Can Someone Channel Ron Paul Supporter Energy For Good Instead Of Annoyance?
from the note:-this-doesn't-make-you-look-good dept
Are you familiar with the horror movie Candyman? In it, naive victims-to-be summon the titular character by repeating his name five times while staring into a mirror. Unpleasantness ensues.Strangely enough, the exact same phenomenon applies to Republican presidential contender Ron Paul. But you'll need a web browser instead of a mirror, and you only need to say his name once.
The online omnipresence of Paul's supporters is impressive to the point of being terror-inducing. Virtually any online poll in which Paul appears can be counted on to swing wildly in his favor — in the wake of one such incident, the National Journal begged Paul's supporters "please stop emailing us." Stories involving Dr. Paul make it to the front page of Digg on a daily basis, and any blog post that triggers a Google Alert for his name is sure to see a flood of comments arrive shortly thereafter.
Now some of his supporters have been caught promoting their preferred candidate using decidedly unsavory means. SecureWorks has released a report detailing the mechanisms behind a four day pro-Paul spam flood (one that we noted back on November 1). Apparently a botnet was employed to send unsolicited emails via infected computers, in much the same illegal style that's used to hawk pirated software and disc0unt v1agra.
Dirty pool, to be sure — and foolish on the part of the Paul fans behind it. The spam and rigged online polls aren't fooling anyone, and only make it easier to dismiss the campaign's online prominence as a the work of a handful of talented geeks. But there's no CPAN module that lets you create a blimp via Perl script; most of the pro-Paul comments left around the net contain enough context that they appear to have been written by actual humans; and incidents like the one that occurred at the San Francisco Republican Straw Poll make it clear that Paul's campaign has some real grassroots support behind it. I'm not buying Ron Paul contracts on Intrade just yet, but it would be nice to see his online armies knock off the transparent internet antics and start channeling their energy toward more productive — or at least dignified — ends. Unfortunately, as my fellow Techdirt Insight Community member and blogger Tim Lee has discussed elsewhere, the odds of this happening don't seem to be very good.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I've tuned them out as well
The annoying behavior of [some] Ron Paul supporters greatly overshadows whatever merits his positions may have. One of these jerks sent their *CHILD* up to our front door on Halloween, not to get some candy, but to force campaign literature into our hands. That's inexcusably rude, doubly so because the pitiful coward responsible didn't have the courage to do it themself.
A couple of weeks later, someone put Ron Paul flyers on every car in the neighborhood -- even though it's clearly posted as no soliciting. Since they chose to do this in a cold, wet, very windy night, the next morning found lots of those brochures littering streets, front lawns, etc. A call to local Ron Paul HQ asking them to get their butts out in the rain and clean up their mess did not result in any action.
Given this behavior, I'm not buying the-botnet-did-it story just yet. I've seen way too many spammer excuses over the years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just so I've got it straight
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whatever, Rich
Ron Paul supporters should post online; they shouldn't vote for their candidate in internet polls; they shouldn't leaflet; and they shouldn't canvass door to door.
Anything else? I suppose I should assume you think they shouldn't make phone calls or run radio or TV ads either?
It becomes increasingly clear that just about every last ****sucker out there who complains that Paul supporters are "pushy" really is angry that they exist in the first place, and the only thing they would consider "un-pushy" is if they ceased to exist.
Talk to the hand. I hope you get robocalled every ten minutes between now and the primaries, have your door knocked on every ten seconds, and have your car covered from end to end in bumper stickers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
some more info:
The spam that was going around from this bot had tiny url links to Ron Paul youtube videos. Youtube has a habit of deleting videos that spam links to; thus, the end effect of the botnet was to have Ron Paul videos deleted, and annoy a lot of people about Ron Paul. Anyone with the savvy to create a bot would know these would be the results; thus, your argument that it was a Ron Paul fan (or fans) creating the bot is an error; Ron Paul fans didn't do the bot or the spam.
I'll grant you that yes, many internet supporters of RP are annoying, and i don't agree with the spamming of windshields either. There are thousands of RP supporters going door to door, as well as funding some innovative campaigning. We won't know how well we've done until the primaries.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Cry Rich
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ok you convinced me.
I'm voting for one of the other 7 dwarfs. They all look and sound alike to me anyway. Now let's bomb Iran.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
spam wasn't from Ron Paul supporters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All Campaigns
I do not like political campaigns which are a bunch of lies and finger pointing.
This is a new twist on things. However low, it does seem to provide exposure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Passion and exuberance...
In fact imo it does appear that an overwhelming amount of web users support Paul and those who do not are in the minority as there are far more individual comments for Ron Paul than against.
What Paul supporters need to do is work on the other 230 million that are not online, That's the next goal..
I also am happy to see the exuberance and passion that Ron Paul supporters have brought back to the political arena. Politics should inspire passion and exuberance. Would anyone suggest apathy be better? Perhaps apathy is what cost us Americans the most. So bless there exuberance and passion and may they change the world.
Want to no more about Ron Paul, don't trust anyone, Google Ron Paul, read all you want about him and make up your own mind. Wikepedia has allot of good info too..
Regards to all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Me
I support the candidate who's supporters I like the best. Obama supporters are cool but a little young. I want to feel powerful and important. I think I will vote for Hillary or Giuliani...then I will know that I am a player.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blame the lack of media exposure
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So cute, they all flock together...
- Emails coming from outside of US sound like bot net works pretty damn well and it makes sense to do it if you are trying to get noticed
- It IS possible to rig an online poll by having one person vote many times. It is easily done even by barely computer literates people
And way to prove the point of the article, Ron Paul supporters!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So cute, they all flock together...
How about this.... when Ron Paul wins the primaries, you have to go back and personally apologize to every single Ron paul fan you offended.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So cute, they all flock together...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So cute, they all flock together...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Use better GRAMMER?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Use better GRAMMER?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some People Just Don't Get It
The Hasty conclusion of a cursory glance followed by a derogatory slant is what causes the onslaught of comment. Ron Paul supporters are more than happy to attempt to educate, should the discussion be about the issues and problems facing our nation.
Unfortunately, many who fear for change in their paradigm relocate themselves to playground rather than intellectual tactics. Rather than discuss issues, they label the messenger and denote their discourse as Spam.
Views Untested Are Worthless !!!
Reality Will Be Reality Whether Believed In Or Not.
The rest of the candidates are just more of the same continuance of ineptitude that will result in the collapse of the American Experiment.
I Vote For Virtue; I Vote For Ron Paul.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FYI
Freedom is such that it is intimately intertwined with freedom. The founders knew this. The bible speaks of this. The two are inseparable. Attack freedom and sacrifice humanity itself. Look at what these people have done (TORTURE KILLING INNOCENTS). Paul and all of us who have awakenED to the truth of the matter help those in UNECESSARY FEAR to see the LIGHT. I myself have always maintained my faith in the individual, individual responsibility, democracy and, therefore, humanity and FREEDOM not kingdom, not serfdom, not neoslavery. LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE FREE PURSUITS OF HAPPINESS. The tighter this "empire" tries to control and squeeze (repress) the individual the more we will like hamburger slip out between it's talons. Freedom is and will always be OMNIPOTENT (all powerful) and OMNIPRESENT (always there here and everywhere). We don't need to police the world to promote this. Policing is in conflict to this. It is inherent.
Pauls message is an imperative because the path we've been on other than being an utter hoax, fraud and a farce, like the war on drugs, has been tearing the very fabric of humanity, from such a hypocritical corner as "standing for freedom."
Have faith, believe in and allow the change for a necessary for this all important rEVOLution. The stealth empire must give way to the individual (the benevolence of the individual) and democracy. Don't believe the evil focus that comes from your mindbox (TV). Believe what you know in your heart to be true.
"We The People" and Ron Paul love, faith, peace, goodness and prosperity wins in 2008!
Sincerely,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I understand your points
Paul supporters have not rigged any online polls, and the spam incident does nothing to indicate otherwise. They are just more enthusiastic and will all pretty much vote for anything they can to support their candidate.
Judging a candidate based on a small number of supporters (or, likely, just one in the spam incident) seems a bit banal. As you can see from your ever growing comment section, the supporters are a wide variety of excited folks.
But, you seem to (sort of) understand this. The campaign is extremely decentralized, and that is new to a lot of people. They are so used to thinking top down about everything (thank your Federal Government for that), they can't imagine that there isn't some secret cabal hired by Ron Paul to run all of this. There isn't, and thus we have anyone and everyone expressing enthusiasm every which way. It's kind of exciting, if annoying at times.
I apologize for the rude types, but try and remember that sometimes freedom is a bit messy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Earth to Tom...
Where tha hell have you been?
Oh wait, better yet, what tha heck are you guys smoking in "Information Technology" now a day?
Like mother always said "If you can't stand the heat, get tha hell out..."
Do you know the "most dangerous weapon" of all Tom?
Yes, "Ignorance" and there's quite a few out there...
Try a "legitimate piece" to make a different and people will respect you for it Tom. Cause this distortion ain't gonna cut it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some real info
" We were also able to see the other types of spam being sent by the botnet - quickly dismissing the idea that this botnet was created for the purpose of political spam."
So the experts at SecureWorks DO NOT think it was done for political gain, but you do????
You Wrote:
"his supporters have been caught promoting their preferred candidate using decidedly unsavory means"
And
"Dirty pool, to be sure — and foolish on the part of the Paul fans behind it"
Yet your own source (SecureWorks) comes to the EXACT opposite conclusion.
Did you not read the report you site? Am I missing something here?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul Spam
Just let you know, this is what the SecureWorks article said in their conclusion:
"...we are left asking the question, who paid to have the Ron Paul spam sent and how did they connect with the spammer, nenastnyj?� The evidence shows that despite being capable of sending upwards of 200 million messages a day, nenastnyj is not one of the major spammers of the world, and seems to focus on spamming as an affiliate for larger kingpin� operations. The Ron Paul spam was very much a one-off job among the other tasks in the Reactor interface. It almost seems as though there may have been some pre-established relationship between the sponsor of the spam and nenastnyj. However, given the current state of law enforcement activity concerning spam in the countries of the CIS, it is unlikely we will get an answer to these questions..."
In other words, "spm" created the spam. It was recognizable work and SercureWorks found that "spm" (a Ukrainian 'bot master') used 'nenastnyj' as a middleman.
So does it make sense this Eastern European was huge Ron Paul supporter or hired by someone who has more than the Yellow Pages at his disposal?
RP2008!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What supporter energy means:
We have some things we believe in very strongly: personal liberty and the constitution.
It's not our fault the other candidates don't have such a powerful message backed by years of integrity through consistency...
As to the SPAM, you always look at who it benefits, and since the youtube videos were removed as a matter of policy and the press reports negatively on it... do you really believe "People smart enough to build a bot net are not necessarily smart enough to consider what happens beyond it's operation"? Maybe that's why you haven't joined the revolution yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amazing how uninformed you are!
As for your complaints about Paul supporters (like me) canvassing the Web and spreading the truth and debunking the myths, well, guess what: it's a free Internet, pal, and if you don't like it, log off. We all spread the word in different ways, Web included.
You should be happy that people are energized and involved in the Presidential campaign instead of bitching about it. You need to realize that the non-Paul candidates want to regulate, tax, censor, and destroy the Internet, and that should concern you, because it affects YOU (and the rest of us) directly.
So don't go complaining about us Paul supporters doing our thing. You don't have the right to not be offended. Instead, find out WHY it's happening and then actually DO something about it, either for or against it! Otherwise you have no real grounds to complain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Someone didn't do his research.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HaH
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I agree!
All those geeks sending fake donations to Ron Paul whose campaign chest now totals more than what McCain has raised in verifiable individual donations needs to quit.
All those geeks sending fake polls, even those which show Ron Paul has more support among military members according to donations than any other presidential candidate needs to stop.
Not everything can be faked with a computer. Not every Ron Paul supporter is a bot-net. Not every online poll is 'rigged' for Ron Paul.
Considering there is no verifiable evidence linking this to Ron Paul's campaign (rather it seems to be taking a popular subject and using it to spread malware - much like anything with "Britney" or "Aguilerra" in a subject line does).
More irresponsible reporting by TechDirt, then again - I'm not surprised anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blog spam not from supporters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blog spam not from supporters.
Agreed. Just the comments section here is proof of that. And I love how they are up in arms about BLOG misreporting something... I bet they get upset about bathroom stall "misreports" as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Blog spam not from supporters.
We Paul supporters just want a fair hearing, and a fair shake. The establishment/corporate agenda is desperate to not allow this, and they want to push the most of us as possible into the "against" camp. The people who think and are against Paul are a small group. The people who don't think, and just eat what they're fed, are the ones that make or break a candidate. We want them fed the truth about Ron Paul, therefore every negative post needs a counter-post. Luckily for us, this is easy because Ron Paul's positions mostly don't need defending. The truth and respect for the Constitution is a beacon of hope that shines bright for all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Revolution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get used to it, dilweed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I swear Techdirt is just contrary sometimes
I have to agree with Will. Seriously, I like the subjects that Techdirt covers, but your reporting really seems to getting worse...and it was never the best to begin with. In the last several years I have noticed more instances of you guys letting your bias get the better of you and just outright errors creeping through. You need to really re-think your story writing, fact checking, and editorial processes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I swear Techdirt is just contrary sometimes
You DO know this is not a library of congress here or state department? May be you should rethink what you read and where you comment. Hopefully the conclusion will be with you commenting elsewhere. Much obliged.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real RonPaul question for TechDirt is...
And can free "Political Lunacy" be part of a viable business model?
Hmmmm, Did I cross the line there just now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Whatever Rich
I must say that you've done an excellent job of completely misreading what I wrote. Oh, and fabricating things that I didn't actually say. Bravo.
Do you not grasp that using, and I mean using, children for political campaigning is wrong?
Do you not grasp that soliciting in a neighborhood that's explicitly posted against it is wrong?
These things are wrong regardless of the candidate, regardless of the position, regardless of the merits. They're rude. They're uncivilized. They're intrusive. And they piss people off -- something that anyone who's actually worked on a campaign already knows. "Don't alienate the voters with tactics, only do it with strategy if you must" is a maxim that I thought every novice politico already knew. Apparently not.
I understand enthusiasm for a candidate, been there, done that. And I applaud it -- at least it shows that people are interested in the political process, which beats apathy. But enthusiasm does not excuse rude behavior. Besides, anyone of even middling intelligence can find plenty of creative ways to propagate the same message to the same people without aggravating them. Heck, it's easier now than it's ever been (in part thanks to the Internet) to do precisely that.
So my expectation -- of the Ron Paul campaign in particular because of its stated desire to break with a great many things best described as "business as usual" -- is that they'll try to be better than the rest: no invasive telephone calls, no mindless slogans, no push polls, etc. If these folks are really as progressive as they claim to be -- and it'd be refreshing if they were -- then they should be able to conduct a campaign at a higher, more principled level than their competition, setting a standard and challenging others to live up to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Whatever Rich
This is exactly why Ron Paul supporters are angry at the media and the "journalists" out there. They denigrate Dr. Paul both subtly and not so subtly, and expect us all to just eat their words and like it.
The so-called "establishment" just doesn't like that we're playing by their rules and doing it effectively, unlike the last few Presidential elections where they had an independent, like Nader, to point & laugh at.
Has anyone else noticed yet how they're floating the idea, some practically begging "run as an independent!" Yeah, they'd love that, it makes it so much easier to define that candidate as an outsider to the general sheeple.
I've got news for ya - the sheeple are mutating back into American humans, and they're getting more pissed by the day.
Make sure you visit www.teaparty07.com, and donate if you can!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Whatever Rich
PS What make you think that children should not be involved in the political process. My home-schooled child could recite the Bill of Rights when he was three. He was not raised to be a slave to the state. I taught him about liberty early.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What the frak?
I understand the knee-jerk reaction by the usual hacks.
What confuses me is why someone who is otherwise so savvy fails to see this smear campaign for what it is. And on top of it asks that his supporters, who are, granted, disproportionately represented online, to stop showing their support online.
Maybe you should be asking why his support comes in large part from the same people who are concerned about the same issues that you, and the rest of techdirt, are concerned about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amazing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SpamBots
They aren't written by real people, it's just a computer program that writes all the news using a single algorithm that filters viewpoints and changes the wording around. It's only a few people behind it, and they fear they are losing their grip on the blinders they have been using to frame every viewpoint.
The computer program is named, "Socialism_Or_Fascism_Make_Your_Choice".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I went to a fight the other day, and an election b
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” ~John F. Kennedy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry Tom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Some real info
Secureworks's research looks reasonably good, but they're hardly the only ones who have looked into this.
The problem is that without a money trail (or equivalent) it's impossible to say for certain who was actually behind it. Past experience (length, disappointing past experience) indicates that it's often the case that the money behind spam runs is laundered through a series of entities in order to obscure the trail and create plausible deniability. Uncovering that is often very difficult without some combination of (a) subpoena powers (b) an insider (c) a major mistake or (d) a security breach. Competent spammers know this and organize their operations to avoid these issues.
So I'm not yet ready to buy the conclusion that the Ron Paul campaign (or anyone in it) had nothing to do with it. Maybe that's so. But I've yet to see convincing evidence -- even circumstantially convincing evidence -- of it. I'd like to; I'd like to believe that they're not spammers, doubly so because (as I hope everyone already knows) the Democratic and Republican parties both are spammers. (One of the few truly bipartisan efforts in this country.) I think it's best for the moment to consider the question open and to await further information.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tech Dirt annoys Ron Pual supports to get exsposur
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who is Ron Paul
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who is Ron Paul
Of course you can.
What is it that you liked about Reagan? You might want to investigate how Paul compares.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmm
Agree sending your kid to the door on halloween to hand out RP flyers isn't the best idea, but then again it's just as well-intended supporter.
If I recall, there may have been a few small indiscretions committed by prior (winning) campaigns. How about that little diddy over on the east coast where the Bush supporters plastered every car at a McCain rally with flyers showing McCain with his "illegitimate black child." (oh you adopted? our bad!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dorpass
Yeah, this coming from someone who is the most consistent poster of stupid and inane comments in Techdirt history. I have been hoping that you will drop off the Internet for months now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dorpass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Definition of Hypocrisy
Believe us, we equally do not like journalists who purposely misrepresent Ron Paul's positions, spin the truth on 'botnet' stories, or call us kooks, whackos, fringe, paulites, paulians, and my favorite bigotted name 'paultards'.
I can't believe in 2007 people still make fun of people that have mental disabilities. I guess it takes superior intellect to pick on people who don't normally fight back.
It's all about perspective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How the mainstream media can get Paul supporters o
All they have to do is start doing their job and start reporting actual news rather than BS on Britney Spear's haircut, and having questions about baseball during Presidential debates.
The mainstream media for the last 15 years has *completely* abrogated it's responsibility to inform people.
The coverage of Paul is mostly deceptive and erroneous but when it's at it's peak of quality it's shallow and uneducational. For example, if I can know more about Operation Ajax and how it eventually directly led to the 9/11 tragedy than a professional journalist can, why am I working as an Electrical Engineer instead of a journalist?
Do your job or get out of the business of journalism to make room for somebody that can. The entire country is tired of a media that is more concerned with the latest film in Hollywood than investigative and truthful reporting on people who are slated to next be the rulers of this country.
An informed electorate is essential to maintaining a democracy and from what I see, the mainstream media is intent on destroying democracy within this nation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clever
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, it says so, so it must be!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New tactic...
Except that probably wouldn't actually work. I would be willing to bet money that YouTube would find a reason to make an 'exception' for Hillary's videos.
The COTUS isn't a perfect document; it' just better than what we are living under now. Don't think RP has a chance? Then go stick your head back in the sand, and don't bother to vote at all, since the winner is going to be Tweedledum or Tweedledee anyway...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think raising over ten f'ing million dollars for a politician is a waste of money.
BUT, I also think spending billions in Iraq and going trillions in debt as our dollar plummets in value is a waste of money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You vote Ron Paul.
Everyone happy, no one hurt.
You understand?
Goodbye. :|
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bizarre
And what happens? Yup. People attack him for being anti-Paul, basically proving Tom's point.
Let's make this clear: it is NOT an anti-Ron Paul post. Not at all. It's simply pointing out that his supporters can often do more harm than good. And how do many of them respond? By doing more harm. Brilliant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bizarre
Show me one, tardball.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Our Man...The Good Doctor...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JJ's Bizarre Comment
"What amazes me about these comments is that they attack Tom for trying to "discredit" Ron Paul."
UH, JJ - I missed the comments that are attacking Tom for trying to "discredit Ron Paul". Could you show some examples? I see a lot of on point comments.
What amazes me is that you read all these comments and then came up with an unfounded conclusion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I agree with JJ in post 62
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People are just tired
Join the Tea Party 12/16 and make history!
Tea Party
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: People are just tired
Human stupidity knows no bounds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reality check for Tom Lee
I'm perfectly willing to admit that we are fighting with all the odds against us, but if we fail I promise you will one day get to see exactly what we were talking about. If you were to only realize the peril we are in as a country you would have some insight into why we crazy Paultards feel such a sense of urgency.
One last question to ask yourself: Can you honestly say that every last Paul supporter is a fool? Do some research.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmmmm...let's see....lots of "no" votes supporting abortion rights and a sprinking of "yeses" where those rights are being curtailed.
Public expression of religion act (i.e. where people can get their attorney's fees covered when their freedom from/of religion rights are violated)? He votes no.
Clean energy act of 2007? Votes no.
Bill to prevent the Organization of Petroleum Export Groups (NOPEC)? Votes no.
Children's Health Insurance (CHIP) Reauthorization? Votes no.
Secure fence act (i.e. Let's keep them furriners on t'other side of a big-ass fence act)? He votes yes.
Looks to me like what you got here is your standard issue, big bidness loving, keep them furriners out, women should be knocked-up and stay home standard issue Republicans. And it sounds as if this great "grass roots movement" of this "down-trodden, underdog every-day Joe" is nothing more than the pissing into the wind of the Republican Party attempting to portray their candidate as something he's not. Geez, can't you guys come up with a new act already? Nader's been trying it for years without much success.
RP's voting record can be found here - http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ron Paul's abortion votes
He is *obviously* toeing the party line.
Moron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: hmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
context
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DUH!
Perhaps there is so much web traffic surrounding Ron Paul is because there is a lot of REAL PEOPLE supporting him!
Any other explanation is an attempt to deny reality and mislead the sheeple.
xtrabiggg
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DUH!
You see, most people are sheep.
People = idiots (until they can prove otherwise)
RP appeals to idiots.
His popularity shouldn't astound or amaze anyone. Emotional rhetoric and the blind zealotry of dozens *can* win elections, as proven by the democrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looks like Techdirt needed an end-of-week bump on
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Looks like Techdirt needed an end-of-week bump
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
enthusiasm counts for somethng I guess
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That made it easy!
Your incredibly childish and insulting posts have made the decision for at least one undecided. Ron Paul, and his "supporters" (read: cult) can kiss my shiny metal ass.
The least you could do when presented with such criticism is respond in a a manner that does not *prove* the point the author was trying to make. But...apparently you couldn't comprehend such a basic concept that most 4 year olds are capable of learning.
Such support from such immature and talentless hacks only makes it even more clear to us that RP appeals only to the lowest common denominator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That made it easy!
What's more important, your country or your personal feelings? You're not a little baby, right?
And another thing, any candidate who wins must receive the support of A-holes, as they are a significant part of the population, rich,poor, black, white or whatever. It is absolutely illogical to expect that a popular candidate will ever only acquire quiet, demur supporters.
Besides that is the obvious fact that Ron Paul in fact is not treated fairly by the media, so those conditions demand that his supporters PROVE that they really exist by being SEEN EVERYWHERE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i am real
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Using RP To Pump Up Techdirt Ad Revenues
This is comment #83, and if you look left, top, right, and bottom, you see no ad at all. In fact, on my screen, I need to click 21 pages up before I see ads. Looks to me like a lot of "wasted ad space". Seems to me like maybe this particular blog is not as much of an ad whore as you accuse it to be.
Many/most blogs/news sites will show you a half-dozen or so comments on a page, and make you click "Read more" to get the next half-dozen. They are trying to crank up page-views and ad revenue. Do you see that here? Nope.
Techdirt added ads in about 2005. They put up a few on the right side, at the top. It's done discretely, non-intrusively, and tastefully. Does that seem like a blog that squeezes every penny of possible ad revenue out of a page view?
I'm affiliated with this blog, though I am not employed by it. I sometimes talk with Mike about his business, and I remember telling him back in 2002 to get some freakin' ads on his pages and monetize his traffic. He said "No, I don't want to look like I'm about the money, and I don't think the readers want to see ads." Took him a few years to be sure the readers wouldn't be offended. You don't know anyone who is less interested in being a sell-out than the guy who runs this blog. IMHO, he does it to a fault.
So (leaving the politics of RP out of my comment) I will say that the accusation made about pushing page views makes me suspect that the posters are just using a template of some sort to attack Techdirt, since the charges don't fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stay updated, Google News
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disappointed
How about posting that Newsweek ran a hit piece on Paul's opposition to the NAFTA superhighway saying it was a conspiracy theory, only to have Paul followers send angry letters to the editors with a link to the government website of Manitoba that explicitly states plans have long been underway to create said highway? Newsweek loses credibility, more awareness is gained of the NAFTA highway and Paul doesn't have to lift a finger.
Why not do some research into why Paul's campaign has so little control over the momentum building behind him? Doesn't it seem odd that this Taxas Libertarian whose own party would just as soon have him fall off the face of the earth is getting record-breaking donation drives that he had no hand in organizing, made even more remarkable by the fact that it's not just a singular, fluke event. It's happened several times and will likely continue to do so.
Make some actual observations about the candidate and his campaign instead of a thinly disguised ad hominem attack on Paul supporters for supporting their candidate in a political and media environment actively working to marginalize the man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
funny RP supporter fantasy world
But a few points are interesting:
- any person at RP headquarters could just as easily have said: "Let's use these 300$ to buy us some time on a ukrainian botnet, untraceable back to us..."
- not a single RP supporter responded to the list where RP's actual voting/political opinions are mentioned, seems the facts don't stand up. Sounds to me like an orchestrated PR campaign going on here... - "employ" 2000 highschool kids at minimum wages (good money at that age, no money to you) and let them patrol the internet 24/7 using all the computers they have access to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looks like Tech Dirt is trolling for some RP traff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'dirty pool'?
If one wishes to discuss 'annoyance' - I so look forward to your many articles about robo-calling over the next year. Perhaps you can back 'em with actual facts VS "Now some of his supporters have been caught promoting their preferred candidate using decidedly unsavory means. " Because you did not show us how you knew that Ron Paul SUPPORTERS were 'caught'. Perhaps you were too busy crafting prose like "Unpleasantness ensues." "terror-inducing."?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jealousy is ugly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Online FAKE
* Won more straw polls than any other candidate
* Raised more money than any other candidate
* Has the largest meetup group members, exponentially, than any other candidate
You can't fake REAL LIFE POLLS, and REAL LIFE MONEY DONATIONS and REAL LIFE MEETUP GROUPS.
These accusations that his fan base is strictly online is completely ignorant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Techdirt: If you're going to mention Ron Paul at l
One incident of a supposed Ron Paul supporter sending spam emails, and the entire campaign gets dinged for it? Who even looks at spam anymore? Rudy Giuliani gets caught billing the city of New York for a large amount of ridiculous expenses relating to his mistress, and all you care about are a couple of spam emails?
As for winning all the online polls, maybe it's because there are PHYSICALLY A LOT OF RON PAUL SUPPORTERS. It's not just online polls either. He has the most youtube views and the most Google hits. He wins nearly every straw poll.
I wonder how his supporters managed to "spam" him with donations from 37,000 different individuals for a total of $4.2 million in a single day? And he doesn't even have Oprah helping him out. With $5 million last quarter and over $10.7 million this quarter from individual donations, it's hard to see how this is the result of a few spammers.
If you're wondering how Ron Paul only manages to get about 10% of "scientific" polls, then looks no further than the bad polling methods. I think most Ron Paul supporters (including me) either don't have landline telephones or don't have time to sit around answering telemarketer calls - I mean poll calls. And that assumes the poll itself isn't biased.
As for the main argument of the article, that Ron Paul supporters channel their energy for good, I think that's what 99.9% of Ron Paul supporters are doing. We're trying to get the word out about a candidate that the mainstream media largely ignores. People are getting tortured, our civil liberties are disappearing, we're keep killing people in huge dead end wars, our gov't is running up an unfathomable debt, our currency is becoming more and more worthless, and all you care about are a few spam emails? Thanks for getting you priorities straight, Techdirt.
By the way, I found this article while browsing Techdirt's website, not through any type of search or other website.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ron Paul 4 president
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Annoying indeed
Although I think it's great that people are getting excited about politics, some folks (Not just in the Ron Paul camp) tend to take it overboard. That said, yes, in my opinion, a large number of Ron Paul supporters are annoying. Sorry, but it's true.
Alright, I'm ready to be yelled at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul has integrity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Moral Of The Story?
I just hope this doesn't get too far out of hand; I don't care for his politics, but he sounds like an honourable man, and God knows his chosen field could use a few more of those.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Time Magazine Person of the Year @ youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm94D1TqYwQ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]