Note to reader: This is a nice little series with about five thousand followers. But you have to read them in order to know what we are talking about. If you are following these posts dig right in. If not, the chain is listed at the bottom of this post. Take them on, one by one and then come back to read this one.
The general thesis is that Ron Paul can best change the Republican Party by running for president again, that more people respond to a big vision than to a call to get involved at the precinct level, and that there is a way, however unlikely, that Ron Paul can put his activist army to work and set in motion events that could lead to his nomination.
Here we go….
Ron Paul and Iowa 2011:
If Ron Paul wins the Iowa Straw Poll (ISP) in 2011, and that is a big “IF” which we will address later, he will be in a favorable position to win the Iowa Caucus the following January. Because, Ron Paul, unlike Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich and others, will be awakening a movement.
The others will be debating how much the government’s latest bailout should be. Or whether there should be six more or three more. They can’t very well say there shouldn’t have been any since they are already on record. Only Ron Paul can be saying that the nationalization of the insurance industry or the banks or the car industry and all the others that will follow represented an abandonment of the free market system and the Swedenization of America at a time when even Sweden has backed away from socialism as a failed model.
People say, well Ron Paul was an aberration. He only “took” with an activist’s segment because of the unpopularity of the Iraq War. But by 2012 the American economy could very well be in chaos over the decisions we are making now.
Take for example the supply of money. Trillions of new dollars are being printed. Eventually, as this continues, our own dollars will be watered down and diluted. It is like a wave out there that is on its way and will someday soon hit the shore. It has already been set in motion and it will come. Every time they print more money it is like a tax on the money in your pocket because they are diminishing from its value. So George W. Bush, the great conservative, who refused to raise taxes, spent so much money that we didn’t have that he was forced to just print more. Ironically, we all got taxed by default, by losing the value of the money we had.
President Elect Obama has already said that we should use the new money we are printing to hire the unemployed to rebuild our roads and infrastructure. Sounds like a good idea. Anyone who had traveled around the world has seen how American highways and bridges and airports and train routes have deteriorated compared to other countries and regions, especially Western Europe, where the strain of distances is not so great. But the newly printed money that we put in the pockets of these workers will compete for food and fuel, driving up prices and diluting the power of the money being earned by workers in the free marketplace. Those American workers who are productive and doing business based on natural supply and demand and who are hiring out of need, not out of charity, will see their capital diminished setting in motion a further need for the government to nationalize and hire and tax or print more money to further prop up its artificially created market.
The American middle class, bearing the brunt of all of this, could very well be in an uproar in 2012, ready to listen to someone who saw this coming for decades and warned against it.
And all the other candidates will be arguing over the details of the involvement in our latest war and who supports the troops the most and what strategies should have been employed. And what we should do now. Only Ron Paul will have warned against foreign intervention in the first place.
Romney won the 2008 ISP but lost in the Caucus because he failed to secure any understanding with Evangelical leaders. Like Steve Forbes in 2000, he gobbled up every Movement Conservative for sale in Washington D.C., hiring them or giving them titles and bringing them onboard. But like Forbes, they dominated the conservative talk radio and television for their candidate but had little or no impact in Iowa. It is because almost all of these leaders are Catholic and while they have some impact in New Hampshire, and a lot as conservative opinion makers, they have little impact on the Southern Baptist South or the Pentecostal – Charismatic states like Iowa.
The key Iowa evangelical activists and political operatives that Romney brought onboard could deliver very little. As a Mormon he should have understood that Iowa Evangelical activists and leaders are linked to their national leaders of influence. If James Dobson would have given his “okay,” for example, it would have been far more powerful than to have some local, Iowa, Family Research Council director weigh in. And even Dobson wouldn’t have been as important as a Pentecostal or Charismatic leader who could have awakened the locals.
Romney had the talented Mark DeMoss carrying his water as an Evangelical on the national scene but while that might have eventually helped him in some southern states it had little influence with the Pentecostal-Charismatic circles in Iowa. It may have even hurt. DeMoss was seen by the leadership as Jerry Falwell’s sidekick, during the Baptist “raid” of PTL.
Ironically, Governor Mike Huckabee, a Baptist, understood this and courted the Pentecostal television preacher Kenneth Copeland, flying to Texas and appearing on his show. Long before it aired, the news was out in Iowa.
Ron Paul will have the right socio-cultural plan in place because he has friends now who support him and can help him craft it. And Ron Paul will be right on the issues because his views are immovable, based on principle. His ship is guided by the stars and so it knows where it is on any issue and any time.
The formula that allows him to win the ISP, which we will visit in an upcoming post, will allow him to win the Caucus too. Because if he wins the ISP, he will awaken the giant. A new movement will be born. A new purpose for the Republican Party will emerge and the political lines will be totally rescrambled. And the same formula that wins the ISP, will work for the caucus as well.
So what’s the next discussion, New Hampshire? No. There are two other things we have to talk about first. The debates, which were the key to his emergence last time and the fundraising power of the ISP win.
The debates will take another post but we can talk about the fundraising right now. Immediately after a win in the ISP, Ron Paul must embark on a national victory fundraising tour. Remember, the value of winning ISP is the time you have before the next big contest. He must use that time to raise money. He must have his picture taken at $1,000 a pop with every supporter in the nation. He must autograph 20,000 copies of his TIME magazine cover story. He will need all the money he can get to pour into Iowa for a caucus win the next January. This will raise the ante ever further. He must max the limits of advertising in Iowa and neighboring states with TV buys that have big cross boarder viewing audiences and have in place a national fundraising system to milk an Iowa Caucus win for that one precious week of fundraising before New Hampshire.
But again, all of this depends on an Iowa Straw Poll win in the summer of 2011 and that is highly unlikely but possible because it is a small universe where he meets the money threshold and where his activist advantage kicks in. More in the next post on how he can actually pull that off and thus trigger the explosion of a national movement.
If you need to catch up, here are the previous posts in this chain:
1.) Why he should run for president?
2.) But isn’t he too old?
3.) How Ron Paul Wins: Step One, the Iowa Straw Poll.
4.) Ron Paul and Karl Rove don’t mix. Who he needs to hire and why.