Where Pon Raul (sic) posts come from...

This is an experiment that Howard Mortman just did. It explains a lot, like where the people come from who just signed up a few days ago and won't shut up about Pon Raul, even though they've never heard of Howard Mortman, Glenn Reynolds, or others on the 'net.

It explains why they'd show up here even though they don't know that a .308 isn't the car that Magnum, P.I. borrowed from Robin Masters.

It explains why they'd show up in L&P and blather on and on without making sense, to people who are a lot more informed than they.

They're doing web searches for Pon Raul, and posting the same crap everywhere. Who are "they"? Interesting question.

http://www.extrememortman.com/politics/a-ron-paul-ron-paul-ron-paul-ron-paul-ron-paul-experiment/

Good stuff.

It's not helping the campaign to go around and annoy the very people who might support the guy on the Web.

If anything, this shows that his support is genuinely grassroots

Click to expand...

...and automated...

...and it's annoying the very people who might otherwise support the guy, or at least not mock his campaign...

...people who have worked on major campaigns before...

I'm not talking (only) about Mortman.

What's the deal?

Click to expand...

I didn't want to create another thread for the search engines to hit.

pcosmar, obviously I'm wasn't referring to you. But this: "War is good business." is a bit on the silly side.

2004 is when the blogosphere really exploded. Contentious politics are good business.

Pon Raul Astroturf Playbook Intro

My post was pretty profane, so Don Gwinn deleted it.

Hiro, you've proved my point. Thank you.

HiroProX, what in hell are you talking about?

Not sure, to be honest, jlbraun.

Nobody from New York or Illinois, I can tell you that much.

I'm not down on Paul, actually, though I don't agree with his foreign policy. That doesn't mean I like what Bush has done, or how. It means that, as the son of two people who grew up under Nazi rule, I think that shaking hands with dictators and trading with our potential enemies (which is what Paul's policy is if you read his website) is naive. Furthermore, I remember when Bush ran on a platform of "no more nation-building!" When someone becomes President with a simplistic policy that can be reduced to a sentence or two, it can REALLY backfire. I mean REALLY backfire. We're looking at it right now. I suspect that, if Paul actually becomes President, his foreign policy will look VERY different from his platform, just like Bush. That means we don't have a clue what he'd really do. But he'd probably have to make SOME difficult decision, and it wouldn't look like "diplomacy and trade" as an answer to everything. I'd rather see someone who presents me with a clue as to what he'd REALLY do.

But in general, I like what Paul stands for. Can't say if he'd make a good President, or if he'd be the libertarian Carter. There's a chance it'd be the latter, IMO. A good President needs a combination of many qualities, in addition to the right ideology.

I am, however, unimpressed with what I see from his followers. If I were he, I'd be concerned that they'd deep-six a campaign that's already not making a blip on national polls. And I'm sure not the only one who thinks this.

To the Pon Raul zealot above, though, I must support Guiliani, because apparently anyone who doesn't worship Paul must be a neo-con anti-RKBA fascist or something.

ADDENDUM: Just saw his latest post. So I'll add: if I don't sound like Cindy Sheehan, and if I think that, all things considered, pulling our troops out of Iraq right now as Paul says he would is a very bad idea, I must be a committed warmongerer.

On what basis do you call Ron Paul inspirational, Hiro? Whom has he inspired?

In all his years in the House, has he attracted a following? Built a caucus?

Are any polls showing a real Paul surge? (Note that Richardson's numbers have been climbing on the Democrat side and Thompson's on the GOP are rising fast, even though he's not running)

Give me a reason I should throw my support behind someone, this early in the game, when I don't agree with a significant part of his platform?

Why not NRA A-rated Richardson? Pollsters say Democrats have a better chance than Republicans anyway.

Why not Thompson? You say he's not electable, but his poll numbers have risen steadily and significantly. Not Paul's. I don't agree with all of Thompson's viewpoints, either, but he's solidly for RKBA. He's quite open about carrying, himself. What about Paul?

If I'm going to support someone I don't 100% agree with, I might as well go with the guy where that wouldn't be a waste of my time and energy (I've worked on a losing campaign. Have you?)

Seems like you're the only one who thinks Thompson is "unelectable."

Bottom line: we may not HAVE a great choice. That's life. Pretending we do doesn't help.

But as I've said before: If you like Paul, do what you can to support him. Do it! But be smart about it, and try not to alienate the people whose support you might need, just because you have some difference of opinion. IOW, stop acting like a Libertarian Party member, for chrissakes. Paul is a Republican now.

Thompson has not filed the papers to declare his candidacy. The deadline is far off.

Clearly, he IS running, and doing a pretty good job of steadily gaining on the two remaining GOP "leaders."

Wake up and smell the coffee.

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-thompson-0524,0,5165912.story?coll=hc-big-headlines-breaking

Richardson is also gaining significantly.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/richardson_begins_to_rise.html

As I said, and as I've always said, support Paul if you find you agree with him all or most of the time. But telling me I should, even though I don't agree with some major stuff, because he's "electable" seems silly at this stage of the game.

It's most important to knock Guiliani and Romney, then McCain, off the GOP horse first. Paul is NOT doing that, by any serious measure.

Now the people who put their cash on the line at tradesports.com seem to think that Thompson just might. https://www.intrade.com/aav2/tradin...elect=70288&updateList=true&showExpired=false

Tradesports has hit things pretty close in the last few elections. Maybe not dead-on, but close. Of course, there's a lot of time between now and Iowa.