Candidates Rely too Much on Advisers

In recent news Mitt Romney's advisers have told him not to give a speech on his Mormon faith. This brings me to wonder whether or not the actual candidates can do much of anything on their own without advisers. Romney had said he wanted to give a speech to explain his Mormon faith, but his political advisers are telling him not to.

So this brings me to this thought. Politicians rely too much on their advisers. As voters, are we voting for a candidate or his advisers? It seems as though we vote for their advisers. The candidates are just their because of their history, but what they do on campaigns to get people to vote for them looks as if their advisers are the ones telling them what to do.

Think about this, most candidates have some one who writes their speeches, so how do you know if what the candidate is saying is what he wants to be saying. An advisers usually tells candidates where to campaign, so how do you know if the candidate truly feels like getting the type of people his advisers tell him to go after?

The campaigns of each man have so many different employees and advisers, it makes me wonder. How can a person run our country if they can't run their own campaign? How can we expect the candidate to make the right decisions in the White House if he can't even make his own decisions to get to the White House?

I do not think that I can trust a candidate to run the country that I love and live for if he cannot do much of anything on his own. I can understand if you have some employees because you can't campaign everywhere at once, but having other people tell you what to give speeches on or not should not be part of these campaigns.

My StumbleUpon Page

What Impact does the New Hampshire Primary have on Ron Paul?

Here I pose a question to you and I ask for your feedback on this one. What effect will the New Hampshire primary, the first primary, have on Ron Paul and his chances at the Republican presidential bid?

The New Hampshire primary, being the first primary in the nation, sets the tone for the rest of the nation's primaries and caucuses. The primary is known as a key one to win and has a big impact on the campaigns for the rest of the primary season.

I believe that this state can make or break the chances of Ron Paul.

If Ron Paul happens to win this state it will give the media nothing to talk bad about him with. It will finally silence the media and they won't be able to use the "spam" excuse and say his voters cheated in the primary. It will also give him an extra boost in publicity as the media surely can't ignore Ron winning this state and if it does it will give all of us supporters more to feed to others on how he has been shut down by the media. This boost will give Ron Paul nearly all the moment going into the other states and will allow people to feel possible more comfortable voting him knowing he has a chance (I do know of many people who vote for their second favorite candidates because their first they believe has no chance of winning).

On the other side of the wall, if Ron Paul doesn't win the state, even if its by the slimmest of margins, the media will keep feeding the "Ron Paul has no chance and is made up of only supporters who make him look popular". The media will continue to make him out as a failure even this early in the primary season. Media is Ron's biggest enemy and if he doesn't do well early they will make him seem like an unpopular choice overall making him less popular to those who have yet to vote.

That is my input, but this something I want to hear from what other supporters or naysayers have to say. So leave some comments and I will respond. I would like to see what is seen out there about Ron Paul and what he needs early.

My StumbleUpon Page

Ron Paul on Rise

I have decided that I will be posting a daily article about Ron Paul everyday. I am a Ron Paul supporter and feel that I need to write about him. Check back each night and there will be a new Ron Paul article for you to read.

Today I will focus on Ron Paul and This November Fifth's impact on the media and publicity of Ron Paul.

Many know of Ron Paul's record breaking fundraising money on November 5th. But what effect does it have on Ron Paul in the media and Ron Paul publicity?

Ron Paul has been left out of many debates, he is despised by FOX, and has even had his discussions banned by Sean Hannity. But this event has brought his name in national media all over. Ron Paul is finally getting his name and all supporters of him are liking the publicity. So with supporters constantly begging for more coverage of Ron Paul, why is FOX and Hannity refusing to cover him? This is one thing I don't understand. CNN has no problem covering Ron Paul. MSNBC has no problem covering Ron Paul. Why does FOX have that problem with covering Ron Paul?

The publicity on CNN (he will be on The Situation Room tomorrow) is certainly going to give him a better shot at winning with more people knowing about him, but FOX is deliberately leaving him out of debates or keeping his participation in debates to a minimal. In a few upcoming debates in key primary states, FOX has refused to allow Ron Paul join the debates.

I would like to see some sort of revolt or something that will get Ron Paul back on FOX or another action, possibly by another TV station, to get Paul in the mainstream media without FOX. I mean, look what it would be like if Paul wins the nomination. Will FOX still keep him off of their station? How would that work?