NOT being on the debate would be GREAT for us
Has anyone considered what would happen if Fox/ Iowa does exclude Ron Paul? 1. Ron Paul might do what he did the last time Iowa excluded him and hold his own press conference - perhaps an hour long? Invite every other station and get time to discuss whatever he wants.
2. What good is another 3 minutes of air time going to do him? Not much.
3. It will galvanize his supporters and make them go crazy. The Boston Tea Party will become a frenzy of donations and who knows how many papers will publish the event along with the exclusion of Paul from the debates.
4. We will need a very peaceful, quiet demonstration outside the debate to show that we do not appreciate this bull, but that is all. No rioting, no shouting, no bullhorns. If we don't take the high road here they win. We have to look like the most polite group of school children you have ever seen. Not one peep. Just signs. Polite signs about how we don't like being censored, but that is about all.
5. If he doesn't get on the debates we can put Iowa on the map as the scum of the earth. The press we get from NOT being in the debate will be fifty times the press we get from being in the debate.
6. Everyone needs to do research to find articles like this one: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016710.html that prove that pollsters are crooked. I called this polling company and asked why Paul was excluded, they said they didn't have the equipment or capability to include all of the candidates and since Paul hadn't done so well in the last poll they conducted where they excluded his name, they decided he was not doing well in polls.
We need to have answers ready for cameras telling them how Public Policy Polling and other specific polling companies do business. Find Zogby polls where they only poll 300 people and find out the math to determine just how much of a plus/minus is added to their polls to show that their polls are junk.
7. Conduct our own poll on all of the forums we can find to see how many of us voted in the last presidential primary - the litmus test to see if you will get called this time. And how many of us have land lines or moves since the last primary.
Don't you see folks, this could be the best thing to happen to Ron Paul. Being excluded from the debates. It proves what we have been saying all along - the political process is crooked and we have the only honest candidate!
Let's look good on this one. Not bad!
If he doesn't get in, we start writing articles all over the place about inaccurate polling, do our best to put the polling companies out of business, cite every editor that cited to one of these un-scientific polls.
Perhaps someone could YouTube a Professor of statistics to discuss polls, their problems, and why this campaign defies all attempts counting our numbers? That would be huge! Anyone up for the task?
We need to start discrediting their method of kicking us out, not them, otherwise, it will look we are just grousing!
He is NOT in the debate
Hi all -
From what I've been able to determine, Ron Paul has NOT been officially invited to this debate. Some posters on ronpaulforums.com are claiming that they have received word from Tancredo's campaign (a supposed copy of which they have posted) that Tancredo has been invited! I have also heard (although unfortunately, I cannot remember the source) that Mike Huckabee has his invitation IN HAND. Short of actually calling the Iowa GOP, which I know the campaign has strongly suggested we NOT do, does ANYONE have a definitive answer on this?
Secondly, the communications director for RP in Iowa (John Zambonini*sp) has confirmed that FAUX NEWS set the debate rules and that the Iowa GOP went along with them. Imagine that .....
He's already IN
This whole thread is moot because they have already accepted him in the debate.
In addition, the RP Campaign has EXPLICITLY asked all grass roots supporters to NOT contact the Iowa GOP to express thier feelings.
This is a dead story.
Alan in NC
Alan in NC
anytime the campaign wants to...
it could hold a 'debate' in that format. Only instead of competing for tv tame against a national one, hold it on a different day.
Work with a university to hold one,invite everyone, and see who shows... then let Ron rip them up in a better conventional debate instead of the show pieces that air now.
"You had me at Ron Paul"
http://gronga.wordpress.com/
..
Gimme a T-bone! http://www.dailypaul.com/node/51102
"You had me at Ron Paul"
http://gronga.wordpress.com/
Ignore the negativity
I see some people are judging you quite harshly, but let's keep a perspective. What we write here is written on the fly. We do our best, and often our best is not good enough. It gives some people the opportunity to throw stones. They are just not happy unless they criticize. You've made their day.
The gist of your argument is that Ron Paul does not need FOX... and I agree 100%. Fairness is inherently an American trait. It would be unfair to exclude Ron Paul. His exclusion alone would incense people who might not care much for him. He'll get a huge sympathy vote.
Ron Paul's response should just be,"FOX is not a major network, so it doesn't matter. CNN knows better not to exclude me, as do all the other major networks. FOX operates in its own dark corner. We don't advertise on the FOX and neither do major corporations."
Plano TX
UM
No.... just the value of the after-interview and polling is worth it.
I think I proved that pollsters are corrupt (Luntz)
Jane Aitken, not corrupt, just stuck in what is...
becoming an outdated paradigm. Think about it. You are the owner of a polling company. Accurate polls, that is, polls that correctly predict the eventual outcome, make you money.
Now, over the last couple decades, voters have become increasingly apathetic (lets leave out the reasons why for now). So, you have a problem: When calling potential voters, how do you determine if they are a LIKELY voter? Well, one obvious way is to find out if they voted before. Hence, it is not unusual when pollsters are trying to find out who will win a republican primary to make sure and speak to people who previously voted republican. The point being, the pollster are not corrupt, they have been just trying to produce accurate polls based on "market conditions," if you will.
Of course, the paradigm can prove useless if conditions have changed, and in this case, one could make a strong argument that they have changed, simply because Dr. Paul has brought in so many previously apathetic citizens (not to mention independents and even Democrats).
The stage is no doubt being set for a paradigm-shattering event at the New Hampshire primary. And then, Luntz and all the rest will be scrambling to figure out how they could be so wrong. But, then again, it will never have been anything personal against Dr. Paul. Often times, the people CLOSEST to a situation will be the very ones who CANNOT see how a situation has changed.
All Caps
I think Mike asked that you don't post in all caps. I'll let you delete the posts...
Iowa has never excluded him
Iowa GOP has NOT excluded Ron nor have they ever.
Independent groups had a forum that did, but you saw what happened.
There has not been anything said about the debates.
While some of these might be good ideas...
no matter how well you "spin" it, not being in the debate would be very bad. To the average voter, Dr. Paul not being on the stage for the debate would mean that he is obviously unelectable, i.e. it would confirm what is the biggest hurdle to the campaign: that he cannot win. No matter how little face time he might get in the debate, just being seen on the stage would further validate he is a legitimate candidate, and we still need that verification.
To put this another way, we want Dr. Paul to be an outsider, but not THAT far outside. And in the end, despite what many "doom-and-gloomers" say here, he will be in.
Agree
I find this the case a well. Since the majority or Americans watch Mainstream Media...i.e FOX news, I believe as well that even the slightest face time will put a dent in people's minds that tell their little brain cells that Ron Paul is real, and is not a "flake" like some articles might say. Plus, what if there is another afterpoll and he wins...what great coverage again despite how they will discredit his winnings.(stacking the votes Um, yeah... NOT)
- Brennan
In fact, enjoiskaterguy...
if I were a Republican "operative," working for the neocon bosses, I would do anything to keep him OUT of the debates right now. The longer Dr. Paul stays in, the worse it will be for the neocons and Guiliani, Romney, et al. The time to shut him up would be right now, before he starts consistently scoring above 5% in the polls. Cause if Dr. Paul gets a real head of steam going, his movement will be a runaway train they will not be able to stop!
Agree with Sanity
While I believe that national TV exposure is very important, IF Ron is excluded from the debate it could easily be taken advantage of and turned into a win for Paul. I think a lot of people see it this way.
But it's all talk about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin ... it's not up to us, or to Ron Paul, it's up to the sponsors of the debate. If they exclude him, there's a [i]chance[/i] to turn it around into a positive for Paul. But that's not a given either - if too many people react in the wrong way, i.e. out of anger without using their head, the chance will be squandered. The establishiment would expect a huge crowd of Ron Paul supporters to protest noisily outside of the debates (if he's excluded), and that would be something that they could use to paint Ron Paul's campaign and his supporters in a negative light. But what if a crowd of thousands of Paul supporters quietly walked right by the debates and on to their own rally? The media wouldn't expect it, they'd have nothing to be critical about, they'd be flabergasted, and they'd probably cover the rally, instead of the protest they expected.
This is all just supposition, I grant you, but shouldn't we always try to envision what Ron Paul would do? Ron Paul is always forceful and unconpromising when it comes to the message of Liberty, but always humble and positive when dealing with others.
2 cents
Follow Ron Paul!
You are right, we need to envision what Ron Paul wants us to do, if not then perhaps we are in the wrong campaign. We are in the process of electing a Commander and Chief. We are not in a revolution to promote Anarchy. So get in pace with what Ron Paul wants us to do. I don't see him waving a gun up on stage when debating, he is using words of vision and wisdom, not mud throwing. People are sick of that and it turns them off. Jump, shout and have fun and we'll get him elected, don't worry. But leave the attacks for the other side, they have to attack cause they can't compete with the logic of Ron Paul. With intelligence there is no need for violence.
SANITY IS AFRAID
FEAR NOT
LETS BE BOLD
LETS GRAB THE BOXES OF TEA AND SMASH THEM OPEN AND
LETS SHOUT , HOOT AND HOLLER
LETS SAVE AMERICA
BECAUSE AMERICA IS DYING
GET ON BOARD ,
ALL ABOARD
THE REVOLUTION EXPRESS IS TAKING OFF!
HAVE A NICE DAY!
if we dont smash the israel lobby the israel lobby will smash us
POLITE AND QUITE
STUPID
STUPID
STUPID
WERE THEY POLITE AND QUIET AT THE BOSTON TEA PARTY?
WERE THEY POLITE AND QUIET WHEN THE STORMED THE
BASTILLE?
UH, LAST TIME I CHECKED THIS WAS A REVOLUTION?????
YES LETS BE NONVIOLENT, BUT LETS RAISE A RAUCUS
ITS TIME TO BE LOUD, AMERICA IS DYING, LETS BE HEARD
LETS NOT BE POLITE AND QUIET
LETS SHOW OUR ANGER , SHOUT THE TRUTH OUT BOLDLY
LETS HAVE SOME CHUTZPAH !
PEACEFUL YES , LOUD YES, POLITE AND QUIET NO!
HAVE A NICE DAY!
if we dont smash the israel lobby the israel lobby will smash us
Sanity sounds like a shill...
not to throw mud, but Sanity has been a member for 3 hours and is writing his first article saying to the effect that Ron Paul NOT being in the debate would be a good thing? What a tool... This board is so easy to sign up on, watch these ridiculous postings....
Probably Sean Hannity (Sanity) stopping by to stir the mud a bit...
We don't need this.
Your post was uncalled for. This is what everyone is talking about. Let someone post their views without attacking them. If you disagree then disagree but Grow Up already.
Try thinking before you let your fingers on the keyboard!
First of all, there is nothing that I said in this post that would stop any action, so it is ridiculous to call me a shill. Second, did you even read my post or are you just a jerk to anyone new to your stupid forum. No wonder people don't come to this one. You people are cruel and idiots. You don't know who I am. What if I wanted to donate and you insulted me out of it? It is too late because I maxed out in February, but you don't know who you are talking to.
You better learn some manners boy! Your comment is rude beyond belief. You sound just like every other anti-paul supporter who isn't intelligent enough to say a word about the message but just likes to attack people!
This is how you win votes? I am never sending any person to this piece of crap forum.
Finally, if you read, or can you read?, if you read what I wrote you would see I was only pointing out that it would not be the end of the world if he did not get into the debate and that there are plenty of good things that can come from it.
I suppose only pessimism is allowed here.
You shoot someone in the face for being optimistic and pointing out the good?
And what did I tell you to do that could hurt Ron Paul? Nothing! Except to lighten up on talk about causing arson if you don't get your way and he doesn't get on the debate like the other thread called for.
Informant - that is a perfect name for you because YOU ARE THE RAT. I said nothing bad at all and yet you try to drive me out of here. So who do you work for?
This board is terribly laid out, filled with idiots and not one person here protected a newbie to a board. You would rather kick someone new out!
And the clever retort and brilliant analysis of my long thought out comment was - this is a ridiculous posting.
Wow - how long did it take you to think that up?
So instead of a basic, chill out, it will all be alright, we will be fine either way, you would rather have panic and riots? Or what is your problem with the basic message? Huh?
Go enjoy the horse you rode in on!
Catching on
I actually liked your article and thought it had some merit. Plus I thought it was well thought out.
You may or may not realize that about 2 weeks ago, this site had an onslaught of very negative posts, so much so that the founder wrote a post about it. Maybe some people are a little sensitive, that's all. Personally I am glad to see new people to this site. It means Ron Paul is truly catching on. I say welcome.
Calm down
I actually agreed with informant when I read it, that you might be a shill. MIGHT be, okay. So your post comes across that way even if you definitely aren't one.
Just because it seems obviously a terrible thing if Ron Paul gets excluded from the debate.
How could anyone think it would be great, seriously?
"What does conservatism today stand for? It stands for war. It stands for power. It stands for spying, jailing without trial, torture, counterfeiting without limit, and lying from morning to night."
Lew Rockwell
Just laugh it off.
I thought your article was very well thought out, regardless of how long you've been posting or how many posts you've made. Don't let him get you angry, when people come off negative and attack those who are on our side, we know their true motives. They want to stir up trouble in the ranks. Just laugh at them and like Ron Paul says have fun.
grant
Vote for Fred
Everyone should vote for Fred Thompson in the Fox News post debate poll. Fred is the guy who scares nobody and for good reason. He's a dud and cannot win. Period. However he still has enough support to participate in the debate and they like having him around to bolster the appearance of democratic inclusion.
What can Fox say when Fred gets the most votes? They can't say it was RP supporters because above all they don't want to give any credence to us or mention Ron's name. They will be forced to pretend Fred won the debate. Some who will only vote for a winner will abandon Rudy and Mitt and begin to support Fred. This is the effect we want. To have those who do not support RP to be equally divided among the others.This will make it easier for Ron to place first in Iowa and we will have used Fox's own tactics against them.
Vote for Fred in the Fox News post debate poll and watch as they scratch their heads and try to explain how it happened.
_______________________________
..Without the truth we have nothing
We should spread the vote perfectly evenly
Since we have so many more supporters that vote, we should set up a web site that assigns each visitor a candidate to vote for, and the visitor MUST ONLY VOTE FOR THAT CANDIDATE (and not revisit the site--of course with the judicious use of cookies, we could mostly enforce that). The website rotates evenly through each candidate such that if Paul supporters follow the rules, it will distribute the votes perfectly evenly.
Then, at the end of the night, they'll have to report all the candidates with almost exactly 20% (or whatever it works out to be with the number of participants) for each one.
...and they'll be scratching their heads... ;)
that would have the same
that would have the same effect as our non participation since there are people out there who will actually vote for who they like. we can't achieve any even result just by voting evenly ourselves.
Vote for Fred
_______________________________
..Without the truth we have nothing
That's Incorrect
If our votes were only a small percentage of the overall votes, you'd be correct, but I believe our numbers are so much greater than the combined votes for the other candidates, it would have the effect of pushing their votes down into the noise so the overall percentages would almost be even.
Plus, if it was about pwning Faux, I think the response would be even greater ;).
Funny
I was thinking the same thing:)
Maybe in opposite land
Not having him in the debate would be great news for Ron Paul if you want him to run as a third party candidate. But since he is running as a Republican it is extremely important that he makes it to this nationally televised debate.. especially with the Iowa primaries so close.
Slipped in undetected. But your volley of words were fast as shit.
Yes it is, it is important
Yes it is, it is important to remember its not the end of the world and there are other things we can do to make things better.
But I believe Dr. Paul will be in the debates. He has just now placed at 7% in latest NH poll and in few weeks we could be in 10% range anyhow. With more exposure and more money spent in IO he will raise in the polls there as well. I think the GOP's advice in IO, don't complain to us but get out there and turns some votes and polls is the right response to this. We're just placed on the front page of NY Times, latest poll showing us at strong 7% in NH (without leaners) and the money raised.
What I really think is happening, we have really caught the MSM off guard with the 11/5 event. We're rising in the polls and they are doing a little prep work before we break out in the double digit percentages. I can see CNN getting a little smarter and trying to garner the paulites and the effect on over-all interest RP campaign will generate once we start breaking out into the double digits.
The important combo is the double-digit poll and the money to back it up. That is the lethal combination that they are starting to anticipate.
Donate tomorrow 11/11, it really makes a difference. I plan on donating on both 11/11 and 12/16.
CNN
I agree with you about CNN.
They are the MSM outlet currently being most friendly towards Dr. Paul.
I suggest we encourage it with polite emails thanking the journalists inviting him on their segments.
I don't think Romney, Giuliani or Hillary supporters email the MSM when their candidate is talked about :)
Positive reinforcement is always important.
Remember, the media is a BUISNESS. The more postive reception they get, the more they'll show the people what they want. Let's keep encouraging them!
I think you are right on!
Even if he is invited to the debate, a peaceful, polite show of signs outside would capture the attention of those attending the debate.