state's Voter Resources (like Division of Elections in NJ)
-Link to Petition for Nomination forms
-Have more contests. Autograph stuff and sell it. Legal?
Ron Paul DVD
This is a done deal.
I've already ordered 300 DVD's.
Go here: www.ronpauldvd.com
Next question?
David Cameron
Well, maybe.
.
The problem is having a committee do anything. That's why I like the idea of supporters getting some Ron Paul clips and just making their own. There was a very hot Rap song a few days ago and I am sure that appeals to the Hip-Hop segment; Biker Grannies have their own tastes, college kids; people from Maine, and so on. So many groups each with their own tastes and priorities.
However, a simple DVD of clips of Ron Paul talking, culled from the debates, TV shows, and so forth, might be good. But I hope they put it on mini-DVDs and keep it short. Nothing more tiresome than a 2-hour video, even if you like the guy. That is why I still like "Ron Paul: Stop Dreaming." It's just a powerful 8 minutes and is a real "convincer."
I like these.
The campaign needs to drill Dr. Paul more on how to respond to extremely hostile media as we saw during the last Fox News debate. These attacks will continue until he successfully deflects them. It's part of running a professional campaign. We've given them the money, now they need to ramp up and make it count for us.
Zen
Great suggestions. Have you e-mail those directly to the campaign?
If not, you should.
I'm sure they overwhelmed with e-mails, but I know they read them.
I send them twice the e-mail suggesting that RP should pull his wear out small Constitution book out of his pocket in the presidential debate, to show American people where he gets his inspiration from.
I know it is controversial and theatrical, but with his still poor name recognition, this is exactly what he needs I believe.
He didn't do this in the debate yet, but he did it in Townhall.com speech.
So I think they are noticing suggestions and think about them. Romney for such an ideaas "pays millions".They are free to RP, so they better "pay attention".
Good idea Mirek
.
I went the Daily Paul route because I think his campaign people check in from time to time, along with Dr. Paul's grandson.
But your idea is a fine one, and I took your advice and mailed them a copy.
The pocket Constitution is a good idea. Sure it's theatrical, but TV is a show, and that is often forgotten.
BTW
I send the campaign, your previous suggestions about 60 minutes, when the rumour first started a few weeks ago. Who knows, perhaps they decided not to do it, because of them.
great suggestions
Your idea of creating short video clips is a great. The campaigns message is an out of the park home run, no need to change anything there so what is needed now is selling and promoting Ron himself. You mentioned the importance of wardrobe and a stylist, I hope he has a tailor and a full time stylist. His tremendous background outshines any of the other candidates, people need to hear about it and why it makes him the best choice for President. Ron has a warm, disarming, caring persona that is powerful and people are drawn to, it needs to be promoted big time. Someone on these boards mentioned going with a billboard campaign, I totally agree much more bang for the buck as many of these companies are struggling for advertisers. I feel doing large arena type campaign rallys like Ralph Nader did in 2000 would be a tremendous success, start doing it now!
On Allies and Foes
The key is knowing "which is which." How do you do that? The same way we win people over to Ron's campaign when we simply offer "Look at his record."
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have already proven to be allies with not only their interviews with Ron, but Jon's interviews with Greenspan http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video... and even retired General Wesley Clark http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video...
Then there was the tonge-in-cheek piece that Stephen Colbert did following Ron's exchange with Huckabee over the use of "honor" in the last Fox debate http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video... not to menton several VERY critical pieces both did "humorously" on Hillary last week. THESE ARE ALLIES!
Bill Maher has also had Ron on, claimed Ron to be his "new hero" and defended Ron against Dodd on another interview as well as proclaiming Ron his GOP choice to Wolf Blitzer on-air. His interview with Chuck Hagel was also highly complimentary to Ron's positions. THIS IS AN ALLY!
Regarding anything pretty much on the MSM (minus Tucker) I would consider, at least at this point, "foe." As several have stated with the more confrontational interviews Ron has done, leave 'em alone for now. There will be a time and there will be a place, but it is NOT to his benefit "here" or "now." The fellow who wrote in and worked with NBC is exactly right, these guys have PhD's in "editing" to suit their purposes (PhD standing for "Past having DECENCY"). They will take out the electric carving knife LONG before Thanksgiving, if given the chance. The ONLY way Ron should do one of those interviews is "live" if at all.
I am a big advocate of "Sun Tzu: The Art of War." There is nothing I have ever studied, applied to this scenario, that would say that Ron's appearance on 60 Minutes or similar would bring any good at this stage. By the way, most have more respect for the likes of Jon Stewart (Emmy Award Winner) and Stephen Colbert than they do the MSM anyway--IT'S TRUE! Even well-known MSM anchors they've had on their shows tout them as "the REAL news source."
For now, go with your proven ALLIES!
Agree completely
.
It is interesting how many discount the comedy shows, such as Stewart and Colbert, but sometimes those are the only shows a segment of the population watches.
Anyhow, you and I are in complete agreement: "Choose the battles you can win."
Suggestions For Dr. Paul
Hey Zenpiper---You hit the nail on the head!!! Number 1 is the best. I also get similar emails like yours. They work and decisions have been changed because of them. GREAT IDEA.
IGNORE SUGGESTION 3
To avoid the big outlets is insane, to be frank. That is the medium where exposure is needed the most, simply because of what you point out: it is an audience Dr Paul is rarely able to reach because of the censorship. Despite the risk, the reward is far greater, especially with Dr Paul's ability to summarize his points concisely, clearly and effectively in the face of pressure or slanted questioning. It has only worked to his advantage thus far, because no matter how they frame him, they cannot change his words themselves, which resonate far greater in their truth than any context with which they try to distort the message. You have to face the fire of those who don't understand, and nobody does that better in politics- nobody opens more eyes in shorter time and with fewer words- than does Dr Paul. My humble opinion...
To avoid the big outlets is
Well, I think the reason some of the militant "Paulestinians" are advocating this is because the mainstream media will portray them as kooks, and hence Ron Paul as one as well. The "Paulestinians" may not realize this, but I know Ron Paul fully does: In order to win this game, he has to play it. Playing it means appealing to the "mainstream." The "Paulestinians" have to decide which is more important: ranting on about CFR and 9/11 or getting Ron Paul elected. He's not going to get elected on those two issues.
Don't ignore Suggestion 3 - more fully explained.
.
I remember Paul's being verbally assaulted by Sean Hannity after the SC debate. (This is after Paul had won the debate, much to Hannity's surprise). What followed was a yelling match, which was pointless, and which may have turn some voters off. It was not necessary and Dr. Paul was shaken by the exchange.
It happened again when Dr. Paul appeared on The O'Reilly Factor. O'Reilly became beligerant, put words into Paul's mouth and was a bully. This could not have helped the Paul image -trying to get a word in edgewise. Paul does not thrive in confrontation.
Nor do I think the George Stephanopolous interview was profitable for him. The supporters were outraged by Stephanopolous's dismissive comments. It was a set-up. Do you think the viewers said, "Wow! I am going to vote for Ron Paul!" Not with the way old CFR George steered it.
Paul does well in the debates, and he can't miss those.
He will continue to get coverage anyway, including TV. Whenever there is a big event (such as in NH recently) the media covers it. In these cases a field reporter will ask him quesions on the spot. These are fine. I am talking about network shows that have an history of manipulation (60 Minutes, Dateline, Hannity & Colmes, Hardball w/Chris Matthews and the rest of the pack). They are disrespectful and confrontational. They trot Dr. Paul out and use him for target practice. Not good.
The real support comes through a) word of mouth - including friend-to-friend email; b) Internet sites & searches; c) live events. Ron Paul has gained the most attention through these venues.
.
Exposure Needed
To pretend that the primary can be won without participating in the major media is absolutely foolish. Dr Paul’s message must be given exposure to as many as possible and get it well beyond the current choir. There are millions of potential and much needed voters watching. Great communicators use the medium given. Short statements (like you suggest in #2) must be given and people will be inquisitive enough to research on their own. Certainly must be careful and give clear and concise points. Comparing highway fatalities to 9-11 dead, while actually correct, is not going to play well to many people. I don’t think that Dr Paul needs to make the WHOLE case every time, just make bullet proof insightful points and let people do more research to see more information for deeper knowledge. We are less free after 9-11, we ARE going broke, we should not be in Iraq, even if you think we should we can’t afford it. Don’t get into 1954, 1913 etc… Save that for campaign appearances.
If we think we are going to win by convincing ourselves repeatedly or even expanding our circle of influence 10 times with out the major media is not reality. Hannity, O Reily, etc are not great debaters, their points can be flipped and valuable exposure gained. Also it ISN’T a debate, none of it is. It is a chance to get views out to people who may not have heard but be receptive. Wins and losses don’t matter; it is how good of an impression did the candidate make and how many people saw it. Don’t get distracted into what a host thinks. Get opportunities for exposure, give a great message, repeat, repeat, repeat.
Joe
We'll have to agree to
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think his appearances only attract attention to his campaign, and whether they initially frame it negatively makes no difference because the attention garnered will force people to confront the realities of what he's saying, and that inevitably changes minds. That is how I came to follow and support Dr. Paul myself. And those agendas of manipulation- for instance, George Snuffaluffugus- only served to inspire this campaign further. That show, in spite of its negative intentions, served to benefit Dr. Paul, that is a fact... same with O'Reilly. He got his viewpoint across clearly. Had he not been on the show, they would just ignore him or spin him in a negative light anyways. At least in appearing, he is able to address the people himself, and that gives him a chance to reach potential voters who otherwise would only hear the media manipulation without a counterpoint. No matter what, there is too much support and money behind him now for the spin to stick anymore, because we are there at every turn to clean it up. The attacks will keep coming regardless of if he appears on these shows or not. At least in appearing on these programs, he has a chance to express himself as opposed to letting them put the words in his mouth.
Almost
.
Jay I want to agree with you. It's just that I worked at NBC for 15 years and know the mindset of these guys. Ron Paul is just more grist for their mill. They have marching orders and they are not to give Ron Paul a break. Hillary and Rudy, yes. Not our guy.
To the Ron Paul supporters, he can be ambushed and it won't matter much because we're behind Dr. Paul and are sympathetic when someone like O'Reilly is nasty. But to the first-time viewer, the campaign is not served enough to justify the risk
Also, 60 Minutes is especially odious because they cut the tape after the interview, as well as have other people making remarks - often disparagingly. The supporters can roll with this stuff - we've seen it and it's water off a duck. But to the first-time viewer, it can be counter-productive. I like Charlie Rose's show, but if I were Dr. Paul, I would be sure to ask, "Who else will be interviewed with me?" If it's a one-on-one, then maybe. I think a one-on-one with Larry King would be OK, or even Oprah, if she invited him. But Chris Matthews - yikes!
Chris Matthews sez, "Ron Paul, I love that guy."
Chris Matthews seems to have read some Ron Paul stuff... :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgHTxIviN8
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ
I'd be wary
.
He may have said that, but I'm not buying it. He is paid to be a bulldog, and he's terrific. Man he talks fast! He may be sympathetic to Ron Paul's campaign and message, but he is hired to confront, probe, push and back the interviewee into the wall. That makes for really great television, instead of the soporific Jim Lehrer approach.
Television is full of true stories about how the host is sweet to the guest before air. "Can I get you some ginger ale?" "How's the golf game?"
But then, on the set... the gloves are off. Tear! Rip! Accuse!
Then, after the show, it's, "So, what's your handicap?"
The guest is baffled. He doesn't "get" the television mindset. To them, It's just a show. As one associate director once confessed, "This is a sausage factory."
DownsizeDC
As for number 1, that is already been created by DownsizeDC.org. Like this article said, you fill out your name, address, zip code, etc. once, and you can write your two Senators and one Representative about any freedom issue. There is a generic message laid out for everybody, plus you can write your personal message. A better way is to join DownsizeDC, plus your state leaders form your "Downsize [your state capitol here]"--for example, in Oklahoma (where I'm from), it will be "DownsizeOKC".
Joined DownsizeDC
Hi talktotbell, thanks for the great info. I just joined and sent my first letter to my representatives. I also sent the following letter to DownsizeDC.
Begin" Subject: Exempt worker's tips from income tax:
Hello DownsizeDC,
I just signed up and sent my first letter. Thanks for making this so easy. I will be sending more of these issues to my representatives.
Here is an issue you might want to look at. While most of our efforts are to stop or repeal bad legislation, this is one you might want to endorse.
H.R. 3664: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.
Sponsor: Rep. Ron Paul (R - TX) Introduced Sept 25th, 2007
Thanks for your work and I hope you will check out the above bill.
End"
I didn’t mention Ron Paul was a presidential candidate, I’m sure they know or will soon find out. Maybe they will add this to their “to do” list and give Dr. Paul some great exposure to what appears to be some 30K to 40K members. I’ll let you know if they take action or answer.
Best Regards,
Anti-Stupid
Babka loves Ron Paul
Thank you for your comments! As for DownsizeDC knowing about Ron Paul, Jim Babka, President of DownsizeDC.org, is a huge fan of Paul and knows about him from the beginning!
downsize
Thank you for the information and link to DownsizeDC!
Gwen Kraft
"Personal Liberty & Personal Responsibility" -- Dr. Ron Paul
"A hero is someone who understands the responsibility that comes with his freedom." -- Bob Dylan
Right, but...
.
If Dr. Paul took a role in making suggestions, that would make a difference. He knows which bills are most deserving of support. That would put him into an immediate leadership role.
Good to know about the site. Maybe Dr. Paul can steer people to it with a link. But that would be his decision.
A Very Valuable Tool and Ally
Hello zenpiper, I very rarely see you post something that I’m not mostly in agreement with, but I would like to comment here.
I spent about an hour on the DownsizeDC site before I joined. They appear to be of a non-partisan constitutional mindset with no other particular agenda that I could see. It would seem to me to be a potentially great ally of our Revolution. We only need to judge each of their initiatives to see if it meets with our own beliefs. It is totally voluntary and everyone can decide for themselves.
I don’t think we need Dr. Paul’s permission to support initiatives to inform our existing representatives of our displeasure (or even agreement) in their actions. While our primary goal is to support Dr. Paul, we also need to start to make our presence known beyond this campaign.
I know you understand the need for grassroots support not just for this campaign but before and after the election as well. The best way we can help Dr. Paul and our country is to start right now to influence those already elected who have an effect on our government. I hope it is not too little too late.
As far as I can see, DownsizeDC could add greatly to our own efforts. I don’t intend to be too critical of you, but let’s not leave it to Dr. Paul. If we (all of us) had taken these kinds of actions over the years, we might have saved ourselves many of the “troubles” we face today. (I’ve been as neglectful of my civic duties as anyone.) The time for change is right now and DsDC looks like a very valuable tool to use in this fight.
Best Regards,
Anti-Stupid
OK !
.
There is no reason you can't use DownsizeDC and also follow Dr. Paul's siggestions via a web site - if that ever happens.
Frankly I don't know if he will see my suggestions, agree with any of them, and then implement any of them. It's a three step process for each and he is a busy tot these days. So I am not holding my breath.
But of course I hope he takes the suggestions.
John Coleman, a fine author, writes that our last chance, as a nation, is through influencing congress. We can't affect the White House, the CFR or the international banking cartel, but we can certainly wield influence through our representatives in the House and Senate.
three suggestions
Love idea number one..Should Ron Paul's campaign head quarters make available the letters necessary to address pending legislation, I am sure Ron Paul supporters would avail themselves to the opportunity of making congress aware of their positions. In a previous forum topic I had suggested Ron Paul supporters. make an e-mail address book of all the congress members and let all members know how we felt on different topics: N.A.U., Fed system. etc.
Also idea nuber two, the putting together informative videos of Dr. Paul's position is a great idea and very cost effective. These videos, having campaign head quarter approval, could be shared hundreds of times over. Perhaps distribtion, sold or free, could be done at rallies and other speaking engagements.
And I just attended Ron Paul's rally in Manchester, N.H. Dr. Paul was awesome. I also think that Dr. Paul should avoid unfriendly, biased, skewed interviews. Instead, try to do as many college campus speeches as possible.
Great Jim
.
Yes, the college speeches are a good idea. He is great with a live crowd, since he has a positive and personable vibe. TV is not his best medium; real, live ones are the best. You are right.
I love all three ideas
I love all three ideas. And I think college campuses are a great idea. Have you seen the utube video "Personal Interview I had with Ron Paul" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0Dy_XgjBiE&mode=related&search=). He is so GREAT with young people and they give him a lot of respect unlike TV personalities - I saw O'Reilly and it was horrible. However, Bill Maher has been a fantastic ally in my estimation.
Very Cool !
.
Cole you should start your own thread here and put this up. This is nice work. What was good was that everybody was relaxed, just having a conversation. (I only saw the first 2 minutes so I need to get back to it tomorrow).
I liked seeing Ron Paul at his desk in his office - that was a different look and feel from most of the other videos. The lighting was nice.
You are right about Bill Maher. In fact, he stated on CNN to Wolf Blitzer that he liked Ron Paul best. This was really good. Wolf wasn't thrilled but hey. Who cares?