No candidacy
has generated more buzz than Ron Paul's, and the following statistics
prove the point:
- "Ron Paul"
recently topped Technorati's
search-term rankings for an unprecedented stretch – current
rank #2 (Technorati is
the leading authority on Internet media usage).
- RonPaul2008.com
draws more traffic than any other candidate's Web site.
- On YouTube.com,
the Internet's most popular video site, the Ron Paul channel has
over 22,000
subscribers, which is 13,000
more than the second most popular candidate (Obama).
- And on Meetup.com,
more than 25,000 people comprise 560 Ron Paul Meetup groups, which
makes the Good Doctor the most popular
Meetup source in the political category. The next candidate,
Obama, is a distant second with 5300 members in 68 groups.
Notes:
All statistics reflect current numbers as of July 23, 2007.
Also, for those who don't know, Meetup.com is the most popular
Internet site for people with common interests who want to organize
events and activities with one another – consequently,
it's the most commonly used online resource for coordinating
political activities.
Some commentators
say this interest and support is illusory, perhaps even the product
of a centralized Internet effort led by the Ron Paul campaign. Yet,
the Paul campaign has only spent $600,000 to date, while other candidates
have already burned through tens
of millions. Although Paul's campaign staff is growing, it doesn't
even have the resources to provide timely responses to the flood of
incoming e-mails (I speak from personal experience here), much less
oversee such a sustained, widespread, technologically-sophisticated
endeavor.
The skeptics
also ignore an obvious question – if it's so easy to jerry-rig
Internet statistics, why haven't other, better-financed campaigns
done the same? (Answer:
It's not easy and, in many cases, it's simply impossible.)
While I personally don't know of anyone who spends their time spamming
online polls or repeatedly Googling their favorite candidate's name,
I have no doubt such people exist in the ranks of most political
movements. And given the evident enthusiasm of Ron Paul supporters,
it's quite likely that a greater percentage of his backers might
attempt to do such things.
That said,
I believe there are more plausible reasons for Ron Paul's "online
success" – most importantly, the Internet is the primary source
of information about Dr. Paul. As early as last fall – two
full years before the election – the conventional media
and major-party establishments had already anointed the top six
Republican and Democratic candidates (Giuliani, McCain, Romney,
Clinton, Obama, & Edwards).
Since then, countless opinion makers
>
have informed Americans that these six politicians complete the
>
list of "viable" Presidential options. In other words,
>
no need to look further – we've done your thinking for you.
>
How and why
this happened exactly is a topic for another day. (Hint – Follow
the
money.) The important
point here is that each of the Anointed Candidates has received
regular, daily coverage since that time (and, in some cases, for
several years now). Although Dr. Paul has benefited from a smattering
of media attention since his "blowback" exchange with
Giuliani in May, people who are curious about Paul's track record
and platform must turn to the Internet. The conventional
media is most unlikely to begin covering Dr. Paul on a regular basis,
no matter how much traction he gains.
Consequently,
Ron Paul's supporters must assume the task of spreading the word.
Fortunately, many of us are happy to do so, and when people first
learn of Dr. Paul's track record, they typically want to know more.
As regular readers of my
blog know, Ron Paul challenges US foreign policy on a refreshingly
honest and fundamental level – a level of inquiry wholly absent
from most political forums. And Dr. Paul's forthrightness doesn't
stop with foreign policy, as he applies the same intellectual rigor
to issues involving civil
liberties, health
care, immigration,
education,
our fiat-money
system, and so on.
