Ron Paul: A Distributed Web 2.0 Campaign

Ron Paul is the least covered candidate by traditional media and most prominent online candidate…

I guess if he makes techcrunch there is something to him.

I actually like him more than the gang in my own party. I don’t know why, I guess I still think it’s possible to have a semi-honest guy in the white house and he is the most honest guy I have seen to date….

Rest of the gang seems to be on the payroll of the special interest group, but not this guy and I guess I am not alone in feeling that way or feeling affinity for his campaign given his popularity online.

Will he be next president, I doubt it, but I think he might finish in top 3 of the GOP with this rate.

To fully take advantage of the Web as of today - the candidate has to appeal to the values of a younger audience

It appears the Talk Show & Television route is still be for those candidates appealing to an older crowd

If, like me, you scan a number of social news sites on a daily basis to stay informed … you’d think Ron Paul was the only candidate running! He truly has been adopted by moderates, and even liberals like myself have to respect him for truly getting out there and speaking his mind.

I love this guy! I suggest all Americans learn about him. This is the kind of candidate I’ve been waiting for…for ever!

vote for Ron Paul to win http://www.betsgowild.com/bet......ab=details

You are mistaken in your article…as a Ron Paul supporter I can tell you and so does Ron Paul in most of his interview. He didn’t choose the medium, the medium chose him. The campaign didn’t give the people anything, the people went out and did it themselves, and the campaign just piggy backed on it. I would say by now, we the people spent more on the campaign than the campaign itself. On stickers, banners, billboards, air planes, materials etc.

Example: there is currently a project to contact people in Iowa via phone. The original project was started on a Ron Paul forum(contacted about 5000 people), the campaign thought it was a good idea(very high conversion rates), so they decided to endorse it

And no Thompson won’t have any luck on the internet. Ron Paul’s message makes for loyal supporters because he is clean. Thompson on the other hand has buildings full of closets with skeletons in them(oppodepot has a bunch that came out already).

Oh funny story about Thompson, they plagiarized 2 Ron Paul supporter videos. Copied all the images, animations etc from 1 video. And dubbed over EXACT audio from another Ron Paul video, and just changed a few texts to say Thompson.

But yeah Ron Paul has major support among web savvy crowd, just look at his Google interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCM_wQy4YVg

Warning the interview is pretty long 65 minutes, but it covers a TON of topics, because the questions are softballs like in the debates.

I’m going to have to agree that he appears to be an honest candidate. While I respect Bush as a man of intellect, because the general American public has no idea what’s going on in the world, I think his terms are something to write about in the history books as a lesson learned. Though I am more right-winged, I’m still pushing for Gore to jump in the race if it’s not too late. Life was great when Clinton was in term, now it’s a hellhole and I think Gore’s the only one who can clean up Bush’s mess. I love how the older generation are learning to embrace technology and learning to appeal to different voters.

Sam, money wise he is already in the top 3

Giulliani - Money on hand = 17mm
Romney -Money on hand(if we subtract his loans from himself) -3mm
Paul -Money on hand -2.4mm
McCain -Money on hand 250K

Andrew
I listened to Paul say the same thing on the video (that they didn’t choose Web 2.0, that it’s the way around) and yet I see a website with little centralized content, one that literally points to the Web 2.0 sites where the content is hosted. It’s a nice line, but it works both ways. Whether the chicken or egg was first doesn’t take away from the central point: Paul is working Web 2.0, and he’s doing it really, really well.

Is Ron Paul REALLY THIS popular with Digg members - or is he or his publicists using one of those Pay for a Vote on Digg services.

No other candidate comes close to these homepage numbers - and just look at the amount of votes (Digg has an Global membership - not just USA)

Just Look at this!

hmmm….

Come now Ron,
is this anyway for a groomed future leader to behave

Ron Paul is the first candidate in a long time that I can respect. There is no sense that he is pandering to the audience (unlike all major contenders). He seems to be forthright with everything he believes. And whenever he debates with anybody, he comes across as extremely knowledgeable.

So, why doesn’t he have more exposure in the major media? I don’t know. If he makes any sort of significant impact on the campaign it will be because of alternative media (Media 2.0?) I hope it happens, but somehow I’m not expecting much.

“And yet if you believe online polls and surveys, Paul will be the next President of the United States.”

Translation: if you’re an idiot…

Oh, and Mr. Riley, “The point of this post is not to ask anyone to support Paul, but to observe how one candidate is using Web 2.0 tools to bypass the tradition methods of communication to deliver his message directly to the people.”

If the point of the post was simply to point out (”observe”) how a candidate is using Web 2.0, why waste so many sentences explaining his political platform and persuasion and linking to a Google video of him explaining them? I do believe those reading this site are perfectly capable of using their browser’s search box to find out more about Paul if they were so inclined…

Just sayin!

@10
Ron Paul spent 500K this last quarter. The Top 3 republicans spent millions.
Ron Paul has 8 staffers total. Others have hundreds

Who has the resources to spam and who doesn’t? You shouldn’t be worried about Ron Paul’s popularity on the web, you should be worried about the lack of popularity for your candidate.

Internet is about 4 months ahead of mainstream…don’t trust me? Go on youtube and watch the latest popular video, then clock the date. It will be a couple of months before someone you know off the internet(not a user of youtube etc), will come up to you and say: hey man, did you see that video of ____.

@11: its because the media ignores his support as spam. Look at it this way, their official polls say that RP only has 2-3%. So there is no sense to cover him. But in reality that number is closer to 10-15%. The reason its so low in the polls…is because official polls contact people who only own a land line, who are registered republicans and who voted in the last primary. Then it adds/subtracts points based on how the pollster wants the results to look
All details of that is here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/pitkaniemi1.html

@12 Paul will be the next president, he may not have the support now…but his numbers are growing exponentially. You gotta remember that he is the only republican anti-Iraq War, only republican who is a true republican(small gov’t), only politician who has a 20 year record of being consistent to his principles. You gotta remember, primaries are over 5 months away, plenty of time for him to get to the top. Other candidates on the other hand are on the down slope

The U.S elections are a comedy show for everyone else around the world. Eventually whoever is “elected” will probably be somebody who already knows they’re going to be the president of the U.S. The election is all just a farce.

There definitely are a few theories that all the social media on digg is being artificially inflated. Read: http://www.pronetadvertising.c.....34389.html

And even people who think he is a fake who was placed by the right in order to siphon votes from the democrats: http://whyorganic.wordpress.co.....ul-a-fake/

He obviously isn’t going to win as even if he is legit and a good candidate, the idiots, i.e. majority, of this country would never vote for him. Definitely an interesting campaign.

Although Paul’s online presence is clearly impressive, his supporters would do well to look at what happened to Howard Dean four years ago. Dean was the Internet phenomenon of 2003-4. His campaign fully utilized the best available online tools to get the message out and were very successful in creating a base of passionate, motivated young supporters.

And yet Dean’s campaign collapsed the moment it came into contact with regular — read non-Web.20-savvy — voters. Although these social networking tools have their place in firing up the base, they also pose a threat to campaigns. They have a tendency to create an online echo chamber of, in this case, Paul supporters talking to each other with minimal input from the outside world.

Just something to bear in mind.

I was totally going to leave this one alone, but was dragged right in by commenter #7 “While I respect Bush as a man of intellect…”

Which is a terrifying allowance, much like the many sentiments here about Ron Paul having “respectable” views. Must we continue to make heroes out of deeply flawed men?

http://www.chron.com/content/c...../paul.html

Let’s move on already. Ron Paul’s not doing anything new on the Internet, at all, unless you slept through 2006. Every serious campaign is doing these very same things.

Despite all the attention he is getting on the web from 20-something males etc., Paul will probably end up with less than 5% of the vote in 75% of the Republican primaries, which are dominated by social conservatives. Only in the west (Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Idaho, California, Oregon, Wyoming, Montana, Nevada, and Washington) and in northernmost New England (New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine) does Paul have a real shot at getting any real support. Anybody who really believe that Paul is going to be our next president, please contact me because I have a bridge to sell you.

Personally, Paul seems like a decent guy, but as bad as some politicians are in elected office, ideologists are usually worse in practice, no matter what their ideology is - communism, libertarianism, fascism, fundamentalist religion, etc, are all the same in that regard.. All ideologies are wrong, because by definition they are based on ideas rather than reality. The best politicians are the ones who at least try not to view issues and problems through a strong prism.

He’s a complete wacko:

“He has long fought for the prohibition of federal individual income taxes by repeal of the 16th Amendment.”

Yeah, that’s going to happen.

“He also introduced legislation that would amend the Constitution to stop giving automatic citizenship to infants born in the United States to non-citizen parents, which has been in effect since the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case in 1898 extended U.S. jurisdiction to include all aliens lawfully residing within the United States, who were not explicitly protected from its jurisdiction by treaty.”

Yes, infants are a grave threat to the United States.

“He has described the “rights of unborn people” as “the greatest moral issue of our time” and called for a federal ban on abortion via constitutional amendment, and says that Pro-Life action must originate from principle.[32]”

What a joke.

“He’s voted against allocating more money for research into breast cancer and many infant diseases, all while giving his famous rallying cry for why he votes against many things… “If it’s not in the Constitution, I don’t vote for it!”

Secondly, Paul has for several years, voted to cut funding for FEMA. Even this past year, when Victoria, Cuero and many other towns in his district were suffering severe flooding, even as FEMA was waiting for the flood waters to recede so they could survey the damage, Ron Paul was on the Hill, insisting that Disaster Relief be cut even more.”

A country that embraced all of Ron Paul’s platform would be a truly, truly scary place to live.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
http://rush_awards.tripod.com/ronpaul.html (yeah, not so credible)

Nicholas above writes: “Ron Paul’s not doing anything new on the Internet, at all.”

Actually, Ron Paul’s not doing anything on the Internet, really. It’s just that the Internet is a remarkable equalizer, and a huge number of Internet users have been exposed to message there instead of in the mainstream media. And since Paul’s message, honesty, and remarkable voting consistency is profoundly appealing to a large portion of those exposed to it, those same Net-users are sharing the word via the sites they already use — Digg, Meetup, Reddit, Slashdot, personal weblogs, you name it. His supporters have also helped him get on TV shows popular among the Net crowd — shows like Jon Stewart and Ron Colbert.

Dr. Paul’s not using the Internet — regular people are using it, motivated by a powerful message that differs from the same old stuff every other politician is peddling. And with professional betting websites now giving him 7-1 odds on the nomination, he’s not *that* much of a long short. More of a dark horse candidate.

10. His support on Digg is real. If you want to look at bots look no further than the Barack Obama campaign and YouTube. A bot was being used to artificially inflate their video views. It magically stopped once they were publicly outed.

19. You need to study up a bit on the history of income tax and where that money actually goes. Do you think your taxes do anything to help the government provide services to you? It nearly all, if not completely, goes towards interest on the national debt. Ron Paul was one of the lone voices who spoke out against the Patriot Act in 2001. He was speaking out our policy of regime change in Iraq and the coming invasion back in 1998. People forget that the stage for the second Iraq invasion was set during the Clinton administration. We were bombing the hell out of Iraq then. I’m pro-choice and I’m not at all threatened by Ron Paul’s belief that the Federal Government should leave the matter to the states. We have bigger problems right now in this country and Ron Paul is the only one talking about this and the only one who, if elected, would do anything to steer us back on course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG_HuFtP8w8

@2

“It appears the Talk Show & Television route is still best for those candidates appealing to people that vote”

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here, most of the people that vote don’t use any of the sites mentioned in the post.

Think of the Neal Armstrong quote: “It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn’t feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.”

Now apply it to web 2.0: “It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, was web 2.0 users. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the web 2.0 user from the rest of the population. I didn’t feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.”

Just sayin…-Metagg

This article is misguided. Paul’s campaign does not direct anyone to do anything. The supporters probably have spent untold millions of dollars on signs, gasoline, lunches, radio shows, palm cards and buttons to distribute not to mention time, out of their own pockets. This would of course not go reported and not be included in the $2.4M he has, more money than McCain. He has ALWAYS outraised Giuliani and McCain in NH, and I think picking up $17K in one single house party in NH (182 RSVPs) was more than ANY candidate, D or R, has ever done here.

Paul has such wide support across the nation from people who can articulate beautifully his platform to a T, unlike Hillary and Obama supporters who when asked, have no clue what their candidate stands for and can only answer “Because I just like them, I dunno why”. It’s a joke. They have no clue what ‘their’ candidate stands for and are shocked when you tell them this is not American Idol!

He has the links for the social networking sites on his site, but he does have writings from himself on the blog, contrary to what you say, I have two of them in my email box.

I also travel with the man when he is in NH, so I think I know him pretty well. He is not slick and won’t just tell you what he thinks you want to hear. If you look at videos of him from 1988, he’s not flipped on any position, really.

To predict he won’t or can’t be president is to say the ‘fix is in’. If that’s true, then our gov’t is a fraud and a sham, and we need a revolution for sure.

Don’t let the media and those in charge choose your president for you.

OH PS - I am a mainstream GOP person who has never NOT voted. Paul is picking up on those as well as Democrats, Independents, and folks who have never voted before or never donated to a campaign before.

He is doing nothing but good, bringing these people into the process and elevating the discussion about war and spending.

To the poster who says getting rid of the IRS would be impossible I say, why do you give up so easily? Other candidates such as Steve Forbes have made this their whole platform. Huckabee mentioned it in one of the debates.

If the people want it, it should come to pass. Isn’t that what government’s function is, by demand of the people? The IRS causes nothing but trouble.

*** Gravel 2008 ***

Mike Gravel is the most honest, sincere, and balanced candidate of all the democrats. I’m surprised he wasn’t even mentioned, considering he’s the ‘Ron Paul’ of the democrats.

Gravel is getting a ton of so-called web 2.0 attention also, some of the user generated content making to Colbert, Daily Show, all over, etc. Though, he’s not getting as much notice as Ron Paul, which is interesting considering the tech crowd tends to be more liberal-leaning.

Of course, the reason for Paul getting more attention than Gravel is pretty obvious:

1. Gravel doesn’t get as much attention because there are a lot of decent candidates on the Dem side, which pulls away the mind-share. A lot of the tech crowd has already clung on to Obama (I did as well, prematurely, until I knew about Gravel and saw that he’s the real deal). Gravel would be one of the greatest presidents the US has ever had… if only more Dems would take real notice.

2. Ron Paul, compared to the other republican candidates, is superior. I can’t even begin to imagine how horrifying it would be and deeper into insanity the US would go were one of his republican competitors to get elected. /takes deep breaths at the though/.

So, of course, objectively, I have much respect Ron Paul in that sense… same way a lot of RP’ers respect the Gravel side. If there are any republicans who want their party back: not hijacked by religious fanatics, and at least somewhat-respected by others as actually being conservative: you better hope he becomes your nominee.

*** Gravel 2008 ***

Ron Paul’s current status has nothing to do with “Web 2.0″, but rather is a confluence of two factors:

1) The Republican Anti-War faction, which is a minority but significant, has nowhere else to go in the Republican party. Important: These are Republican Anti-War people, NOT “Ron Paul” people. They’ll abandon him as soon as the primaries are over and someone else gets the nomination (and that will happen, because he’s not widely supported in the Republican party itself).

2) He’s a long-time darling of Libertarian pundits, precisely because of his extremism. These people are loud, noisy, and all over the Internet. But they are the classic case of attention-getters way out of proportion to their actual influence in the real world and to real voters.

Putting #1 and #2 together leads to a lot of sound and fury, but signifies nothing.

All you naysayers are going to look pretty silly, I predict, when this thing finally plays itself out.

I love how people characterize Paul as “extreme” … that’s quite a statement, isn’t it. As if it is somehow extreme to adhere to the Constitution, you know that document the Court and the government’s been ignoring for 100 years. The Constitution is a LIBERAL document … it is by its nature centrist - it aims to protect ALL OF US from the tyranny of governmental power mobilized. What so-called liberals forget in their haste to use governmental power to change us all into good citizens is that simple fact. The so-called conservatives who seek to wage war on the rest of the world as well as here at home are not conserving anything: they are wasting money, time, and blood, countless lives-worth. What they really should be conserving is the Constitution, and our fragile Republic.

Our biggest challenge has been converting GOP rank and file republicans, not independents/democrats. Democrats can see their party is a sham (poor Gravel / Kucinich), just look at who they ran last time. And they’re going to do it again … Obama is just building buzz for the next election I’m sure. It’s shameful that the party was elected to Congress to end the war, and yet they have not. Why is that, I wonder? Perhaps to make sure the war is a talking point in the general election next year? How many young men and women have to die for the democrats to ensure their political victory? Sickening, truly sickening. Gravel is right to crucify them all on stage.

Ron Paul will win this thing, simply by all of the awareness he has raised. It’s not about him, or the Presidency, and it never was. It’s about changing the dialog in this country, away from how do we apply the spoils of taxation or war, and towards how do we create a better, safer, more prosperous society. It’s about our place in the universe - not at its center, but as a free and friendly little corner, a beacon of light to the rest.

26. You may be surprised to find out how mainstream Ron Paul supporters are. Virtually my entire family plan to vote for him in the primaries and the majority of my friends as well. These are people from all walks of life from bible thumping christians to porn producers to pretty hardcore feminists. While they may not agree with Ron Paul on every issue they support him because they think the country needs to be steered in the direction he would steer it and also because they feel he is being honest with them when he speaks and they don’t need to guess where he is coming from.

Since when did this become a GOP blog?

Ron Paul’s message makes for loyal supporters because he is clean. Thompson on the other hand has buildings full of closets with skeletons in them

What about his views on terrorism:

Under the headline of “Terrorist Update,” for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”

He has also stated that “I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.” He also opposed all federal aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina — I wonder why?

Ron Paul has absolutely no chance beyond the sociopath set, who happen to be huge users of sites like Digg.

George (comment No 12) and others claiming this is about pushing a political line: in case you missed it: I’m NOT AMERICAN nor do I live in the US, so I have ZERO in terms of an entrenched position to push or party affiliation. The fact that I’ve noticed Paul from Western Australia due to his web presence speaks for itself, so I don’t need to really justify the presence argument over some sort of weird conspiracy TC is pushing a political line idea

hey, whoever tihs pud is interviewing Ron Paul needs to stop the “uh-huh” and all these other sounds he’s making to indicate that he’s listening to Ron, we KNOW he’s listening. Those noises are damn annoying.

@17 + 30:
That newsletter article was written by a staffer and not approved by him. It had his name attached, so he took responsibility for it. He has clearly stated that those are not his views. The rest of his record will bear that out. This is the lone incident that gets brought up by anti-ron people, but it is a red herring. He is not a racist. He is also not a sociopath. Some of us, like Dr. Paul, believe that only through freedom can we truly help those that need it. The Federal government just needs to keep out of it. He doesn’t believe we should rely on the government to help, when it takes FEMA 5 days to get water to NO. He thinks that without that safety net, the town of NO and the state of Louisiana would have had their own measures in place to better take care of the situation.

He (or one of his supporters) was also one of the first candidates to use our service to create an interactive shirt. You can see it at http://reactee.com/vote2008.

I’m basically a conservative with libertarian views (for the most part) atheist pro-choicer who wants government out of our lives. I think RP is refreshing and I believe he believes every word he says. Whether he’s electable is another thing. I think he doesn’t have enough money to win, and regardless of his online fanbase, if you know anything about politics, you need a lot more than votes to win the Presidency, but I wish him good luck. Personally, I don’t see a candidate that gives me confidence in our future. I’m sorry to say that, but it’s true. They’re all bible-thumping liberals on the left and bible-thumping conservatives on the right. For once it would be nice to have an atheist for president.

@ “Paul’s Facebook group has over 15,000 members”

So what? Obama has over 300,000 in his.

And Paul also seems to support the “illuminati secretly run the world via the UN and the Trilateral Commission” conspiracy drek too:

http://www.illuminati-news.com/ron-paul.htm

Duncan,

cool to see your perspective, and i think ron is a solid candidate that’s running on beliefs instead of polling - which is impressive.

one semantical note, when you wrote:

He’s also anti-Iraq war, and in a historical sense broadly anti-interventionist as well; Paul is a candidate who believes the Monroe Doctrine is simply wrong.

it seemed a little contradictory. the monroe doctrine’s crux was specifically that we DO NOT as Americans get into foreign conflicts and are morally against colonialism, something that many today would say iraq’s nation building is. i don’t believe that persay, but some do. with that idea in mind he most likely supports the doctrine to the letter of the law.

just a point of clarification. maybe i’m totally off - which is entirely possible.

again, cool post.

thoughts?

WH

I already see comments from folks demonizing RP instead of debating the issues.

And that is his Achilles heal, the mainstream media (controlled by oilgopolists) will demonize him when he wins a primary!

#35 - As far as bible thumping goes, with Rudy leading in the GOP, it’s not as central an issue as its been previously.

In fact, Ron Paul could very well be the only pro-life/overturn-roe-vs-wade candidate in the general election (assuming he runs third party), and might be able to capture a large percentage of the evangelical vote on that alone.

I’m not sure I agree with isolationism, but I’ll admit that RP is refreshing in his frankness and consistency.

Ron Paul is popular because liberty is popular.

Ron Paul is the number one most searched person in the blogsphere for the last three months straight per http://www.technorati.com

Ron Paul has more than 4 times as many volunteers than Obama per
http://www.meetup.com/topics/polact/cand/pres/
and 22 times as many volunteers as Hillary, and far more volunteers than those of ALL other presidential candidates combined.

There is a reason that Ron Paul is popular on the Internet and that is because liberty is popular, and that is because people know an honest person when they see him.

Watch Ron Paul speak and you will see what I mean.

http://www.RonPaul2008.com

Ron Paul You Tube Video Site:
http://www.YouTube.com/RonPaul2008DotCom

Or Google Video or You Tube “Ron Paul”

Go Ron Paul 2008!!!

Ron Paul in his own words

Ron Paul is NOT an isolationist. In fact, just the opposite:

7/5/07 Radio Interview with Michael Smerconish

Michael Smerconish: Do you call this view of the world an isolationist policy?

Ron Paul: I don’t. Some like to accuse me of that, but I’m the opposite of an isolationist. I’m a free-trader, and I like low tariffs; I like travel, and I like to be friends with everybody. I think what we have today is diplomatic isolationism. When you think about it, we have more enemies and less allies than ever before, we go it alone, and I think we have become an isolationist nation. But my position is a lot different than that.

Michael Smerconish: One other on this score. I love having this conversation. I’m generally enthused about what you say our foreign policy should be. What do we do about our friends in Israel?

Ron Paul: I think just like so much of our foreign policy has unintended consequences, I think we have literally put Israel in a weakened position. Israel can take of herself. She has 200 or 300 nuclear weapons. Nobody’s going to touch her. She can take care of anybody over there. By us perpetually giving Israel money, Israel can’t do what she has to do for herself – they have to get permission from us, or we say “we won’t give you our money unless you take orders from us.” And besides, Israel without us there taking care of her day to day, Israel would be more likely to pursue peace with Syria. They want to now, but we stop Israel from pursuing any peace treaty with Syria. So I think in the long run, we harm Israel. A lot of people won’t accept that, but I sincerely believe that. Israel is very capable. The whole problem with my position is they say “you don’t care about Israel”, but if what I say could possibly be true, we may be doing Israel more harm than good.

@18 Greg Andrew, who wrote:

“All ideologies are wrong, because by definition they are based on ideas rather than reality. The best politicians are the ones who at least try not to view issues and problems through a strong prism.”

Oh, only a soft ideological prism will do eh? You don’t think the neo-conservatives are idealists? They are known to be straussians.

We better disown the founding fathers and that damned constitution then!

It is ideas that allow us to make sense of reality, and ideas that change the world.

One thing you miss is that Paul has had online support FOR YEARS. He had an online base as soon as he started running.

see this is exactly what I mean about internet and how its opening up doors. 5 years ago, you could say: Clinton eats babies, and honestly you couldn’t do anything about it…you would go Really? No way am I voting for a baby eater.

But now your little assaults can be checked. i.e. for that racist hit piece you can go to http://textalyser.net/ and plug-in the racist article, and his other pieces. And you can see by text density etc, that they were written by 2 different people.

As far as Dean comparison, its really a bad comparison. Dean was a democrat whose only message was the Iraq war, he brought nothing new to the table. And 1 issue candidates have a much harder time winning. + the dean scream was orchestrated by the media, they cut out the audio of the crowd, and just left the scream there.

Paul is much more than Dean, he has the record, the integrity, and hundreds of positions. He talks from the heart, while other candidates read catchy speeches written by staffers.

As far as him not being electable, thats hog wash…the GOP is at the lowest membership it ever was at. 50% of the country doesn’t vote. Less than 10% of the country votes in the primaries. To win a state like New Hampshire with 2 million residents, all you need is 50K people. And since Paul is the only candidate who actually has cross over appeal(myself, I actually registered republican just to vote for him), his chances are very high.

Also you have to remember 3 things, if you are a republican(christian person)
1-Romney is a mormon, that looks like he’ll have a problem wtih the religious right
2-Giulliani married his cousin. + I think in a few months his hero status will be gone.
3-Thompson-his wife is in her 20s, I honestly don’t think any true Christians would approve of someone marrying someone who is young enough to be his daughter

@ W. Hutson #37 -
That is my understanding understanding of the Monroe Doctrine as well.

I wonder if Ron Paul is the Howard Dean of 2004, and the media is afraid to jump on him because they got burned by inflated internet presence with Dean? It’s a little unfortunate that the candidates that don’t stand much of a chance are creating so much buzz online. It’s giving us a sense of false hope. It does give me hope for future elections that perhaps the Internet can help dissolve the two-party system. I don’t think we’re there yet for this election.

For this election, I hope we can convince younger people to get to the polls.

Dr. Paul will not pull a Dean. I have heard Dr. Paul speak in a large group, in a very small group full of home schoolers, read a whole bunch of what he has written or heard in his speeches in Congress; consistency of message due to following principles.

Dean was a joke from the get go, likable as Perot, but wholly unsuitable for political office of any kind.

Someone complained about this becoming a GOP blog: he he smart bots out there. Ahhh, change that for bots with an incredibly well programmed logic.

@Duncan / 31 “The fact that I’ve noticed Paul from Western Australia due to his web presence speaks for itself”

Yes. It says that the web is extremely poor in reflecting reality and prone to its own obsessions.

Anyway, Ron Paul is an extremist, this is just a fact. A fringe extremist. I’ll grant it’s fun to see a politician with nothing to lose saying what they really think. But he has a long record of really wild stuff. Here, just a few minutes looking at his Congressional site turned up:

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....13003c.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Liberty Amendment, which repeals the 16th Amendment,”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....91002b.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial
stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve.”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....090503.htm
“Repeal of all legal tender laws is a must. Sound money never requires the force of legal tender laws. Only paper money requires such laws.”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....072503.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Honest Money Act. The Honest
Money Act repeals legal tender laws, a.k.a. forced tender laws, that
compel American citizens to accept fiat (arbitrary) irredeemable
paper-ticket or electronic money as their unit of account.”

This is really, really similar to a story I wrote on my blog like three weeks ago.

http://www.bivingsreport.com/2.....mpaigning/

Ron Paul really can win, even if most Americans still haven’t heard of him. Why? Because less than 20% turn out for the primaries. If his supporters remain as dedicated as they appear to be now, his primary results will have a multiplier of five compared to his poll standings. In a multi-candidate race, he could win the nomination while never polling above 6%.

Is he socially conservative enough? He’s more so than Giuliani, or McCain, or Romney, the supposed front-runners for the nomination of a party dominated by social conservatives. The only issue where most conservatives find fault with him is the Iraq war, and that is changing every day. The large and growing segment of anti-war Republicans has no other option.

How will he do against Hillary Clinton in the general election? Gee, I don’t know. Who voted for the war, and who didn’t? Who has 45% of the population already committed to never voting for her? Who would you trust with the now greatly expanded powers of the presidency — the candidate raking in the big corporate donations, or the candidate with the 30-year public record of consistency and integrity?

And don’t think for a minute that the polls are accurate, because they are employing outdated screens for likely Republican primary voters. I just changed my registration to Republican to vote for Ron Paul. So did my wife. My brother registered for the first time in his life, just to vote for Ron Paul. My 60-something mother has hundreds of people on her email list, and they are all supporting Ron Paul.

There is a revolution underway, and the mainstream media don’t seem to understand it. They called him a fringe candidate, and thought he was little known outside his home district, even though he raised a lot of his Congressional campaign funds outside of Texas, and was already a hero to millions of libertarians and small-government conservatives on the Internet.

Now they are shocked that he has raised more money than supposedly better-known Republican governors like Huckabee, Thompson, and Gilmore, or a conservative Senator like Brownback. What they haven’t yet picked up on is that 20,000 Meetup volunteers are worth much more than his official fundraising totals.

Ron Paul is the best candidate, simply because he stands for the same things that both liberals and conservatives agree on. If each side were to just look at his platform, there would be not contest, he’d win in a landslide.

Good coverage TC

@ #19

the man is crazy cause he wants to change big things; (sound genius to me)

@Duncan / 31 “The fact that I’ve noticed Paul from Western Australia due to his web presence speaks for itself”

Yes. It says that the web is extremely poor in reflecting reality and prone to its own obsessions.

Anyway, Ron Paul is an extremist, this is just a fact. A fringe extremist. I’ll grant it’s fun to see a politician with nothing to lose saying what they really think. But he has a long record of really wild stuff. Here, just a few minutes looking at his Congressional site turned up:

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....13003c.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Liberty Amendment, which repeals the 16th Amendment,”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....91002b.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve.”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....090503.htm
“Repeal of all legal tender laws is a must. Sound money never requires the force of legal tender laws. Only paper money requires such laws.”

http://www.house.gov/paul/cong.....072503.htm
“Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Honest Money Act. The Honest
Money Act repeals legal tender laws, a.k.a. forced tender laws, that
compel American citizens to accept fiat (arbitrary) irredeemable
paper-ticket or electronic money as their unit of account.”

[reposted hopeful this one will get through moderation]

Duncan Riley: Thanks for the good article - balanced, level-headed and correct. Not too many of those around …

For me, Ron Paul is the source of a whole new adventure. He will get me to do something I’ve never done before. Will I survive? Will I be the same person after doing it, or will I be transformed for the rest of my life? I hope it will be exciting, but I still have my fears, uncertainties and doubts.

Because of Ron Paul, for the first time in my life I’ll vote in the Republican primaries.

(51) Seth, you dont get it. All those points you listed is exact reason people support RP

I’ve been very impressed by his speaches at congress (youtube). This guy is truthful and straightforward on his viewpoints and has been for years. Unlike some of the other candidates that are only saying whatever is fashionable to get elected.

@ stefan, I get it. He’s a complete loon on the subject of government, the Internet is a veritable treehouse of loons on the subject of government, therefore he’s big on the ‘Net and similar environments. I’ve been on the ‘Net for many, many, years, so I grasp the dynamic. But it sure isn’t because of “Web 2.0″!

Here’s a “good” one:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

Last week, Congress hailed the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The heroic Ron Paul was the only member of Congress to vote No. Here is his statement. ~ Ed.

“Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.”

“The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.”

[Oh joy! He's the only member of congress TO SPEAK AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT in *2004*. This is complete utter barking frothing round-the-bend political nonsense. Yeah, it has an audience, and it's real scary that it does].

Seth: Yeah you wouldn’t want anyone interfering with your money train.

(55) Ron Paul interprets the constitution as founding fathers intended. Both parties have been hijacked by special interests, and they view the constitution in terms those special interest groups.

why do you think whole world(except Albania) sees America in negative light? Is the whole world wrong? Why do you think we are getting dumber and fatter?

@15 What is wrong with those things?

My guess is that you would have been a Tory.

Oops, not 16 but 51

@55 As a bonafide member of an “annointed” minority group … kudos Dr. Paul.

Not that I was unaware of his position on that issue.

If the guv’ment is big enough to dish it out, it is big enough to take the dishes and the chickensin the pot.
To paraphrase Jefferson (no, not Davis)

You guys should do one of those charts comparing the Web 2.0 exposure of the different candidates. Many of them have MySpace pages and such.

@stefan (#58) “Ron Paul interprets the constitution as founding fathers intended.”
Yeah, I know, he wants to bring back slavery. That’s only a half a joke.

Look, it’s not 1789 anymore. The US went through a divisive internal war in the 1860’s, and *another* such internal war in the *1960’s*. Ron Paul avowed wants to refight that last war, for private segregation. Even the old racist Dixiecrats didn’t go that far in public in recent years. That’s fringe of fringe. And it shows something about Internet culture that I even have to bother pointing it out.

@62 Yeah, sure, whatever. How do you finally determine when the 1964 Civil Rights Act is no longer needed, according to you? Per me it was always was an issue of jurisdiction: the Feds don’t have none.

I guess when m group finally takes over. Not that I would complain, I will be very benevolent towards the new minorities.

In debates RP said we dont get our rights as members of group (blacks, whites, women, gays) we get our rights as individuals. That’s principle of liberty founding fathers fought for.

Seth Finkelstein, I got news for you, we are all slaves right now, this very instance. You don’t think so? You are in for a rude awakening. Ron Paul is the only one who understands that, and who truly wants to set everyone free.

It’s time for the SLEEPERS to Awaken. Time to break those chains and make this again a government that serves the people, not a people that serves a government!

I’m 54 life long democrat. My spouse and I have reregistered republican to vote for Dr. Paul. Not for the republican party but for Dr. Paul. My daughter in Florida called yesturday to inform me that she and her husband researched Dr. Paul at my urging and would be reregistering to vote republican in the Florida primary. I can safely state my extended family is 20 Dr. paul voters strong in 5 states. None of us have ever been polled but we do vote. Ann

New York Times reports that Ron Paul has his own currency…
http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2007/07/16/cq_3089.html

I think that Ron Paul’s views are refreshing and add to the debate, but I can’t say I agree with his “get rid of all federal governmental invention” approach. Under his philosophy, programs like the National Park System would be pulled and put into private ownership. The last thing I want to see is a McDonalds on the edge of the Grand Canyon.

@68 The citizens of a given State wants their Federal representatives to vote for such thing as a National Park System but they will not push theirState representatives to do it.

Hmmm. I see.

Since you cannot get it done with support of your fellow State citizens (to establish a State Park System at par with theFederal) you want to exceed the delegated authorities to the Federal government, to buy other bullies, by trading other unconstitutional spendings, to force upon your non-agreeable citizens said usurpation of authority?

A truly whacked 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

Hold your nose and exit the vehicle.

lol @ libertarians

WOW. There was no conspiracy in 9/11 !!!!! It was a happenstance of chance.

Jaime, what differences does it make if something’s federal or state? Isn’t it all just inefficient government? The U.S. is a single country, and some things should be managed nation wide. Ron Paul would be against such things as the National Park System whether they were state or federal, because both reject a pure free-market approach. His argument is that the free market cures all ills, but this is just old-school republican dogma. Our system is sick, there is a better way of doing things, but Ron Paul’s solutions are that of an ideological extremist.

Exciting stuff. It will be neat to see how politics changes over the next few years - and whether it is for the better or worse.

Fink~
What are you talking about?
If we had not been lead off the path that our founders so wisely & bravely set us on, Then Ron Paul WOULD sound crazy. But he is pointing out all the crap that has gone wrong with our country over the years & he is courageously (in the face of all of the ignorance) warning us that we need to take every action to get back on that right path.
Do you have no concept of what the Constitution was for?
It certainly was not designed with the intent of allowing our government to rob the citizens of our own country or any other. It was designed with every effort to PROTECT us!
It stops working when we stop applying those principles.
Ron Paul has applied these principles of Constitutional soundness, not just in the way that he presents legislation and how he votes, but in his own personal affairs.
He has never voted for an increase in pay for himself (not heard of!).
He does not participate in the Congressional pension program (big $$$ from taxpayers to Politicians).
He has 5 kids, all are doctors & they never used student loans. He supported them all the way because he does not think that it is fair to us to have to finance anyone else’s education.
You think he’s nuts because it’s nuts to find a guy with such principles who would get mixed up with these snakes that are the politicians & who are ruining our country & taking our freedoms.
Well, I’ll go nuts with Ron Paul cause the man gives me a new sense of hope for mine & my kid’s future. He makes me want to run out & tell everyone about him & go to the trouble to vote.
I had lost hope till I saw what he was talking about.
Call me WACKO, unrealistic, naive, or stupid, but you won’t change the truth.
He WILL be my President!
and if you think I am in the minority…just wait!
Debra Murphy

@41 Jeff:

Isolationism in the general sense isn’t tied to trade, it’s usually regarding military treaties and such. when the Monroe doctrine was brought to life we entered into a period of incredible trade growth - mostly because we stayed neutral in many military conflicts.

In terms of Paul, I think he’s a libertarian in many ways and isolationism is a tenet of their beliefs. I can respect that.

@74 We are a compact of soverign States. The States delegated certain authorities and never,the States, relinquished their authority to take them back.

It does very much matter. What you are saying that the Constitution is just a guideline that the Federal government can massage to their hearts’ content.

Living Constitutions are Dead Letters.

At this stage, I am very happy to be able to support someone that wants to restore the rule of law to the usurping Central government.

BTW, I am not a libertarian.

I read on another post a few days ago where someone said something like “It amazes me how many intelligent people I know who are falling for this Ron Paul scam!”

I missed my opportunity but wanted to reply “hmm, if all of the intelligent people you know are backing Ron Paul, maybe they know something you don’t”.

Our troops are dying on Alien Soil for no good reason!
The USA is just pounding sand in Iraq.
BRING THEM HOME NOW!!!
SUPPORT RON PAUL - SUPPORT THE TROOPS

Ron is amazing! After seeing his performance over the last few weeks, and the passion he rouses in people, I’m convinced that he will win.

Nice article TC! I wrote a blog about this a while back, basically saying that politics is taking a very decentralized turn, and bringing up the fact that we may see the need for online “Community Managers” in politics, much as we do in the online games industry.

In any case, there was a cool article today ( http://www.agoravox.com/articl.....ticle=6473 ) bringing up the fact that a recent election in South Korea was driven by online support for a liberal candidate in a conservative controlled government. We’ve all heard the Korea is a few years in the future, and I suspect we’ll truly see this situation coming to pass in the US and around the world. Whether it’s Ron Paul, or the person after him, the web will change politics forever.
With that said, Go Ron Paul! Nothing excites me more than change