Sorry, Ron Paul: TV Still Bigger Than Web Among Voters
Paging Dr. Ron Paul... the impact of Internet buzz on actual votes is still negligible, particularly in New Hampshire. A study of 2,200 primary voters in New Hampshire conducted by AdAge and marketing firm SS&K showed 40% of voters had visited a candidate's web site and one in four had visited a candidate's profile on a social networking site like MySpace or Facebook. That compares to 56% who said they'd seen a TV ad for one of the candidates, and 51% who said they'd watched a televised debate.
This study doesn't say a whole lot new, but it does help explain why the campaigns focus their ad spending on local TV. Web fave Ron Paul drew 8% of Republican votes in New Hampshire, while Hillary Clinton narrowly beat Barack Obama -- a leader in most measures of online buzz among Democrats -- by a wide margin.
This study doesn't say a whole lot new, but it does help explain why the campaigns focus their ad spending on local TV. Web fave Ron Paul drew 8% of Republican votes in New Hampshire, while Hillary Clinton narrowly beat Barack Obama -- a leader in most measures of online buzz among Democrats -- by a wide margin.
First, the world isn't quite ready for a real libertarian president. Sure, he's tapped into some hard-core dissent among Republicans that wonder wtf happened to their party in the last 15 years, but the TOO many people still think that libertarian ideas (viz. legalizing drugs, etc.) are off the charts wierd and don't him seriously. Other folks here pointed out the sad reality of the current day: the plurality of *voters* are like, a thousand years old. These are not a people ready for serious change, even in response to the sub-Nixon disaster that is GW Bush.
Second, I disagree with the poster that seemd to characterized Ron Paul as an expert politician. While he might not be completely ignorant, he's certainly no expert either.
He squandered a lot of the money that he raised on the Internet on amateur mistakes like crummy commercials. The flap with those ancient newsletters shows a certain laziness with respect to the tiny details that will win or lose an election. He should have banned those stories from his newsletters way back when, but he let them slide because he probably figured that, although wrong and repugnant to himself, it might give him a boost among certain wacky elements.
The hope for the future, on the other hand, is twofold. First, our geriatric voter base has got to croak eventually. Today's Internet-savvy 40- and 50- somethings are eventually going to retire and register to vote. And who knows, maybe young people will actually start to vote if things get bad enough.
Second, although Ron Paul is an amateur, it's clear to many smart people that his ideas have serious legs. Maybe one of those people is the next Clinton or Romney (i.e. outstanding political executers). Maybe somebody will say, "hey, if you combine THOSE ideas with MY super organizing skills, I'll clean up". All it takes is one serious player to view the Ideas as a strategic advantage, and we'll elect a libertarian.
Ron Paul may not win this election, but his role in it is historical, and that's why he's got my $2k.
SI
All you have to do is turn on CSPAN in the morning and listen to what older people say when they call in. An overwhelming amount have comments about the most irrelevant things about the candidates. For instance, one woman went on and on this morning about how she was disgusted how Nancy Pelosi was reading a book while Pres. Bush was speaking, the host immediately responded, 'uh it was most likely a copy of the speech m'am' . She didn't know what to say she obviously felt stupid and then she went on about how she voted Republican all of her life but now she is inspired by Obama. Now I know this is just one little lady, but countless callers talk this way and it totally amazes me. I seriously believe many, many older people go to the polls voting because of their impression of a candidate they seen on their TV. Far too many of these people are getting every once of their information from their televisions. They're lead to believe that "second tier" candidates aren't worth even thinking about, and because of the fact that media won't give coverage to whomever they feel doesn't deserve it, these people are lead to believe there is a good reason for it, but never actually questioning those reason.
The internet is where it is questioned, and until these older crowds finally discover the internet, or years from now when there's no more people that are totally computer illiterate, we will have sheep being herded to the voting booths by the media.
Ron Paul has an "under the radar" strategy. While most of the candidates were spending their time and money in Florida, Ron Paul was working in the Nevada caucuses (where he took second place), which has more electoral votes than Florida does. He knows that this nomination won't be won in the primaries, because the Republican Party is so divided, and he also knows that his successes are being blacked out by the mainstream media, so he's focusing his energies on winning as many delegates as he can, spreading his message, and building his grassroots network. There will almost certainly be a brokered Republican convention, which hasn't happened in decades, and Dr. Paul knows that can work to his advantage. Don't underestimate his political skills. He's won his congressional district every time, even though he's been opposed by his own parties. It's political guerilla warfare. His campaign has survived despite attempts by the mainstream media to marginalize him, ignore him, and ridicule him. Yet, he keeps raising money and gaining support. Huckabee and Guiliani are broke. Romney is spending his personal fortune to buy the election. McCain has made a comeback, but a lot of Republicans, including Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, hate him. Thompson's gone. Ron Paul is in for the long haul, with a steady stream of funds coming in and a dedicated grassroots network. It ain't over till it's over.
For a great satire on the president, the mainstream media, and the war on terror, see this YouTube music video from the international award-winning zombie musical feature film, "Song of the Dead." (www.songofthedead.com)It' stars horror movie veteran Reggie Bannister (Phantasm, Wishmaster, Bubba Ho-tep) as the president of the U.S. The filmmaker, Chip Gubera, is giving a share of his profits from DVD sales to the Ron Paul campaign. Go to:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qQmkkoxSKYw
Do your own research, google the candidate that corporate media is afraid to talk about (except disparagingly) Ron Paul, then check out the other candidates. Make your own judgment about which candidate actually has a message, which actually has statements that history backs, and which would actually be an ethical steward of the American trust.