Ron Paul: The Internet Superstar???

Being new to the blogosphere, I'm not certain about the customs here.  But one of the reasons I want to blog is to have more of a conversation about news before I sit down to write as opposed to hearing from you after it airs.

I am working on a Ron Paul profile piece (Paul is a Republican congressman from Lake Jackson running for President).  His political positions are easy to identify and well covered.  His long shot campaign is quite honest about its chances and admittedly surprised about its early success.

Much of that success is on-line.  He shows up really well on internet polls.  He is huge on my space.  He is a meetup superstar.  He is dugg on digg.  Cnet said all this yesterday.

The question reporters asked in the past has been is it real or some sort of shadow internet society jamming the net with Ron Paul votes?  I wonder in your point of view - as a blog reader and therefore smart internet user - does it matter?  Are we really seeing the long awaited leveling of the playing field where money doesn't matter as much?  Even if it is just Ron Paul fans voting several times for him in online polls does it any way pervert the process?  Conversely are these online polls equivalent to American Idol and therefore not a worthy part of the political discussion?

Before I sit down to write, I'd love to hear from you.

Comments

[Michael Kerner]

To answer your question, I look particularly at the polls run by networks immediately after debates.

They ask the people who just saw the debate who won and generally Ron Paul comes in first or second. Most recently, after Sunday's ABC poll, he came in a strong first with 56% of the vote.

When you compare that to the telephone poll results where he gets single digits you get confused. My opinion here is that he suffers from name recognition deficiency. Those who know him and just saw him in a debate think that he is wonderful, but a random sample of Americans mostly don't know him.

The MSM is probably responsible for that. They have decided that he has no chance so they barely talk about him. They help keep the secret that there is a real freedom loving option this time, not a poor choice of evils that we have to pick the lesser of.

[David Thompson]

It is simple. The freedom message resonates with the people. It resonates because the messenger is a man who is principled, honest,and consistent on his views. He observes the Constitution, the law of the land. Ron Paul is not a politician. He is a statesman. He will protect the rights and privacy of individuals

[Eli]

Thanks for the invite! I'll start writing. By the way, welcome to the blogosphere :)

[Yongrel]

Ron Paul's support is most definitely real. To find evidence of his support, look no further than meetup.com, where the Ron Paul meetups consist of over 30,00 members. All of these volunteers donate time and money to further Dr. Paul's campaign. Not to mention, he is extraordinarily popular on Facebook, MySpace and other social networking sites.

And then there's the Ron Paul Photo Rally. To answer the frequent accusations that RP supporters are all spammers, this online photo rally has been created. It is composed of over 1,400 pictures of RP supporters.

http://rally.ronpaulplanet.org/

And as far as online polls go, be careful before you attribute his succes to supporters voting multiple times.

In the recent ABC poll that was held immediately after the Aug 5th GOP debate, Ron Paul on by a landslide, despite ABC allowing a=only one vote per IP address. Is it really likely that Ron Paul's supporters went door-to-door using their neighbors computers, just to vote multiple times. Additionally, Ron Paul performed very similarly in the Drudge Report Poll held at the same time. His numbers in that poll were very close to his nubers in the ABC poll, suggesting that even when it is possible to vote multiple times, Ron Paul supporters do not.

I look forward to reading your piece on Dr. Ron Paul.

[Lino DiFelice]

Ron Paul is maybe going to surprise on the upside in the Primaries. His message of liberty and freedom is resonating with a lot of apolitical people.

Remember that over 1/2 of the population does not vote and that is due to the "tweedledee or tweedledum" choices in past elections. Democrat Republican means more of the same. Maybe Ron Paul will pull voters out of their stupor and realize there is an alternative to the status quo.

[l hickey]

Am am 61 and while I would feel more comfortable with Pat Buchanan, because he is less sanguine about a China and Russia surging in power, I like Ron Paul by far the best of the miserable lot we have to choose from. I am pro life, and very anti war. Both parties and the press has been bought by a clique that runs the country. You could put the lot of them into a auditorium. Ron Paul is not in that clique, and while "they" will stop him probably in S Carolina, he will embarrass
a few Likudnik cowards that sold their country down the river for Israeli strategic interests.

[Jonan Trainer]

The MSM is centralized and controlled through monetary force (the journalist writes what the editor says or he fires you). The Internet is decentralized and free (the blogger writes whatever the blogger wants to). Therefore, the marketplace of ideas on the Internet is more abundant (see therealnews.com for example).

In this marketplace, the strongest and most persuasive ideas prevail according to the voice of the people. The sunlight is very powerful and disinfects extremely well. When the MSM, or anyone for that matter, promotes Crap ideas as a gourmet meal the arguments are quickly exposed as the Crap they really are. Enter the Blogosphere at your own risk!

The success of Ron Paul is only a reflection of the success of the ideas he promotes.

Here are a couple quotes from Ludwig von Mises, Ron Paul's hero.

"Only ideas can overcome ideas."Socialism p.460

"Both force and money are impotent against ideas." Omnipotent Government p. 210

[HowieHardcore]

Yes to both questions: Money is less relevant, in fact it's a huge plus if a candidate can get as much exposure as Ron Paul has without spending much. The Internet levels the field and is a more intelligent medium that brainless tv ads. On the second question, internet polls are fine for a quick pulse but they are not scientific although it's telling that Paul has overwhelming support in these polls. I think the other candidate's supporters must be asleep or stuck in front of the t.v. or something. Maybe the rest of the G.O.P. candidates don't have any real supporters.

[Rob]

I believe what we are seeing here is REAL, grass roots support. People are tired of the media telling us who the "top tier" candidates are. With the internet, WE shall decide that.

It's VERY hard to vote more than once on the online polls. Do your research carefully, a lot of people have debunked that old canard of shadowy "spammers". The establishment is going to be in for a big surprise when they see the ballot box for Ron Paul "spammed"....of course i'm sure they will take care of that too.

There is plenty of stuff on the internet on Ron Paul.

There are currently only TWO candidates running for president, OURS (Ron Paul) and their's (all the rest).

Ron Paul 2008!

[Doug]

Ron Paul's Internet support is real, and spontaneous. I had to laugh out loud when Sean Hannity claimed that the Paul campaign was organizing some kind of coordinated effort to take the lead in the Fox News text message poll after their debate -- Dr. Paul's campaign staff at that time was about four people.

Internet polls rarely reach the 50,000 vote level, and I don't remember any reaching 100,000. Even a candidate at 3% in the polls could have 3 million supporters, so it doesn't take repeat voting or cheating to win by a wide margin.

So why are Ron Paul's supporters more likely to vote online than those of his competitors? Part of it is because they have to to get him noticed, since the networks tend to ignore him.

Part of it is his libertarian-leaning platform, one shared by a large number of Americans (10-15%), but almost totally unrepresented in government, thanks to the two party system. A lot of people have been waiting for someone to say what he is saying, and what to thank him.

The final part is the messenger -- Dr. Paul's integrity and consistency are remarkable in a successful politician (10 terms in Congress), so people feel safe in giving him their enthusiastic support, that he won't turn around and change positions or embarrass them later.

[Brad from PA]

Its definitely real. If it were so easy to run spambots, the other better-funded campaigns would be doing it (well, Barack Obama was caught running a spambot to increase his video views on the Youtube site and hushed up on it after it was exposed). The reason why Ron Paul doesn't show up on polls is because the majority of his supporters don't fall into the categories that are polled. The majority of Ron Paul supporters are either first time voters, Democrats or Independents who are joining the GOP to support Ron Paul, and people who haven't been voting because there is nobody whom they deem worthy of their vote. Most of them fall into that 18-30 demographic that doesn't have landlines and therefore is too expensive to reach with traditional telephone polls. It also isn't really that easy to vote multiple times on online polls as it is very easy to limit a poll to one vote per IP address. So, proxies are required to vote multiple times on online polls (and they are slow and very difficult to use).

Recently, he's been drawing a consistent (instead of just occasional) 2-3% in the traditional polls, even though most of his supporters aren't included in those polls. His real level of support is probably (to make a relatively conservative estimate) around 10% at the moment.

In a recent Rasmussen poll, he actually got 34% head-to-head VS Hillary (who got 49%) and was at 30% against Obama (who had 50%). Considering his lack of name recognition among people over the age of 30, that's pretty significant. Since his profession is a doctor and he voted against the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, he outflanks the Democrats on their most significant issues, which means that he'd probably have better odds in the general election than he does in the primary.

At Ames this weekend, because Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson have no-showed, Ron Paul is expected to finish at least 2nd and may beat Romney.

There's also all the rallies Ron Paul has held. While most campaigns hold rallies in very small venues that can only seat about 100 people, Ron Paul holds his rallies in massive venues and draws over a thousand people every time. Back in June, when he was excluded from a Republican candidates forum held by Iowans for Tax Relief (run by a then-consultant of the McCain campaign) and the Iowa Christian Alliance, he held an event next door at the same time and drew twice as many people. He drew a few thousand people to a rally near Pittsburgh last Friday. He drew over 600 (according to an probably low estimate by the local press) to a rally in the small town of Fairfield, Iowa on Sunday night. These rallies are frequently aired live on the Internet and watched by 500-600 additional people.

The Paul campaign has simply been underestimated all year long. After Fox News failed to set Ron Paul up at the 2nd debate (how they left Giuliani's microphone on when he wasn't supposed to be talking is a mystery that is probably best explained by Giuliani's part-ownership of the Fox News Channel), failed Senate candidate from Maryland Michael Steele (the Republican who pretended to be a Democrat during the 2006 election and lost) claimed that it was "done" for Ron Paul. He has since been made to look foolish for saying that, as Ron Paul's support is obviously far greater now than it was back in May.

[Doug]

It's not just online success, either. Ron Paul has attracted crowds of 500 to 1200 people in Missouri, Iowa, California, Nevada, South Carolina, Texas, and Pennsylvania. The video is online, and doesn't lie.

Ron Paul fans are frustrated that the mainstream media don't really cover the campaign, but it seems that they don't cover the other second tier candidates either. The polls and the horserace are given way too much coverage, and the actual ideas and qualifications tend to be ignored.

[James]

Hello,

Personally, Congressman Paul has a great deal of appeal on to me on two core issues. As a registered Republican I oppose high taxes. As a religious man, I oppose war.

Ron Paul is only candidate who gives me confidence that he will address these issues.

Thanks,

James

[Philemon]

I think it is significant that individuals are motivated to support Ron Paul, whereas the supporters for other Republican candidates are conspicuous by their absence.

Some of the other candidates seem to be flying high nonetheless. So, where is their support coming from?

[joe]

I saw 1000 real people at the recent pittsburgh rally that had no coverage in the mainstream media. The reason these people are there is because freedom brings ALL people together and so many are starving for this message from a real person.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/337058/ron_paul_draws_large_diverse_crowd.html

Also look at the meetup growth stats.

http://www.ronpaul4president.org/RP_stats.html

There are now 30,000 self motivated real volunteers, with an average of 368 added per day, again with almost no media coverage. Has there ever been anything like this? These are real people taking real action. Making signs, calling people, handing out lit, making videos and dvs, writing songs, taking out advertisements, getting organized. It's just the beginning and this will bust out of the internet soon.

[James]

Greetings Ted,

Your seeing the end of the OLD media's (TV, Newspaper, Periodicals) death grip over news propagation and the emergence of the NEW media's (Internet) unstoppable information proliferation. Now people can do their own fact checking and realize that a great deal of the "News" is actually not News as we knew it but rather Information with a shrewd slant impregnated in it. The steadily controlled stream of information out of the TV is no match for the torrent of raw thoughts, ideas, news and media on the internet.

Truly this is the beginning of a new age where propaganda has less power than it once did and the people are waking up to the realization that Main Stream Media is simply a school of fish that move in unison. The only difference is some of the fish are red and some blue.

The slanderous articles about Dr. Paul and his supporters lend creditability to this comment. To insult a group of people because one fears the prospect of an anti-establishment president is the pinnacle of desperation. To deny his victory in a poll citing unsubstantiated claims of voting fraud is childish and further demonstrates my point.

There will always be people who will abuse the system, this comes part and parcel with humanity; the few bad apples.

But to denigrate the bunch and lash out at all individuals inclined to support a consistent, principled and honest man is the hallmark of a madman. The fact remains that if Dr. Paul and his supporters were so minor and fringe the media would pay little attention. The threat is real and Dr. Paul’s message of Liberty and Peace is more powerful than any amount of sensationalized, titillating grandstanding that any news outlet can muster.

To those that would challenge the message of Dr. Paul: Good luck he has Peace, Justice, Liberty, the intent of the founders and the Constitution on his side. What do you have?

[Stephen]

My comments just match most of what has been said here. I vote Ron Paul but an issue just as big is the vote fraud of the USA. This will the biggest thing to watch. If vote fraud is eliminated Ron will win the Presidency.

No electronic or machine voting period. Paper ballots put in a clear plastic box then counted right there by local voters and witnessed by local voters after election, then results notarized and hand delivered to the State. Done in less than 12 hours! We don't need instant results, but verifiable ones. Without this Dr. Paul will never be elected! http://www.votefraud.org/ http://youtube.com/watch?v=7gWITrQSHY0

[John Howard]

The mainstream media is government-licensed and corporate-funded. Their treatment of Ron Paul is obviously contemptuous and manipulative. Why, then, should we believe that the mainstream polls (many run by the media) are somehow honest and objective?

Together they tell us who our choices are while refusing to tell us about alternatives, then argue that we shouldn't be told about alternatives because we don't know about them (they lack "name-recognition"). It is circular and dishonest. I never heard of Obama until he showed up for a whole hour on Meet The Press. I'm still waiting for them to give Ron Paul an hour like that. They are cheats.

This media dishonesty and the scandalous no-paper-trail electronic voting machines are the two big stories. So long as those in power license the media and own the voting machines, we have an uphill fight to restore freedom.

[Jason]

"At Ames this weekend, because Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson have no-showed, Ron Paul is expected to finish at least 2nd and may beat Romney."

This is totally wrong. Almost no one but wishful thinkers expects him to finish 1st or 2nd. Regardless of message, you have several candidates who have spent (together) millions of dollars in Iowa and are literally bribing people to vote for them. Ron Paul Just has been running a national campaign and has barely set foot in Iowa.

Ron Paul is expected to finish 7th but many are hopeful he will finish higher.

[Christopher F. Dillard]

Being a native Houstonian born in the early 70's, Ron Paul was one of the first politicians that I ever heard of. It was a sad day when I realized he was the exception and not the norm for those that represent us in Washington. After watching the 2nd debate on Fox in which "the exchange" occurred, I was moved to action because of the complete breakdown in the communication process.

For me personally, it is Ron Paul's adherence to the Constitution, and his firm resolve to continue this stance that attracts me to him. It is the true "absurdity" that the US Government continues to operate outside of the very document that granted it the right to exist.

[Erica]

Please everyone STOP quoting that ABC/Washington Post poll that says that Ron Paul only has 2% of the vote! The poll is not scientific because the sample size is only 402 people!! 72% of them admit that they have NEVER visited a candidate's web page online. If you don't believe me click here and download the pdf file.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3444367&page=1

email me if you have comments
emtericag1@gmail.com

[Tim]

The thing about Dr. Paul is that people that get to know him inevitably become supporters. It really is that simple, and his supporters know this.

In a nutshell, that's why Dr. Paul's supporters are so exuberant, diligent, and creative. They understand that a Ron Paul presidency would restore integrity in America, and they know that, deep-down, most American's yearn for this as well.

[rho]

In my opinion, old-style telephone polls were more accurate because the dissemination of information was much more predictable prior to widespread Internet use. The Dean campaign capitalized on Internet communications and fundraising, but the landscape is different even from 2004. YouTube, Meetup, Facebook--these are quite new innovations, and they are a "force-multiplier" for grassroots campaigns such as Dr. Paul's.

If Dr. Paul has a weakness it's that he is always brutally honest about his opinions. When somebody tells you what they actually think you'll hear stuff you'll disagree with. Other politicians mold and shape their rhetoric to suit the audience, which makes them a lot less controversial, but honest debate is coming back into vogue. Prototypical politicians come off as particularly phony when directly contrasted on a user-driven site such as YouTube rather than a "gateway" medium such as national network TV.

[Eric]

I am a 40 year-old who took my lovely wife along with three young kids and drove 2.5 hours on a Saturday to show support for Dr. Paul and hear him speak. Many other families like mine along with people from all other walks of life did the same - over 1200 people. That is NOT "just the internet".

The reason for the growing crowds at every stop is Congressman Paul's ability to speak the words that Americans are concluding about their government: it needs to shrink in size and scope.

Here is where the internet comes into play. All information is now freely available at the touch of a button. No longer are sound bytes spoon fed to dozing voyeurs nor are headlines read in the belief that it entails the whole story. The "new media" now has squatter's rights on the fourth estate.

Throughout the decades Ron Paul has proven his statesmanship. We found him on the internet and new he was the person to do the job. Also, we're savvy enough to understand that we shouldn't wait for the nod of approval to get started toward our goal. It's going to be human action at its best: using the new internet tools at our disposal to put Dr. Paul where he needs to be: The White House.

[Eric Kuhlmann]

It is absolutely real. Ive been a lifelong california liberal who really was apathetic about voting and only really went because my wife insisted.

I watched the first rebublican debate expecting to get a laugh and had no idea I would be blown away by a little texas congressman.

Since then, thanks to a spark set by Paul, I have learned so much about what is really going on in this country. Ive learned more about the iraq war, money, income taxes, the IRS, the Federal reserve, the constitution, our very currency and about the dire straits of our fiat economy in 3 months than I have learned in 35 years.

If someone like Paul, who has an impeccable record defending the constitution and impeccable integrity cannot do well in our political process, then frankly I have lost hope. We are too far gone as a country, and we dont want to be saved.

Paul represents the sleeping tiger in all of us. We know deep down that we are at a precipice, that we are looking at an economic collapse that makes 1929 look like a walk in the park. The question is, when it happens will we just be dumbfounded look around in confusion and blame everyone but ourselves? Or will we recognize early enough that we are in dire need of a new revolution?

Before you write your piece I would do alot of browsing, read lewrockwell and check out ronpaullibrary.com