Ron Paul Wins Illinois Straw Poll...Media Blackout Continues

[Pseudo Nym]

I can't say for sure, but I suspect a lot of younger people that supported Paul last time around, the "early adopters" if you will, have defected as they've matured politically and philosophically and were forced to confront criticisms of his ideology. It probably doesn't help that the economy has gone down the drain in the intervening years, giving all those young, white, heteronormative, able-bodied males (practically the definition of unearned privilege) a new perspective on adversity, and just how unfair life really is, as they were let go from their cushy IT jobs. A recognition that it's not always an option to "pull yourself up by your bootstraps."

So what you're left with is a wider age range, probably a majority of whom are conservatives that felt the Bush administration had betrayed traditional conservative values, and all these other guys - Romney, Perry, Cain etc. - are offering up more of the same.

 

[Fastb]

Srsly?

Look beyond the party politics and you'll realize the establishment (democrats, republicans, mainstream media, etc) all have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Black zebra with white stripes VS white zebra with black stripes. I cannot see the difference between democrats and republicans anymore. They preach different stories but when they get to Washington they all get corrupted.

 

[lukep]

I can't say for sure, but I suspect...

So what you're left with is...

LOL at the person who doesn't get Libertarianism at all trying to guess why Paul has supporters and what his base is made up out of!

It reminds me of watching christians trying to make sense of the universe, guessing that some invisible fairy lives up in the clouds and controls their every thought and desire...

Too funny! :485:

 

[Pseudo Nym]

LOL at the person who doesn't get Libertarianism at all trying to guess why Paul has supporters and what his base is made up out of!

What makes you think I don't 'get' Libertarianism? I think I understand the tenets common to different stripes of Libertarianism well enough. What type of Libertarian are you by the way? Minarchist? Anarcho-capitalist? Ayn Rand-inspired? I'm sure you're not a left-libertarian.

I was only relating my own perception. Four years ago, Ron Paul was all over the social media sites I spent time on. Now, I don't see much about him. Granted, it doesn't mean much that he isn't popular on the particular sites I frequent (excepting this one of course), and some of those sites aren't the same ones they were four years ago. But it seems to me that demo of young, tech-savvy early adopters have largely moved on. I could be wrong.

 

[lukep]

What makes you think I don't 'get' Libertarianism?

Obviously because all your speculation about his followers/voters haven't mentioned any libertarians at all. You talk about young people who aren't happy with the system, and you talk about people of any age that are disillusioned with the past POTUSes, and no mention of any people who would actually vote for Paul because of his sound ideas and logic...

If you do understand libertarianism then you certainly don't seem to think this country has any libertarians in it. (We could use a lot more, I admit, but Paul's many decades in office is testament to the fact that we exist!)

What type of Libertarian are you by the way? Minarchist? Anarcho-capitalist? Ayn Rand-inspired? I'm sure you're not a left-libertarian.

I'm more AnCap than anything else, still not the perfect definition of me though.

I was only relating my own perception. Four years ago, Ron Paul was all over the social media sites I spent time on. ...it seems to me that demo of young, tech-savvy early adopters have largely moved on. I could be wrong.

I just don't see why they were likely to be "Young" tech-savvy folks in the first place... Surely if he has a powerful following of real libertarians, they would have used Digg and the same sites to do their online awareness campaigns then too...

The bottom line here is that the MYTH of RP's following being nothing but a small bunch of college kids was simply created and perpetuated by the media, so Paul couldn't get elected.

In reality there were likely only a few college kids involved, perhaps as few as 5 or 10 worldwide that would be needed to drum up all that support on Digg and reddit and other places Paul was popular, because the older ppl (Paul's MAIN fan base, the libertarians) know how to use google and find Paul's name anywhere online and argue with them on that turf.

 

[p0ck3taces]

Paul doesn't have young supporters. Blah, Blah, whine, whine.

Your always talking out of your ass and taking up way too much post space.

Ron Paul leads the group for young supporters.

Perry Zooms to Front of Pack for 2012 GOP Nomination

Internet Demographic Data of Ron Paul Supporters

With the above you can't just say "old people don't go online" as it is simply comparing the age of traffic on his sites vs other candidates sites.

 

[Pseudo Nym]

Obviously because all your speculation about his followers/voters haven't mentioned any libertarians at all. You talk about young people who aren't happy with the system, and you talk about people of any age that are disillusioned with the past POTUSes, and no mention of any people who would actually vote for Paul because of his sound ideas and logic...

I think Paul's popularity in the last few years are due to those people that have become disillusioned with the major parties, and also the rise in popularity of the formerly fringe conspiracy theory scene (due in large part to the increased exposure provided through the web and Youtube specifically; I'm no stranger to the conspiracy theory stuff, having listened to certain "alternative" late-night talk radio programs since the mid 90s. Was a bit strange for me seeing it go more mainstream in the last few years).

If you do understand libertarianism then you certainly don't seem to think this country has any libertarians in it. (We could use a lot more, I admit, but Paul's many decades in office is testament to the fact that we exist!)

There are Libertarians around, sure. They've always been around. In 2008, the Libertarian party candidate, Bob Barr, got half a million votes. In the scheme of things though, by themselves they aren't a particularly large voting bloc.

My point is that RP's recent popularity has little to do with people that are long-time Libertarians, and more to do with people that got excited because he wasn't Jack Johnson or John Jackson. That and "9/11 was an inside job" and various other conspiracy theories.

I just don't see why they were likely to be "Young" tech-savvy folks in the first place... Surely if he has a powerful following of real libertarians, they would have used Digg and the same sites to do their online awareness campaigns then too...

The bottom line here is that the MYTH of RP's following being nothing but a small bunch of college kids was simply created and perpetuated by the media, so Paul couldn't get elected.

In reality there were likely only a few college kids involved, perhaps as few as 5 or 10 worldwide that would be needed to drum up all that support on Digg and reddit and other places Paul was popular, because the older ppl (Paul's MAIN fan base, the libertarians) know how to use google and find Paul's name anywhere online and argue with them on that turf.

If that's all it was, where is all that support on those sites now? Surely those same techniques should work just as well? The difference is, I think, four years ago the users of those sites were enthusiastic about him. They're not anymore. Ron Paul posts are getting ignored or downvoted. That demo, at least, seems to have outgrown him.

 

[Pseudo Nym]

Your always talking out of your ass and taking up way too much post space.

Ron Paul leads the group for young supporters.

Internet Demographic Data of Ron Paul Supporters

Lamestream media poll, you can't believe them! You fucking moron!1


There. Saved lukep having to post.

 

[music4mic]

Straw polls are usually full of young party activists, aka Ron Poll supporters more than average. Doesn't mean jack shit in the primary/general.

Not necessarily true. I can tell you first hand candidates spend big money to make sure they have a strong showing in these straw polls. I went to a rather large one in 2007 and it was a mixed crowd and Romney's camp was giving out multiple tickets/votes to his supporters to make sure he won.

 

[PunchMyFace]

 

[crackp0t]

I'm no stranger to the conspiracy theory stuff, having listened to certain "alternative" late-night talk radio programs since the mid 90s.

If it's the show I'm thinking of I kind of like it. I don't necessarily believe everything they talk about, but it's entertaining. I knew one of the guests on there and he use to post here.

 

[Pseudo Nym]

If it's the show I'm thinking of I kind of like it. I don't necessarily believe everything they talk about, but it's entertaining. I knew one of the guests on there and he use to post here.

I have to say, I don't enjoy it as much as I used to, ever since the original host retired. And after so many years you get a bit tired of the usual cast of characters and cranks that come on the show.


But back to the topic at hand. So apparently the largest third party in the US (in terms of registered voters) is the right-wing religious conservative Constitution Party. Then the Green Party, and finally the Libertarian Party. So... I dunno. If there's so many Libertarians around, are they not interested in the Libertarian Party, or what? I sure never see anyone here talk about it. I suppose like a lot of potential third party voters, they either just vote for whichever guy in the big two parties they hate least, or they don't vote.

Realistically, I know a third party candidate has zero chance of winning at the national level. And a big reason for that is the voting system. If that could be fixed... well, then we might have something. I think, despite whatever ideological differences we might have, voting reform should be something we can all support. Give third party candidates half a chance.

Like with #OWS - you may not agree with them on a lot, but one of the consistent core messages is to get big corporate money out of politics. That, I think most of us can agree on.

 

[crackp0t]

Awesome, is there a site with that listed, id love to email it to some people.

Honey Badger doesn't give a shit about sending lists to people.

 

[BluAffiliate]

Please explain to me in detail how such a large bunch of "young party activists" understand liberty enough to like Paul?

Kids don't like Paul... He's the opposite of bleeding heart & blind patriotism. He's 100% experience. Only adults who understand how the world really works can appreciate Paul's record.

No, actually the right wing of the United States is trending away from social-conservativism and traditionalism closer towards liberty and capitalism, and this is why Ron Paul performs usually well at straw polls. Also his supporters seem to be the more die hard of the group and take time to actually attend these.

 

[dreamache]

I realized that Paul's philosophy was very narrow and fixed; it seemed all I ever heard him talk about was monetary policy. His answers to most everything else were lacking in nuance and critical understanding, and his worldview seemed limited.

I agree with just about everything he has to say, and that's coming from someone who has a very open mind.

Tell me, what is it that RP believes that you disagree with?

 

[dreamache]

Also, I do believe much of RP's supporters are younger, more informed, less herded sheep that don't* solely get their news from the mainstream media via radio and television.

When you consider that the youth are more exposed to various forms of media than any other age group, it's not a bash against a candidate to say that their primary following comes from younger generations, it's a positive. We're not controlled (I say we're, and I'm 28) by the mainstream media. We understand they've been bought and paid for, to ensure whoever gets elected is yet another willing puppet.

 

[lukep]

Your always talking out of your ass and taking up way too much post space.

And you think showing me weak-sauce stats like this is going to make my posts shorter and fewer somehow???

From Gallup.com:

Gallup conducts 1,000 interviews per day, 350 days out of the year, among both landline and cell phones across the U.S.

Yeah... That's fair. 100% people who answer phones, (a.k.a. morons.) Never a single internet user.

Ron Paul leads the group for young supporters.

Perry Zooms to Front of Pack for 2012 GOP Nomination...

...Internet Demographic Data of Ron Paul Supporters

With the above you can't just say "old people don't go online" as it is simply comparing the age of traffic on his sites vs other candidates sites.

Get your argument straight.

In fact I said:

In reality there were likely only a few college kids involved, perhaps as few as 5 or 10 worldwide that would be needed to drum up all that support on Digg and reddit and other places Paul was popular, because the older ppl (Paul's MAIN fan base, the libertarians) know how to use google and find Paul's name anywhere online and argue with them on that turf.

That's pretty much the opposite of "old people don't go online." :smokin:

I think Paul's popularity in the last few years are due to those people that have become disillusioned with the major parties, and also the rise in popularity of the formerly fringe conspiracy theory scene (due in large part to the increased exposure provided through the web and Youtube specifically...

This does happen, of course, probably to a lot of NEW Paul supporters, but you seem to imply that this makes up the Majority of his support... I beg to differ.

I believe smart people are smart.

A smart person, no matter his age (Although most will be over 40 because experience makes you smarter) is likely to become a libertarian and a smart person is also likely to know how to digg or reddit a story. There is clearly a correlation here, so you can't just assume all of Paul's support is kids when you see lots of web, digg, and reddit activity.

C'mon marketers! Look past the initial demographics you've been given and see the bigger likelyhood!

If that's all it was, where is all that support on those sites now? Surely those same techniques should work just as well? The difference is, I think, four years ago the users of those sites were enthusiastic about him. They're not anymore. Ron Paul posts are getting ignored or downvoted. That demo, at least, seems to have outgrown him.

OR, the SMART ppl who worked hard in these sites 4 years ago saw that it wasn't effective and decided this time around they'd do something more effective?

...I wonder if RP moneybombs have raised more cash this time around... Anyone know the answer to that? I'm thinking so.

No, actually the right wing of the United States is trending away from social-conservativism and traditionalism closer towards liberty and capitalism, and this is why Ron Paul performs usually well at straw polls. Also his supporters seem to be the more die hard of the group and take time to actually attend these.

Usually when you agree with someone 100% Blu, it's customary to start your sentence off with some other word than "No." :thumbsup:

 

[Napolean]

I love how there is always an explanation for how Ron Paul does well on stuff like straw polls, internet polls, etc. And how they stress how meaningless Ron Paul's results are, because they are accomplished by his "supporters".

When any other candidate accomplishes the same thing, omg its totally newsworthy. Hermain Cain was put on a pedestal when he won the florida straw poll, but if Ron Paul had won that straw poll, you wouldn't have heard a peep about it, just like every other straw poll he's won.

When Ron Paul wins an internet poll, its because its all young people and his followers on the internet who makes sure he wins every single online poll. So it doesn't matter, and is only worth presenting on a news station when the polls have Ron Paul in 3rd place or worse.

So, let me get this straight. Ron Paul is unelectable because:

His supporters vote for him in straw polls and gets him to first place.
His supports show support for him in online polls and consistently get him voted in first place.

Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Herman Cain ARE electable/front runners when:

Their supporters vote for them in straw polls and get them to first place.

And online polls are worth referencing on television when their supporters vote for them and get them to first place.

Oh oh and, demographic based telephone polling is also way way more accurate than the closest thing to unregulated polling systems we have (internet polls, and to a lesser degree, straw polls). Even though the people running these telephone surveys/polls/whatever, can more than likely predict the outcomes before they even start calling anybody. Those curve fitted polls are totally more accurate right? So that's why the media treats those as the gold standard, even more so than straw polls these days!

 

[dreamache]

I love how there is always an explanation for how Ron Paul does well on stuff like straw polls, internet polls, etc. And how they stress how meaningless Ron Paul's results are, because they are accomplished by his "supporters".

When any other candidate accomplishes the same thing, omg its totally newsworthy. Hermain Cain was put on a pedestal when he won the florida straw poll, but if Ron Paul had won that straw poll, you wouldn't have heard a peep about it, just like every other straw poll he's won.

When Ron Paul wins an internet poll, its because its all young people and his followers on the internet who makes sure he wins every single online poll. So it doesn't matter, and is only worth presenting on a news station when the polls have Ron Paul in 3rd place or worse.

just to prove your point..
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jQgGUZxADY]Who Cares That RON PAUL Wins Straw Polls? LOL - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ericchristopher]

Cain didn't know what a Neo-con was two weeks ago.

We need wiki-news.