PDA

View Full Version : Is spamming polls the best way to gain Ron Paul supporters?




swmmr1928
10-01-2011, 10:00 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

InTradePro
10-01-2011, 10:03 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

A dubious premise. We don't spam online polls.

TheTyke
10-01-2011, 10:03 AM
We vote in them like everyone else, but tend to have a more organized web presence. I think it does make people look into Ron Paul, and besides that, it keeps the media from trumpeting whatever Establishment candidate might win. If we win, they normally just don't talk about us, or they complain about the results - which is slightly better.

Welcome to the forums. :)

bluesc
10-01-2011, 10:03 AM
Nope, but I like to think of it as denying other candidates good press. If any other candidate won these post-debate polls, it would all of a sudden be relevant.

brenton
10-01-2011, 10:04 AM
informing people there is a poll and linking them to it isn't spamming. the results are used as a gauge of support by whoever's conducting the poll, so we show our support for our candidate. why does someone who's been a member for such a short time make this their first post and insinuate that all paul wins in online polls are "spammed" results?

RonPaulFever
10-01-2011, 10:08 AM
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5089/trollsparymax192w.jpg

John F Kennedy III
10-01-2011, 10:10 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

We don't spam. It isn't our fault we outnumber all other candidates online supporters.

BTW, welcome to the forums :)

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:12 AM
We don't spam. It isn't our fault we outnumber all other candidates online supporters.

This. Spam implies individuals vote more than once. We just post the poll so people can do it idly when they check in here. It isn't exactly an onerous task.

Welcome to the forums, though!

swmmr1928
10-01-2011, 10:15 AM
Thankyou for welcoming me.

Maybe I should have chosen a word other than spam.

I would say that the results are so extreme that they could easily be mistaken for a spammed poll.

Yes I understand that an organized presence on the online polls is a way to show you support, but I wonder how many people decide to learn more about a candidate based on extreme poll results (high or low). How do people respond to poll results?

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:17 AM
Some places actually run stories on the results of their polls, so it becomes earned media. The real question is why NOT do it? I'm not sure you understand how little effort we put into it.

RonPaulFever
10-01-2011, 10:17 AM
How do people respond to poll results?

We don't know because the polls that show Ron Paul as the winner usually get taken down.

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:18 AM
We don't know because the polls that show Ron Paul as the winner usually get taken down.

Mostly on Fox, but at least those can't be used to bolster his competitors at his expense.

But look at the thread titles on this forum, at all the projects.... we spend very little time on polls.

swmmr1928
10-01-2011, 10:27 AM
Mostly on Fox, but at least those can't be used to bolster his competitors at his expense.

But look at the thread titles on this forum, at all the projects.... we spend very little time on polls.

Yes I understand that it takes very little effort, I have participated in several. But is it the image we want? From what I have heard, it is not received well by the pollsters.

pacelli
10-01-2011, 10:28 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

Welcome to the forum!

InTradePro
10-01-2011, 10:28 AM
The results are mostly correct. People don't realise that online polls include independants, democrats and those who previously didn't vote as well as republicans.
When most offline polls are polling on voters that previously voted republican. Hence the difference.

Also you can note the results on MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/07/7658608-who-do-you-think-won-the-republican-debate-at-the-reagan-library) and left leaning polls are better then Dr Paul for right leaning such as Fox, but he wins them both anyway.

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:29 AM
Yes I understand that it takes very little effort, I have participated in several. But is it the image we want? From what I have heard, it is not received well by the pollsters.

It is not well received by those who want someone else to win. A lot of pollsters put in Ron Paul just to get the clicks.

Shift to straw polls for a moment. Ron won California the week before Cain won Florida. Ron won despite Perry organizing. Ron won more votes than Perry and Romney (who came in 2d and 3d) together. In Florida Cain can say the exact same thing. Why do you hear so much more of Cain's win? Because his positions don't threaten the status quo. Ron's do. So Ron's wins make people unhappy, yet Cain orgainized for Florida, he had his previous media push right when that was being organized for (you had to sign up in June) and his radio show broadcast covered Florida so it is where he has active supporters (there and Georgia). Ron will always be treated badly, it doesn't mean we are acting badly, and if we let others win, then the polls are treated as legitimate, to the detriment of our candidate.

orenbus
10-01-2011, 10:37 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

We have more political nerds that actually understand the issues than the other campaigns. The nerds rule the internet thus Ron Paul rules the polls, no spamming needed there is just more of us on the net than any of the other campaigns put together.

swmmr1928
10-01-2011, 10:39 AM
It is not well received by those who want someone else to win. A lot of pollsters put in Ron Paul just to get the clicks.

Shift to straw polls for a moment. Ron won California the week before Cain won Florida. Ron won despite Perry organizing. Ron won more votes than Perry and Romney (who came in 2d and 3d) together. In Florida Cain can say the exact same thing. Why do you hear so much more of Cain's win? Because his positions don't threaten the status quo. Ron's do. So Ron's wins make people unhappy, yet Cain orgainized for Florida, he had his previous media push right when that was being organized for (you had to sign up in June) and his radio show broadcast covered Florida so it is where he has active supporters (there and Georgia). Ron will always be treated badly, it doesn't mean we are acting badly, and if we let others win, then the polls are treated as legitimate, to the detriment of our candidate.

Good reasons. But doesn't Cain want to change the tax system and also destroy several federal departments (TSA)? So, why do you say Cain does not threaten the status quo (as much as Paul)?

bluesc
10-01-2011, 10:45 AM
Good reasons. But doesn't Cain want to change the tax system and also destroy several federal departments (TSA)? So, why do you say Cain does not threaten the status quo (as much as Paul)?

Cain wants to add new forms of taxation to help fund the continuing wars that keep the defense contractors (special interests) rich. He has taken the pledge to defend Israel with American lives. He will keep the FED gravy train running.

He is great for the status quo.

swmmr1928
10-01-2011, 10:48 AM
Is there a graphic ranking candidates based on how well their positions would maintain the status quo, I am wondering?

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:49 AM
Good reasons. But doesn't Cain want to change the tax system and also destroy several federal departments (TSA)? So, why do you say Cain does not threaten the status quo (as much as Paul)?

No, Cain says whatever a crowd wants him to say. Go back and look at the PROGRESSION of his positions. He has no fixed principles at all. And his 999 plan actually keeps the income tax AND starts a national VAT, and remember income tax was supposed to only be 1%, only to 'pay for a war' and only on the wealthy, and only temporary. Once the government has acclimated people to it, they will never give it up. The Dems have been pushing for a VAT for ADDITIONAL income for government, forever.

Cain was pro TARP when TARP was going through, says the Fed doesn't need to be audited because you can just check its web page (which never showed the $16 TRILLION the Fed injected without congressional action, a third of which went overseas) etc etc. Cain is no threat to the status quo. He even used to outright say on national tv that he had no program but would 'get the right people in' and figure one out 'first thing' when he was elected. He would be hostage to special interest think tanks to come up with policy

sailingaway
10-01-2011, 10:57 AM
Is there a graphic ranking candidates based on how well their positions would maintain the status quo, I am wondering?

Would it even matter if their positions aren't consistent? Cain's positions have changed dramatically just in the few short months he's been running for President, so his positions today aren't predictive. Ron's positions matter because he has been consistent for 30 years, regardless of the shifting political pendulum and regardless of the crowd he is facing.

this is supporter made, and the end should say those are the principles Ron would fight for, not snap his fingers and get, but it gives just a taste of his consistency:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohKz9OeiI0g

John F Kennedy III
10-01-2011, 11:14 AM
No, Cain says whatever a crowd wants him to say. Go back and look at the PROGRESSION of his positions. He has no fixed principles at all. And his 999 plan actually keeps the income tax AND starts a national VAT, and remember income tax was supposed to only be 1%, only to 'pay for a war' and only on the wealthy, and only temporary. Once the government has acclimated people to it, they will never give it up. The Dems have been pushing for a VAT for ADDITIONAL income for government, forever.

Cain was pro TARP when TARP was going through, says the Fed doesn't need to be audited because you can just check its web page (which never showed the $16 TRILLION the Fed injected without congressional action, a third of which went overseas) etc etc. Cain is no threat to the status quo. He even used to outright say on national tv that he had no program but would 'get the right people in' and figure one out 'first thing' when he was elected. He would be hostage to special interest think tanks to come up with policy

And he is a member of the North American Competitiveness Council. Who are actively seeking a merger of US, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union.

And he was originally pushing a 23% "fair tax".

And he attended the 2009 Bilderberg meeting. A group that is actively seeking far more than just a North American Union.

Herman Cain is perfect for the status quo.

acptulsa
10-01-2011, 11:21 AM
Is there a graphic ranking candidates based on how well their positions would maintain the status quo, I am wondering?

Does it matter? If you'll recall, Obama's stated positions durng the campaign would have changed the status quo quite a bit--for example, the nation would be at peace. Is the nation at peace?

If you want to learn something about a candidate, look at his stated positions over time, and compare these to his voting recrord.

It doesn't take a lot of this to help you see why we are so set on electing Ron Paul.

Paul4Prez
10-01-2011, 10:03 PM
Voting isn't spamming. If the other candidates have so many supporters, where the heck are they?

specsaregood
10-01-2011, 10:07 PM
hell, i dont even bother voting in them anymore. and imsure there are many like me, yet we still blow the results out.

HeyArchie
10-01-2011, 10:21 PM
Is there a graphic ranking candidates based on how well their positions would maintain the status quo, I am wondering?
http://i51.tinypic.com/ne6mwj.png
Just a little something I cooked up. Notice Cain's numbers...

kah13176
10-01-2011, 10:36 PM
Annihilating internet polls is a community sport and connecting activity for us. Like sex is for Bonobos.

MelissaCato
10-01-2011, 10:38 PM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters? I don't think the Revolution ever spammed the Polls, we never had to. The numbers are there. Whhoaaa B'ATIDE !!!! Lincoln was right about the media, I'm convinced. Yoooo TRUMP, WTF U donate to RevPAC yet or what ? YeeeeHawwwww

XTreat
10-01-2011, 10:56 PM
http://i51.tinypic.com/ne6mwj.png
Just a little something I cooked up. Notice Cain's numbers...

lulz

swmmr1928
10-02-2011, 09:43 AM
Voting isn't spamming. If the other candidates have so many supporters, where the heck are they?

Other than Mitt Central, do other candidates have strong forums?

sailingaway
10-02-2011, 09:45 AM
Other than Mitt Central, do other candidates have strong forums?

WHY don't other candidates have strong forums?

All it takes is supporters.

acptulsa
10-02-2011, 09:51 AM
Before we can get the nation to look and see why we're so enthusiastic for and dedicated to our man's plans, we have to get the nation to see that we're enthusiastic and dedicated. And we all know by now that the media won't admit this unless we force them to.

itsnobody
10-02-2011, 09:52 AM
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

I agree it didn't work in 2007-2008, it's just a waste of time.

Better time spent attracting actual voters.

acptulsa
10-02-2011, 09:57 AM
I agree it didn't work in 2007-2008, it's just a waste of time.

Better time spend attracting actual voters.

So, we have a magic wand?

We've grown our numbers substantially somehow. And I say this is one of the ways we did it. It's no bad thing to eventually get people to ask, 'Who is this guy?'

chadhb
10-02-2011, 10:01 AM
Ron Paul owns the internet, just like John McCain owned retirement communities and morons.

itsnobody
10-02-2011, 10:20 AM
So, we have a magic wand?

We've grown our numbers substantially somehow. And I say this is one of the ways we did it. It's no bad thing to eventually get people to ask, 'Who is this guy?'

Ron Paul already has name recognition...so it's just a waste of time

satchelmcqueen
10-02-2011, 11:16 AM
we dont spam. we just vote. spamming would be me cheating and voting numerous times. i vote once and leave it. i juat vote.

the media and everyone else needs to understand that a vote isnt spamming anything.perhaps if the other candidates supporters took the time to vote it might look a bit different. or it could be that they do, and paul just has more support than the media is saying....thats my guess.
What is the purpose of spamming the online polls? Does it really help us gain supporters?

satchelmcqueen
10-02-2011, 11:19 AM
and thats the problem. are they looking for real results or the results THEY want to report on? bill orielly just booted ron and cain from his last poll. very unfair to both. this shows they are stacking the polls in anyones favor they want to see do good.

Yes I understand that it takes very little effort, I have participated in several. But is it the image we want? From what I have heard, it is not received well by the pollsters.

freeforall
10-02-2011, 11:22 AM
I think our organization is awesome if we all are voting once. It wouldn't hurt to quell the reputation though.

tribute_13
10-02-2011, 11:23 AM
It is not well received by those who want someone else to win. A lot of pollsters put in Ron Paul just to get the clicks.

Shift to straw polls for a moment. Ron won California the week before Cain won Florida. Ron won despite Perry organizing. Ron won more votes than Perry and Romney (who came in 2d and 3d) together. In Florida Cain can say the exact same thing. Why do you hear so much more of Cain's win? Because his positions don't threaten the status quo. Ron's do. So Ron's wins make people unhappy, yet Cain orgainized for Florida, he had his previous media push right when that was being organized for (you had to sign up in June) and his radio show broadcast covered Florida so it is where he has active supporters (there and Georgia). Ron will always be treated badly, it doesn't mean we are acting badly, and if we let others win, then the polls are treated as legitimate, to the detriment of our candidate.

Cain won the Straw Poll because Romney told some of his delegates to vote for Cain to skew Perry's number. Romney doesn't deal in Straw Polls and frankly he doesn't really give a damn about them. Romney let Cain have it so he would overshadow Perry. Who would you rather be up against for the nod. Perry or Cain? From Romney's pov, Cain has less electability that Perry given the trend of general election matchups. Just makes his job easier.

The Free Hornet
10-02-2011, 11:35 AM
Ron Paul already has name recognition...so it's just a waste of time

It is advertisement to everyone who sees the results of the poll. Everyone who votes for someone else is like, "oh, how very disappointing I shall now go sit in a darkened corner and rethink my life choices." Meanwhile, the Ron Paul supports see the results and say, "Fuck YEAH!"

Many news articles have been written about Ron Paul winning these polls and, increasingly, it is casting doubts on the integrity and effectiveness of the manipulating pollsters. The online votes are a terrific weapon.

In the Bill O'Reilly poll, not only is Ron almost winning...


Congressman Ron Paul criticized the Obama administration for "assassinating" U.S.-born Anwar al-Awlaki with a drone attack. Where do you stand?

He's right - it's immoral & illegal 47%
Al-Awlaki's killing is justified 53%

If you click through the states, you'll note he does GREAT in an important state: IOWA (70% to 30%). I note he is at 80% in New Mexico (ty Johnson!) and 80% in Rhode Island (ty Family Guy!).

The thread on that poll if you have not yet voted:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?319833-Bill-O-Reilly-Poll-Ron-Paul-Awlaki-Assasination-VOTE!-WE-RE-LOSING!

Captain Shays
10-02-2011, 12:37 PM
I spam polls every time I vote in them if voting in polls is spamming. But why is my vote "spam" but Romney's are a "vote"? I guess because as a Ron Paul supporter I would be considered spam in the lexicon of meat groups. Now if I was a Cain supporter my same vote would be a porterhouse steak instead of spam.
That all said there was only one time my wife and me tried to vote more than once. It was the second debate in the last election. We were accused of voting a 1,000 times each so we just wanted to see if it was possible. So we both voted for Ron Paul then we called back. I tried to vote for one of the other candidates and she tried to vote for Ron Paul but neither of us could cast another vote because they had our address.