Monday, January 16, 2012

Ron Paul Case Files #1

I've seen so many well intentioned, passionate supporters of Ron Paul completely botch it up when calling talk radio, posting on news articles and posting on opposing facebook pages.

We can not play into the stereotype of; Paulbot or Paultard or any other derogatory idea of who we are.

Our mission is singular, attract a new supporter from anywhere. I'm putting together a series of tips called "Case Files". This is the first one...

Case File #1 -

Use one of these scripts when calling; Rush, Levine, Hannity, Savage, Berry or any other conservative radio talk show.

Greet the host and as soon as they give you the green light say...
“people are rightly concerned about our National Security and many fear that a Ron Paul Presidency would put our country in serious danger. I worry about our safety too and though I can’t predict the future I can say that Ron Paul has received far more donations from our military personnel than all other Republican candidates combined. Endorsements from these heroes is more than good enough for me, but you should decide for yourself, please Google Ron Paul”
If the host hasn’t cut you off or disconnected you at this point say…

“thank you for your time, I'll take your comments off the air"

You want to be friendly and even tempered. It is extremely important not to get into an argument with the host; not because you are wrong or you can't hold your own, but because they control the microphone. They will take any chance to paint you as; kooky, crazy, or insincere. Don't give them that chance.

Another tact;

"people are rightly concerned about our National Security and many fear that a Ron Paul Presidency would put our country in serious danger. I worry about our safety too and though I can’t predict the future I can say that Ron Paul has received an endorsment from the former head of the CIA unit responsible for tracking Osama Bin Laden. His real world experience and expertise is enough for me, but you should decide for yourself, Google Ron Paul"

You don't have to (and probably shouldn't) use these verbatim, but they are a good starting point.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012


I thought I noticed something odd, but dismissed it as quickly as it came into my head. Then I saw someone else mention it, and thought, huh, weird.

Given how nasty the campaign has been getting, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney seem overly and possibly overtly cordial. What gives?

Perhaps they've found a deep respect for one another... uh no.

Maybe Paul is gunning for VP or some other high ranking position in a Romney administration... yeah 'cause that is just the kind of thing Ron Paul would do.

Maybe Romney is courting the Paul voter who he KNOWS he will need come general election time... me thinks we're getting closer.

Maybe both candidates think they are better off once everyone else is out of the race... Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner.

Ron Paul's campaign has made many mentions of how only he and Romney can run a national campaign. Romney's camp has acknowledged they wouldn't mind facing off with Paul. So... who's right?

Well, that kinda depends. Conventional wisdom indicates that would favor Romney, and I admit I've long felt that Ron Paul was better off if the field was fractured. That said there are two factors that will play a role, but how big?

February, the month is chalk full of caucus states and Paul has banked on his organization and grass roots support in these states. Nevada, Minnesota, Maine & Washington (March 3rd, but before super tuesday) will be critical to give people a real view of the "not-Romney" alternative.

Proportional delegates, until April 1st most of the contests will divide up delegates proportionally, which means in a two person race the delegates could be quite even. If Ron Paul can hang in well enough to stave off the inevitability factor he has two big aces up his sleeve, Texas and California.

If Romney sweeps South Carolina and Florida we are going to see how this chess match plays out sooner rather than later.

Ron Paul has already changed America

One of the slights against Ron Paul is that he has rarely gotten any legislation through congress. While this is certainly true and may speak to the power of persuasion he has over his peers, I frankly think it speaks more to the power of persuasion that lobbyists have over his peers. (but hey, that's a whole different story)

Undeterred, Dr. Paul has been a consistent voice of dissent in congress, proudly earning the label "Dr. No". More importantly he has completely changed the political discourse in this country and it will have reverberating effects for years to come.

What are some of the things that Paul has changed?

Moneybomb - A term now regularly used to describe political fund raising events, but it was Paul's supporters who lay claim to the original Moneybomb back in '07. Nobody else comes close to his success with these types of fund raising efforts either. While most candidates struggle to reach a few hundred thousand dollars, Ron Paul regularly hits several million in donations.

End the Fed - yes it's a book, but more it's an idea. Paul questions the need for a central bank and then really questions what the central bank has been doing. His efforts to audit the Fed came to fruition (at least in part) and the results were staggering. Over 16 trillion in buddy loans from money that was created out of thin air. The ability for one organization to wield so much power over the global economy is terrifying and Ron Paul brought it to light.

Sound Money - we may be a long way from returning to the gold standard, but because of voices like Dr. Paul's we are closer to things like a balanced budget amendment.

Congressional authorization for war - Presidents Republican and Democrat alike have denigrated the War Powers Act and have been left unchecked by weak congresses. Ron Paul takes them to task on the issue.

Liberty - His belief that government's nearly sole repsonsibilty is in the protection of our liberty. Once considered a fringe movement, the idea of real freedom is (as Dr. Paul likes to say) becoming popular, don't you know!

Regardless of elections won or lost, legislation passed or not, there are few people in the history of our country who have had or will have a greater impact than Ron Paul.

All bets are off!

While New Hampshire and Iowa have very different demographics there are a couple of items from exit polling that really caught my eye.

In both states 46% of repsondants indicated that they had made up their mind in the last few days. While unfathomable to me, I expect that to continue in SC and Florida as long as the field stays somewhat intact. In Iowa this greatly helped Santorum and in New Hampshire it was a boon to Romney and to a lesser degree Huntsman.

While that 46% of the field is difficult to predict (really, really difficult), let's look at the 54% of the electorate who were more sure of their vote. In both contests so far Ron Paul has had 12% of the population locked up at least a month in advance.  To me this represents his floor, I do not believe in any contest from now until June that he will do worse than that. Outside of Romney no other candidate has a floor greater than 4%.

As the race eventually becomes Romney vs Paul (question is when, not if), the establishment will try to portray it as; the "presumptive nominee" vs "the cranky old guy who won't go away". Before that happens, Ron Paul has got to show that he can get some of these "last minute" voters. South Carolina is the perfect spot to do this.

The field is still fractured enough that a win here is not impossible, but more importantly, if he can jump up to the 20% support level in a southern state then I think he shows serious muscle.

Even with no delegates in South Carolina or Florida, Ron Paul could enter Super Tuesday in virtual delagate tie with Romney. If that is the case, all bets are off!

Sunday, January 8, 2012


Claims of "unelectable" are always made with arrogance, ignorance or malice.

In the spirit of full disclosure I am a Ron Paul supporter, but I could be speaking for thousands of candidates in hundreds of races in our recent history.

Look no further than Newt Gingrinch who just nine months ago, his campaign in disarray was left for dead. Smelling salt technology has obviously come a long way. Then there is Rick Santorum, never really alive in this race, (polling at sub 5% for MONTHS) comes out of nowhere and pulls off a tie (delegates) in Iowa.

Why should you listen to a pundit, the media or anyone else with regard to electability? At best they are usually wrong and at worst they are intentionally trying to lead you in a certain direction. Listen to the candidates, scrutinize their records (for yourself) and choose the one who most closely aligns to your way of thinking.

Electability is determined on election day and not before. What makes an individual electable or not is in each of our hands, one by one our votes are counted and count they do. We should replace our own judgement with someone else's... never.

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Chicken Hawk

Nothing cuts like the truth.

Many will say that is "unseemly" to call someone out so personally over military records especially in a live, face to face to debate. I happen to think that allowing our kids to be killed fighting; unjust, unlawful, undeclared wars when you were unwilling to go yourself is FAR, FAR more egregious and I am proud of Ron Paul for calling a spade a spade and not backing down from it.

Newt called Ron a liar and the good doctor did not flinch or retreat one inch. The reality is that Newt has to live with his decisions and based on past interviews and his emotional response tonight, that is obviously not easy for him.

"Given everything I believe in a large part of me thinks I should have gone over…[but] Part of the question I had to ask myself was what difference I would have made. "
-- Newt Gingrich, Wall Street Journal, 1985

That said we all make mistakes and all have regrets. I could respect Newt if in acknowledging his own flaws he would refuse to send our kids to war unnecessarily, but he does not. 

Chicken hawk it is them.

Nobody is saying he dodged the draft illegally, but frankly why does he believe that his right to life is greater than that of another, that his duty to his country is best served out in another way?

It's not and it wasn't.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Sheeple for Sale

 After Utah votes in June there will have been 2,265 delegates won in the Republican Primary season.

So far (after Iowa) 28 have been won, a whopping 1.24% of the total. By all sane points of view this race is a million miles from being over and yet Michele Bachmann has withdrawn indicating that the "people of Iowa have spoken clearly". Well sure, but they are the only ones for crying out loud.

Rick Perry seemed on the verge of doing the same thing, but decided to give it the old college try and stick around at least through South Carolina.

Your eight year old kid likely stuck with with her flute lessons longer than some people stay in the presidential race.

Think about it, a football game is 1.24% over at about the 14:10 mark of the first quarter, don't see a lot of teams packing it in at that point.  The major league baseball season is 1.24% over after two games, there are a lot of really bad teams and they ALL play ALL 162.

So why do the people of Iowa (apparently) speak so clearly for the rest of the country?


It costs an astonishing amount of money to run for president and if it looks grim at any point the spiggot is getting shut off. Michele was already on fumes and Iowa was as far that as big ol' campaign bus was going. Rick on the other hand has loads of cash, although he won't stick around if there is a second poor showing in South Carolina.

Running for President should not cost a billion dollars, the system is so broken that it needs to be scrapped entirely, but that's not happening this year.

The first reason would be muted somewhat if we were not a country of sheeple. Think I'm wrong, consider this; On December 13th Rick Santorum was polling at 6% (Rasmussen) by the 28th in the same poll he was up to 16% and he ultimately won over 24% of the vote. Was this momentum the result of some amazing revelation? An altered strategy? What then?

It was of course the sheeple factor, people like to vote for a winner. If Bob is voting one way and Sally agrees well, by golly it's good enough for the sheeple. No disrepect to Mr. Santorum but had the vote happened a week earlier or a week later he wouldn't have sniffed the top spot.

In the entrance polls before the caucus we learned that an amazing 46% of the voters decided on who to vote for within just a few days of the caucus and over 1/3 of that vote went to Santorum, so in other words... he got very, very lucky. How could so many voters in Iowa have just made up their minds? Are you kidding me? These candidates have lived in your state for the last six months and half of you woke up on Tuesday, flipped a coin and voted for Santorum, unreal. Sheeple, yes sheeple.

Only a third of Iowans knew for at least the last month who they would be voting for and that tally was absolutely dominated by Ron Paul and Mitt Romny, suggesting that they are the only two candidates with any kind of real staying power or a message that actually resonates, but hey don't count out the sheeple!

In South Carolina, Rick Santorum was getting 4% (at best) in any poll before Iowa voted. In two polls after Iowa he is averaging 22%, that is meteoric and can only be explained by one thing... yup, you guessed it, sheeple.

Until you start to think for yourselves, evaluate candidates on your own and make your own decisions this process will perpetually be a joke.

Oh, nevermind, just go back to grazing.

Republican Delegate Leaderboard

* Based on the the green papers info.

Forty delegates down, Romney takes the lead alone. With South Carolina (and the Florida) being a winner take all state, whoever wins on the 21st will be the delegate leader going into Florida.

Polls indicate that it is likely to be a three way race between Romney, Gingrich and Santorum. Perry needs a big lift or he will fold, likewise for Huntsman. I also suspect that if Gingrich beats Santorum for the religious right vote that he may be out as well.

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Santorum vs Paul

In a bit of a surprise, social conservatives in Iowa decided that it was better to rally behind one candidate in the hopes they could defeat Mitt Romney. Oh soo close!

Assuming that the state delegates exercise the will of the people, Romney and Santorum will receive 6 delegates and Ron Paul will receive 4.

Why is it that social conservatives avoid Ron Paul?

Is it because of his stance on abortion? Nope, he’s pro-life.
Is it because of his stance on marriage? Nope, he supports DOMA
Is it because of his faith? Nope, He’s a Christian who regularly invokes the bible or Jesus in his speeches.

There are two reasons…

First, Ron Paul supports states’ rights which would include the right to make currently illegal substances and activities legal. Many people try to paint this as “wanting” to legalize pot or prostitution. Ron Paul is personally opposed to both, but recognizes the free will of states and individuals to make these choices. The best parallel I can draw is with religion itself. Many Christians believe (and I agree in many respects) that the right to worship as we choose is being hampered by the government. In this regard we do not want the government interfering with our freedom, but are willing give it up when it is for things we find morally reprehensible. I don’t believe we can have our cake and eat it to, we must affirm the constitutional role of government or we choose another path.

Second, on his foreign policy, he has been hammered as an isolationist who is soft on terrorism and Iran while being unfriendly to Israel. It is naturally disturbing to hear these things. The reality is that Ron Paul believes in a strong national defense, that said his vision for it is admittedly and markedly different than that of his Republican colleagues. Secure our borders & protect from within. Go to war if we are attacked, but do so with a congressional declaration of war.

Ron Paul is a candidate whose reach extends beyond the Republican base while not compromising conservative values, sounds like someone the base should be rallying around.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

The Donald a Spoiler

Just in case the Republican Party chooses the “wrong” candidate, Donald Trump is leaving open the possibility of an independent run. Like so many of The Donald’s other undertakings this selfless gesture is his way of looking out for our country, golly gee, what a guy!

Given the immense strength of the Republican party’s candidates whoever could he be referring to? I mean, just who exactly could be considered the wrong candidate?

Let’s analyze;

Mitt Romney? Nope he likes Mitt.
Rick Santorum? Swell guy
Newt Gingrich? Almost saved his debate, of course not.
Michele Bachmann? Such a suuuper lady, dontcha know!
Rick Perry? Peachy keen!

Let’s see, who’s left… who could it be that has Trump so frazzled? Oh wait, yes it’s…

Ron Paul

As the pundits everywhere continue their claim that Ron Paul is unelectable Donald is unintentionally telling us the truth. Ron Paul absolutely could win the party nomination and that proposition is growing in likelihood. Frankly he scares the bejeezus out of Trump and the Republican establishment and it has NOTHING to do with national security.

If Paul wins the nomination and Trump runs independent, it does effectively re-elect Obama. Think about that for a second… somebody spoiling Ron Paul’s bid instead of the other way around.

Ironic and tragic.

Monday, January 2, 2012

Wednesday's Iowa Headline

Romney finishes 2nd in Iowa, Santorum holds off Gingrich for 3rd.

Mitt Romney held off a quartet of social conservatives to capture second place in the Iowa Caucuses . This will enhance his standing as the front runner in New Hampshire, now just one week away. Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann all captured more than 10% of the vote and as a result will likely stay in the race a bit longer. This of course is exactly what Mitt Romney wanted. The longer the field stays intact the sooner  he can put the nomination away.

I fully expect to see many articles like this come Wednesday morning. There will be other methods of discrediting Ron Paul’s victory in Iowa, some creative, some not so much. Some well-disguised, but most will be completely transparent efforts. The question at this point is not whether he wins, but whether he wins by enough that ignoring it is impossible.

My Iowa prediction;

Ron Paul – 30%
Mitt Romney – 20%

Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann will all score 11 to 15 percent and none will be damaged so badly that they drop out. This will benefit Romney, but it benefits Paul more.