Digg

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Why the Internet Loves Ron Paul

zaphu.com — An interesting commentary about Ron Paul's popularity on the web.

Bury

23smokey 1 year 38 days ago

137 diggs
digg it

tonycomputerguy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8If only the major news networks would talk more about Ron Paul, instead of stupid BS like Obama not being black enough and Hillary not being effeminate enough, maybe he wouldn't be an internet only phenomenon...
Dugg 4 Ron Paul in '08
- subman697, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7If the MSM started talking about Ron Paul, he would already be GONE from the race (as if he is actually in it now). His extreme religious vies, which he uses to slant his "interpretation" of the constitution are enough by themselves to put him on the crazy list.
- Herkimer56, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8I wish that the media would pay more attention to him, too. Let them dig in to his past the way they have the serious contenders and we'll get him out of the government completely.
Junkyarddawg, on 10/10/2007, -15/+9I love the way the ronpaul spam has just sortof tapered out after ronpaul stated that he's not a troofer and find the troofer movement absurd.
Having thus alienated his nuttiest and loudest supporters, it's just the white supremacists and lewrockwell.com left to push his going-nowhere campaign.

Of course, that's still too many.

Buried for being in the wrong topic. Post election spam to Election '08, please.
- Renniks, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8It wasn't about the campaign, it was an opinion piece. You're buried for obviously not reading the article, and for being a blatant ignoramus.
  - FyreGoddess, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7It's an opinion piece about Ron Paul's supporters on the internet. It IS about his campaign, since that's what the author has an opinion about.
    
    Sometimes things can fall into more than one category...
Minuteman1969, on 10/10/2007, -6/+11Ron Paul is popular on the Internet because the 'net is the home of America's patriots, liberty-lovers, and freedom fighters. His consistently constitutional positions on policy issues makes him the distinctive and ( - dare I say it - ) ONLY choice for restoring limited, constitutional government at 1600 Pennsylvania. I personally believe that unless we begin taking America back by getting Ron Paul in the White House, civil war in America will become inevitable; otherwise our government will become so irresistably evil that all humanity will be enslaved by it and the people who control it from behind the scenes.
Mr. Paul's consistent voting record prompted one of his congressional colleagues to say, "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are." Another colleague observed, "There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."
- subman697, on 10/10/2007, -9/+6Now take out "Ron Paul", and insert Lyndon LaRouche, and you have the exact same ***** being spit out back in the late 70's, early 80's. Your ***** is (nearly) 30 year old recycled crap.
  
  And I am not talking about being identical on the issues: I am talking about the same, wacko, "only HE can save the world" crap that epitomizes the RP newbies.
  - EthanAA, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well its been a long time since the 70's and now there is the internet douche bag, more people listen. Ron Paul is the man.
- FyreGoddess, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7Ron Paul is popular on the internet, because online one person can appear to be as many people as they have time to pretend to be.
- subman697, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7""There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."
  
  The problem with those "principles" are they are anti-gay, pro church as controller, pro big business without controls, and anti-constitution when is suits his "principles" (see his vote on the pledge of allegiance). There are many more, but just those are enough to know he should never be running this country.
  - Mavtek, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5"The problem with those "principles" are they are anti-gay, pro church as controller, pro big business without controls, and anti-constitution"
    
    Substantiate your claims please!!
    Anti-gay? How so?
    Pro-Church? How so?
    Pro big business with no controls? HOW SO?
    He himself has said we don't have free market because of corporatism! He is for freedom of Religion, but that should be allowed! He doesn't think the Pledge should be changed, that's a states rights matter.
    You need to research him more before you spout off propaganda!
    - subman697, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6"You need to research him more before you spout off propaganda!"
      
      Again and again, I find I HAVE researched YOUR candidate more than YOU have. That is a common thread with RP supporters.
      
      Did you listen to his radio interview posted here 4 times last week? I did. Did you read his comments on the importance of the church ABOVE the government? I did. Have you read his "let the market decide" pipe dream, fake utopia positions on big business controls, citing MICROSOFT as an example of how big business should be run? I did. Did you listen to his comments saying if it is against "God's Law" (re: his Baptist beliefs), it is invalid as a government law? I did.
      
      This is at LEAST the fourth time I have been accused of spouting propaganda by an RP supporter who HASN'T done his homework. Everything I am quoting comes STRAIGHT from Ron Paul. how about you get off your ass, and live up to your claim of being an intelligent self thinker?
      
      Do your OWN research, and quit being a lazy follower, spitting out rhetoric and buzzwords. Either RP believes in personal freedom for EVERYONE, or he is full of *****. His statement (written and on tape) make it clear he is full of *****. Personal Freedom does not end with the baptist church's version of what is right and wrong. Our founding fathers made sure to NOT let that happen, despite Ron Paul's claims.
    - Junkyarddawg, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Take any issue RP feels strongly about - like he does about abortion, stem cell research, 10 commandments in federal buildings and various other religoius issues - but has no chance of banning on the federal level, and he always want to move the issue to the state level, where he'd instantly get his way in between one third and half the states, including his own. That's really all there's to his "constitutionalism": he uses the constitution as an excuse to push his far-right religious agenda.
      
      It's never more obvious than with abortion. Take a woman with a single celled embryo inside her, and RP seriously claims that it's NEITHER the federal governments right NOR the individual womans right to determine what to do with that embryo, but the local state governments right. Absolutely bizarre. And it gets better. The Supreme Court is the constitutionally mandated entity to interprete the constitution. However, Ron Paul apparently think HE is the constitutionally mandated entity to interprete the constitution, as he's stated that the supreme court was "in error" in hearing the Roe vs Wade case.
      And you can bet that RP is really quite aware that individual rights actually are NOT state level issues.
      
      Pro-church: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html is pretty explicit, and then there's this fawning sycophantic claptrap he wrote about pope Ron Paul... sorry, John Paul: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html
      Ron Paul is a fundie. Deal with it.
      
      Pro-big business: check his voting record, where he e.g. votes in favor of removing all regulations on where big oil may drill. Ron Paul loves big business.
      
      Then we have this bizarre fantasy some RP supporters have, that if the state is destroyed, corporations will magically disappear, and the Free Market(tm) will be wild and free, equal and equitable. In reality, of course, big corporations and private armies would simply move in to fill the power vacuum left by the government.
    - Mavtek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Wow way not to answer my questions specifically, Dr. Paul stated that we need more Google's and Microsoft's in the world. Not that he thinks everything they do is some grand view of free markets, but in the way specifically they treat their employees! If you take quotes directly out of context sure, quotes get misrepresented.
      
      Please watch his entire Google interview on Youtube.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCM_wQy4YVg
      
      Also can you name another candidate that's running currently that isn't pro-church? So as an Atheist can you tell me a better candidate to support? Dennis Kucinich is the closest one I can think of, but he lacks the support Dr. Paul has. For me Dr. Paul is the least of all the evils on the stage. Granted I don't agree with his stance on theology, but I also have looked at his past voting record and know that he will not infringe on my lack of beliefs. So again pro-church I ask, as compared to whom?
      
      Also way not to answer my questions! You said Dr. Paul is anti-gay, yet he himself has voted no on banning gay marriage twice!
      
      There are several websites that portray candidates voting records, they generalize bills and then tell you if said candidate voted ya or nay. I implore you to actually look into the bills you have questions of regarding Dr. Paul and his reasoning for voting yes or no on. His reasoning is very consistent, and honestly these bills can't be generalized such as "Gay adoption bill". He voted for a bill that in effect bars single people from adopting, he believes children should be raised with 2 adults rearing them regardless of whether they maybe gay or otherwise.
theblueprint, on 10/10/2007, -12/+7The internet does not love Ron Paul.

The people who do love Ron Paul take their love to the internet.

RonBots are like the people who like to wear plush teddy bear costumes during intercourse: there's so few of them, they need the internet to find other like-minded people.
- subman697, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7"RonBots are like the people who like to wear plush teddy bear costumes during intercourse"
  
  Hilarious! Thanks for a good Friday laugh...
- metapop, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2by calling ron paul supporters "ronbots" you mistakingly suggest two things-
  1- ron paul supporters aren't real people, or are code designed to mess up pollls (this is obviously not true based on straw poll results)
  2- if "ronbots" are in fact real people, like other bots, they do what they're told and don't think for themselves. (if any presidential candidate's supporters think for themselves, it's ron paul's group. he's the only presidential candidate that stands on real issues and not rhetoric.)
  
  your post also suggests that the internet somehow doesn't represent what people truly think- which couldn't be further from the truth. mainstream media is so out of touch it's pathetic. the internet is the *only* place where people can truly make their voices heard.
  - theblueprint, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1"the internet is the *only* place where people can truly make their voices heard."
    
    That's my point exactly. There's not enough Paul supporters to so much as be noticed in day to day life, so they need to conregrate on the net, much like those with a taste for plush in their sex life.
- strangesmell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yeah, I saw that episode of Entourage too.
- JohnnyAmerican, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0And yet, it seems you are in the minority here. Odd, seeing as how "The internet doesn't love Ron Paul". lmao...the problem you are faced with is this. This is the next generation. The revolution will NOT be televised...but it WILL be available on youtube. =) The mainstream media is doing their best to BURY Dr.Paul's message but they are losing the war of words. The numbers online are too great to be ignored.
  
  Now, go run along and snuggle up with your Wall Street Journal while you masturbate to pictures of Ann Coulter.
  
  Idiot...
onetimer, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6It is just an illusion that the internet loves ron paul. If the majority of internet users really did support ron paul, you'd be seeing his gallup numbers alot higher than 2-3%.

The fact is, a small sect of zealots have been working overtime spamming Ron Paul into every facet they can (digg, web-boards, every online poll). What happens is like a colony, they invade an will do almost nothing but plug ron paul every chance they get, and then go to other Ron paul circle jerks and sort of digitally "high five" each other (etc digging up supporters/down criticizers, bumping up posts on a forum, voting over and over and over with scripts).

Why do you think Ron paul stories get a large velocity of diggs but generally never make it to the front page? Because the digg algorithm recognizes it's mostly dugg by accounts (usually extra ones that RP supporters use in addition to their own) that digg almost nothing but ROn paul stories, and so weighs down their diggs. Plus of course, the people that recognize spam and will bury it.

It is an illusion they control the internet, and once RP does not get nominated, these guys will go back to their lives, if they have any.
- fsprebel, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Ron Paul may only have 3% of likely GOP voters supporting him. But, what about all the independents, anti-war dems, libertarians, constitutionalists, etc? With all this extra support outside the party, the poll numbers are likely to be between 10-15% right now. Staying on this track will win Paul the GOP nod for sure.
- onetimer, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Can you show me the website where you got the 10-15%? is it IpulledItOutOfMyAss.com perhaps? Fact is, it will be the registered GOP voters deciding who gets the nomination, and without that, even Paul knows he'd have zero chance of winning.
Mavtek, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8've been using the internet longer than most people currently on the internet. Since the advent of "Bulletin Boards", News rooms, MMORPG's consisted of what direction now, command line games.

The internet is growing up all the time, it's growing into a great realm of free ideas, free speech, and overall an equalizing force for the people who might be opposed to the governance that denies them these inherit rights. I think it's safe to say that an overwhelming majority of intelligent Internet users harbor these same beliefs. As a member of this majority, I proclaim that Dr. Ron Paul stands for these same beliefs, so as an intelligent internet user in the majority I stand by Dr. Ron Paul.
- subman697, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5I have been on the "internet" since 9600 baud modem days (can't recall what I did with my 2400 baud modems, so I will just leave that be). As a member of the group that believes in free ideas, free speech, and freedom from oppression, I ABSOLUTELY do not support Ron Paul.
  
  I specifically do not support his statements regarding the church usurping the government in importance. I do not support his undermining of the rule of law in his vote on the pledge of allegiance. I do not support his anti-abortion (re anti-personal freedom) stance. I do not support his Baptist belief that any law that does not follow "God's law" is invalid.
  
  So, if you TRULY are an intelligent internet user, you would have researched these issues, and seen that Ron Paul supports the "constitution" when it fits his personal beliefs. When it doesn't, forget personal freedom OR rule of law, OR the constitution...
  - Mavtek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Dr. Paul claims to be a Baptist, this does not mean that you follow every rule that the baptist follow. He converted from Episcopalian to Baptist because his wife is a Baptist. He may believe that the church does usurp the "Federal Government" as far as personal beliefs, but not rule of law. That is ridiculous. Ron Paul supports the Constitution because it is his personal belief, I ask you again to research more than just his voting records, why don't you look up his reasoning for voting for or against these bills.
lordcarbo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Libertarians know what they're talking about. Nobody else does.

I mean, Paul isn't exactly some superlibertarian, but he's close enough.
Herkimer56, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4Why does the internet love Ron Paul? Because the internet loves a freak show.
wtbuser, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I won't deny there are Ronbots, but the Ronbots don't get the articles to the front page. The Ronbots digg every article with Ron Paul in it and if you search "Ron Paul" there are many and many are dugg but only a fraction make it to the front page. It is the others on digg that propel the articles that extra distance to get it to the front page.
vdaliessio, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3OK, are we done with the "he's a religious nut" people yet? Ron's views are decidedly mainstream on most of the issues. To your point of abortion, the federal government is already eroding any "rights" you thought you had, if your state legislature does not protect your rights you can throw them out, basically, is what his view means in essence. Christmas displays by municipal governments? James Madison said "De minimus non-curat lex" - the law does not concern itself with trifles, the federal government however would be unable to promote or hinder any religion in any way, it would also be unable to steal your money through taxes and inflation (hidden tax), it would be unable to take your property or your freedom for possessing certain substances, it would be completely unable to tell you who and how you marry, what drugs you may purchase and use, and whose medical services you patronize.
vdaliessio, on 10/27/2007, -2/+4Subman, everything you are saying is either a distortion, mis-characterization, or an outright lie. Yes, Ron Paul is pro-life (honestly so, he's an OB-GYN, not a spineless demagogue), but he also believes the federal government has no role in the abortion debate. Frankly, recent laws and SC rulings have made it clear that the federal government will not protect the "right" to an abortion, but if your state legislature won't do it, you can throw them out, or move to California, Nevada, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York where it will be quickly enshrined as a constitutional right.
vdaliessio, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6Oh, I forgot to mention, he's the only electable anti-war candidate. If you enjoy war, empire, obscene profits for the merchants of death, blood and more blood, more terrorism, more financial catastrophe, then, by all means elect Romney or Hillary.
vdaliessio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Junkyarddawg:"Pro-big business: check his voting record, where he e.g. votes in favor of removing all regulations on where big oil may drill. Ron Paul loves big business."
WRONG, Rep. Paul believes that property owners should be allowed to do WITH THEIR OWN PROPERTY as they wish. This same commitment to property rights also means he is strictly against a corporation's right to trespass or pollute upon your property or person, a right which they currently enjoy under EPA "standards".
JYD; "Then we have this bizarre fantasy some RP supporters have, that if the state is destroyed, corporations will magically disappear, and the Free Market(tm) will be wild and free, equal and equitable"
Ridiculous and wrong. Corporations aren't the problem, government favoritism of certain corporations (mercantilism) is. Left to slug it out in a free market, we would still in all likelihood have corporations, probably just a bit smaller and more numerous on average, just not the government-fed behemoths we have now.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Why the Internet Loves Ron Paul

Login or register to add a comment