Rand Paul 2016 Facebook Page is front for Rare website at expense of Rand

[Okaloosa]

If you want to see Rand Paul elected or at least be able to speak for himself please go to the page https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016 and comment on posts that push primarily the website rare and ask them to stick to being an unofficial page for Rand not a front for Rare. Regardless if you are fine with Rare using Rand's name a majority of the comments think it is Rand Paul in an official capacity posting and often on divisive issues. See the latest post for Rare that goes after Bill Nye the Science guy on a hot button issue Rand doesn't speak on and additionally even going after parents for their differing political views.

https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016/posts/675258392589362?notif_t=notify_me

[Natural Citizen]

I think that it is counterinuitive to default to placing one's position on science itself solely into context with evangelical terms of controversy. Which is exactly what that page/link that you shared attempts to stimulate. Why is it that every time we say the word science it turns into a debate premised upon creationism? Science is much more than that. And it would seem, to me, that we do this just so we can avoid actually debating scientific application itself. This is unfortunate. It is imperetive that people begin to realize that they'd do well to expect an actual position on science(s) from prospective representatives who wish to lead in a technological age where scientific application/technology exists and impacts/guides much of the legislation that we see today.

We can't do that if everyone continues to turn awareness of scientific relevance into Jesus speak all of the time.

I had just finished spewing about this very thing here... http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?462902-DARPA’s-Atlas-robot-learns-karate-(VIDEO)&p=5703067&viewfull=1#post5703067

and here.... http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?462508-GMO-labeling-on-the-Ballot-in-Oregon&p=5702943&viewfull=1#post5702943

[economics102]

Yeah, someone needs to stop this, they are actively undermining Rand's efforts with posts like the Bill Nye one.

[TaftFan]

Jack Hunter runs the page. I know this, because he will post the article with his commentary on his personal account and then it shows up on the page.

He should really know better than speaking in first person. Enough people already think Rand runs the page without him talking like Rand is.

[randomname]

Jack Hunter runs the page. I know this, because he will post the article with his commentary on his personal account and then it shows up on the page.

He should really know better than speaking in first person. Enough people already think Rand runs the page without him talking like Rand is.

I thought he had been fired. Why the fuck is Rand still letting him run a facebook page under his name? Shouldnt this be handed over to his staff sooner than later before this inevitably comes out in another smear campaign?

[economics102]

If it really is Jack Hunter that's fucked up.

[TaftFan]

I thought he had been fired. Why the fuck is Rand still letting him run a facebook page under his name? Shouldnt this be handed over to his staff sooner than later before this inevitably comes out in another smear campaign?

Jack set the page up independently of Rand. Rand's two pages are "Rand Paul" (official campaign page) and "Senator Rand Paul" (official Senate page).

[specsaregood]

Jack set the page up independently of Rand. Rand's two pages are "Rand Paul" (official campaign page) and "Senator Rand Paul" (official Senate page).

Exactly, Randal has no official say in who runs it or what gets posted.

[randomname]

Jack set the page up independently of Rand. Rand's two pages are "Rand Paul" (official campaign page) and "Senator Rand Paul" (official Senate page).
The problem is it looks like these posts come from Rand and that page will get scrutiny as 2016 starts looming. Too easy for Jack Hunter to write something that gets taken out of context and for the media lynch mob to descend on Rand linking this to Ron's lack of review over what went out under his name in the "racist newsletters". Remember Jack Hunter already got smeared as a racist and was forced to resign. It's too easy to dismiss a "I didn't write that", or a "we don't run that page", when this would be easily solved with a simple phone call to Jack Hunter asking him nicely to take down the page or rename it.

Otherwise Facebook is perfectly willing to remove the page after a simple DMCA takedown request.

Can someone contact the campaign about this? A "Rand fires racist but not really as he's still running his facebook page" story right now is not really that juicy, but it will be when they re-run the racist smear next year.

[specsaregood]

Can someone contact the campaign about this? A "Rand fires racist but not really as he's still running his facebook page" story right now is not really that juicy, but it will be when they re-run the racist smear next year.

That someone is you. Email him or his PAC and suggest it if it bothers you. Email hunter and ask him to make it more obvious that it is a fan page and not official

[RonPaulMall]

The problem is it looks like these posts come from Rand and that page will get scrutiny as 2016 starts looming. Too easy for Jack Hunter to write something that gets taken out of context and for the media lynch mob to descend on Rand linking this to Ron's lack of review over what went out under his name in the "racist newsletters". Remember Jack Hunter already got smeared as a racist and was forced to resign. It's too easy to dismiss a "I didn't write that", or a "we don't run that page", when this would be easily solved with a simple phone call to Jack Hunter asking him nicely to take down the page or rename it.

Otherwise Facebook is perfectly willing to remove the page after a simple DMCA takedown request.

Can someone contact the campaign about this? A "Rand fires racist but not really as he's still running his facebook page" story right now is not really that juicy, but it will be when they re-run the racist smear next year.

It is not Rand Paul's Facebook page, so that will not be the story. There are going to a million Rand Paul pages and sites by the time 2016 rolls around. Hillary ones too. And Rand can not file a DCMA take down because the concept of Rand Paul running for President in 2016 is not something he owns a copyright to. Hunter has as much right to pimp Rand for President in 2016 as Rand or anybody else. And I seriously doubt he's going to give up or rename the website because "Rand Paul 2016" are going to be very good Google Keywords as we approach election season.

[Matt Collins]

Jack Hunter runs the page. I know this, because he will post the article with his commentary on his personal account and then it shows up on the page. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

[TaftFan]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

If my cause is false, then please point out why.

In addition to seeing correlations between Hunter's own page and Rand 2016 (sometimes exact verbage), I know for a fact he is a Rare editor, he openly claims to run the Rare Liberty Facebook page, and after doing some searching I have found that his defunct Southern Avenger page pushed the Rand 2016 page hard before it was deleted.

I don't think you need to cover for Jack. He clearly isn't worried about a paper trail.

[Matt Collins]

If my cause is false, then please point out why.

In addition to seeing correlations between Hunter's own page and Rand 2016 (sometimes exact verbage), I know for a fact he is a Rare editor, he openly claims to run the Rare Liberty Facebook page, and after doing some searching I have found that his defunct Southern Avenger page pushed the Rand 2016 page hard before it was deleted.Correlation does not equal causation.

[TaftFan]

Correlation does not equal causation.

Right. That can be applied to a lot of things. More gun ownership does not equal less crime. More economic freedom does not equal greater prosperity. Sorry, I don't buy it.

A lot of human understanding relies on making assumptions from correlations. It is fundamental to society.

Are you here to contribute or play logic games? More importantly, why do you feel the need to cover for Jack, when he obviously isn't too worried about a paper trail?

[TaftFan]

I actually like what Jack does with the page for the most part. As I said, he needs to refrain from speaking in first person, and it would be good if he stayed a little more on topic. But I understand more hits for Rare means more exposure, leading to more widely seen positive coverage for Rand.

[Matt Collins]

Things can be correlated. But your suspicion that Jack is running or posting to that page is circumstantial only. You have no proof that he is.

[TaftFan]

Things can be correlated. But your suspicion that Jack is running or posting to that page is circumstantial only. You have no proof that he is.

He's not on trial for murder, and I don't think most people here are demanding that level of proof.

Not sure why you insist on being contrary.

[Matt Collins]

He's not on trial for murder, and I don't think most people here are demanding that level of proof.

Not sure why you insist on being contrary.Because you're making an accusation with no proof.

[Vanguard101]

The Rand Paul 2016 page is Jack Hunter? LOL

[RonPaulMall]

Because you're making an accusation with no proof.

Jack Hunter runs Rare. The entire focus of that page is driving traffic to Rare. He might not have "proof", but it would bizarre if we were to find out that Jack is not the driving force behind the page. Who else would go to the trouble of building a Facebook page for Rare's benefit? You the Fairy Traffic Godmother did it?

[Okaloosa]

I normally like what Matt Collins posts but Jack Hunter hasn't kept it a secret although it isn't advertised. I didn't create this thread to make anything personal against him, but as it stands I see more harm than good for Rand coming from this page.

[ClydeCoulter]

Wow @Matt, do you have knowledge one way or another of it? If Jack is, does he want it kept "secret"?

[Occam's Banana]

Because you're making an accusation with no proof.

LOL. That's pretty rich coming from Mr. I Have Proof Of Something But I'm Not Going To Show It To You (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463121-The-case-for-and-against-Jesse-Benton-s-professional-campaign-involvement&p=5702456&viewfull=1#post5702456) ...

[Matt Collins]

Who else would go to the trouble of building a Facebook page for Rare's benefit? You the Fairy Traffic Godmother did it?I don't know for certain that it is not Jack, but knowing him I don't think it is. But the point still stands that no one can prove it either way.

[fr33]

I don't know for certain that it is not Jack, but knowing him I don't think it is. But the point still stands that no one can prove it either way.

Why don't we all ask him using our preferred methods of contact?

534578384190181376

[DevilsAdvocate]

I don't know for certain that it is not Jack, but knowing him I don't think it is. But the point still stands that no one can prove it either way.

Stop diverting the thread with your nonsense. We all know what's going on here.


Jack Hunter runs the page. I know this, because he will post the article with his commentary on his personal account and then it shows up on the page.

He should really know better than speaking in first person. Enough people already think Rand runs the page without him talking like Rand is.

Jack Hunter is a failure who got kicked off the bandwagon, and now is trying to use Rand's name for his own benefit to avoid getting a real job.

Sorry if that sounds harsh but stuff like this gets me really mad. The page is the first Google result, and if you scroll through the comments it's very clear that most of them think it's actually him.

[DevilsAdvocate]

By the way Collins, I don't want to start a war with you here. I was pretty angry when I wrote my last comment.

Here is my suggestion: You claim you know Jack Hunter. Why don't you call him up and see if he knows anything about this? If he does, maybe you can ask him to stop it.

[TaftFan]

Stop diverting the thread with your nonsense. We all know what's going on here.



Jack Hunter is a failure who got kicked off the bandwagon, and now is trying to use Rand's name for his own benefit to avoid getting a real job.

Sorry if that sounds harsh but stuff like this gets me really mad. The page is the first Google result, and if you scroll through the comments it's very clear that most of them think it's actually him.

I would say that at least half think it is actually Rand. Even though he hasn't announced he is running in 2016.

Heck, I run the Rand Paul/Ted Cruz 2016 Facebook page (not my preferred ticket, btw) , and a good portion of them think that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz actually run the page and are posting from it. I get private messages and post comments DAILY confirming such.

By the way, this may be of interest to you all. As a page owner, Facebook gives me the insights of my page and other pages. I follow the biggest Rand pages to see how they are doing. Here is a screenshot I took yesterday.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/1524700_360362197463633_2389803287417514702_n.jpg? oh=e3556ffc1ecb83cb727d2a32436e2c6e&oe=5512FD47&__gda__=1423390854_19c743b1eeff536cf71c529c0dd87e0 8

As you can see, Hunter's page is blowing Rand's official pages out of the water in terms of outreach, despite a significant like difference. In other words, he is the most influential person using Rand's name on Facebook.

[Brian4Liberty]

Jack Hunter runs Rare. The entire focus of that page is driving traffic to Rare.

You mean Senior Managing Editor...


The Rare Team

Leon Levitt*— Publisher
James de Gale*— Business development
Daniel Kelly— Director of Sales & Revenue
Will Alford*— Editorial director
Jack Hunter — Senior managing editor
Tabitha Hale*— Managing editor, Social
Betsi Fores— Managing editor, Content
Jeremy Lott — Contributing editor
Matt Purple — News editor
Douglas Barclay*— Content editor
Richard Thompson— Content editor
Matt Naham — Content editor
Kurt Wallace*— Strategic content editor

Rare All-Stars:*Neal Boortz,*Herman Cain,*Nancy French,*Cristina Gonzalez,*Monica Perez

Contributors:*Erick Erickson,*Amelia Hamilton, Josh Harris,*Austin Hill,*Kemberlee Kaye,*Merrill Matthews,*Amy Miller,*Rick Robinson,*Kyle Wingfield

Doejo*— Development partner
Brandon Jones*— Developer


Read more at http://rare.us/about-us/

[Grenadine]

That page used to be owned by Dave Aiello, who then sold to someone else. I'm guessing it was sold to Jack Hunter and is being grown in the meantime with Rare articles until it is handed over to the official Rand campaign in 2016 (or to a supporting PAC).

[DevilsAdvocate]

That page used to be owned by Dave Aiello, who then sold to someone else. I'm guessing it was sold to Jack Hunter and is being grown in the meantime with Rare articles until it is handed over to the official Rand campaign in 2016 (or to a supporting PAC).

If this actually becomes the official page, then our opposition will have plenty of cannon fodder tweeting out all of the previous divisive posts. I think the official "draft Rand" Facebook page should become the official Rand 2016 page, or maybe just start a new one.

[randomname]

If this actually becomes the official page, then our opposition will have plenty of cannon fodder tweeting out all of the previous divisive posts. I think the official "draft Rand" Facebook page should become the official Rand 2016 page, or maybe just start a new one.

Yes that was my concern. The campaign could scrub them whenever they buy the page but I doubt that will stop the internet mobs from using the controversial posts in a smear campaign. It would be the ron paul newsletter situation all over again :)

[brandon]

Yea I've brought this issue up before and didn't get much of a response. Hunter or whoever is running that page needs to stop. The shit they post is often mildly infuriating and I've unliked the page, but 100k people are still seeing that garbage and thinking it's from Rand.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Yes that was my concern. The campaign could scrub them whenever they buy the page but I doubt that will stop the internet mobs from using the controversial posts in a smear campaign. It would be the ron paul newsletter situation all over again :)

Is that you in your profile pic? Looking spiffy! You should run for offfice!

[randomname]

And Rand can not file a DCMA take down because the concept of Rand Paul running for President in 2016 is not something he owns a copyright to.

That is a silly argument. Of course he can get it taken down from Facebook, and he probably should. They'll remove pages over mich less. Even without the DMCA or such a thing as personality rights he would have plenty of standing seeing how he's a celeb and might run in 2016.

[randomname]

And more so as theyre posting controversial shit, it has tons of likes and people think it's him.

[economics102]

That is a silly argument. Of course he can get it taken down from Facebook, and he probably should. They'll remove pages over mich less. Even without the DMCA or such a thing as personality rights he would have plenty of standing seeing how he's a celeb and might run in 2016.

Especially since the posts are written in first-person, which could lead to the argument that there's an intention to cause confusion.

[economics102]

100k people are still seeing that garbage and thinking it's from Rand.

Actually it's nearly 200k :(

[DevilsAdvocate]

Especially since the posts are written in first-person, which could lead to the argument that there's an intention to cause confusion.

Okay, that's pretty effed up!!! We need to do something about this!

[fr33]

Has anybody else tried to ask Jack Hunter if he runs the page? Of course he didn't respond to me. Why not ask? If we want Rand to become the next president, then why not act to make a positive change?

[Okaloosa]

Has anybody else tried to ask Jack Hunter if he runs the page? Of course he didn't respond to me. Why not ask? If we want Rand to become the next president, then why not act to make a positive change?

He is the admin of the facebook page or at least one of them. I have had a conversation about it with him.

[Okaloosa]

Jack Hunter and Rare have just posted an article about diplomacy with Iran. This is a touchy subject best handled by Rand personally not a website attempting to get clicks to make money off of his name. Feel free to post reminding people this is not Rand Paul or affiliated with him and asking the page to post a reminder on every post that they are not Rand.

https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016/posts/678547812260420?notif_t=notify_me

[TaftFan]

Oh my gosh. Comparing people to Bin Laden. I'm attempting damage control.

https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016/posts/688019204646614

[cajuncocoa]

Oh my gosh. Comparing people to Bin Laden. I'm attempting damage control.

https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016/posts/688019204646614
The article is critical of Americans who defend torture. And you're attempting damage control? Against what?

[TaftFan]

The article is critical of Americans who defend torture. And you're attempting damage control? Against what?

Against the literally dozens of people saying "Sorry Rand, you lost my vote."

Most people don't like themselves or other Americans compared to bin Laden, let alone by their presidential candidate (that is how it is perceived by them).

[Okaloosa]

Wow I'm not surprised by the comments. I'm surprised at what a big asshole Jack Hunter is for using Rand's name to get web traffic to make money for himself. Seriously Jack Hunter is doing more damage than any conspiracy theorist that Jack used to go after.

Go and tell people this isn't Rand comparing people to Osama Bin Laden.

https://www.facebook.com/Rand2016/posts/688019204646614

[TaftFan]

I've just learned that Hunter has received sanction from Rand's staff to mislead the way he does. Absolutely unbelievable.

[TaftFan]

Someone thought giving Jack free reign was a good idea. Someone thought meeting with Sharpton and the MS GOP was a good idea.

And it wasn't Jesse Benton.

[jjdoyle]

I've just learned that Hunter has received sanction from Rand's staff to mislead the way he does. Absolutely unbelievable.

I honestly don't doubt this at all.
Hunter "took one for the team" when he resigned from Rand's campaign. He's gotta continue to bilk the movement somehow, using the "Paul" name. This is how he can do so, unofficially.

[Okaloosa]

I can't say that Rand has okayed Hunter in his current affairs, but I'm going to call his office and get to the bottom of this.

[TaftFan]

Slight correction-my source told me that when Jack used to run the official Rand Paul page (yes, he did) he was given free reign to talk in first person.

It appears he has NOT changed his habits since transitioning to his own Rand 2016 page, and it seems that Rand's staff has no objected to it.

As I demonstrated before in another thread, the Rand Paul 2016 page often outperforms both of Rand's official pages combined based on post reach.

[cajuncocoa]

Against the literally dozens of people saying "Sorry Rand, you lost my vote."

Most people don't like themselves or other Americans compared to bin Laden, let alone by their presidential candidate (that is how it is perceived by them).
When they sanction and excuse torture, they become what they hate. It's a bitter pill to swallow.

[cajuncocoa]

I just came back from reading the comments on that Facebook page and I LOL'd. Rand cannot possibly make those people happy and make most of the people on this site happy at the same time. He would have to choose one or the other because those people sound more like Bush/Cheney leftovers than Ron Paul supporters. Why bother? They're going in Jeb's corner as soon as he announces.

[Occam's Banana]

So Jack Hunter is pissing off bigoted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors) torture-mongers, is he? Well, then, good!

Bigoted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors) torture-mongers deserve to be compared to Osama bin Laden.

No, wait ... actually, the comparison might be unfair - to Osama bin Laden ...

+rep to Jack Hunter - again (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors&p=5711747&viewfull=1#post5711747).

[jmdrake]

Yeah, someone needs to stop this, they are actively undermining Rand's efforts with posts like the Bill Nye one.

How? Bill Nye is a douche and most Republicans agree with creationism and an overwhelming majority support the idea that parents should be able to teach it to their children. Next you'll be saying that some article linking Rand Paul to auditing the Fed hurts Rand Paul because some people don't believe in auditing the Fed.

[jmdrake]

I just came back from reading the comments on that Facebook page and I LOL'd. Rand cannot possibly make those people happy and make most of the people on this site happy at the same time. He would have to choose one or the other because those people sound more like Bush/Cheney leftovers than Ron Paul supporters. Why bother? They're going in Jeb's corner as soon as he announces.

The people butt hurt over criticizing Bill Nye won't vote republican period. They will vote Hillary guaranteed.

[jmdrake]

I gave this thread a 1 star. (Yeah, I admit it). It's totally stupid. Anyone who things that standing up for creationism when Rand is running in a REPUBLICAN primary is jack stupid. And anyone who agrees with idiots like Bill Nye that parents shouldn't teach their children their core beliefs isn't really a libertarian. I guess next someone will say parents shouldn't "indoctrinate" their kids that communism is bad and free markets are good? Really?

[ExPatPaki]

So Jack Hunter is pissing off bigoted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors) torture-mongers, is he? Well, then, good!

Bigoted (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors) torture-mongers deserve to be compared to Osama bin Laden.

No, wait ... actually, the comparison might be unfair - to Osama bin Laden ...

+rep to Jack Hunter - again (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?463713-Jack-Hunter-uses-Rand-Paul-2016-Page-to-defend-Ferguson-Protestors&p=5711747&viewfull=1#post5711747).

Yep, if you support torture you are no better than Osama bin Laden. If you support torture, please kill yourself to make the world a better place. No one will be sad when you do so.

[brandon]

most Republicans agree with creationism

This sounded really hard to believe so I looked it up. Looks like Republicans are split about 50/50 on evolution. I thought it would be like 75/25.

[KingNothing]

The article is critical of Americans who defend torture. And you're attempting damage control? Against what?

There is a way to convey a message so as to not immediately infuriate a great number of people.

[scottditzen]

This sounded really hard to believe so I looked it up. Looks like Republicans are split about 50/50 on evolution. I thought it would be like 75/25.

Rand is savvy enough that to stick up for individual religious principles without sounding like he's anti-intellectual. Or coming off like Noah's ark belongs in a scientific textbook.

However I don't trust Rare in any such instance which requires this sort of nuance. I really wish they would just make it clear that they are NOT the first person voice of Rand Paul.

[jmdrake]

This sounded really hard to believe so I looked it up. Looks like Republicans are split about 50/50 on evolution. I thought it would be like 75/25.

Why would you be surprised that Republicans favor creationism when most evangelicals are Republicans? :confused: I'm curious as to what poll you are looking at. Even among Democrats, it's only 67/27 according to this poll. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/republicans-belief-in-evolution-plummets-poll-reveals/ And personally I think that poll is poorly worded. It asks if things exist in their present form or have they "evolved over time." Well most creationists believe things have "evolved over time." If you asked the question "Do you believe that life began as single celled organisms that eventually evolved to all of the life forms we see today." I bet the number supporting evolution would be much lower especially among republicans.