ron paul

Tuesday was the day of the Ron Paul Revolution transition into the new Campaign for Liberty headed by former Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul from Texas. Over 12,000 people attended the rally some from as far away as Georgia and New York who all drove to Minneapolis, Minnesota just to take part in the finally of the campaign.

Many young people were in attendance who expressed their disenchantment with the two party system, the war in Iraq, health care, and more.

The Convention was designed as a counter convention to the Republican National Convention across the Mississippi in St. Paul, Minnesota where they say their Revolution Continues. A major component the Campaign for Liberty lists is to gain a "foothold in political life at every level of government by expanding our precinct leader program."

Below is a quick video compilation of some interviews I did and what it was like in the event on Tuesday night. It was filled with a lot of great energy and enthusiasm as you'll see.

Crossposted from Rock the Trail

CIRCLE has finally released their fact sheet summary of youth turnout in the presidential primary contests. The numbers are much the same as what we reported last week. Here's what you need to know:

• In the states for which data is available, 6.5 million young voters (17 - 29) participated in either the Democratic or Republican Presidential primaries.
• Overall turnout rose from 9% (recorded in 2000, the last comparable cycle), to 17%.
• This is the third consecutive cycle in which youth turnout increased.
• This is the first time youth turnout has increased three cycles in a row since 18 - 20 year olds were first granted the right to vote in 1971.
• In the 17 states for which comparable exit polling is available from 2000, all but one state (New York) saw an increase in youth turnout.
• Of those 17 states, 10 saw at least a 10 point jump in youth turnout (NH, MA, GA, MO, TX, TN, IA, MS, OH, OK).
• Obama captured the Democratic youth vote 60 - 38%.

Also remember from the Rock the Vote's fact sheet and last week's post mortem that young voter's share of the electorate rose from 9.4% in 2004 to 14.3% in 2008, and young voters participated in the Democratic primary over the GOP primary at a rate of 2 - 1.

The most interesting piece of new data in the CIRCLE report is the candidate breakdown in the GOP contest. More young Republicans voted against John McCain than voted for him, and he barely inched out Mike Huckabee to capture a plurality of youth votes among the top 4 candidates. As for Ron Paul - the so-called GOP youth candidate, he only received 10% of the youth vote. Can we finally put to rest the fiction that Ron Paul is the conservative youth candidate? At best he had a highly tech savvy core of youth supporters that amounted to very little at the polls.

It was reported yesterday that Congressman Paul is holding his own "shadow convention" this year. It will be interesting to see who shows up.

Campaigns and Elections Magazine is about as wonky as you get outside of polling data, and aside from it being fairly establishment they do tend to talk about some outside the box ideas. I think I've seen them acknowledge young voters three times in my 2 year subscription I bought. Last month's issue headlined their picture of what looked like a Millennial in a South Park t-shirt, listening to an iPod, and whistling as he walked down the street carrying a copy of The Fountainhead.

The piece looks at what they say is a growing political group that they have lovingly deemed Cultural Libertarians.

I was shocked as a devoted South Park fan who owns an iPod and (only rarely) admits in certain circles that I have read Atlas Shrugged more than once. I was suddenly fearful that perhaps I had indeed mislabeled myself a loyal progressive democrat.

(I would link you to the article but Campaigns and Elections has yet to figure out how to use the internet. Only the existing magazines pieces are available not back issues, and the search function only takes you to a page which amusingly enough reads "search.") While its tempting to write a blog about not letting bad websites happen to you... I'll soldier onward.

".... recognizing that politics is a lagging indicator of American society, which has been moving with broadband-like speed into an era of Do It Yourself culture and not-so-rugged individualism. Think of what Americans have come to expect and insist upon in their social and economic lives: increasingly individualized service, culture and consumer products at every level ("You want soy with that decaf mocha frappuccino?"); more and more control over education, healthcare, and retirement; and a nearly full throttled embrace of lifestyle tolerance and pluralism that was unimaginable in a pre-Netflix, pre-"Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," pre-iPod America."

I put down my half-caf latte and clicked off the iTunes and muted CNN. What could possibly be so bad about a world where everyone has healthcare and a quality education? Holy opportunity, Batman

The piece goes on to name the internet as the culprit for causing a world of "geometrically increased consumer choice[s] and placed a premium on personalization." They claim that the only candidate able to tap into the Internet Generation while "leveraging the traditional American values of decentralization and choice" was Rep. Ron Paul.

Acknowledging his campaign was a complete and total failure what it did succeed in was capturing a solid number of young white men. In California for example Ron Paul was 3rd only to McCain and Romney among 25-29 year olds surpassing Giuliani and Mike Huckabee (who had Chuck Norris you remember).

According to the NYTimes piece on Paul

"If his campaign had taken place in the pre-Internet era, it might have gone the way of his 1988 Libertarian campaign for president, as a footnote to history. But because of the Internet’s low-cost ability to connect grass-roots supporters with one another — in this case, largely iconoclastic white men — Mr. Paul’s once-solo quest has taken on a life of its own. It is evolving from a figment of cyberspace into a traditional campaign, with yard signs, direct mail and old-fashioned rallies, like one here on Saturday attended by a few thousand people under cold, gray skies. Mr. Paul said it was his biggest rally so far. He said it proved his campaign was more than “a few spammers” and called it a “gigantic opportunity” to establish credibility."

C&E goes on to say

"Much of this activity will be explicity libertarian, since the decentralization of control and individual empowerment is so deeply embedded in Internet technology and culture. Observers as varied as the liberal Michael Kinsley (who sighed in Time magazine that libertarians "are going to be an increasingly powerful force in politcs") and the conservative Washington Times (which reluctantly dubbed libertarians the "new 'It' faction" in American politics) agree that such folks are a growing foce to be reckoned with."

A sidebar says the 7 Ways to Win Our Vote (speaking of these new cultural libertarians) are:

1. Legalize online gambling.
2. Make the Internet tax morium permanent.
3. Ban the use of eminent domain for private gain.
4. Bring the troops home, already.
5. Grant amnesty -- er, citizenship -- to illegal immigrants.
6. Let patients smoke dope.
7. Decouple health insurance from employment.

Its freaking me out that I agree with more than half of these. My question is about the extent to which this is reflective of a generation not necessarily a specific sect of political ideology. If you ask GOP registered young people and Democratically registered young people how they feel on these issues, I wonder if they would agree with many or any of them.

The two party system is here to stay (at least for now) but the ideas of 3rd parties seem to be embedded within Millennial culture enough to earn a seat at the table. I don't know if that deserves to have itself be a specific faction but I do think that future politicians should take note that there is a community out there untapped currently because they ignore the 2 party system. Is the internet the link we need or is more required?

It's another day on airplanes for me (I'm on a plane now flying from San Fran to NYC as I write this, I'll upload when I land), and I only had time this morning to read through about half the items in my RSS Reader. Here's some of the stuff I found interesting. Tomorrow I'll have some thoughts on the McCain candidacy and the youth vote, and on Friday I'm hoping to complete a review of the book UnChristian: What a New Generation Thinks of Christianity . . . And Why It Matters.

I've finally had a chance to read Obama's speech on race in America. Like most people, I was blown away. I'm still digesting but it really was like nothing we've heard on race in our political discourse at least during my life. In all the post-delivery reporting I've read, I'm finding Glen Greenwald seems to have one of the more interesting takes on whether or not Obama will succeed in his goal of elevating the level of the conversation on race in America, and Press Think offers a play by play on how the media - particularly CNN and Wolf Blitzer - immediately failed to rise to the occasion.

Another news item I missed at Take Back America was the announcement that a number of progressive leaning institutions (and non-partisan groups that most do progressive stuff) will be dumping up to $425 million into the 2008 election cycle. This will be similar to what America Coming Together did in 2004, but hopefully will have learned some new tricks/lessons along the way. Included in those efforts and budget will be Rock the Vote. Ben Smith at the Politico provides an estimated break down on that money:

AFL-CIO: $53.4 million
AFL-CIO affiliates: $200 million
Change to Win affiliates: $100 million-plus
MoveOn: $30 million
Acorn: $35 million
Rock the Vote: $5 million-plus
La Raza: $4 million-$6 million

Two thoughts. First, that is a shitload of money from the unions. I wonder what sort of outreach that the unions will do to young voters and young members. Second, of the remaining $75 million another good chunk will likely find its way to youth vote registration and GOTV. Rock the Vote is the only youth-only org on the list, but MoveOn, Acorn, and La Raza are all likely to spend resources on reaching young voters as well. MoveOn did some youth organizing in 2004, Acorn has been known to do youth work in communities of color,and I'm sure La Raza will likewise look to reach young Latinos, who are a fast growing (and increasingly Democratic) constituency.

There are no reports yet on how this money will be spent. Knowing what we know about reaching young people - and in organizing generally - what I'm most interested in finding out is how much of this money will go to media vs. field work. It's too early to start arm-chair quarterbacking these institutions, but it's something to watch.

Having trouble understanding wtf is up with the credit crunch, the subprime mortgage fiasco, and the recent bank failures? The New York Times tries to boil it all down for you and does a decent job of it. It's times like these when I wish I took less Lit classes in college and added on a course or two in economics.

Finally, I loved Tim Fernholz's take-down of the Ron Paul "movement" over at Campus Progress. Fernholz is talking generally about all Ron Paul supporters, but one thing I would add to his piece is the total evaporation of Paul's youth support. Some of you may remember that Ron Paul was touted as the Republican "youth candidate," and his savvy online supporters helped him come out on top in the final MTV/MySpace candidate dialogue, but that support never materialized at the polls, where he failed to capture the youth vote (18 - 29) in a single contest, often finishing 10 points or more behind John McCain or Mike Huckabee.

Karl-Thomas Musselman has a great diary over at the Burnt Orange Report asking "wtf happened to all those Ron Paul youth supporters?"

As a basis for his diary, Karl points to a Ron Paul rally held on a University of Texas campus recently. The rally had 4,000 attendees, but produced only 54 votes for Dr. Paul in early voting on campus.

I've noted in the past that Ron Paul has repeatedly come in 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th place among 18 - 29 year olds in the Republican primaries, and I don't think he's ever broken 20% among conservative youth in a given primary or caucus. Why is that so?

It would be hugely interesting to see a post-mortem analysis comparing the Obama and Ron Paul youth field campaigns . . . or even some decent polling asking why conservative youth cast their ballots for a specific candidate.

Last night, four Presidential candidates participated in the final MTV/MySpace Candidate Dialogue. Dubbed "Closing Arguments," the event, which ran almost two hours, was a final chance for the candidates to make their arguments to young voters, who have played an influential role in the nominating process thus far.

The event was not very interesting in what it told us about the candidates - most viewers in the live audience had already decided which candidate would receive their ballot, and the candidates themselves said nothing new. Last night's event was interesting in that it revealed a new battleground for online organizing that will surely come into play during the general election.

When I arrived at the event at MTV studios in Times Square, a rally in support of Sen. Obama was already in progress. The Obama camp placed attendance somewhere around 300. Supporters were also there for Hillary and Ron Paul, though their numbers were much more modest. This wasn't all that unexpected. Obama has the most youth support by far, and he's been able to organize his supporters quite effectively on the ground.

The surprises came during the online polling when Ron Paul took his turn (all online polling results below):

I've long noted that the candidate dialogues were the most interactive events on the campaign trail, and I've been excited about the possibility that MTV and MySpace could create a feedback loop between the candidates and the online audience that would keep the candidates more honest in their answers and cut down on speculation among the punditry by providing a real-time glimpse into what young voters were thinking about the campaigns.

This didn't happen in previous Dialogues, where young voters overwhelmingly agreed with the answers provided by Senators Obama, Edwards, and McCain. My hope was that this feedback loop would emerge during last night's Q&A with one of the Republican candidates, who generally have views that contrast greatly with those of young voters.

Instead of that feedback loop, what I saw was a tactical assault by Ron Paul supporters to "win" the debate for their candidate. In question after question, Ron Paul scored much higher than I would have expected, and the Democratic candidates scored far lower than I thought possible.

For example, Darfur has long been a high priority with young voters, who are also multilateralists, and questions about the genocide have come up in almost all of the previous dialogues. When asked a question about Darfur, Dr. Paul laid out a non-interventionist plan for handling the crisis in which he equated direct involvement in solving the Darfur crisis to our intervention in Iraq. I expected Paul's answer to invoke a backlash in the online voting. Instead, he garnered a startling 61 percent support.

This level of support continued. 76 percent supported his views on how the country should have responded to 9/11. 78 percent supported his views on energy independence. 81 percent supported his foreign policy ideas, and fully half declared their intention to vote for Rep. Paul on Tuesday. To be sure, Ron Paul has some youth support, but this was above and beyond any support he's received thus far. Even in the Republican contests Huckabee, Romney and McCain have repeatedly done better among young conservative voters than Ron Paul.

These results were startling, but perhaps not unexpected. Ron Paul's support has mostly manifested itself on the internet, where he dominates social news websites like Digg and Reddit. This tech savvy was on display once again last night, and the Paulites were not content to limit their activity to boosting their candidate. They also worked to drag down his opponents.

This was confirmed when the Democrats - Obama and Clinton - had their turn. Sen. Obama scored just above or below 50 percent support on almost every question asked of him. This was far different from his first appearance on MTV, when he typically scored upwards of 75% support. Chris Cilliza of the Washington Post, the moderator in charge of the online component of the debate tried to explain Obama's low-marks as a manifestation of young voters desire for "experience" over the Senator's message of "change," but polling for Clinton not ten minutes later put the lie to that analysis. Sen. Clinton rarely scored higher than 25 or 30 percent support, despite the fact that younger people are participating in the Democratic primaries in far greater numbers than the GOP contests.

Last night, Obama's supporters showed their strength outside the venue with as they rallied for their candidate, but Ron Paul's supporters were the real winners last night. Yet again they were the first to break new ground in another online venue. Unlike the other campaigns, Paul's supporters figured out that the interactivity of the MySpace/MTV dialogues was a two way street; it could keep candidates accountable, but it could also be used by supporters to influence the kinds of questions their candidate received and how his performance was reported. Pauls supporters made last night's event another battleground for their online campaign, and gave their long-shot candidate another feather in his cap (even if they probably didn't improve his chances of winning the nomination).

This has implications beyond Super Tuesday. Due to the success of these events, MTV and MySpace will likely engage the eventually nominees for both parties next fall. Whoever those nominees are, if they are smart, they will learn last night's lesson and organizer their supporters accordingly.

I just got an email from some of the press people organizing the final MTV/MySpace candidate dialogue. As I reported earlier this week, both Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee are confirmed to participate in the "closing arguments"/Super Dialogue. Now Barack Obama and Ron Paul are also confirmed for the event, which will take place this Saturday at 6pm at MTV's New York studio.

That means that Mitt Romney will be the only major Presidential candidate to not participate at least once in these forums. I wonder what the 5 brothers think of that?

Larry Lessig is well known as a brilliant legal mind and nerd extraordinaire, but his recently posted Ted Talks video showed me a side to him I was excited to see.

Larry has our backs.

After explaining to the older leaning Ted audience what a mashup or remix was and showing some of my favorite examples, Lessig explains to them

"In my view the most significant thing to recognize about what this internet is its opportunity to revive the "read/write" culture..... digital technology is the opportunity for the revival of these vocal cords ... user generated content spreading in businesses in extraordinarily valuable ways like these (shows logos of YouTube, Facebook, MySpace etc..). Celebrating amateur culture - by which I don't mean amateurish culture, I mean culture where people produce for the love of what they are doing and not for the money.

I mean the culture that your kids are producing all the time. For what (John Phillip) Sousa romanticized when seeing the young people circled together singing songs, its what your kids are doing right now. Taking the old songs and remixing them to make them something different. Its how they understand access to this culture."

He goes on to talk about these technologies not being new, these are things that film producers have been able to do for years but it is the democratization of this technique.

"Anyone with a $1500 computer who can take sounds and images from around us and use them to say things differently. These tools of creativity have become tools of speech. It is a literacy for this generation. This is how our kids speak. This is how they think. It is what your kids are. As they increasingly understand digital technologies and their relationships to themselves." (emphasis added)

Lessig then goes on to explore the assault on creative culture with the "right vs. wrong" world of copywright laws, piracy, and the youth lead underground.

This lecture is particularly interesting given the NYTimes article about Ron Paul today about online (and also youth support) that people find so shocking. Here is a HUGE participatory campaign that has translated online action to blink and bank.

Contrasted - and on the same day - that the Clinton Campaign insults young people and Facebook users for not wearing 3 piece establishment suits and being old.

" At least two of Hillary Clinton's upper-echelon advisers, Mandy Grunwald and Mark Penn, were decidedly unimpressed. "Our people look like caucus-goers," Grunwald said, "and his people look like they are 18. Penn said they look like Facebook." Penn added, "Only a few of their people look like they could vote in any state."

I don't think I'm alone in my age group looking for jobs where I can wear sandals and t-shirts to work. Ten bucks says this is one of the major reasons that there is a massive anti-Hillary facebook group.

Not to mention Karl Rove and Max Cleland who spoke at a conferences on the Rise of Citizen 2.0.

"He (Rove) argued that the Netroots have been largely ineffective and said MoveOn.org’s inability to end the war proves his point."

"Cleland also lamented the abundance of vulgar words on blogs and expressed shock when a friend shared with him my favorite YouTube video. The blogosphere, he said, is "out of control" and "ain't gonna win undecided voters" even though it may be responsible for increases in youth voter turnout."

I'm sure there is a George Allen, Hillary Clinton, and Karl Rove walk into an internet cafe joke to be made here somewhere. Of course, she's only recently become youth friendly. Though only technically. Perhaps, she'll learn better soon.

I think the character of campaigns like Ron Paul, Howard Dean, Webb, Tester, and others compared to very establishment, message controlled, topdown campaign- web 2.0 (aka youthy stuff) might be a necessary quality. If you're an establishment candidate like Clinton and you've already declared yourself as the winner then there is no need for any kind of outside of the box thinking. I think John Kerry would disagree (though not until after November 2004). But if you're opposing these types of candidates you can't win unless you create a backdoor, under the radar, campaign... Just ask Nancy Boyda.

Those, most often, are fueled by the enthusiasm of youth and the young at heart who are utilizing the technologies that CNN posts each night.

I hate to tell Sen. Clinton or Karl Rove this... but this is the future, this is the generation of your children, and until you embrace it you'll continue to only pull votes from the older crowds which will grow older and older as you yourselves do until eventually your own support will appear in history books rather in the tracking polls you'd like to see it in.