Popular Posts

Monday, February 6, 2012

Switch Strategy Now!

With the low turnouts in Florida and Nevada, understanding why Ron Paul is not coming in first or even second ought to be a no-brainer. The candidate with the most fervent and fixed supporters should be in good shape when turnout is low for all other candidates.

It is time to replace the current strategy with a coalition strategy. Ron Paul is not winning, he is finishing way to far back in both caucuses and primaries. He is getting way too few delegates and votes to have any significant influence at the Tampa Bay convention.

It is also wishful thinking to believe that Santorum and/or Gingrich dropping out will bring more voters to Paul than to Romney. Ron Paul is at his peak now. Things are not going to get better with the delegate/caucus strategy.

But let's imagine what would happen if Ron Paul did go explicitly coalition. Promising a coalition cabinet and vowing to put half of savings from spending reductions into block grants for the states based solely on state populations would cause a huge stir in a media environment looking for a new story. Everyone is convince the drama is over and the nominee is decided.

Imagine Ron Paul dealing in a big way with the racism charges by showing up on The Tavis Smiley Show after delivering a major speech confronting every charge and outlining an agenda to end discrimination in our judicial system by ending the drug war and commuting the sentences tens of thousands of non violent offenders.

For nearly a year I have been pushing this strategy. It has not been tried. Do not confuse it with the Blue Republican strategy. As necessary and noble as that grassroots hospitality has been, it has not delivered the numbers of progressives needed to put Ron Paul in position to win.

Shifting to the coaltion strategy should not be delayed. Waiting for another third or fourth place finish is ridiculous. Make the switch today. Get it done now!

1 comment:

  1. I would suggest that the campaign also start specifying the phrase "Commerce Clause" and what it means as essentially unchecked federal authority. Because most people see the Civil Rights Act, (.e.g.) as a *good* thing and can't understand why they should vote for someone who voted against it. Conversely few people seem to understand that the corruption of the Constitution represents the legal basis for all the intrusive things they think are *bad*.

    I know it doesn't fit well into a sound bite but it's not like Ron Paul has ever been shy about explaining things.