Ron Paul: Will Have Best Campaign Team Possible

I see no reason not to take Dr. Paul at his word when he writes, in his most recent appeal, “We will build the strongest team we possibly can and execute the best, most professional effort in our power.”

This is an encouraging note of reassurance to grassroots supporters who have expressed concerns. A sign of the professionalism Dr. Paul refers to is that instead of shooting or shunning the messengers, the team soberly and directly acknowledged them. I intend to do whatever I can, as last time, to promote Dr. Paul’s message.

Jim

Amen. My sentiments exactly.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BC6FHDWT24Q2SALIFLKMZJBO3M Zee Zee

this is good news. he needs to get all the professionals that know how to influence the media and how the game works, like Doug Weed on board.
http://www.facebook.com/sweisman66 Scott Weisman

As long as the official campaign recognizes the grass roots for the robust source of ideas and innovation that it is. Some ideas (like the blimp) may be a bit weird and not worth the expense, but others (like the money bomb) are pure genius. Many of the personal efforts at commercials and promotional media far excelled the officials commercials during the 2008 campaign.

The enthusiastic experimentation should be embraced, even if it sometimes fails.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Tom-Insko/100000927025663 Tom Insko

Dr. Paul has almost singlehandedly brought Austrian economics to the nation’s attention through his candidacy. I’ll support him any way I can.
Tamu02aggie

Can someone get him a speech coach? Perhaps Frank Luntz.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_BC6FHDWT24Q2SALIFLKMZJBO3M Zee Zee

I’m not sure I agree. We want someone who actually believes in Ron Paul. Doug Wead was in that Ron Paul campaign documentary which came out, and I think he said in there that he helped George HW Bush prepare for debates.
Anonymous

The true problem is getting people to understand what Dr. Paul is saying. All they hear is, as an example, “legalize heroin” and they automatically think Dr. Paul is all about drugs and legalization of drugs. What they don’t hear is “I am for personal liberty.” They don’t hear him when he talks about over medicating that so many Dr’s practice. There is a vast difference in wanting to take the general government out of the so called drug war – which is both unconstitutional and ineffective – and leaving the drug problem up to the states. I have just spend several hours trying to explain the difference and I still don’t think I got through.
jaffi411

I remember Ron Paul when I was a Sailor in the US Navy and the US was trying to sell the war for Iraq. What I remember most about that time is that he was the only man on the House floor to stand by his principles and state that if we are to go to war, then Congress must declare war. Don’t get me wrong, I was swept up into the confusion after 9/11 and joined the military because I thought that that was my duty. But, I remember that when I was sworn in, that I did so in order to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I bear true faith and allegiance to the same”. It was Ron Paul’s stance against the hysteria of the time that actually got me to read the Constitution (something that most soldiers/sailors never do), and to begin to study history and economics. He was the spark that got me to become quite interested in the sciences that explain the world around me.

When his 2008 campaign came, I thought that he would be entirely marginalized; I was out of the military and had come to the understanding that most people did not give a care in the world to the actions of the State, economics, or the real history of our past (and, that of the world). I was wrong. Here, I thought that I was going to be one in a million supporting a candidate that had no chance of winning. While it is true that he had no chance to win, what I did not expect is that he would completely change the entire face of American politics. He didn’t need to win the election to actually win, all he needed to do was plant the seed of curiosity in the people. They began to not believe everything that they are told, they began to question, to research and to ask. They began to become true individuals, searching for the answers of humanity, searching for liberty. Ron Paul single-handidly started a movement that was far too long in the making. A movement where people finally realized the root of civilization: Liberty.

While I do not have any allusions about the next campaign, I also know that Ron doesn’t either. He never expects to win, which is why he merely expresses his true opinions and thoughts, without regard to poll numbers, and engrained in the timeless principles that he learned from the likes of Rothbard, Mises, and Spooner (and, many more).

If anything, a Ron Paul campaign is a catalyst of human thought, one that seeks to find the answers to the question: Who are we, where are we going, and where do we (and, our posterity) want to be?

You have my full support. Let’s do it, and do it now.
Anonymous

1. What would be nice is spending those Ron Paul millions on a high-def 30 second CGI cartoon that effortlessly explains to people who watch Jersey Shore the nature of Cantillon Effects and how central bank money dilution is based upon the theft of purchasing power from those holding the old money. Get that through the heads of the masses and the game is over.

2. Think Progress is still at it. They go berserk when they hear “democratic socialism is slavery”.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2011/05/to-hardcore-libertarians-democratic-government-as-such-is-a-form-of-slavery/

And best of all:

Like so many other Republicans, Paul needs to learn that the Constitution is not some toy that he can take apart and reassemble to force the nation down whatever path he chooses. The Constitution’s words actually mean something, and Ron Paul is not free to ignore them.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/15/paul-ss-medicare-slavery/

3. Remember John Quiggin?

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2009/05/the-right-and-austrian-business-cycle-theory/

An Austrian School writer in Poland demolished Quiggin. Quiggin responded by explaining that the Australian panic of the 1890s was caused by “free banking”, banks with a 1/3 reserve requirement. That Australian panic is ALWAYS brought up by Keynesians to “disprove” the ABCT.

http://critiquesofcollectivism.blogspot.com/2011/02/john-quiggin-on-abct.html

Who would have ever thought that a 1/3 reserve requirement would cause problems?
Good Idea

As we discussed in a previous blog entry, it is extremely important that the campaign acquires leaders who know how to RESPECT and PROMOTE good talent. The leaders must understand the need and importance for recognition, and the need to provide a slippery vine for good ideas and talent to be properly used. It is called “experienced management” - people who know how to get things done through other people. If the campaign can find these leaders, then I think that Ron Paul will promote the message much more efficiently this time around. And maybe even have a shot at winning..
Jefferson

Tom, I have taken action regarding our shared concerns about the SC debate, money bomb, and lack of rehearsal for the debate. If you could drop in and offer some words, it would mean a lot. I respect your opinions, and they way you help adapt the message. Please visit this thread if you can.http://dailypaul.com/164810/im-sending-rp-a-care-package-and-i-need-help-filling-it
Brian

I’ve always thought the same thing. But Ron Paul has always admitted that he’s not the best speaker or debater, so at least he acknowledges it and will probably work on it.

The Chris Matthews interview was pretty good, but Ron should have expected the Civil Rights Act of1964 questions and should have had a 30 second reply in mind to smash them down hard and fast. The Chris Wallace interview was good too, but the “general welfare clause” questions drove me crazy because those should be smashable in 20 seconds as well. I don’t know. I think he gets a little flustered answering challenges in debates and interviews. It’s not that he doesn’t know the answer. He certainly does. I think it’s that our position is so intellectual and sophisticated that Ron Paul sometimes feels that he has to give a long, professorial explanation, and then gets bogged down, when he needs to work on compressing the arguments into short, concise replies. Pat Buchanan has always had a talent for this; I love his skills of argumentation, of using great, stimulating sentences that really show his master of the English language. And of course Tom Woods is one of the greatest public speakers I’ve ever witnessed. Who else would throw in obscure The Simpsons references into monologues covering pretty complex topics. And economist Walter Block throwing in random Cartman from Southpark references into his lectures…that’s just gold! If Ron Paul could throw in some witty pop culture stuff like that it would be an improvement.
http://www.mises.org Mechanized

“Tom Woods is one of the greatest public speakers I’ve ever witnessed.”

Agreed. It is quite extraordinary how Tom Woods can captivate an audience. Once he begins speaking, I personally find it difficult to stop listening. While Tom would doubtlessly scoff at running for political office he would certainly have my vote.
Martial_Artist

@jaffi411, I too was in the Navy, but likely much earlier than yourself (I had been retired therefrom for almost 20 years on 9/11/2001). Insofar as I can remember, Ron Paul is the only living elected official in either house of the U.S. Congress whom I can recall standing by all of his principles, come hell or high water. It is well past time that we had a President with that character and the willingness to stand up to the Congress by every means at his disposal.

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer
Rob

If they go for the best campaign team possible, they will try to get Ed Rollins who had been committed to Huckabee. Rollins was Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager and knows this business inside and out. He will arm Ron Paul with the best sound bites and get them on the right media to respond to critics. You have to respond before the opponent’s meme gets into full public awareness, or you can never live it down. But another task that Rollin’s would have to do is to hone RP’s message down to an intelligible program.

We know Ron Paul’s philosophy. What we need to know. What voters want to know is what Ron Paul will do. It is time to prioritize the message. I know that Ron Paul wants to begin by cutting overseas defense spending, but that will only put a small dent in the budget deficit. I know that Ron Paul wants to let young people opt out of social security. But that would deprive social security of revenue at just the time when its expenditures are beginning to skyrocket. Many of the things that RP proposes are at cross-purposes to each other if you tried to accomplish them all at the same time. These things need to be sorted out into a coherent program.

Sound money, non-interventionism, and constitutionalism are the broad themes of RP’s message. But these principles need to be augmented with specific programs, and RP needs to show the American public how his programs will address our current problems and provide a better future for us and for our children.

What RP really needs is someone who will make him spend a few days daydreaming about what he would do as president. He already knows enough about Congress to know what is feasible. He needs to tell us what he would get done and how. If he would sort out his priorities, both the confusion and the apparent radicalism of his message would be greatly reduced.
yes’m

This can only be the best campaign team possible if Tom Woods came on board as speaking coach.

If Ron spoke as eloquently as Tom no one would dare call him “crazy”.