In short, the more they’re whining, the more we’re winning.

Except when you’re not.

What picture am I supposed to get from YouTube? I search Barack Obama, and my search returned 439k results. His official channel has 2019 videos and 211,446 subscribers. By comparison, a search for Ron Paul returned 297k results. His official 2008 campaign channel has 794 videos and 110,996 subscribers. His official 2012 channel has 55 videos and 26,453 subscribers. Honestly, what am I supposed to be seeing here? Certainly not dominance.

With regard to Facebook, having multiple pages isn’t necessarily a good thing. But with regard to the claim that Paul is dominating, a recent study by Engage sheds some light on the topic. The study shows that Paul is frequently mentioned on Facebook, but so are Cain, Romney, etc. Unfortunately, what is not shown is how the candidates were being talked about, i.e., positively, negatively or neutral.

Ron Paul has done quite well on Twitter. If you go to Trendistic, you can compare Ron Paul against Mitt Romney and Herman Cain. For the most part, Paul was received more mentions on Twitter except when Herman Cain briefly overtook him.

As a hack, social media is a useful tool, but winning elections still comes down to what Hunter S. Thompson wrote in his book Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ‘72:

Political organization is basically a matter of list keeping. You canvass a state by foot and by phone to find out who is for you, who is against you, and who is uncommitted. Once you have the list, you cross off the ones against you, barrage the uncommitted with pleas and information, and make sure your supporters get to the polls.

Social media can help you achieve this, but for now, nothing beats shoe leather and a phone. Good luck on turning around Tumblr I guess. Maybe I just follow a lot of libertarians et al, because I see just as much Paul love as I do Paul hate.

(Source: johnnygoldwater)