TechCrunch Endorses Obama and McCain

[misconstrued]

"And while Ron Paul won the TechCrunch primary by a very large margin, he too has flawed technology policies - not the least of which is that he is staunchly against net neutrality, and doesn’t want the FCC to get too involved with spectrum allocation rules."

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/29/the-techcrunch-tech-president-endorsements-barack-obama-and-john-mccain/

No registration required to post comments on TechCrunch...

[qwerty]

Don´t care about it!

This is what matters now, http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=104208


:cool:

[JohnnyWrath]

What a crap site who wants the government to run the internet...they suck, who cares.

What a joke...


Now, as an aside, McCain did say that he was “illiterate” when it comes to computers, which isn’t uncommon for his generation.

What issue isn't McCain stupid on?

[Chibioz]

Isn't Dr. Paul supposed to have an interview with them at some point?

[misconstrued]

Isn't Dr. Paul supposed to have an interview with them at some point?

I don't think the interview ever happened...

[misconstrued]

For those of you who have not heard of TechCrunch before they are one of the most popular technology blogs/news sites on the Internet.

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?c=1&f=555555&u=techcrunch.com&u=ronpaul2008.com&r=6m&y=t&z=3&h=300&w=610

[misconstrued]

From the author of the article and owner of the site:

"You’ve got to rememeber that even though Paul is a force online, no one is really planning on voting for him"

Are you voting for Ron Paul? If so, post a comment there and say so... Apparently I'm a "no one"... are you?

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/29/the-techcrunch-tech-president-endorsements-barack-obama-and-john-mccain/#comments

[frasu]

From the author of the article and owner of the site:

"You’ve got to rememeber that even though Paul is a force online, no one is really planning on voting for him"

Are you voting for Ron Paul? If so, post a comment there and say so... Apparently I'm a "no one"... are you?

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/29/the-techcrunch-tech-president-endorsements-barack-obama-and-john-mccain/#comments

wtf? this guy doesn't sound too reasonable and failles miserably when he starts taking on "politics"... no owner left behind program?

in any case u can't fight this train of thought:

People tend to have few choices when it comes to Internet or mobile providers. In those cases using government to force a level playing field and open access is what actually stimulates economic growth. Republicans also tend to shy away from “green” issues such as pollution (carbon emissions), and alternative fuel research. Finally, their reluctance to get the Federal government involved directly in education means that they avoid issues like increasing math and science curriculum in pubic schools, or providing Federal funding or incentives to address the digital divide (in particular, getting computers and Internet into schools).

[homah]

He says Ron Paul has dangerous views on education. This guy isn't qualified to write an article recommending a politician and if he was, he shouldn't base his endorsements on a single issue that isn't terribly important compared to more pressing issues this country is facing.

[JoBurke]

For those of you who have not heard of TechCrunch before they are one of the most popular technology blogs/news sites on the Internet.

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?c=1&f=555555&u=techcrunch.com&u=ronpaul2008.com&r=6m&y=t&z=3&h=300&w=610

Yes, and Fascists...who knew?

[Staupostek]

Strange thing is, their own rules state, "TechCrunch will endorse one candidate from each the Democratic and Republican party as the pro-tech candidate based on the popular results of reader voting and blog input from our community of technology leaders and entrepreneurs."

So, I guess the popular vote means only if it agrees with the higher powers. If not, they'll toss it out and choose whoever they want.

Are we seeing how authoritarian everything is in this country yet.

[Zolah]

Cyber-fascists, yay.

[walt]

If Jessie Benton wasn't completely and totally incompetent, that misperception would have been fixed. Why didn't Ron Paul have an interview with Arrington like the others? Because Jessie Benton is incompetent.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=61944&highlight=techcrunch

On Decmber 20, 2007, I asked the official campaign to fix this information, both via phone and via the alleged Campaign Suggestion Box.

I want a full refund and public denouncement of this clown by Ron Paul himself by 5PM today - he must be FIRED for this campaign to have any credibility.

[Staupostek]

Why didn't Ron Paul have an interview with Arrington like the others?

Maybe that would have allowed this net neutrality issue to be cleared up and then they couldn't endorse McCain with any half way believable excuse for it.

[mysticgeek]

It's all a scam ... they know if they write crap like this ... we will go and protest... then the site hits pile up. What a pathetic attempt at self promotion.

[roXet]

It's all a scam ... they know if they write crap like this ... we will go and protest... then the site hits pile up. What a pathetic attempt at self promotion.

I don't really think techcrunch needs our protest to get hits.

[Thumper]

Thank God for Michael Arrington's paternal, guiding hand. He might just save us all from ourselves...

/sarcasm

Just another case of an uninformed jackass deciding what's best for the rest of us. I love it when someone tries to pass off their opinions as fact, neo-journalism at it's finest.

[mysticgeek]

I don't really think techcrunch needs our protest to get hits.
probably not ... But they suck anyway...lol

[wfd40]

so wheres the friggin interview with dr. paul i was promised yesterday????????

I dont care so much about the endorsement (actually thats a lie, I do).. but more that Dr. Paul get a solid 30-40min to educate Arrington on why the FCC is bullshit and how they will sell out the internet to the BIG CORP far faster than a truly free market would...

This is absolutely pathetic on the part of HQ

[slacker921]

"This is absolutely pathetic on the part of HQ" .. on this I have to agree. This was a big misstep.
TechCrunch is huge.

From TechCrunches perspective what they saw was a ton of "spammers" voting on their poll and zero interest from the actual candidate - which reinforced the image of the candidate being fringe and not a real contender. The other campaigns were responsive. They knew this was important.

[wfd40]

If HQ doesnt rectify this by setting up a 30minute onair interview with arrington... I will never give them another penny.

I'm sorry, but this is really the last straw. This site IS THE SITE FOR ANYONE IN TECHNOLOGY (re: google, venture capital, facebook, pe, etc.)

and Dr. Paul didn't even give them the time of day.. of course theyre not going to endorse the only GOP candidate that didnt do a FRIGGIN INTERVIEW

Light up the board people..

[JimInNY]

Obviously he is bought and paid for.

[Jae0]

Obviously he is bought and paid for.

Or just an idiot.

[HazardPerry]

If HQ doesnt rectify this by setting up a 30minute onair interview with arrington... I will never give them another penny.

I'm sorry, but this is really the last straw. This site IS THE SITE FOR ANYONE IN TECHNOLOGY (re: google, venture capital, facebook, pe, etc.)

and Dr. Paul didn't even give them the time of day.. of course theyre not going to endorse the only GOP candidate that didnt do a FRIGGIN INTERVIEW

Light up the board people..

This is in no way HQ's fault, that is a bit misguided...

TechCrunch is a blog about iPods and AJAX, sure, lots of people read it, but they aren't going to really be swayed to vote one way or another because of it.

The owner of the site is obviously ignorant of the dangers of Net Neutrality being a "solution looking for a problem," as it were, and seems to have swallowed the bait as far as the "Ron Paul is a loony with no chance." Amazingly frustrating but what can you expect. If it wasn't for Obama hijacking our more impressionable youth with all of his bullshit, we might be in a different place.

Bottom line: forget it. Tech Crunch is run by a shallow dude who obviously doesn't understand the implications of his own stock and trade enough to even grasp the concept of Net Neutrality - which is basically a load of doublespeak like PATRIOT act. If you ask somebody "Are you for Net Neutrality?" they are going to go "oh yes of course! the net should always be neutral!" and if you oppose it, it looks like you are opposed to the neutrality of the internet. Incredibly childish semantics and yet that is the state of our legislative process, and unfortunately the thought processes of many well-meaning netizens.

The point is, this is in no way HQ's fault. They are busy winning states and talking to people on the ground and running ads and putting the campaign in high gear. Let it go, the guy actually endorsed John McCain. We never catch a break, live with it.

[wfd40]

This is in no way HQ's fault, that is a bit misguided...

TechCrunch is a blog about iPods and AJAX, sure, lots of people read it, but they aren't going to really be swayed to vote one way or another because of it.

The owner of the site is obviously ignorant of the dangers of Net Neutrality being a "solution looking for a problem," as it were, and seems to have swallowed the bait as far as the "Ron Paul is a loony with no chance." Amazingly frustrating but what can you expect. If it wasn't for Obama hijacking our more impressionable youth with all of his bullshit, we might be in a different place.

Bottom line: forget it. Tech Crunch is run by a shallow dude who obviously doesn't understand the implications of his own stock and trade enough to even grasp the concept of Net Neutrality - which is basically a load of doublespeak like PATRIOT act. If you ask somebody "Are you for Net Neutrality?" they are going to go "oh yes of course! the net should always be neutral!" and if you oppose it, it looks like you are opposed to the neutrality of the internet. Incredibly childish semantics and yet that is the state of our legislative process, and unfortunately the thought processes of many well-meaning netizens.

The point is, this is in no way HQ's fault. They are busy winning states and talking to people on the ground and running ads and putting the campaign in high gear. Let it go, the guy actually endorsed John McCain. We never catch a break, live with it.


# Michael Arrington

January 29th, 2008 at 7:21 am

Just added a clip from Fox News this morning where we announced the endorsement live in front of an audience of about a million people. Note that I talk about the reader poll winners as well as the endorsement. sorry about the delay in the middle, getting these clips up fast is hard.


Well aint that swell...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMq0_H1vdUo
"Who gets the silicon valley vote??"

lolz

Way to go team... and as for your logic concerning HQ's penchant for winning states vs endorsements... hate to break it to ya bub, but key endorsements lead to wins... look at more-wars-mccain... he's lining them up left and right, which not only gets him more press but makes the sheeple think "he, alot of other serious folks are backing him.. I probably should too.. cause i definitely want to vote for a winning".

In other words, your argument assumes that "a" (wins) does not require "b" (endorsements/media attention etc) - I, of course, see it differently.

[Coola]

don't give them the traffic lol

[Shink]

As much as it'd be nice for the techies who go there to see 'we endorse Ron Paul,' I must admit I'm glad we weren't endorsed by idiots who think government regulating the internet is a good thing.

[walt]

Mr. Arrington just sent me this....

"I just spoke with Ron Paul today and we went through most of the
interviews (it will be up this afternoon). He's clearly shifting some
of his thoughts on net neutrality and mobile spectrum, but nothing we
had up on the site was inaccurate as far as I know."

How can you NOT blame HQ after reading that? He won the poll, HQ snubbed Arrington - they are clueless as how to deal with any press or blogger.

[steph3n]

Mr. Arrington just sent me this....

"I just spoke with Ron Paul today and we went through most of the
interviews (it will be up this afternoon). He's clearly shifting some
of his thoughts on net neutrality and mobile spectrum, but nothing we
had up on the site was inaccurate as far as I know."

How can you NOT blame HQ after reading that? He won the poll, HQ snubbed Arrington - they are clueless as how to deal with any press or blogger.

Ron Paul isn't shifting his views, this guy just doesn't know his views :D

[walt]

Ron Paul isn't shifting his views, this guy just doesn't know his views :D

EXACTLY! This is the crown jewel of our failure.

[wfd40]

EXACTLY! This is the crown jewel of our failure.

Fact: We are getting "out-teched" by OBAMA

Every speech, every rally, every email asking for donations not only includes a youtube link.. but also, and more importantly - they get the political blogs to link to the videos..

Remember, youtube is the great equalizer... as are blogs like huffpost which count their readership in the millions..

This week, Dr. paul put up a couple solid videos and that was seriously fantastic.. but when the bmoc of silicon valley techblogging is still confused about Pauls positions - and wasn't given an interview until after the endorsement (and we'll see just how long dr. paul gave him.. i'm hoping for a solid 15-30min) - we've got serious issues.

HQ may or may not be able to get the MSM to give Paul a little time, but they certainly can get love from the little guys whose traffic can be greatly increased as a result of any and all Pro-Paul coverage.

:mad: