@royalecraig Anecdotal? No, measured and verified. About fifty thousand times larger sampling than a gallup poll. There are no anecdotes in that video. You were not paying attention.
@minivanjack mmmm maybe I didn't do it too good but I was trying to compliment you on a great job proving beyond question that the media only presents us with the establishment's preferred choices. If the public don't see Ron Paul, they aint going to vote for him, Good Job minivan man.
Not a big Ron Paul fan, but I agree, when we see the media ignoring a man who consistently has people looking him up on the internet, there's clearly a problem.
You should also do a similar test on other "unpopular candidates" including the various Green Party candidates, and the less democrat candidates.
I feel that Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney also have received the same treatment. (These are the non-mainstream politicians I support.)
I should go and look at their charts.
I find all non-mainstream candidates get treated unfairly, and no matter which viewpoint they come from. This is a major problem.
@sounoriginal "Totally Wrong"? Actually, flat unsupported denial like yours is "totally wrong". You fail to even address the fact that internet traffic on Ron Paul was, for most of the 2008 campaign period, double that of any other candidate. So let's pretend that doesn't mean anything, let's pretend Ron Paul hasn't won nearly every straw poll then and now, let's pretend that Ron Paul wasn't the only Federal elected Official to predict the economic downturns, it's only Youtube, let's pretend.
@sounoriginal You missed the point. The numbers are astronomical. Calling Obama's web traffic in 2007-2008 100%, a "marginal candidate" like Ralph Nader would have been 7%. Ron Paul's was at 200%. Look carefully at that number. It is TWICE the "leading" mainstream candidate's web traffic! And that is a sampling of 80% of Americans (internet users). Yes. That is popularity. Oh, maybe you're one of those who think people looked at Paul for "different reasons" than they look at Obama. Get real.
This is so misleading. Of course those people get more videos on youtube, because those who vote for them are mostly youths and the youth use the internet more than the older people.
@madichelp0 That is entirely not true. Mostly youths? So I guess mostly youths designed the internet, and mostly youths have youtube accounts. I think that people, mostly old people, listen to the TV too much and should try reading a book? Or wait, you must be old, but why are you on the internet?
@tbscrazy12 You don't have to take my word for it, there is countless of studies that show that young people use the internet more.
Oh and I don't know if I should take that "being old" as a compliment if that includes that you could make sense of my sentences. I on the other hand can't say the same for you, as I still after reading the second sentence a few times meant as it started as a statement and ended as a question.
The fun part of it all is that I'm not even old, I'm even less than 20.
For the sake of conspiracy theorists, please stop posting so you all don't look so stupid. You and people like you are the sole reason no one takes you seriously.
@tbscrazy12 So, instead of following your own requirement on my sources you just say "do the research" like all other conspiracy theorists. Well I did the research, and until you have more legit sources saying otherwise, my story is the correct one. That's how science works, and if you can't accept that, then you can...can...just keep being yourself, because that's probably the lowest one can get in terms of science.
If I knew that there was a global conspiracy then the group "conspiracy theorists" would in my eyes look like a part of the conspiracy. It's like you delibretly try to look so stupid that people wanna stay away from you (and then all the theories you have). I mean seriously, did you even read what you wrote before you posted it?
Media controls the election process. Who controls the media? The nation within nations, who also controls the money system and more. The Nutwork behind media controls the money and the Government (the Law) and more. Do you get it?
Simple. If Fox doesn't like a Republican, or favors another, they will bury the candidate. In the last elections, they stupidly picked CT senatorial candidate Linda McMahon over Peter Schiff. Schiff is the real deal, but Fox liked McMahon. Of course, she got clobbered in the general elections. MSNBC, CNN and NPR would never dare promote a Republican, hence they stayed away from anyone who was a real threat to Obama.
Not a surprise. As a Ron Paul follower I saw and felt the media choose the presidential winner long before the "election" while sidelining Ron Paul. That's why I switched my TV off for good.
another point to make, is how all the media sponsored debates would give time preference to certain candidates. During the end of the primaries, the media had a love fest with McCain and Romney, so they would give 2-3 times as much speaking time at debates over Ron Paul. Fair and balanced?
Ron Paul would get rid of unconstitutional corrupt government so the media which is owned by globalist elements in our government (who want you to be a slave and have brainwashed you all for 80 years) who want to control the elections. They are rigging the elections directly and by keeping people from fiinding out the truth about the candidates and their beliefs in the founding principles in constitutional government. Ron Paul and Libertarians = American freedom. Left or Right puppets = slavery.
@Libertyracer Don't be in denial. The Federal Reserve that issues the paper money to all but a few countries in the world would let Paul live for about two minutes if he threatened their little money scam. You really need a reality check for you seem to be in denial about the power of the Rothschild's and Rockefeller's and the other families in this group. Don't feel too bad very few know the story of Jekyll Island and the takeover of our money supply . Peace be with you and good luck!
THE MEDIA LIES ALL THE TIME "GET OVER IT" OR MOVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY. move to siberia so that you can eat reindeer guts for dinner every night you ungratefull butthole.
ummm.... Fox is the biggest media company with the most viewers and they supported McCain. Also more videos is different than more views of those videos. Third the more unknown someone is perhaps the more people who TRY TO FIND THINGS OUT ABOUT HIM and since there not on the media they turn to the internet.
Also this is something called correlation which has nothing to do with causation. Ron Paul was pushed to the side because he was a third party and all third parties are pushed out.
Statistically speaking the i virtually no difference in the strength of a test that uses a million samples and one that uses few thousand samples. And a simple count of hits on anything does not tell you wether it's popular or infamous. You even demonstrate that yourself by saying - "This video has attracted a lot of attention from hater-trolls"
I'm not saying that RP doesn't deserve more coverage than he gets, just that the "evidence" in the video is at best circumstantial.
Could it be because Ron Paul has been around the public eye longer than Obama and has had a pretty large following from young adult demographic on the internet because of his views, especially of those on drugs? Because of his appeal with this demographic, he had a lot more publicity on the internet than just about any other politician running. Obama was pretty unknown at this time, and it wasn't until he started making public appearances and speeches that people saw what he was about.
Very interesting comparison of search results. As for myself, I don't even bother with TV media because of the vast amount of unbiased information on the internet. If not unbiased, it is always easy to view several sides of items simultaneously.
I don't understand how a Google search topic translates to popularity. Is Jerry Day suggesting that because someone's web presence - in the form of YouTube videos, articles or comments - is large, then their popularity is correspondingly large?
its not about the vote, its about the media and their impression on our minds, which is relevant in this interesting study. Whats next? A big face on our TV telling us to "Bow to Obama, Or Die"?
Or have you been brainwashed not to recognize when someone is telling you the truth? We've all been brainwashed the last 50 years to accept unconstitutional levels of government intrusion into our lives that have created the Nanny Welfare state we now live in as slaves. Maybe you should be informed rather than just opinionated?
His assumption that searching on "Ron Paul" is a vote for the same is absurd. I personally believe that there were millions of people with the question "who the hell IS Ron Paul?" See, that's hardly a popularity vote at all, but he's counting it as one!
BTW - Who says he's the "only one that understands economics."
But doesn't it seem unusual to you that when millions of people are asking, "Who is Ron Paul?" the news media makes little to no effort to answer that question? When someone is getting 3x the attention of another candidate on the Internet, doesn't it seem a little strange that the media doesn't follow suit?
At the recent CPAC convention Ron Paul won the straw poll wit 31% of the vote, beating Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. That's pretty significant.
The significance is that it is a distortion of fact to state that a search is any indication of popularity. As for "beating" Mit Romney, who will NEVER be elected on account of his religious beliefs, and Sarah Palin, who has had more press than anybody, big deal! You are trying to read what you want into the data. The reality is Ron Paul is NOT a viable candidate.
I get your point. Search /= Popularity. What I'm saying is that in a perfect world, the amount of media attention a person gets should be relative to the amount of *interest* in that person. Ron Paul would be a viable candidate if he received the same amount of attention as Sarah Palin (who seems to have no actually skill other than being in the news) and Mitt Romney, who as you mentioned is highly discriminated against.
Explain to me how he is not a viable candidate again? Any candidate should be viable if the people, NOT the mainstream media determine there is an interest in the man's stance on the issues.
You guys are stupid. MSM is full of proffesionals that will never lie to you, how else would you get your news? I rely on MSM 100% (except fox news lol) and you conspiracy theorists are stupid fuckers if you think rich people or the government control CNN or MSNBC or BBC. You know what else is funny? some of you believe they're actually aliens, LOL! stupid nerds. 9/11 was done by terrorists, shut the fuck up.
Census 2010 is Anti-American and Anti-Freedom. The information gathered WILL BE USED AGAINST THE PEOPLE! The Pagans running this census could use it to gather information on Christians. 4AM wakeup call and a ride to a FEMA deathcamp - BEWARE!
You're an idiot. There are legitimate concerns that people can have with regards to the census, but fearing that it is run by pagans to lock Christians in death camps is nonsense. If you can support an assertion like that, then people might take you seriously, but since I know you cannot, maybe just let people who are not paranoid discuss the census and what may or may not bother them about it.
And why pagans? Why not be afraid that Muslims, Jews, or Atheists ran it?
you are absolutely retarded. and "new world order" was a reference to the collapse of the bipolar (cold war) system and the establishment of the unipolar (US dominated) system that existed throughout the 1990s and parts of the 00s. please shut the fuck up.
You need to buy a dictionary. You keep using the f-word as though it meant something. Learn some new words so you can better express yourself without offending.
5 stars! We all know the news media's unprecedented control of exposure and opinion especially regarding political candidates. This is proof in numbers. Thanks.
Well, I had no idea Ron Paul was the president of the internet. Makes me wonder who was the president of the newspapers. Or talk radio. Or late night talk shows. Search popularity has nothing to do with supporting a candidate. I searched Sarah Palin more than I did anyone else and Lord knows I can't stand that woman. However, this was a very interesting video and I will further research the validity and importance of internet vs. mainstream media coverage.
the main stream media is a conman for corporations and governments, media gets paid billions $ to spread the propaganda, news reporters become instant millionairs, and the parasites ( governments and corporations) keep their lies and cover ups intact.. you are being lied to every day and its about time you stupid people wake up..
Our political system needs to go from a bi-political system to include more parties. The system won't allow for a real swatch of political ideologies. And hence, we have a polarized political system without any real debate and compromise. Both sides claim, "either you with us or against us".
Please help to support a legitimate investigation! 9/11 was a setup. The collapse of the American economy is a setup. Fight for your country. The future is in our hands! For interesting, scientifically based information, please visit:
theconspiracyexposed.blogspot. (com)
Please leave your thoughtful comments and share pertinent information. Thanks!
The Ron Paul fans didn't show up at the polls, obviously. Too many tinfoil hat types and people who believed their vote wouldn't matter, so they just didn't show up.
Thanks a lot, you jackasses - every one of you INTELLECTUALLY HONEST in choosing Paul, yet because of your laziness or more likely refusal to vote, the other guys won.
@mowriter Here's an idea, maybe you should look at some of the primary election irregularities and also consider that most 'voters' are so dumbed down and ignorant that they weren't even actively researching any candidates, the media would say jump and they'd see how high they could go. Then when you have a lot of passionate people who ARE paying attention and trying to talk to others, the media convinces them that someone's a wingnut and can't win anyway so they go with an appointed candidate.
Nobius: part of my earlier comment on not enough Paul voters reminds me of my own vote for NADER in 2000. I honestly voted on principal, only to get thanked by neo-con mouth breathers for not voting my fear like they did (grrrrrr). That Paul would come from the ranks of the Right...REEEEALLY screws with my comfortable paradigm assuming all rightists are empire builders and equally fast and loose with the people's money (LOL).
This man is right on. I knew nothing about Ron Paul till well into the elections. I questioned why the media wasnt giving us information on him. They refused to. When the elections happened I watched him get 33% in one state and within several seconds they deleted every vote from him. On tube I started listening to what he had to say. I was amazed. He was the only candidate that made sense. I found out then that both parties hated him with a passion. I now follow Ron closely.
Let's see... If I got this right Ron Paul mopped up on the internet but fell flat in national media attention and likewise in the popular vote count. Guess all those internet crawlers didn't vote or maybe they didn't like what they saw.....?
Nice spin Jerry, but misleading. Google & Youtube don't directly measure popularity or preference. Frequency of hits isn't a measure of independent hits nor does it suggest people have a preference for a particular candidate. RP's "popularity" could simple be a function of people trying to learn more about him without necessarily meaning they prefer him. I agree with you that the media is biased and perhaps they didn't give RP a fare shake. But you seem to be engaging in similar tactics.
It's obviously common sense that hits on a webpage don't mean anything about votes as they aren't necessarily supporters. His whole point was the media controls who becomes president due to the average stupidity of americans....the correlation between the media and the search hits a candidate got show that the media can label candidates as good or bad and change people's decisions on who to vote for. Despite low media coverage, Ron Paul has still been extremely popular on the internet.
Thanks, Jack. True then and true now. We saw it happening.
I will be looking at Google Trends in 2012, but expect much of the same. All news outlets are full of phycological manipulations for the weak of mind and the uninformed.
BTW In my county, 95% or more are Republican, but; surprisingly, newspaper results showed an extremely high number voted for RP in the primary, but most would not split the ticket in the presidential election.
by the way news media sucks salt....im studying journalism right now...and i feel like i`m gonna spend four years getting a big fake degree so I can learn how to effectively be someone`s puppet ....
"puppet"...That does seem to be the master plan. The world will be a better place if you use the education to learn research, critical thinking and composition and NEVER affiliate with ANYTHING. Criticize ALL media the way you did my video.
this is interesting...but i wouldn`t say it means the media is lying...i would say the media really likes to talk about obama....maybe ppl are researching ron paul BECAUSE they don`t see enough of him on tv...
i know that it is speculation....i`m just throwing my thoughts out....and i figured that i could use the same data you used to prove your point to prove mine....u derived that people are interested in Ron Paul and the media doesn`t reflect that....but i could say maybe what LITTLE they saw incited them to research him....and that could account for the high incidence of internet searches for Ron Paul...
The media hardly talks about a lot of people (ie: Ralph Nader) , but Ron Paul was the only one who's internet traffic exploded high above mainstream candidates. It's like you didn't see what was in the video.
Look, I`m not saying that what you are saying is incorrect. All I`m saying is you need to take into account other factors. News media is what I like to call `dumb media`...media that shoves info down the throat of people who just sit and absorb and lack the ability or desire to think for themselves. How much of the % of people who actually watch tv are smart or cognizant enough to even comprehend anything Ron Paul said in the `2 minutes` he might have gotten air time in the media?
not as much as the number of viewers who decide hey this Obama guy is pretty smart since he speaks so eloquently...or this McCain guy has experience...though anybody with a good analytical sense could see that he`s bullshitting through his answers....and then proceed to search for them on youtube and google.....only the ones smart enough to say...oh that ron paul guy actually made sense and sounds like he knows what he`s talking about would have said `hey i`m gonna go look him up on the internet
Those people are the kind of people the news media...or media in general does not cater to. The people who want to formulate their own opinions. Naturally those people will watch the news coverage of the election and say, I don`t see enough of this Ron Paul guy, I think I`ll google him, which is why it show up so high on your little graph. Hence I wouldn`t say that the people who were searching up Ron Paul were doing it DESPITE the fact that the media was not giving him attention. I would say it
was BECAUSE they weren`t giving him enough coverage and the little bit that the intelligent audience did see, made them want to look him up. Ralph Nader does not get much searches, but maybe its because the media does not sensationalize to the the `dumb` audience, and he says nothing really too smart enough or controversial enough to attract the critically thinking viewers enough to make them want to look him up.
You are thinking and making perfectly good points, but it's all speculation and it undercounts the disparity. Paul had MASSIVE numbers. Far more than could be explained by your speculations. Never in history has a presidential "underdog" shown any metric 37% HIGHER than a "front runner". It does not happen. Apart from deliberate media suppression there is simply no logical explanation.
@minivanjack I saw a UFO once, it was shaped like a foot. It was at the end of my bed one night but when I hurried to the end of my bed to get a better look, it was gone....
Also if you put terrorism it shows that the end of 09 the media tried to promote it but the views went down witch means people are starting to wake up in my opinion
The trouble with conservatives is that they always ask rhetorical questions of their masters. The Jews control the FED and the press in the US. It's that simple.
So that flaw would account for, perhaps 5% error? Or maybe even 10% or 20% error? The video demonstrates the internet popularity of Ron Paul for those periods to be under-reported by media by factors between 200% and 500%. Looking for minor flaws in the video misses the point. Our media is intentionally lying or news services are ALL ridiculously ignorant and incompetent and making the same errors. It has to be one of those two things. If you want to trust media like that go ahead.
I'm not defending the media, I don't even live in the US, and I'm not fond of American news. My point is just that the word "popularity" is used in an undefined way and that there might be more than one explanation to the figures. I've been experimenting with som Swedish political partys. A small nationalistic party is very overrepresented in googletrends because they are more active on the net than the established partys. But they do not have as much support from the people.
It is Interesting that you would claim to know how much support the nationalist party actually has. Again, your objection to the word "popularity" is a minor point compared to the staggering difference between Internet and media interest in Ron Paul. Your challenge, even if valid, is widely insufficient to explain the discrepancy. Our media was deliberately suppressing the phenomenon. That is why 250,000 people shared the video.
Look how many times the word 'probably' appears in BLOOMBERG headlines (headlies?) these days (Dec09)
eg.
"Some Fucking Indicator regarding the crippled us economy PROBABLY rose this month!"
"Job losses PROBABLY fell by humungous fucking degree beating every stupid commie's expectation this week!; barely-educated government shill screams from high window"
"US economy PROBABLY rose higher than the one those fucking chinks have, spokespauper stated"
"Obama PROBABLY sticks cock in 1st lady's mouth while Ron Paul flies to Cambodia on back of Flying Monkeyshine; spokesretard close to deal stated"
"US economy PROBABLY recovered so much this month, you can go back to buying shit you don't need with money you don't have based on the PROBABLE rise in your property prices which might show up next month; Dollar falls, Yen rises."
television is just for entertainment!! thats the reality..dumb person always believes to mainstream media.they have boss they have directors! they are not always in truth because they are paid to say what the boss say
Yes he had more video more views... But so Did the Balloon boy Hoax.... Just because they had alot of videos out and alot of people watching.. Maybe they just like to see Stupid people..
That chart shows intrest only.. Not for good or bad.. Not get the facts right before this BS video
Putting "Pirates, Republican" in google trends leads me to believe that a pirate candidate would vastly outperform any republican candidate, given an equivalent amount of media coverage.
To be the devil's advocate here: why shouldn't the media offer coverage to those who offer them the most money? Everybody loves to hate the media, but even Ron Paul would admit they're just trying to appease their shareholders. Why shouldn't a business do everything it possibly can to secure its own interests?
With freedom of the press comes an ethical duty to report the news and not to influence the news. The corrupt mainstream media today should be forced to add a disclaimer to their news reports which are biased in nature The MSM has been provided with a great power in America and they are criminal in their abuse of that power.
They have always exhausted every effort to keep Ron out of the spotlight and to also make him look like a quack. That's really sad since he's the only one with balls big enough to stand up against the fed. He spent the better part of his career fighting for our liberties. It's sad that when they bury the Constitution completely, only then will people realize that this nation will be for sale to the highest bidder because we are bankrupt! Never give up the fight for your freedom!
This guy draws some pretty far out conclusions. How you figure net chatter with "popularity" this guy speaks but he cannot justify his angle with such flawed logic.
Poor Ron Paul. Get over it already. Why would the news cover Paul when he wasn't a candidate for the presidency? High search numbers can mean more than popularity - it can suggest people didn't know who he was and were trying to learn about him. Probably after some nut claimed aliens make the newsmedia hold him down. News coverage and search popularity SHOULD be similar, it's logical. And again, measuring youtube videos? What a joke. It's the internet, not to be taken seriously.
ive seen more logic on youtube than tv. Youtube allows you to capture the stuff that the corporate media silences. You make the same argument that obama makes about the "youtube community". Just terrible that we have people like you afraid of dissent, mocking us. Why are you afraid of dissent? Please explain. This video had all the evidence laid out, and you STILL couldnt understand!
I don't fear dissent - that's just you being too ignorant to make an argument without presuming ad hominem.
I was on-board with the notion that the media has an agenda and produces the news to suit it. Then this video becomes a campaign advertisement, and that's where I get off the wagon.
It's true that you can find insightful things on youtube, at the same time also disgusting, useless, or downright insane things as well.
This fella sounds like a birther. Think about it. If you can think.
25% unemployment, street riots and Marshall Law, which, if people don't wake up pretty soon is exactly what we'll have. The biggest problem our nation faces, more than the economy, healthcare, terrorism or whatever, are the folks who still don't realize that government is the last place we should be looking for solutions or help. Get out of debt, plant a food garden, just say no to taxes and hope everyone else does the same.
Google Trends and Youtube are not shown in this video to differentiate between US interest and foreign interest. Not all YouTube videos about Ron Paul are necessarily made by US voters. The interest in Ron Paul was not just national, but global. That could be interpreted as a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how you look at it.
Ron Paul may have been the one a lot of people on the Internet, with geography disregarded, wanted running this country. That doesn't make him the voters' choice
There is no apparent reason that Paul would have more international interest than any other candidate unless the U.S. media media was deliberately blacking out Paul, and international media was not, which was the point of "Media Caught Lying". This video demonstrates that U.S. mainstream media is strictly controlled and manipulated by some very powerful forces and agendas, probably from OUTSIDE media, unless the U.S. media is stacked with anti-Constitutionalist Progressives. Hmm.
It's interesting to note that negative comments about Ron Paul were non-existent when Obama had his post-inaugural media honeymoon. As soon as Obama showed he is a war-making money-squandering puppet of world bankers people once again come out to bash the real solutions in defense of Obalitics.
So you've never typed in a search topic in the Youtube search box and had it bring up something totally irrelevant to your inquiry? Think this would affect the statistics much? Yeah, of course it would... Although heavily flawed, your idea of this connection was extremely intelligent! I fully believe that the media is our 4th branch of government!
You are suggesting that search results account for four times as much search traffic for Paul over Obama? You're not even on the outer most fringe of reality. And your "irrelevant search result" syndrome only happens when Paul happens to be running for a President? Try again.
Ummm silly, I am a fan of Ron Paul so what you are implying is ridiculous obviously! Another question, did I say four times as much? I don't recall saying that. I gave you a compliment (you are so very welcome) and suggested you look into strengthening your implications. But I see you are nothing but an ignorant ass hat. Being articulate does not make you right or intelligent....good luck with your "research". You old bitter ignorant shit
None of those statistics are showing who's looking or how old the searcher is..
Look let's face it Ron Paul is the closest thing we have to preaching anarchy in gov't... so naturally a bunch of high school kids playing mock debate in gov't class like him. The internet is full of ignorant young'uns.
Let me ask this: How does the internet know about Ron Paul if the media didn't give him coverage?.. pfft this is a BAD analysis.. interesting.. but bad nonetheless.
"Bad analysis"? ... So your argument is that if the mainstream media does not report it we have no right to know it? If mainstream media doesn't report it it doesn't exist? You need to look at who sponsors mainstream media and start to use some critical thinking.
Yey! we found out what the media is doing! But does it matter though? Americans are too stupid to save themselves anyway!
MrOrgangina 3 days ago
OMG, the media lies to us !!!!!!! haha, nice work Jerry Day, anecdoatal evidence is fine but you can't beat good solid evidence to nail it.
royalecraig 3 days ago
@royalecraig Anecdotal? No, measured and verified. About fifty thousand times larger sampling than a gallup poll. There are no anecdotes in that video. You were not paying attention.
minivanjack 3 days ago
@minivanjack mmmm maybe I didn't do it too good but I was trying to compliment you on a great job proving beyond question that the media only presents us with the establishment's preferred choices. If the public don't see Ron Paul, they aint going to vote for him, Good Job minivan man.
royalecraig 3 days ago
@royalecraig Sorry, I misread that.
minivanjack 3 days ago
Brilliant analysis!
billhuston 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MONEY ON YOUR MIND y not t in to top bar on here paulcampbell85 and see the top tips man and you well make some money FREE tip to get you going
paulcampbell85 1 month ago
Not a big Ron Paul fan, but I agree, when we see the media ignoring a man who consistently has people looking him up on the internet, there's clearly a problem.
TakumaMimura 4 months ago
he media lies constantly. Don't think Libya is any different. We are being played as fools.
orange70383 5 months ago
You should also do a similar test on other "unpopular candidates" including the various Green Party candidates, and the less democrat candidates.
I feel that Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney also have received the same treatment. (These are the non-mainstream politicians I support.)
I should go and look at their charts.
I find all non-mainstream candidates get treated unfairly, and no matter which viewpoint they come from. This is a major problem.
ruediix 6 months ago
Ron Paul for President 2012/
YoSuperman40 7 months ago
If you're looking for blacked-out and covered-up news. Check out Whiteout Press dot com. That's what we specialize in.
whiteoutpress 8 months ago
Using searches and videos as a measure of popularity is just totally wrong.
Unless you want to claim that people like the song "Friday"
Inaccurate representation of the facts is inaccurate
sounoriginal 9 months ago
@sounoriginal "Totally Wrong"? Actually, flat unsupported denial like yours is "totally wrong". You fail to even address the fact that internet traffic on Ron Paul was, for most of the 2008 campaign period, double that of any other candidate. So let's pretend that doesn't mean anything, let's pretend Ron Paul hasn't won nearly every straw poll then and now, let's pretend that Ron Paul wasn't the only Federal elected Official to predict the economic downturns, it's only Youtube, let's pretend.
minivanjack 9 months ago
@sounoriginal You missed the point. The numbers are astronomical. Calling Obama's web traffic in 2007-2008 100%, a "marginal candidate" like Ralph Nader would have been 7%. Ron Paul's was at 200%. Look carefully at that number. It is TWICE the "leading" mainstream candidate's web traffic! And that is a sampling of 80% of Americans (internet users). Yes. That is popularity. Oh, maybe you're one of those who think people looked at Paul for "different reasons" than they look at Obama. Get real.
minivanjack 8 months ago
This is so misleading. Of course those people get more videos on youtube, because those who vote for them are mostly youths and the youth use the internet more than the older people.
madichelp0 10 months ago
@madichelp0 That is entirely not true. Mostly youths? So I guess mostly youths designed the internet, and mostly youths have youtube accounts. I think that people, mostly old people, listen to the TV too much and should try reading a book? Or wait, you must be old, but why are you on the internet?
tbscrazy12 10 months ago
@tbscrazy12 You don't have to take my word for it, there is countless of studies that show that young people use the internet more.
Oh and I don't know if I should take that "being old" as a compliment if that includes that you could make sense of my sentences. I on the other hand can't say the same for you, as I still after reading the second sentence a few times meant as it started as a statement and ended as a question.
The fun part of it all is that I'm not even old, I'm even less than 20.
madichelp0 10 months ago
@madichelp0 You never addressed my argument and you didn't list any of those studies...
tbscrazy12 10 months ago
@tbscrazy12 If a fast google search is too much for you then here:
(.)pewinternet(.)org/Infographics/2010/Internet-acess-by-age-group-over-time.aspx
(.)csu(.)nisra(.)gov(.)uk/Individual_internet_access_by_sex_and_age.htm
(.)statistics(.)gov(.)uk/pdfdir/inta0806.pdf
For the sake of conspiracy theorists, please stop posting so you all don't look so stupid. You and people like you are the sole reason no one takes you seriously.
madichelp0 10 months ago
@madichelp0 Try researching a database or library fag.
tbscrazy12 10 months ago
@tbscrazy12 So, instead of following your own requirement on my sources you just say "do the research" like all other conspiracy theorists. Well I did the research, and until you have more legit sources saying otherwise, my story is the correct one. That's how science works, and if you can't accept that, then you can...can...just keep being yourself, because that's probably the lowest one can get in terms of science.
madichelp0 10 months ago
@tbscrazy12 "fag"?
If I knew that there was a global conspiracy then the group "conspiracy theorists" would in my eyes look like a part of the conspiracy. It's like you delibretly try to look so stupid that people wanna stay away from you (and then all the theories you have). I mean seriously, did you even read what you wrote before you posted it?
madichelp0 10 months ago
Oh my goodness man, you are very intelligent good sir!
I give a lot of respect to you.
I knew it, these media disgraces are lying to all of us, they can't conceal the truth that they so want to hide.
IAMLelouchVBritannia 10 months ago
Ron Paul FTW! i love the Man!!
andyOsalek 11 months ago
Media controls the election process. Who controls the media? The nation within nations, who also controls the money system and more. The Nutwork behind media controls the money and the Government (the Law) and more. Do you get it?
elbuggo 11 months ago
Simple. If Fox doesn't like a Republican, or favors another, they will bury the candidate. In the last elections, they stupidly picked CT senatorial candidate Linda McMahon over Peter Schiff. Schiff is the real deal, but Fox liked McMahon. Of course, she got clobbered in the general elections. MSNBC, CNN and NPR would never dare promote a Republican, hence they stayed away from anyone who was a real threat to Obama.
ElKabong61 11 months ago
The mysterious hockey stick graph rears its' ugly head once again... Go figure.
BenZeneProject 1 year ago
Not a surprise. As a Ron Paul follower I saw and felt the media choose the presidential winner long before the "election" while sidelining Ron Paul. That's why I switched my TV off for good.
Victord2000 1 year ago
Thanks for this video. Very informational! Good work!
HoGraz 1 year ago
another point to make, is how all the media sponsored debates would give time preference to certain candidates. During the end of the primaries, the media had a love fest with McCain and Romney, so they would give 2-3 times as much speaking time at debates over Ron Paul. Fair and balanced?
SomeFunkyDude79 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
real asian women #lushfmlk.info#
helarymax 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul would win an election for president of the world.
NOWisNWO 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
best Asian women #lushfmlk.info#
mithnibrige 1 year ago
Media & lying go hand in hand. click justice party UK. for greatest news.
justicepartyuk 1 year ago
Ron Paul would get rid of unconstitutional corrupt government so the media which is owned by globalist elements in our government (who want you to be a slave and have brainwashed you all for 80 years) who want to control the elections. They are rigging the elections directly and by keeping people from fiinding out the truth about the candidates and their beliefs in the founding principles in constitutional government. Ron Paul and Libertarians = American freedom. Left or Right puppets = slavery.
Libertyracer 1 year ago
@Libertyracer Don't be in denial. The Federal Reserve that issues the paper money to all but a few countries in the world would let Paul live for about two minutes if he threatened their little money scam. You really need a reality check for you seem to be in denial about the power of the Rothschild's and Rockefeller's and the other families in this group. Don't feel too bad very few know the story of Jekyll Island and the takeover of our money supply . Peace be with you and good luck!
larry1369 1 year ago
Stumbled on this via Stubleupon. This was a very thought-inspiring video. Thank you for creating it.
etickettoride 1 year ago
yea the media lies. where have u been for the last 80 years
Shatflappington 1 year ago
THE MEDIA LIES ALL THE TIME "GET OVER IT" OR MOVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY. move to siberia so that you can eat reindeer guts for dinner every night you ungratefull butthole.
Shatflappington 1 year ago
UMMMMM...Excuse me, Sir, but Ron Paul is a member of the JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, which has ties to the CIA and naziism, and they have their own agenda.
He is a freemason who does freemasonic handshakes, and, therefore, is controlled.
MrDuffy81 1 year ago
ummm.... Fox is the biggest media company with the most viewers and they supported McCain. Also more videos is different than more views of those videos. Third the more unknown someone is perhaps the more people who TRY TO FIND THINGS OUT ABOUT HIM and since there not on the media they turn to the internet.
Also this is something called correlation which has nothing to do with causation. Ron Paul was pushed to the side because he was a third party and all third parties are pushed out.
Thanatos6619 1 year ago
@Thanatos6619 Funny! We both started out with the same thought..."UMMM" LOL
MrDuffy81 1 year ago
Obama media "lovefest" sums it up well. Obama can do no wrong in their eyes. LESS GOVERNMENT=MORE FREEDOM! It really is that simple.
gilmour0009 1 year ago
Does this Bozo think he's Andy Rooney??? Hey Jerry Baby...try to develop your own style. What a hack
mdlink1 1 year ago
I agree with all you present, but who is controlling the media and Why. I know, do you?
If you try to tell people you will be called all kinds of names.
So how do we expose evil? Even Jesus tried 2,000 years ago.
StigmataBOB1 1 year ago
WOW- you should make a video.
gilmour0009 1 year ago
Statistically speaking the i virtually no difference in the strength of a test that uses a million samples and one that uses few thousand samples. And a simple count of hits on anything does not tell you wether it's popular or infamous. You even demonstrate that yourself by saying - "This video has attracted a lot of attention from hater-trolls"
I'm not saying that RP doesn't deserve more coverage than he gets, just that the "evidence" in the video is at best circumstantial.
Tapecutter59 1 year ago
Could it be because Ron Paul has been around the public eye longer than Obama and has had a pretty large following from young adult demographic on the internet because of his views, especially of those on drugs? Because of his appeal with this demographic, he had a lot more publicity on the internet than just about any other politician running. Obama was pretty unknown at this time, and it wasn't until he started making public appearances and speeches that people saw what he was about.
Treniths 1 year ago
And yet, none of the web geek love-fest played out in the election.
Schtickbass 1 year ago
check out oprah winfrey and ron paul - she owns tv but ron paul still has huge popularity - almost as much.
lunawebs 1 year ago
RON PAUL CAN STILL WIN
FnordPerfect 1 year ago
Very interesting comparison of search results. As for myself, I don't even bother with TV media because of the vast amount of unbiased information on the internet. If not unbiased, it is always easy to view several sides of items simultaneously.
viperabs 1 year ago
I don't understand how a Google search topic translates to popularity. Is Jerry Day suggesting that because someone's web presence - in the form of YouTube videos, articles or comments - is large, then their popularity is correspondingly large?
fancymonster 1 year ago
its not about the vote, its about the media and their impression on our minds, which is relevant in this interesting study. Whats next? A big face on our TV telling us to "Bow to Obama, Or Die"?
TheOne2Ask 1 year ago
Jerry,
Ron Paul is a lunatic, but you make a very good point in this video.
thebronze 1 year ago
Or have you been brainwashed not to recognize when someone is telling you the truth? We've all been brainwashed the last 50 years to accept unconstitutional levels of government intrusion into our lives that have created the Nanny Welfare state we now live in as slaves. Maybe you should be informed rather than just opinionated?
Libertyracer 1 year ago
It's because Ron Paul was in Bruno and the media doesn't care about that lol.
siczyk 1 year ago
ah Google Owns Youtube if you have not remembered. Media is TV, Internet, Newspaper,etc. Its just own runs them.
AZNWOKZ 1 year ago
Internet > Broadcast Media
XozaShadow 1 year ago
Great Video.
Superb Reporting.
I searched Barack just now. the coverage, after inauguration... pathetic.
Thanks.
ThePeoplesPolls 1 year ago
I am so glad you posted this! thank you thank you thank you!
leasecleaning 1 year ago
His assumption that searching on "Ron Paul" is a vote for the same is absurd. I personally believe that there were millions of people with the question "who the hell IS Ron Paul?" See, that's hardly a popularity vote at all, but he's counting it as one!
BTW - Who says he's the "only one that understands economics."
craigmoritz 1 year ago
But doesn't it seem unusual to you that when millions of people are asking, "Who is Ron Paul?" the news media makes little to no effort to answer that question? When someone is getting 3x the attention of another candidate on the Internet, doesn't it seem a little strange that the media doesn't follow suit?
At the recent CPAC convention Ron Paul won the straw poll wit 31% of the vote, beating Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. That's pretty significant.
smiledammit24 1 year ago
The significance is that it is a distortion of fact to state that a search is any indication of popularity. As for "beating" Mit Romney, who will NEVER be elected on account of his religious beliefs, and Sarah Palin, who has had more press than anybody, big deal! You are trying to read what you want into the data. The reality is Ron Paul is NOT a viable candidate.
craigmoritz 1 year ago
I get your point. Search /= Popularity. What I'm saying is that in a perfect world, the amount of media attention a person gets should be relative to the amount of *interest* in that person. Ron Paul would be a viable candidate if he received the same amount of attention as Sarah Palin (who seems to have no actually skill other than being in the news) and Mitt Romney, who as you mentioned is highly discriminated against.
smiledammit24 1 year ago
You say Ron Paul is not a viable candidate. That makes you a moron.
saxster 1 year ago
@saxster did you watch the whole video?
ThePeoplesPolls 1 year ago
Yes.
saxster 1 year ago
Explain to me how he is not a viable candidate again? Any candidate should be viable if the people, NOT the mainstream media determine there is an interest in the man's stance on the issues.
Auriconxl 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You guys are stupid. MSM is full of proffesionals that will never lie to you, how else would you get your news? I rely on MSM 100% (except fox news lol) and you conspiracy theorists are stupid fuckers if you think rich people or the government control CNN or MSNBC or BBC. You know what else is funny? some of you believe they're actually aliens, LOL! stupid nerds. 9/11 was done by terrorists, shut the fuck up.
MareBellator 1 year ago
Census 2010 is Anti-American and Anti-Freedom. The information gathered WILL BE USED AGAINST THE PEOPLE! The Pagans running this census could use it to gather information on Christians. 4AM wakeup call and a ride to a FEMA deathcamp - BEWARE!
See NWO Solution
Godisyoursolution 1 year ago
@Godisyoursolution:
You're an idiot. There are legitimate concerns that people can have with regards to the census, but fearing that it is run by pagans to lock Christians in death camps is nonsense. If you can support an assertion like that, then people might take you seriously, but since I know you cannot, maybe just let people who are not paranoid discuss the census and what may or may not bother them about it.
And why pagans? Why not be afraid that Muslims, Jews, or Atheists ran it?
S201676 1 year ago
you are absolutely retarded. and "new world order" was a reference to the collapse of the bipolar (cold war) system and the establishment of the unipolar (US dominated) system that existed throughout the 1990s and parts of the 00s. please shut the fuck up.
pihingler 1 year ago
THANK YOU
smiledammit24 1 year ago
You need to buy a dictionary. You keep using the f-word as though it meant something. Learn some new words so you can better express yourself without offending.
nlewis59 1 year ago
shut the fuck up, jackass.
pihingler 1 year ago
5 stars! We all know the news media's unprecedented control of exposure and opinion especially regarding political candidates. This is proof in numbers. Thanks.
bluesingincat 1 year ago
Well, I had no idea Ron Paul was the president of the internet. Makes me wonder who was the president of the newspapers. Or talk radio. Or late night talk shows. Search popularity has nothing to do with supporting a candidate. I searched Sarah Palin more than I did anyone else and Lord knows I can't stand that woman. However, this was a very interesting video and I will further research the validity and importance of internet vs. mainstream media coverage.
blaquejaxx 1 year ago
what does it say about Huckabee? his campaign was run on a shoestring, to boot lol how did he do with no money?
heycolslaw 1 year ago
Top notch commentary! Thank you Mr. Day.
gaeilgesinger 1 year ago
the main stream media is a conman for corporations and governments, media gets paid billions $ to spread the propaganda, news reporters become instant millionairs, and the parasites ( governments and corporations) keep their lies and cover ups intact.. you are being lied to every day and its about time you stupid people wake up..
neozzyinu 1 year ago
Our political system needs to go from a bi-political system to include more parties. The system won't allow for a real swatch of political ideologies. And hence, we have a polarized political system without any real debate and compromise. Both sides claim, "either you with us or against us".
Great video.
TroutEhCuss 1 year ago
This video is worth a subscription. Information I can truly use on my own...and damn if it isn't interesting enough to pay attention to.
HotaruZoku 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please help to support a legitimate investigation! 9/11 was a setup. The collapse of the American economy is a setup. Fight for your country. The future is in our hands! For interesting, scientifically based information, please visit:
theconspiracyexposed.blogspot. (com)
Please leave your thoughtful comments and share pertinent information. Thanks!
barquedust 1 year ago
The Ron Paul fans didn't show up at the polls, obviously. Too many tinfoil hat types and people who believed their vote wouldn't matter, so they just didn't show up.
Thanks a lot, you jackasses - every one of you INTELLECTUALLY HONEST in choosing Paul, yet because of your laziness or more likely refusal to vote, the other guys won.
mowriter 1 year ago
@mowriter Here's an idea, maybe you should look at some of the primary election irregularities and also consider that most 'voters' are so dumbed down and ignorant that they weren't even actively researching any candidates, the media would say jump and they'd see how high they could go. Then when you have a lot of passionate people who ARE paying attention and trying to talk to others, the media convinces them that someone's a wingnut and can't win anyway so they go with an appointed candidate.
Nobius420 1 year ago
Nobius: irregularities I can buy...though that's more troubling than the abject laziness in our culture. I agree 100% re: dumbed down and ignorant.
mowriter 1 year ago
Nobius: part of my earlier comment on not enough Paul voters reminds me of my own vote for NADER in 2000. I honestly voted on principal, only to get thanked by neo-con mouth breathers for not voting my fear like they did (grrrrrr). That Paul would come from the ranks of the Right...REEEEALLY screws with my comfortable paradigm assuming all rightists are empire builders and equally fast and loose with the people's money (LOL).
mowriter 1 year ago
This man is right on. I knew nothing about Ron Paul till well into the elections. I questioned why the media wasnt giving us information on him. They refused to. When the elections happened I watched him get 33% in one state and within several seconds they deleted every vote from him. On tube I started listening to what he had to say. I was amazed. He was the only candidate that made sense. I found out then that both parties hated him with a passion. I now follow Ron closely.
conservativetothecor 1 year ago
Let's see... If I got this right Ron Paul mopped up on the internet but fell flat in national media attention and likewise in the popular vote count. Guess all those internet crawlers didn't vote or maybe they didn't like what they saw.....?
w7qho 1 year ago
Nice spin Jerry, but misleading. Google & Youtube don't directly measure popularity or preference. Frequency of hits isn't a measure of independent hits nor does it suggest people have a preference for a particular candidate. RP's "popularity" could simple be a function of people trying to learn more about him without necessarily meaning they prefer him. I agree with you that the media is biased and perhaps they didn't give RP a fare shake. But you seem to be engaging in similar tactics.
psetke 1 year ago
@psetke - excellent point, and I'm sure one that Jerry doesn't recognize.
flyingfish182 1 year ago
It's obviously common sense that hits on a webpage don't mean anything about votes as they aren't necessarily supporters. His whole point was the media controls who becomes president due to the average stupidity of americans....the correlation between the media and the search hits a candidate got show that the media can label candidates as good or bad and change people's decisions on who to vote for. Despite low media coverage, Ron Paul has still been extremely popular on the internet.
ImInCommand 1 year ago
Thanks, Jack. True then and true now. We saw it happening.
I will be looking at Google Trends in 2012, but expect much of the same. All news outlets are full of phycological manipulations for the weak of mind and the uninformed.
BTW In my county, 95% or more are Republican, but; surprisingly, newspaper results showed an extremely high number voted for RP in the primary, but most would not split the ticket in the presidential election.
HDHV30 1 year ago
Is it just me or does Jerry sound a LOT like Crichton from Red Dwarf?
decoy256 1 year ago
by the way news media sucks salt....im studying journalism right now...and i feel like i`m gonna spend four years getting a big fake degree so I can learn how to effectively be someone`s puppet ....
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
TheLiselErienne:
"puppet"...That does seem to be the master plan. The world will be a better place if you use the education to learn research, critical thinking and composition and NEVER affiliate with ANYTHING. Criticize ALL media the way you did my video.
minivanjack 1 year ago
this is interesting...but i wouldn`t say it means the media is lying...i would say the media really likes to talk about obama....maybe ppl are researching ron paul BECAUSE they don`t see enough of him on tv...
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
TheLiselErienne:
"maybe people are..." pure speculation. At least I had references.
minivanjack 1 year ago
i know that it is speculation....i`m just throwing my thoughts out....and i figured that i could use the same data you used to prove your point to prove mine....u derived that people are interested in Ron Paul and the media doesn`t reflect that....but i could say maybe what LITTLE they saw incited them to research him....and that could account for the high incidence of internet searches for Ron Paul...
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
TheLiselErienne:
The media hardly talks about a lot of people (ie: Ralph Nader) , but Ron Paul was the only one who's internet traffic exploded high above mainstream candidates. It's like you didn't see what was in the video.
minivanjack 1 year ago
Look, I`m not saying that what you are saying is incorrect. All I`m saying is you need to take into account other factors. News media is what I like to call `dumb media`...media that shoves info down the throat of people who just sit and absorb and lack the ability or desire to think for themselves. How much of the % of people who actually watch tv are smart or cognizant enough to even comprehend anything Ron Paul said in the `2 minutes` he might have gotten air time in the media?
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
not as much as the number of viewers who decide hey this Obama guy is pretty smart since he speaks so eloquently...or this McCain guy has experience...though anybody with a good analytical sense could see that he`s bullshitting through his answers....and then proceed to search for them on youtube and google.....only the ones smart enough to say...oh that ron paul guy actually made sense and sounds like he knows what he`s talking about would have said `hey i`m gonna go look him up on the internet
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
Those people are the kind of people the news media...or media in general does not cater to. The people who want to formulate their own opinions. Naturally those people will watch the news coverage of the election and say, I don`t see enough of this Ron Paul guy, I think I`ll google him, which is why it show up so high on your little graph. Hence I wouldn`t say that the people who were searching up Ron Paul were doing it DESPITE the fact that the media was not giving him attention. I would say it
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
was BECAUSE they weren`t giving him enough coverage and the little bit that the intelligent audience did see, made them want to look him up. Ralph Nader does not get much searches, but maybe its because the media does not sensationalize to the the `dumb` audience, and he says nothing really too smart enough or controversial enough to attract the critically thinking viewers enough to make them want to look him up.
TheLiselErienne 1 year ago
TheLiselErianne:
You are thinking and making perfectly good points, but it's all speculation and it undercounts the disparity. Paul had MASSIVE numbers. Far more than could be explained by your speculations. Never in history has a presidential "underdog" shown any metric 37% HIGHER than a "front runner". It does not happen. Apart from deliberate media suppression there is simply no logical explanation.
minivanjack 1 year ago
@minivanjack I saw a UFO once, it was shaped like a foot. It was at the end of my bed one night but when I hurried to the end of my bed to get a better look, it was gone....
story46 11 months ago
ron paul u go boyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Jsworld1980 1 year ago
Also if you put terrorism it shows that the end of 09 the media tried to promote it but the views went down witch means people are starting to wake up in my opinion
cleancut05 1 year ago
I put illumanti in this and in mid 09 it seriously peaked for a month or 2 the died down, can anyone elaborate on this, Nice vid thanks for info
cleancut05 1 year ago
If Ron Paul was elected, he would end up like Kennedy.
goosenamedbrian 2 years ago
You have an excellent speaking voice. Excellent
MrCone223 2 years ago
The trouble with conservatives is that they always ask rhetorical questions of their masters. The Jews control the FED and the press in the US. It's that simple.
WEREFEAT 2 years ago
It's not that simple. Those who control are not all Jews and all Jews do not control. To focus on race instead of deed is truly ignorant folly.
minivanjack 2 years ago
The argument is flawed. There is a differens between searching a name and voting for a person.
FoolieFishing 2 years ago
So that flaw would account for, perhaps 5% error? Or maybe even 10% or 20% error? The video demonstrates the internet popularity of Ron Paul for those periods to be under-reported by media by factors between 200% and 500%. Looking for minor flaws in the video misses the point. Our media is intentionally lying or news services are ALL ridiculously ignorant and incompetent and making the same errors. It has to be one of those two things. If you want to trust media like that go ahead.
minivanjack 2 years ago
I'm not defending the media, I don't even live in the US, and I'm not fond of American news. My point is just that the word "popularity" is used in an undefined way and that there might be more than one explanation to the figures. I've been experimenting with som Swedish political partys. A small nationalistic party is very overrepresented in googletrends because they are more active on the net than the established partys. But they do not have as much support from the people.
FoolieFishing 2 years ago
It is Interesting that you would claim to know how much support the nationalist party actually has. Again, your objection to the word "popularity" is a minor point compared to the staggering difference between Internet and media interest in Ron Paul. Your challenge, even if valid, is widely insufficient to explain the discrepancy. Our media was deliberately suppressing the phenomenon. That is why 250,000 people shared the video.
minivanjack 2 years ago
What a joke the usa's media has become!
Look how many times the word 'probably' appears in BLOOMBERG headlines (headlies?) these days (Dec09)
eg.
"Some Fucking Indicator regarding the crippled us economy PROBABLY rose this month!"
"Job losses PROBABLY fell by humungous fucking degree beating every stupid commie's expectation this week!; barely-educated government shill screams from high window"
"US economy PROBABLY rose higher than the one those fucking chinks have, spokespauper stated"
QED
flangelet 2 years ago
Bloomberg Nov09
"Obama PROBABLY sticks cock in 1st lady's mouth while Ron Paul flies to Cambodia on back of Flying Monkeyshine; spokesretard close to deal stated"
"US economy PROBABLY recovered so much this month, you can go back to buying shit you don't need with money you don't have based on the PROBABLE rise in your property prices which might show up next month; Dollar falls, Yen rises."
flangelet 2 years ago
I read Blomberg for a laugh each day.
Here's a real one just in case you thought I was shitting you;
2009Dec03
"Service Industries in U.S. Probably Grew at Faster Pace as Recovery Spread"
Probably, hur?
Not actually', then?
'Probably' constitutes news these day, eh america?
flangelet 2 years ago
So the media own the american people.
GisleAune 2 years ago
ye like thats a surprise haha
ipimees 2 years ago
no, just the world.
addadhdnarc 2 years ago
Popular on the Internet =/= people wanting to vote for him.
I don't think this guy understands why Ron Paul has so many hits and videos lol.
stratman06 2 years ago
Here's one thing Ron Paul doesn't understand: Science
StewieSwan 2 years ago
television is just for entertainment!! thats the reality..dumb person always believes to mainstream media.they have boss they have directors! they are not always in truth because they are paid to say what the boss say
TheMadafada 2 years ago
OH look how many videos BUSH had out...
He is a Monkey shit from another planet... He had alot of videos and views... ALL FOR LAUGHS... get it right..
Obama is Liked Ron paul is a Dipshit and a whiner. No one wants a whiner
adam3176 2 years ago
Your rhetoric sucks but, I agree with it. I meant that in a good way.
addadhdnarc 2 years ago
Yes he had more video more views... But so Did the Balloon boy Hoax.... Just because they had alot of videos out and alot of people watching.. Maybe they just like to see Stupid people..
That chart shows intrest only.. Not for good or bad.. Not get the facts right before this BS video
adam3176 2 years ago
Putting "Pirates, Republican" in google trends leads me to believe that a pirate candidate would vastly outperform any republican candidate, given an equivalent amount of media coverage.
To be the devil's advocate here: why shouldn't the media offer coverage to those who offer them the most money? Everybody loves to hate the media, but even Ron Paul would admit they're just trying to appease their shareholders. Why shouldn't a business do everything it possibly can to secure its own interests?
Thurguston 2 years ago
Who is "offering the media more money" and why would that affect Ron Paul?
minivanjack 2 years ago
They should - and we should point out that 'the news' is not truthful information, but profitable information -- just like The National Enquirer.
nayjevin 2 years ago
With freedom of the press comes an ethical duty to report the news and not to influence the news. The corrupt mainstream media today should be forced to add a disclaimer to their news reports which are biased in nature The MSM has been provided with a great power in America and they are criminal in their abuse of that power.
tolynette 2 years ago
They have always exhausted every effort to keep Ron out of the spotlight and to also make him look like a quack. That's really sad since he's the only one with balls big enough to stand up against the fed. He spent the better part of his career fighting for our liberties. It's sad that when they bury the Constitution completely, only then will people realize that this nation will be for sale to the highest bidder because we are bankrupt! Never give up the fight for your freedom!
tubecat72072 2 years ago
The media needs a slap in the face and a kick in the crotch.
Luxoran 2 years ago
Awesome video.
wonderbread93 2 years ago
This guy draws some pretty far out conclusions. How you figure net chatter with "popularity" this guy speaks but he cannot justify his angle with such flawed logic.
BraniusBalki 2 years ago
Uh, I hate to break it to you, Jack.
He just told you how he figured it.
Wait a minute....
You must have come to the far out conclusions, from flawed logic when you ...umm...voted for obama?
The numbers speak for themselves.
The money Paul raised also spoke pretty loudly.
But guess what?
The media spoke too.
But they were speaking about what they were PAID to speak.
And you took it. Hook, line and sinker.
AzBirdDog 2 years ago
Who controls our media?
The U.S. Council on Foreign Relations is a thinktank where our government and our media can secretly develop propaganda.
They can create illusions and tell you it's reality.
However, skilled physics know that certain recent events are scientifically impossible.
There was no terrorist attack on 9/11
There is no war on terror.
The big money is taking over the big oil market.
Nothing more...
JZJYRWO 2 years ago
Poor Ron Paul. Get over it already. Why would the news cover Paul when he wasn't a candidate for the presidency? High search numbers can mean more than popularity - it can suggest people didn't know who he was and were trying to learn about him. Probably after some nut claimed aliens make the newsmedia hold him down. News coverage and search popularity SHOULD be similar, it's logical. And again, measuring youtube videos? What a joke. It's the internet, not to be taken seriously.
muddro420 2 years ago
ive seen more logic on youtube than tv. Youtube allows you to capture the stuff that the corporate media silences. You make the same argument that obama makes about the "youtube community". Just terrible that we have people like you afraid of dissent, mocking us. Why are you afraid of dissent? Please explain. This video had all the evidence laid out, and you STILL couldnt understand!
mmmmmarcus 2 years ago
I don't fear dissent - that's just you being too ignorant to make an argument without presuming ad hominem.
I was on-board with the notion that the media has an agenda and produces the news to suit it. Then this video becomes a campaign advertisement, and that's where I get off the wagon.
It's true that you can find insightful things on youtube, at the same time also disgusting, useless, or downright insane things as well.
This fella sounds like a birther. Think about it. If you can think.
muddro420 2 years ago
As a ron paul supporter, i can no longer speak to you.
You are my enemy. Good day.
mmmmmarcus 2 years ago
go to "google trends" and type "porn, jesus". surprising?
shutemdwn 2 years ago
Comment removed
ViveLaLiberty 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Lesbian Feet - __UXPORNTUBE{.}COM__
BARBIESmith1002 2 years ago
This is a formidable presentation, well done.
FuckFeminists 2 years ago
First, Thank you. This was a well presented opinion/hypothesis. i'm not sure what to classify it as.
What do you think it would take to get people angry/concerned enough to fix the mess we're in for ourselves and not depend on the government.
gr8fantasy 2 years ago
25% unemployment, street riots and Marshall Law, which, if people don't wake up pretty soon is exactly what we'll have. The biggest problem our nation faces, more than the economy, healthcare, terrorism or whatever, are the folks who still don't realize that government is the last place we should be looking for solutions or help. Get out of debt, plant a food garden, just say no to taxes and hope everyone else does the same.
minivanjack 2 years ago
Marshall Law? Do you mean martial law?
garyhouy52 2 years ago
Martial Law. Thank you.
minivanjack 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. jilo
SterlingSadler 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. FTYGFH
packrellerey 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. wegg
JuligJars 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice work. keep it up. mean time come for social media marketing for esteembpo**com fdguhoe
SterlingSadler 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. dfgh
WilmerDow 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. HGJYT
packrellerey 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice work. keep it up. mean time come for social media marketing for esteembpo**com
kwoodward80 2 years ago
It's hard to find videos this good. Thanks!
avidalocan 2 years ago
Thank you for exposing the truth... 5stars!!
TonganSoIja63 2 years ago
Youtube and Google do so act the same there run by the same company.
SebastianMcK 2 years ago
Google Trends and Youtube are not shown in this video to differentiate between US interest and foreign interest. Not all YouTube videos about Ron Paul are necessarily made by US voters. The interest in Ron Paul was not just national, but global. That could be interpreted as a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how you look at it.
Ron Paul may have been the one a lot of people on the Internet, with geography disregarded, wanted running this country. That doesn't make him the voters' choice
ZachsMind 2 years ago
There is no apparent reason that Paul would have more international interest than any other candidate unless the U.S. media media was deliberately blacking out Paul, and international media was not, which was the point of "Media Caught Lying". This video demonstrates that U.S. mainstream media is strictly controlled and manipulated by some very powerful forces and agendas, probably from OUTSIDE media, unless the U.S. media is stacked with anti-Constitutionalist Progressives. Hmm.
minivanjack 2 years ago
It's interesting to note that negative comments about Ron Paul were non-existent when Obama had his post-inaugural media honeymoon. As soon as Obama showed he is a war-making money-squandering puppet of world bankers people once again come out to bash the real solutions in defense of Obalitics.
minivanjack 2 years ago
So you've never typed in a search topic in the Youtube search box and had it bring up something totally irrelevant to your inquiry? Think this would affect the statistics much? Yeah, of course it would... Although heavily flawed, your idea of this connection was extremely intelligent! I fully believe that the media is our 4th branch of government!
kellybellows1 2 years ago
You are suggesting that search results account for four times as much search traffic for Paul over Obama? You're not even on the outer most fringe of reality. And your "irrelevant search result" syndrome only happens when Paul happens to be running for a President? Try again.
minivanjack 2 years ago
Ummm silly, I am a fan of Ron Paul so what you are implying is ridiculous obviously! Another question, did I say four times as much? I don't recall saying that. I gave you a compliment (you are so very welcome) and suggested you look into strengthening your implications. But I see you are nothing but an ignorant ass hat. Being articulate does not make you right or intelligent....good luck with your "research". You old bitter ignorant shit
kellybellows1 2 years ago
No, you didn't say four times as much, Google trends did. It was in the video. What video were you watching?
minivanjack 2 years ago
Excellent video! keep up the good work.
bigdanmahony 2 years ago
You are right on with this video.
Looks like Rand Paul just may be running for Senator in Kentucky. Let's hope Bunting decides not to run.
RandPaul2010(.)com
That will prep Rand to be VP in 2012.
Ron Paul/Rand Paul 2012
ONLY Doctors WILL HEAL Our Country
HISTORY that We The People WILL Definitely get behind!!
"Switch to Gold, the Fed WILL Fold"
NoBailout4Banksters 2 years ago
None of those statistics are showing who's looking or how old the searcher is..
Look let's face it Ron Paul is the closest thing we have to preaching anarchy in gov't... so naturally a bunch of high school kids playing mock debate in gov't class like him. The internet is full of ignorant young'uns.
Let me ask this: How does the internet know about Ron Paul if the media didn't give him coverage?.. pfft this is a BAD analysis.. interesting.. but bad nonetheless.
I do admit the media is BS.
rosamyluna 2 years ago
"Bad analysis"? ... So your argument is that if the mainstream media does not report it we have no right to know it? If mainstream media doesn't report it it doesn't exist? You need to look at who sponsors mainstream media and start to use some critical thinking.
minivanjack 2 years ago