Flood of Articles relating Ron Paul to Howard Dean

[adpierce]

We all knew it was coming, but if you've been looking at the blogosphere, and news outlets there is a strong movement to equate Ron Paul to Howard Dean. I believe this is an attempt to marginalize Ron Paul. One common thing these people are pointing out is the fact that Howard Dean had the poll numbers not just the ffundraisng. Before you type F*&^ You Frank, hear me out. Polls are incredibly skewed, they're often based on horrible methodology, and more often than not leave out our favorite candidate. However, they're a good indicator of who will inevitably will win because of the fact that most people vote based on name recognition within their party. The polls are still telling us one key thing. Most people don't know who Ron Paul is. Furthermore, the polls have a psychological effect on those who actually do know who Ron Paul is. They say well I like Ron Paul's policies but there's no possible way he can win. I've got a Youtube Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsGkTnQ_xtA) on this particular issue, but it's enough to say that it's a circular problem. Media polls take popular support and report on it, then the population depends on polling to vote. Inevitably the person who wins the election is the one with the most name recognition at the beginning of the race. What I'd like from you guys is to respond to the argument that Ron Paul is just another internet phenomenon. He's Howard Dean without the real life support reflected in polls. Heres just a snippet of articles relating Ron Paul to Howard Dean if you want to read em.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/10/04/post_114.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ari-melber/ron-paul-is-the-new-howar_b_71601.html
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/11/ron_paul_-_ralph_nader_bill_buckley_or_howard_dean/

[werdd]

were going to minnisota, wyoming, idaho, yeaahwewaaahhh!

[robatsu]

With every bump in the scientific polls, we hear a lot of hurrahs from the same folks that have been bitterly deriding them. I think the polls are accurate in that they report the answers to the questions asked. However, these polls ignore the fact that every single RP supporter is going to vote, which significantly dilutes the lead of "frontrunners", so it is ok to discount the results somewhat. But nobody is making up numbers.

Anyhow.

It is true that the genesis of Ron Paul's support was on the Internet. This was an end run around the MSM blockade and like any new/unknown candidate, was among a small minority of the general population.

This was the tinder.

However, the Internet has developed to the point that it now has allowed this small minority to get the word out and effectively campaign for a non-anointed candidate. The first battle was converting a lot of internet savvy people.

This was the kindling.

These people recognized that Ron Paul couldn't win the election using only the Internet to deliver his message. So they set about breaking the MSM embargo. To do this, they used the internet to organize and further recruit, but the Internet at this point had become a tool rather than a goal.

This has been successful in the wake of Q3 & 11/5 donations and other developments, virtually all of them organized on internet.

So now Ron has MSM access to spread his message more broadly than is possible with the Internet in 2007. Here is hoping that the next stage is a roaring conflagration.

That's how I see it.

[kylejack]

Some of those links are >1 month old, heh.

[Visual]

Being compared to howard dean beats being not talked about or being ridiculed.

[fletcher]

Im fine with them saying RP is Howard Dean without the poll numbers. If there is one thing Dean taught us it is that poll numbers can be very wrong. When they make that comparison they are reminding people of that.

[Akus]

I say better to Howard Dean then some Al Quaeda plant. Plus, Ron Paul knows better then do some stupid scream. It's not him anyway, it's the rhetoric that comes out of that man's mouth.