Saturday, June 23, 2007

Ron Paul supporters VS. Fred Thompson supporters on Meetup

Fred Thompson is supposed to officially announce he's running for President next week. Right now he's the darling of the Republican head honchos, and of a mainstream press that, as I have noted many times on this blog, is too lazy and more interested in maintaining the status quo than doing anything that might jeopardize that. And if you were to listen to them, you would believe that there is this "massive groundswell" of support for Fred Thompson out in the public.

Okay well...

Credit denvervoipguru on the Ron Paul Forums for finding this. It's the current number of people using the website Meetup to "meet up" and coordinate activities promoting their favorite candidates.

Here are Fred Thompson's "meetups":

And here are Ron Paul's "meetups":

Fred Thompson has 72 Members. Ron Paul has 14,673. Fred Thompson has 5 cities represented on Meetup... whereas Ron Paul has 323. There is one event being organized through Meetup for Fred Thompson supporters, while Ron Paul's have 482.

And yet according to most of the stateside press, all of this Ron Paul vibe is being generated by, at most, a couple hundred enthusiasts who live in their parents' basements, don't have girlfriends and are too dumb to realize that they are "throwing their vote away".

So I have to ask: on the level playing field that is the Internet, where is a comparative amount of support for Fred Thompson or any other candidate, as opposed to that which seems evident for Ron Paul? I mean, it seems that if Fred Thompson's support is this vast, that it would certainly approximate that of a "second tier candidate", doesn't it?

If anyone has an explanation for this discrepancy, I would love to know what it is.

20 comments:

John Campbell said...

I'll play devil's advocate.

Is it because Ron Paul has had a head start?

Before you answer that, check the meetups for Rudy McRomney and all the other Republican candidates who have been campaigning longer than Ron Paul.

Anonymous said...

I just searched Meetup for McCain, Giuliani and Romney. Each has exactly one (1) Meetup group -- Rudy and Mitt in the SF Bay Area and McCain in Ponca City, Oklahoma. No kidding.

Ken said...

Just because there are all these "meetups" doesn't mean that there are real people involved.
All of these so called Meetups that supposedly happen are just writings by a few people with a lot of different email addresses.
If you follow the link, you can see all the real people who comment on Ron Paul, and how the papers in Iowa are allowing the comments out.
Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance, so quit your pretending.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ken said...

What, the fact that the local Iowa papers are filled with comments like:
Ron Paul's Message of Hate
Doctor of Doom
and one that really is good,
" Griffin Hahn is absolutely correct in saying that Ron Paul is a throwback to our forefathers. Unfortunately, Griffin Hahn didn't mention that Ron Paul is a throwback to only our racist forefathers who believe in slavery and white supremacy. It's ridiculous to think that somebody backing a racist for President would know what "our forefathers" would do in today's world. I will go out on a limb and guess that most of them would abhor Ron Paul's record of racism. "

Note that all of these comments in a local Iowa paper have no rebuttals.

I guess that is just a little too real world for you.

Call me names all you want. It's not going to change the real world.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ken said...

I note that the "die horribly" mantra is all too often thrown out by the supporters of Ron Paul.

My point is that the real people who read the papers in Iowa (click on Ken for one example), have unrebutted comments saying that Ron Paul is a racist.

Ed Failor (who is a decent fellow) has said how people have threatened his family.

Even if I liked Ron Paul, his supporters seem to be willing to stoop to any level.

Ron Paul seems to bring out the hate in people.

Maybe we can find a president who can bring people together, rather than one whose supporters run around telling people, die, die, die.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Chris Knight said...

"Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance, so quit your pretending."

Why doesn't he have a chance?

Because big corporate media and party bigwigs TELL you he doesn't have a chance?

Some of us choose not to follow the herd, because it invariably leads over the cliff.

This country is being destroyed because people choose who "can win" instead of choosing what is right for it in the long run.

As for Paul being a racist, that is one of the most ridiculous things that I've ever heard.

As for a President who can bring people together: no President can do that, not really. But a President can try his/her best to do things that won't tear them apart. Destroying people by sending them into meaningless wars is one of the. So far, only Ron Paul has said he won't continue that mad policy (and I think Fred Thompson has indicated he's already hot to attack Iran).

Chris Knight said...

"anonymous",

Your comments are completely out of line. I am therefore deleting them.

Ken said...

Thanks Mr. Knight for the reasonable response.

Part of my point is that in the local Iowa papers, the comments are like the ones that I said.

You can check them out yourself
@ www.muscatinejournal.com/articles/2007/06/20/opinion/letters/doc4679465e03b0d422595663.txt

There are no rebuttal comments to the racist ones.

So why do people fault me for going with what is said in the free and open comments section of the papers.

Of course in the forums set up by Ron Paul supporters a Ron Paul positive message is set out, but in the free and open comments section of the local papers, a different story is told.

Since the media doesn't really report on Ron Paul, maybe this is one of the reasons? Maybe there is more to the story than the positive message that you say he bears.

Chris Knight said...

"Since the media doesn't really report on Ron Paul, maybe this is one of the reasons?"

I doubt it, for the same reasons that I've doubted the mainstream media a lot of other times before on this blog and elsewhere. The media doesn't report on Ron Paul for the most part because, and you especially get this with the really big corporate media, reporters and editors really have become too comfortable with "the way things are". Potentially rocking the boat is not in their best interest because then (gasp!) they would have to do more work than what they are used to.

I've been following Ron Paul for over ten years now. I've never seen that he's anything remotely like a racist. I have seen where he has followed a very strict interpretation of the Constitution and that some are saying that some of his votes could be seen as "racist" because of that, but as for racism... that's one charge that I just don't see and if someone has a legitimate claim for it, I would definitely like to know about it.

Ken said...

Dear Mr. Knight,
Let's say you are right.

Why is it that no one has taken the time to post a reasoned response in the comments of the local Iowa paper.

I mean if everyone was so upset about ITR which is based in Muscatine, why don't they care about correcting what you say are inaccurate statements.

If you wonder why people in Iowa don't think Ron Paul is credible, maybe you should look at what the people are saying in the feedback of the news that is about Ron Paul.

Chris Knight said...

"Why is it that no one has taken the time to post a reasoned response in the comments of the local Iowa paper."

Possibly because they have better things to do than answer charges that aren't serious to begin with?

(There was a point in reading those comments that I ceased taking them seriously at all. It has to do with a certain "hobgoblin" that's been used too much by those who love to cry out "RACIST!", without anything further to back up their claim.)

Ken said...

So, people will call all night long, but not address what you claim are misstatements of fact.
Doesn't that seem a little strange?

Chris Knight said...

I honestly don't know what you're driving at here.

All I wondered with this post is why, if there IS anything eclipsing this apparent amount of support for Ron Paul regarding the other candidates, then why aren't we seeing it? It can't ALL be from the same few number of Paul supporters, can it?

Look at how many pro-Ron Paul videos are on YouTube, compared to videos for other candidates. That alone should say *something*.

You insist that Ron Paul doesn't have a chance. I insist that anything is possible. Maybe this is what differentiates us the most. But I'm failing to see what your point is so far as this "racism" charge goes.

Seefate said...

Ron Paul has more of a chance then people give him. If you want to live in a fantasy world and think that the internet consists of 5 people who are "spammers" and don't represent the voice of America then you can live in that bubble. But the fact is Paul is the first candidate ever to use the internet to this much of a degree and Dr. Paul will absolutely make a large splash in the primaries.

As far as giving a rebuttal to some horribly misinformed people I don't really see a point. These people probably represent the 30% of Americans who still feel that the Iraq war was the right decision and also probably beleive that Bush is the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ.

Other then that, all I have to say is a little education will can set you free. www.ronpaul2008.com

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny boy -

Who's spamming now?

Love ya, mean it,

-b

Ken said...

This is why Ron Paul remains a fringe candidate, rather than help change the minds of normal people, I get go google Ron Paul (which has a lot of things like why Fred Thompson is better than Ron Paul, etc).
No one wants to engage the people of Iowa in a real discussion. Instead they call people in the middle of the night and threaten them with all sorts of things.
If that method of winning hearts and minds isn't working in Iraq, how is it going to work in the United States?
In order for newspapers to cover Ron Paul, they have to that people care about the story, and more than just the internet.
There are a lot of people in Iowa that don't have really good internet service, and many that don't have any.
Ignore the newspapers in the United States, and Ron Paul will lose.
It's that simple, and if you can't get your head around that, then that's your loss.

Shane said...

Hey Ken, I tried to leave a rebuttal comment and it never showed up.

What's up with that?