Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Tea Party politics

I went to the local tea party on April 15th and came away with mixed feelings that I'll share later. What I want to share today is a very inspiring clip from a tea party in South Carolina. The speaker is GOP representative Gresham Barrett, who supported both the $700 billion TARP bailout and the current Obama stimulus package. He's come to be known to his own as Bailout Barrett.

The crowd relentlessly rejects him throughout his speech, and watching this renews my hope that we the people will indeed rise to the occasion and start tossing these faux conservatives out on their butts.


I would like nothing better than to see the tea party movement immediately adopt an interim agenda to hold the big spenders in Congress accountable regardless of their party affiliation, by uniting the people to remove them from office. Anyone who voted for any of the bailouts MUST BE FIRED in the next election, and that means uniting behind the leading challenger in order to be successful in finally throwing the bums out.

So here and now, I'll take the accountability pledge, as a grassroots participant in the tea party movement:
"I vow to support the leading challenger of every congressman and senator who voted "yes" on any of the bailouts, regardless of his/her party affiliation, and will continue to do so until the last one of the big spenders has been FIRED."
Hopefully this sort of action will diminish the clutches of neocons and party insiders on the movement and restore the integrity of the voters' intent. In addition to actually holding our representatives accountable for once by the only means available to us.

Pass it on.

--

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

eh, About those media "polls"

There's been a lot of discussion on why Ron Paul, with all of his obvious Internet popularity, is only polling in the single digits nationwide. Various theories have been presented, such as "pollsters don't call cell phones, and Ron Paul's followers don't use landlines," and "much of Ron Paul's support comes from first-time voters."

The mainstream uses the single-digit poll results to support their claim that "Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance," and use them as ammunition for excluding him from debates or coverage. But just how "scientific" are those polling methods?

...

..[these] polls use only "Republicans who voted in the last Presidential Primary." (link)

Well, how about that. How many republicans do you know who went and voted in the 2004 GOP presidential primaries, since the only candidate running for the GOP nomination was incumbent President Bush? Hmmmm? According to USAToday, Republican turnout in the 2004 primary was a whopping 6.6%! These scientific, professional media polls are based on a sampling of people taken from only 6.6% of the registered republicans from 2004!

As the original author says,
Think about that. The mainstream press is using this handful of people who voted for George W. Bush--when he was running unopposed!--as their "statistically significant" sample of concerned American voters. The political analysts are basing their election predictions, and their professional careers, on a random and biased telephone survey of a few hundred people who bothered to show up when their "fearless leader" wasn't being challenged by anyone.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 9/15/07

I started to think these updates were pointless, since Paul trounces them all every single time, so I slacked off a little. But I got curious myself to see how things were going so here's another update in spite of myself.

Note: the growth charts have Fred Thompson's old Youtube profile numbers. His new profile as an official candidate is only a week old, and will be used in the next update to replace the original numbers in the growth charts below.

Cumulatives:





Averages:





Here are the progress graphs showing actual growth in various user activities for each GOP candidate since May 22.
Channel ViewsCumulative RatingsCumulative Comments
Cumulative ViewsSubscribersRatings Averages
Comments AveragesViews Averages



Previous entries:
Aug 10, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 08/10/07 - Dem Comparison
Aug 2, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/29/07 - Launch Pad Edition
July 15, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/15/07
July 1, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/01/07
June 21, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 06/21/07
June 11, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats - 06/11/07
June 2, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats, Charts (Followup)
May 22, 2007: About those Youtube Stats...
--

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Another Liberal crosses over

I’m going over to the Dark Side; I have joined the Republican Party. If we’re going to have warrantless detentions, torture, prison camps, and corporate handouts, I want to be on the inside. Power and pork, here I come!
Link

--

Thursday, August 02, 2007

GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/29/07 - Launch Pad Edition

Just in time to beat the Ron Paul YouTube Spotlight Rush, these charts represent a snapshot of YouTube internal statistics for all the GOP presidential candidates on the day before Paul's YouTube profile was placed on the Spotlight calendar - July 29, 2007. When the spotlight period is over, we'll take another look and see what impact the extra exposure had on the one candidate who was already leaving the rest of them in the dust. All the charts you're accustomed to are below. See previous posts for explanations that aren't self-evident.

Cumulatives:





Averages:





Here are the growth graphs showing actual growth in various user activities for each candidate since May 22. All candidates have been now been added to these growth charts.
Channel ViewsCumulative RatingsCumulative Comments
Cumulative ViewsSubscribersRatings Averages
Comments AveragesViews Averages

We'll do this again next week and see how the rest of YouTube takes to the Ron Paul Revolution.


Previous entries:
July 15, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/15/07
July 1, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/01/07
June 21, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 06/21/07
June 11, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats - 06/11/07
June 2, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats, Charts (Followup)
May 22, 2007: About those Youtube Stats...

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

GOP Candidates' YouTube Stats - 07/15/07

Little late posting this update, but the data used was collected on July 15 and I just now got around to putting it all together. Initial observations are that the growth for some of the second tier candidates seems to be dipping a little (see growth charts here). Paul's on a rocket to the stars and Romney is the only other candidate with any hope of coming to within half of Paul's YouTube success. And the media says McCain is all but over, but according to this data, his YouTube supporters have not yet abandoned him.

The Charts
First, the cumulative views (inspired by TechPresident's Youtube charts) and other cumulatives for the frontrunner candidates.





Now for the averages sans outliers to reflect true user loyalty to each candidate (an explanation on the outlier data and why they're removed can be found here).






Here are the growth graphs showing actual growth in various user activities for each candidate since May 22. All candidates have been now been added to these growth charts.
Channel ViewsCumulative RatingsCumulative Comments
Cumulative ViewsSubscribersRatings Averages
Comments AveragesViews Averages

As usual, Paul's numbers are blowing the curve. If you want me to remove Paul's data to look at the actual growth of the other candidates, let me know in the comments.

Previous entries:
July 1, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/01/07
June 21, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 06/21/07
June 11, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats - 06/11/07
June 2, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats, Charts (Followup)
May 22, 2007: About those Youtube Stats...

Friday, July 06, 2007

Debunking the "Ron Paul can't win" Myths

-Updated July 6, 2007-

It's become a standard component of all discussion surrounding Ron Paul's presidential candidacy: "..but he won't win the nomination." Stop saying it, because it's not true. I'll tell you why, without even mentioning his unshakable voluminous internet support mob (well, except to say his avid supporters have completely taken over Digg and Youtube, and he consistently wins every online poll that's offered - see how this internet support translates to actual feet on the ground here).

First off, how much does the media establishment really control the message? Let's look at a little recent electoral history: at this point in 1975, Jimmy Carter was at 1% in the national polls and went on to win the Presidency. In 1980, amidst a crowded field of GOP contenders, Ronald Reagan was flat out told he couldn't win, but he did. In mid-1987, Dukakis was at 1% in the polls and went on to win the Democratic nomination. In 1991, Clinton was at 2% in the polls and went on to become President.

How will it happen for Ron Paul?
Two years ago, Republicans made up 50% of the electorate. Indisputably, Bush's bungling of the war has shrunk that number down to 30%. Did that 20% just vanish, was it absorbed into the Democratic party, or did they drop off the radar as disenchanted conservatives because there was no one in leadership representing their views?

Who are these people that make up the missing 20%? From my own observations, about half of them are what is known as paleo-conservatives, small-government traditionalists who opposed the war from the start, but opposed Democrats even more, whose votes in 2004 were primarily anti-Kerry votes. Another quarter of them are Christian conservatives who've painfully recognized the liberal nature of this administration's policies and failures of its execution of the war in Iraq, the Birchers and Buchananists. Some of them are the free-trade libertarian-minded conservatives who've grown tired of government interference in matters of the economy. A small handful of them are anti-immigration conservatives seething from Bush and the GOP leaders' refusal to protect the borders. All of these groups are primed to embrace Ron Paul's message with enthusiasm, and together they comprise a full 20% of the electorate.

The Voting Electorate
Roughly 35% of the electorate self-identify as Democrats, and a dwindling 30% call themselves Republicans (see chart below). Media polling organizations often limit themselves to voters in these two groups, leaving out the voices of the 35% who claim neither party as their own.

Using the latest polling data, Giuliani has the support of 18% of self-identified Republicans, or about 5.4% of the overall electorate. McCain has 14% support from Republicans, or 4.2% of the electorate. Further, a full 30% of republicans (and 30% of democrats) are undecided, expressing great dissatisfaction with the media-anointed frontrunners. That figure alone equals a whopping 18% of the electorate (9% Republicans, 9% Democrats).

Now let's take that 20% of the electorate that is comprised of traditional conservatives who've abandoned the GOP since 2004 for various reasons. Combine that with the 9% of undecideds from the republican base and what you have is vast potential - 29% of the electorate - for Ron Paul. This gap between the dwindling base and mass of conservatives as a whole poses insurmountable odds to the likes of Giuliani's puny 5.4% or McCain's 4.2%, provided Paul's message is able to penetrate the media din of celebrity frontrunners.

In addition to this obvious GOP chasm (which is intensifying steadily over current immigration issues), we have another layer of influence to consider in how the country will vote. With nearly 3/4 of the country now opposed to the war in Iraq, and only one candidate offering to end it conclusively and expeditiously, odds overwhelmingly favor that very candidate. And there are lots more anti-war conservatives than the media give you privy to.

Remember, Paul consistently ranks very high in conservative credentials as determined by major conservative organizations and pundits alike. Early on, conservative support for Paul was vocalized, while some of these conservatives have already formally endorsed Paul for the GOP nomination.

Disenchanted Liberals
Coming straight out of left field, a third level of opportunity emerges from liberals writhing in their perceived betrayal of the newly elected Democratic majorities. Recent actions by the Democratic congress concerning war and trade issues have party activists livid, as a cursory scan of the liberal blogs will reveal. An undercurrent of Paul's common sense policy proposals already flows through these environs, and can easily separate the more frustrated liberals from the party, motivating them to vote for Paul in the primaries. The reasons are varied in their explanations, but more and more liberals are mentioning Paul in a surprisingly favorable light. Here's one liberal who believes that a Paul nomination will greatly improve the quality of discourse in today's acrid political environment. And another who embraces the taboo amongst liberal peers that comes from supporting Paul.

His common sense message of freedom, liberty, small government, non-intervention and reduced taxation, so deeply devoted to the Constitution, is uniting people across the political spectrum. Birchers and liberals united in common cause? Yes, it's happening. Despite pundit attempts to discredit Paul with the "he can't win" disclaimer, the vast pool of voters across the landscape who are hungry for strong, proven, Constitutional leadership is Ron Paul's for the taking.



Now say it with me: He can win.

No it will not be an easy task, and no you cannot sit back and relax and just watch it happen. Paul needs our support every minute of every day to carry his campaign into top tier status to help introduce him to the uninspired, quasi-apolitical conservative masses.

One more time: He can win. But only with our unequivocal enthusiasm and support.

Once Paul becomes the Republican presidential nominee, how do you think he'll fair against big government Hillary and billionaire corporatist Bloomberg? In this matchup, I predict a landslide victory for Paul. Though to become the 44th President of the United States, he only needs 33% + 1. It's no longer looking so impossible now, is it?


Update July 6, 2007:
For those still not convinced Ron Paul is the people's only choice for the 44th President of the United States, consider these points:

51% of this country voted for Ron Paul's message when they elected George Bush as president in 2000, because Bush ran on the traditional conservative platform of small-government, states rights, lower taxes and a humble foreign policy. And now for 2008, Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate in a crowded field who is bravely carrying the torch for that philosophy. The difference between Paul and Bush is that Paul has the solid record of 20 years of conservative, Constitutional leadership to back up every single thing he's saying. The people voted for this message just 7 years ago, and with a candidate of impeccable character like Paul leading the way, they'll vote for it again.

Also,
70% of Americans want the war in Iraq to be over, and our troops home. Only one candidate has the temerity to initiate that process on the first day of his presidency, Ron Paul. Ron Paul has been against this illegitimate war since it was first conceived in 1998, and has bravely spoken against it in his writings, in his speeches on the floor of the House, and in his public speaking engagements. There is no doubt where he stands regarding the war in Iraq, and the subsequent build-up of aggression towards Iran. He brings forth the leadership that a full 70% of this country wants.

81% of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, and in the same poll, 72% believe our Founding Fathers would be disappointed with the state of our nation today. Our current course is set for perpetual war, imminent bankruptcy, the continued weakening of our borders, our sovereignty, and our individual liberties, regardless of which party's media-designated "frontrunner" takes the helm in 2008. Only one candidate is offering to put us back on the course our Founding Fathers designed. That candidate is Ron Paul.

A new Zogby Poll has found that 9 in 10 Americans - 90% - believe the U.S. Constitution is still relevant in today's world. Only one candidate has adhered strictly to the Constitution throughout his entire political career. That candidate is Ron Paul. When God-fearing patriotic Americans listen to him speak, they know in their hearts that he's right because the language of liberty touches an inalienable instinct in all red-blooded Americans. We know that both the GOP and our government have lost their way and only one man, with the strength of his convictions, as well as our own, can return them both to the correct path.

There is absolutely no mistake: this country wants Ron Paul as its next president. What have you done today to help make that happen?

Sunday, July 01, 2007

GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 07/01/07

I'm a couple days late with this update, but other than the tedium of adding the remaining candidates to the minutiae charts, only a little has changed since last time. Rudy almost doubled the number of videos for his campaign this week, but that doesn't seem to have helped his numbers much. With 41 videos now in his profile, he's still averaging only 2 comments per. Mitt "double Guantanamo" Romney slowed his production down to a trickle, but I'm sure he'll break 200 videos by the next update. And for what, exactly?

One of the pieces of data that I had originally overlooked is the average score of the ratings each video receives, which roughly indicates whether a candidate is producing high quality, well-liked, engaging videos. I've added that element to the tracking just to see whose videos are rating the highest quality. And, though none of the candidates are really tanking in this department, you probably don't have to actually look at these numbers to know whose videos are drawing in an average of almost 5 stars across the board (Ron Paul).

Before we get to the charts, here is how the candidates' videos are graded by the masses, from lowest to highest:

Rudy Giuliani:2.79 stars
Sam Brownback3.30
Jim Gilmore3.40
John McCain3.44
Tom Tancredo3.83
Mike Huckabee3.88
Duncan Hunter3.93
Fred Thompson4.12
Mitt Romney4.27
Ron Paul4.89


First, the cumulative views (inspired by TechPresident's Youtube charts) and other cumulatives for the frontrunner candidates. I'll be adding the remaining candidates to these charts in one of the next updates because most of the rest are starting to show a little rustling in their Youtube popularity. But for now, the established frontrunners:





Now for the averages sans outliers to reflect true user loyalty to each candidate (an explanation on the outlier data and why they're removed can be found here).





Here are the growth graphs showing actual growth in various user activities for each candidate since May 22. All candidates have been now been added to these growth charts. This is what tedium is all about:
Channel ViewsCumulative RatingsCumulative Comments
Cumulative ViewsSubscribersRatings Averages
Comments AveragesViews Averages

You can't really tell what's going on with the other candidates as long as Paul's numbers keep blowing the curve. I couldn't decide whether to remove Paul's numbers or not, just so people could see the steady pace at which the also-rans continue to grow without being scrunched up at the bottom like they are. But then, if these candidates can't catch up and carve their own visible paths on these charts, that's not mine nor Ron Paul's problem.

Previous entries:
June 21, 2007: GOP Candidates YouTube Stats - 06/21/07
June 11, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats - 06/11/07
June 2, 2007: GOP Candidate YouTube Stats, Charts (Followup)
May 22, 2007: About those Youtube Stats...

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Media Polls vs. Online Rankings, 2008 Presidential Candidates

I read this article about the impact of the internet on the 2008 presidential election, about how the internet is coming to be to the 2008 election what television was to Kennedy in 1960. I was impressed that the author mentioned Howard Dean's 2003 rise on the internet, when this analogy first surfaced, and felt confident that Ron Paul's internet presence would receive his just notice as well. Not so.

That prompted me to consider just how close all the offline media polls are tracking with the online activity of our favorite candidates. After several hours of digging around in the data, I present to you: more charts. Charts reflecting the offline media poll rankings of each candidate among his or her party, and comparing the data to the respective candidate's online rankings. So here we go.

The charts below compare the offline media polling numbers to the online world rankings for each candidate in their party. The first one shows the offline media poll rankings for Democrats during the month of June, 2007. As you can see, it's pretty consistently Clinton-Obama-Edwards in that order, with Clinton hitting the upper 30s-lower 40s, Obama hovering in the mid-20s, Edwards in the mid-10s, Richardson getting an anemic 5% average and Kucinich down around the 2-3% mark as usual.



Now look at their online rankings (below). The three frontrunners are still frontrunners just in differing orders, and the second tier candidates are showing second-tier rankings. Obama and Edwards seem to be vying for the lead with an occassional spike by Clinton. Notice both Biden's and Richardson's online rankings track pretty closely with the offline media polls, but they're the only two candidates to do so among Democrats. It may not be very obvious on this chart, but while Kucinich is ranked down in the 2-3 point range in offline polling, he's achieving somewhere around 10-15% penetration in online Democratic markets. Overall there is not much discrepancy to worry about at this point.



Now let's look at the Republican candidates (below), starting with the offline media poll numbers. Giuliani is solidly out front, with F. Thompson and McCain battling it out for second place. Poor Romney seems to be straddling the second-tier ditch, not quite in the upper ranks but doing a few solid points better than the actual second-tier contenders.



Something is radically askew here. As you can see from the Democratic candidate numbers, the online rankings are off, but not so terribly much that you're in another world. Here, we enter a whole other world. Suddenly the frontrunners are no longer frontrunners, and several second-tier candidates leap into the fore with heightened internet activity. Take a look at the GOP candidates' online rankings.



Ron Paul literally blows the rest of the candidates away, across the board, with second-tier straddler Mitt Romney and only one alleged front-runner, John McCain, coming within spitball range of Paul's online position. Could this possibly portend a showdown between McCain, Paul and Romney in the primaries?

I would expect small deviations like we see in the Democrat numbers to be normal as the world settles in comfortably to the internet age, but nothing so radical as an almost complete flip of the numbers like we see here. Why such a startling discrepancy between media polls and online rankings among the GOP candidates? What is it among republican voters that could cause this sort of chaos in the numbers? I've heard all the cellphone-landline arguments and don't buy it, not when the Democrats have a relatively smooth support transition from media polls to the internet. So what it is, really?