Nice Wired magazine article on Ron Paul's Internet success

Note also the link to a poll that includes Ron Paul, at http://www.gopstrawpolls.com/ (where he is doing very well!)

Love & Liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Ron Paul: How a Fringe Politician Took Over the Web
Brendan Spiegel
(online at http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/06/ron_paul )


  06.27.07 | 2:00 AM
When Texas Congressman Ron Paul entered the race for next year's Republican presidential nomination, few political analysts paid much notice.

Paul has no backing from political bigwigs or any campaign war chest to speak of. As the Libertarian Party presidential nominee in 1988 he won less than one-half of 1 percent of the national vote.

Yet despite his status among the longest of the long shots, the 71-year-old has become one of the internet's most omnipresent –- and some say most irritating -– subjects.

According to Technorati, "Ron Paul" is one of the web's most searched-for terms. News about Paul has an outsize presence on Digg and reddit, two sites that allow users to highlight their preferred content. Paul's YouTube channel has been viewed over one million times, dwarfing efforts from competitors like John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. The Ron Paul internet boom has born everything from Belgians for Ron Paul to a reggae music video promoting Paul's views on monetary policy and habeas corpus.

During the 2004 election, a web-savvy campaign staff helped turn Howard Dean's anti-war candidacy into the first online political phenomenon. But the Ron Paul frenzy seems to have sprung from the internet itself. Paul's libertarian message – he is against big government, the war, and pretty much anything that costs taxpayers money – has attracted a group of anti-establishment, tech-savvy supporters who have taken everyone by surprise.

"The people who are actually working for the campaign are a little overwhelmed with what's happening," says Alex Wallenwein, a supporter who organized two of the 362 Meetup.com groups dedicated to Paul.

To many immersed in the political blogosphere, Paul's passionate supporters seem to be everywhere at once. Editors of political websites are inundated with angry e-mails demanding they devote more coverage to Paul. Blog posts that criticize Paul are often followed by hundreds of livid comments from his fans. Most frustrating to those not on board the Ron Paul bandwagon, he routinely ranks first in online presidential polls on sites ranging from CNN.com to niche political blogs.

Conversely, Paul rates in the low single digits in scientific telephone polls and few political pundits afford him any chance of winning the nomination. When the editors at National Journal's The Hotline compiled their well-respected White House 2008 Rankings in May, they put Paul in last place among the 12 Republicans running, tacking on a fed-up message to his fans: "Just please stop e-mailing us."

They aren't the only ones who see Paul supporters as a nuisance. Many users of Digg and reddit are perplexed to see story after story about Paul topping lists of the most popular news. Critics say Paul supporters disregard the spirit of these social content sites by posting messages on blogs that encourage readers to go to Digg or reddit and vote for every story about Paul. One Digg user complained Paul supporters are violating the site's terms of service, which prohibit any organized effort that artificially alters the most popular news list.

Many prominent bloggers complain Paul's supporters have tainted informal, unscientific polls by organizing large-scale get-out-the-vote campaigns through blogs and social networking sites. As a result, the polls are less a measure of which candidate has the most support than whose fans are putting the most time into their voting efforts.

Matt Margolis runs GOP Straw Polls, a popular series of monthly surveys that are posted on numerous blogs in an attempt to gauge how much support candidates have throughout the conservative blogosphere. Margolis originally didn't include Paul in the polls but added his name when his fan base began to grow. Paul now dominates the polls, winning nearly half of all ballots cast in the most recent survey.

Margolis says Paul's success is the result of his supporters' "coordinated efforts to show themselves and their power in these polls." While most readers will vote once or twice and then move on, Margolis says Paul fans are visiting numerous blogs hosting the polls and voting repeatedly, while encouraging others to do the same through messages on MySpace, Facebook and blogs.

"There is certainly a higher frequency of multiple voting among Paul supporters than others," says Margolis. "I was perfectly fine with giving them the opportunity to vote for him. But they make the data of the poll almost useless by their methods."

Many bloggers have expressed concern that Paul's massive online vote totals could only be accomplished through the use of bots that automatically send hundreds of votes. While no one has presented evidence to prove this, several blogs have removed Paul's name from their polls. Not surprisingly, Paul fans have responded with streams of angry e-mails.

Paul supporters say his success is just the results of the wild, wild web operating at its finest, giving voice to a movement that would otherwise find no traction in traditional media. "If we have 20,000 passionate supporters who go and vote in an online poll and Rudy Giuliani can only get 1,000, we're not going to apologize for that," says Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign communication director.

Michael Nystrom, founder of the Daily Paul blog, says, "What I find interesting is that other candidates have more money, but Ron Paul has something money can't buy, and that's this very active online community." Whether or not Paul's online support translates into any real world success, it is clear this candidate has stumbled upon a new brand of internet activism that has the rest of the web scrambling to adapt.

(Attachment unknown.gif is missing)

The challenge before us now is to ensure that similar (and greater) success goes to an actual *Libertarian*.

Note, too, the role of effective marketing communications in Paul's campaign (as well as the Democrats' Dean insurgency a few years before).

Cheers,

Brian

Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote: Note also the link to a poll that includes Ron Paul, at http://
www.gopstrawpolls.com/ (where he is doing very well!)

Love & Liberty,
    <<< starchild >>>

Ron Paul: How a Fringe Politician Took Over the Web
Brendan Spiegel
(online at http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/06/
ron_paul )


  06.27.07 | 2:00 AM
When Texas Congressman Ron Paul entered the race for next year's
Republican presidential nomination, few political analysts paid much
notice.

Paul has no backing from political bigwigs or any campaign war chest
to speak of. As the Libertarian Party presidential nominee in 1988 he
won less than one-half of 1 percent of the national vote.

Yet despite his status among the longest of the long shots, the 71-
year-old has become one of the internet's most omnipresent –- and
some say most irritating -– subjects.

According to Technorati, "Ron Paul" is one of the web's most searched-
for terms. News about Paul has an outsize presence on Digg and
reddit, two sites that allow users to highlight their preferred
content. Paul's YouTube channel has been viewed over one million
times, dwarfing efforts from competitors like John McCain and Rudy
Giuliani. The Ron Paul internet boom has born everything from
Belgians for Ron Paul to a reggae music video promoting Paul's views
on monetary policy and habeas corpus.

During the 2004 election, a web-savvy campaign staff helped turn
Howard Dean's anti-war candidacy into the first online political
phenomenon. But the Ron Paul frenzy seems to have sprung from the
internet itself. Paul's libertarian message – he is against big
government, the war, and pretty much anything that costs taxpayers
money – has attracted a group of anti-establishment, tech-savvy
supporters who have taken everyone by surprise.

"The people who are actually working for the campaign are a little
overwhelmed with what's happening," says Alex Wallenwein, a supporter
who organized two of the 362 Meetup.com groups dedicated to Paul.

To many immersed in the political blogosphere, Paul's passionate
supporters seem to be everywhere at once. Editors of political
websites are inundated with angry e-mails demanding they devote more
coverage to Paul. Blog posts that criticize Paul are often followed
by hundreds of livid comments from his fans. Most frustrating to
those not on board the Ron Paul bandwagon, he routinely ranks first
in online presidential polls on sites ranging from CNN.com to niche
political blogs.

Conversely, Paul rates in the low single digits in scientific
telephone polls and few political pundits afford him any chance of
winning the nomination. When the editors at National Journal's The
Hotline compiled their well-respected White House 2008 Rankings in
May, they put Paul in last place among the 12 Republicans running,
tacking on a fed-up message to his fans: "Just please stop e-mailing
us."

They aren't the only ones who see Paul supporters as a nuisance. Many
users of Digg and reddit are perplexed to see story after story about
Paul topping lists of the most popular news. Critics say Paul
supporters disregard the spirit of these social content sites by
posting messages on blogs that encourage readers to go to Digg or
reddit and vote for every story about Paul. One Digg user complained
Paul supporters are violating the site's terms of service, which
prohibit any organized effort that artificially alters the most
popular news list.

Many prominent bloggers complain Paul's supporters have tainted
informal, unscientific polls by organizing large-scale get-out-the-
vote campaigns through blogs and social networking sites. As a
result, the polls are less a measure of which candidate has the most
support than whose fans are putting the most time into their voting
efforts.

Matt Margolis runs GOP Straw Polls, a popular series of monthly
surveys that are posted on numerous blogs in an attempt to gauge how
much support candidates have throughout the conservative blogosphere.
Margolis originally didn't include Paul in the polls but added his
name when his fan base began to grow. Paul now dominates the polls,
winning nearly half of all ballots cast in the most recent survey.

Margolis says Paul's success is the result of his supporters'
"coordinated efforts to show themselves and their power in these
polls." While most readers will vote once or twice and then move on,
Margolis says Paul fans are visiting numerous blogs hosting the polls
and voting repeatedly, while encouraging others to do the same
through messages on MySpace, Facebook and blogs.

"There is certainly a higher frequency of multiple voting among Paul
supporters than others," says Margolis. "I was perfectly fine with
giving them the opportunity to vote for him. But they make the data
of the poll almost useless by their methods."

Many bloggers have expressed concern that Paul's massive online vote
totals could only be accomplished through the use of bots that
automatically send hundreds of votes. While no one has presented
evidence to prove this, several blogs have removed Paul's name from
their polls. Not surprisingly, Paul fans have responded with streams
of angry e-mails.

Paul supporters say his success is just the results of the wild, wild
web operating at its finest, giving voice to a movement that would
otherwise find no traction in traditional media. "If we have 20,000
passionate supporters who go and vote in an online poll and Rudy
Giuliani can only get 1,000, we're not going to apologize for that,"
says Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign communication director.

Michael Nystrom, founder of the Daily Paul blog, says, "What I find
interesting is that other candidates have more money, but Ron Paul
has something money can't buy, and that's this very active online
community." Whether or not Paul's online support translates into any
real world success, it is clear this candidate has stumbled upon a
new brand of internet activism that has the rest of the web
scrambling to adapt.

Brian,

  I wouldn't characterize what's happening on the Internet with Ron Paul as "marketing." The term "marketing" implies some centralized decision-making process that I don't think exists in this case.

  But I do share your desire to see an LP nominee who is more libertarian do equally well.

Love & Liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Starchild:

I don't know where you're getting the idea that marketing is a "centralized decision-making process." Good marketing is effective communication of your proposition to people who find such a proposition compelling -- and maintaining an ongoing discussion with those people.

Cheers,

Brian

Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote: Brian,

I wouldn't characterize what's happening on the Internet with Ron Paul as "marketing." The term "marketing" implies some centralized decision-making process that I don't think exists in this case.

But I do share your desire to see an LP nominee who is more libertarian do equally well.

Love & Liberty,
    <<< starchild >>>

Brian,

  If all you're talking about is effective communication and maintaining ongoing discussions, then let's use those and similar terms instead of corporate-sounding terminology like "marketing," and we can probably avoid most of our disagreement on this topic.

Love & Liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Starchild:

I'm quite deliberate in my language because I mean what I say. If you disagree with my specific approach, criticism is welcome, but all this focus on "bad words" reminds me of the sort of political correctness I'd encounter at a typical Democratic Party gathering.

Cheers,

Brian

Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote: Brian,

If all you're talking about is effective communication and maintaining ongoing discussions, then let's use those and similar terms instead of corporate-sounding terminology like "marketing," and we can probably avoid most of our disagreement on this topic.

Love & Liberty,
    <<< starchild >>>

Brian,

  Ultimately it's not the word "marketing" that I'm concerned about. It is the whole sales/marketing approach, which I feel is corrupting of our political movement. But why would one want to use the word as a matter of course, unless one was seeking to embrace such an approach? Hence my focus on the word.

  Political correctness becomes problematic when it creeps into law, or when it becomes a weapon to elevate some people over others. But I suspect that you (and most of us on this list) have your own list of "bad words" you don't want used in this forum -- they might include words like "faggot," "nigger," and "cunt." Political correctness is so strongly in effect with regard to those words that some reading this message probably wince at seeing them printed here. Indeed I share that reaction, and use them here only to make a point.

  Well, I feel similarly about people using marketing language where it doesn't belong. If I don't have quite as strong a reaction, it's not from any lack of depth of conviction on my part, but simply because I don't have the weight of society behind me as opponents of more traditional "bad words" do.

Love & Liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Starchild:
   
  I honestly don't know where to begin.
   
  If I was some trippy mooncalf, full of outrage, I'd probably take umbrage with your comparison of my profession with racial or homophobic slurs. But I'm not, and I don't, except for a quick chuckle.
   
  The Libertarian Party (and politics in general) isn't some centrally-directed "movement" where "we" say "all the right things." One of the most ironic situations in this particular discussion is that you're demanding we don't take a "centralized approach" to communications -- yet here you are demanding that we centralize our style of communications your way, and only your way (not to mention doing the online equivalent of stamping your foot and shouting just like my three-year-old niece does when she doesn't get to control the dialogue!) Your constant demands that we cease all effective outreach and communications techniques because they're personally "icky" to you are *identical* to all the paleo-libertarians who told me to "stop all the gay stuff because we shouldn't have all those bad words affiliated with us."

  Chill out, man. You do things your way, I'll do things mine, other Libertarians will do things their way, and the free market of ideas, not a wannabe "central committee for communication words," will determine who is successful.
   
  Some of us will go to the marketplace of ideas with compelling and effective presentations of libertarian ideas and calls to action, others will want to plaster the Transamerica Building with LP posters and offer to pay the fines. In a year's time, we can compare the results and then have a discussion about "effectiveness" and "proper words." Capisce?
   
  Cheers,
   
  Brian
   
Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote:
            Brian,
  
  Ultimately it's not the word "marketing" that I'm concerned about. It is the whole sales/marketing approach, which I feel is corrupting of our political movement. But why would one want to use the word as a matter of course, unless one was seeking to embrace such an approach? Hence my focus on the word.
  
  Political correctness becomes problematic when it creeps into law, or when it becomes a weapon to elevate some people over others. But I suspect that you (and most of us on this list) have your own list of "bad words" you don't want used in this forum -- they might include words like "faggot," "nigger," and "cunt." Political correctness is so strongly in effect with regard to those words that some reading this message probably wince at seeing them printed here. Indeed I share that reaction, and use them here only to make a point.
  
  Well, I feel similarly about people using marketing language where it doesn't belong. If I don't have quite as strong a reaction, it's not from any lack of depth of conviction on my part, but simply because I don't have the weight of society behind me as opponents of more traditional "bad words" do.
  
  Love & Liberty,
  <<< starchild >>>