Elephant-Donkey

HAHAHAOHWOW won the Face Off.

HAHAHAOHWOW vs Keith

Face Offs: 5
Wins: 5
Losses: 0
Ties: 0
St Petersburg, FL
All Face Offs

Votes

Face Offs: 2
Wins: 1
Losses: 1
Ties: 0
No City, XX
All Face Offs

Votes

Ron Paul's candidacy has a public relations image problem due to it's primary use of the internet as a communication and fundraising tool.

HAHAHAOHWOW said 11/13, 05:02 PM
Ron Paul supporters have abused internet forums and chat rooms alike with hideous spamming. A google search of { "ron paul" and "spam" } turns up almost 2 million hits, whereas if you remove the parentheses the results top 3 million. Other presidential candidates are nowhere close.

Furthermore, his campaign has accepted donations from notorious internet conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and allegedly from a white power group leader named Don Black, who is with "Stormfront" CITE:http://lonestartimes.com/2007/10/25/rpb1/ (ron black donation)
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search_hp.asp?txtName=jones%2C+alex&NumOfThou=0&txt2008=Y&submit=Go%21 (Alex Jones the radio guy)

Although these are two minor parts of campaign donations, both the white power movement and the conspiacy movement use the internet as their main communications tool. In fact, white power and conspiracy theorists are highly competent internet users. ((they know more about proxies than most people for example)) So they use their abilities to amplify the Ron Paul message, and by their distasteful public image, further cripple his candidacy by association.

This is a direct result of his internet driven campaign.

Keith said 11/14, 10:42 AM
You are right, these issues are causing him a problem. Though if it were not for the visibility generated by his internet campaign, he would not be relevant enough to have a "Public relations image problem". If it were not for his internet campaign, he would end up just like Dennis Kuchinich. No one would care, no one would listen, people would just smile and nod and say "If only he had a shot at winning..."

Instead, he has actually gotten people to listen to what he is saying, and actually might impact this election. I am not suggesting that he will win anything, but where he stands on a lot of issues reminds a lot of conservatives that they don't fit in the Republican party anymore. So, he will gladly take a little bad with the immense amount of good it has done his campaign.

Lastly, everyone has sketchy donors and people they are associated with during their campaigns. Romney had Sen. Craig, Guliani has Kerek and a priest who has been accused of molesting children, Hillary had that Chinese fellow who was breaking donation laws, and Obama embraced a vehemently anti-gay minister. In the end, it all ends up being a wash.

HAHAHAOHWOW said 11/14, 11:15 AM
The visibility of his internet campaign is exactly due to the work of the internet reprobates however. You do not deny that he has a public image problem; in fact it seems that the fact he has one is not bad. Sort of a "bad publicity is good publicity" approach. I maintain that he can create good publicity and squelch the effects of the spammers, conspiracy theorists, and racialists who represent a visible and noisy minority of his supporters.

The internet campaign worked well for Howard Dean in 2004. But for the overplayed "Dean Scream" meme it is arguable he would have easily caught the nomination. He did not have the spammers or infamous internet supporters that Paul has. I believe that Paul can use the Dean model and still be relevant and not have the problems he has today. Obviously from a fundraising perspective both Dean and Paul can produce results.

Keith said 11/14, 12:17 PM
A couple things,

First, Paul has very little to do with the actual running of that aspect of the campaign. It could be that his campaign staff actually encourages these people actively. I seriously doubt that is the case, but it is highly unlikely that Paul is in anyway running the internet campaign.

Secondly, Dean would have never 'easily' won the nomination. It wasn't that the scream was overplayed, it was that people were waiting for an excuse. You don't think people in the media and in the major parties had no idea they were going to go with the 'unpresidential' and 'wacky, crazy, unbalanced guy' angle on Dean? Dean and Paul are very similair in two ways, first, the internet funding/popularity. Second, both were not afraid of who they were. Not afraid to say exactly what they believed. People can get behind that.

Normally, the 'major' canidates would just continue to ignore and dismiss Paul and Dean, but they raised too much money to just be ignored. As with Dean, Paul has almost no room for error. Everyone will be waiting for him to slip up and it won't have anything to with spamming. So yes, an area for improvement. But something that matter? No.

HAHAHAOHWOW said 11/15, 11:20 AM
I find it hard to believe that a serious presidential candidate has a "hands off" policy to the source that provides such a vast majority of his campaign wealth. Of course he does not "run" his campaign, he has handlers to do it, but he cannot be blind to what the effects of it are. And if his campaign staff are encouraging spammers and racists then he is de facto responsible a la a respondeat superior/vicarious liability theory and he should do something about it or come out and support it.

Although discussing Dean too much avoids the point I would point to the following sites to support that Dean was the frontrunner and was trending towards victory until Iowa: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/primaries_past.php
If polling is to be believed, then he was the odds on favorite at the time. His reasons for not being nominated are immaterial to this argument. His fundraising success is.

Ron Paul has already slipped up and the malignant internet support is a substantial contributing factor. People who use the "old media" don't care about the internet. The internet "new media" has Paul supporters pegged, and the "new media" sets the tone.

Keith said 11/16, 02:54 PM
I am not suggesting he isn't responsible for what his campain does and doesn't do. He is 100% responsible even if he literaly does have a total hands off approach.

Your statement that why Dean wasn't nominated isn't important is exactly what you fail to grasp about this... or perhaps your arguement has nothing to do with the subject you posted. It states that Ron Paul has a public image problem due to the way in which his campain uses (abuses) the internet. This is completely wrong. It isn't a problem unless it is hurting, rather than helping, his chances of winning the nomination. Frankly I don't see it doing that. Paul will have already won Iowa, thereby giving him the boost in the MSM that he would need to carry his message to all those people who don't care about the internet. Or, he won't, and he'll fade away. Either way, no one will really remember the spamming at all by the time we get to the main event.

It's also insane that Dean was 'trending' towards victory before the FIRST primary. Early polls, esp in caucuses and esp in Iowa are notoriously fickle. Iowa matters, and I doubt more than 10% of voters will know about the spamming. Less than 4% will care.

Comments

Add Your Comment

Any independent or little known candidate who is going to try to run a campaign must use a resource such as the Internet to blazon their policies. Ron Paul could have chosen to pull a Kucinich. He's not just going to see his name in print, he's going to make a difference in this election.

edwards 08 | 11/15/07

Report Offensive Comment

that may be the case, but his supporters' abusive campaigning and his notorious internet contributors are harming not helping his cause.

HAHAHAOHWOW | 11/15/07

Report Offensive Comment

Hillary Clinton is the best woman for the job. If you want a job done get a woman , she will get it done and do it right

sunbunny | 11/15/07

Report Offensive Comment