Google Trends- Ron Paul is king of the net

[al2n]

Google Trends is a great feature that tracks searches done on the most popular search engine as well as tracking news references.

Looks like Ron Paul is getting the most searches, but the fewest news references.

Thompson got a spike, but has faded into the background.

Google Trends Results (http://google.com/trends?q=ron+paul%2C+mitt+romney%2C+barack+obama%2 C+Fred+Thompson%2C+Hilary+Clinton%2C+Barack+Obama&ctab=0&geo=all&date=2007&sort=0)

[al2n]

Here is another tracking site for Presidential hopefuls. Tracks a number of sources and charts the candidates rankings.

Obama and Paul are the leaders of cyberspace.

Obama rules Myspace and Facebook, Paul is king of Meetup and YouTube.

http://www.techpresident.com/

[al2n]

Ron Paul is #1 on the internet according to Hitwise.
Hitwise collects their data via network-centric means over user-centric data from other traffic tracking sources.
http://hitwise.com/products-services/how-we-do-it.php

Here is the data on the candidates as of October 6th:

http://hitwise.com/political-data-center/key-candidates.php

[AE6IP]

Gotta love the L Ron Hubbard effect.

[al2n]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Oct. 17 2007,11:20)]Gotta love the L Ron Hubbard effect.
What's the matter?

Hard to argue with the facts?

[w3bny]

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b220/Bunnieman/desu-2.jpg

[kc7jty]

I'm sure once the curiosity of the masses is quenched by some understanding or misunderstanding of Mr. Paul they will be turned off by him. It's called simpleton's law. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 17 2007,11:33)]I'm sure once the curiosity of the masses is quenched by some understanding or misunderstanding of Mr. Paul they will be turned off by him.
He's been moving in an upward direction since February. I don't see a decline anytime soon as likely.

[KG4JYD]

Yeah he is pretty high on Alexa:
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?url=ronpaul2008.com

And check this site out (it is absolutely amazing whether you are for Ron Paul or not!!!):
http://ronpaulgraphs.com/

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Oct. 17 2007,11:28)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Oct. 17 2007,11:20)]Gotta love the L Ron Hubbard effect.
What's the matter?

Hard to argue with the facts?
You've got data that doesn't tell you anything useful because it's carefully cherry picked.

We've already gone over this ground, and you didn't learn anything the first time, so there's no use in taking you over it again.

Instead, I think I'll quote Frank Zappa

Quote[/b] ]Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom. Wisdom is not truth. Truth is not beauty. Beauty is not love. Love is not music. Music is the best...

[al2n]

How is Google Trends cherry picking?

Go to the site, enter all the names and hit enter. You will get a graph showing which name has generated the most searches and news hits from Google. That is not cherry picking, it is a direct comparison using the same website as a baseline.

The other sites do the same thing. An equal comparison of the candidates from various sites.

You complained last time that MySpace was not included, so I found you a site that includes Myspace data. Obama is the leader of Myspace, not Ron Paul. If I were cherry picking as you suggest, why would I give links to something that does not put Ron Paul as #1 for a particular website?

We give links, you complain about the data and how it was collected, we give more data collected in a different manner (which shows the same results) and you still complain about it.

You will not be happy till you find something that supports your view. Everything else is skewed or false information in your view.

That is the sign of someone with a closed mind.

[KD6NIG]

I bet Youtube or some other video site beats them all http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Which tells me people care more about idiotic video antics than the next leader of our nation http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N3ATS]

Next Marty will tell you that because Obama has more MySpace friends he is more popular on MySpace than Paul is. This may or may not be true.

Thing is though, Marty conveniently leaves out the fact that Barack Obama's MySpace was created by someone else, almost three years ago, and was taken over by Obama when he became a presidential contender. At that point he already had a sizeable "fan base" of 30,000 friends.

But we don't call that "cherry picking" do we?

http://www.techpresident.com/node/301

[N3ATS]

Google search results for each candidate. Each name was entered in quotes to avoid hits on just the names "Ron" or "Paul", etc...

Results 1 - 10 of about 11,500,000 for "ron paul". (0.18 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 8,010,000 for "john edwards". (0.25 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 5,410,000 for "fred thompson". (0.10 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 3,230,000 for "barack obama". (0.32 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,200,000 for "rudy giuliani". (0.21 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,200,000 for "rudy giuliani". (0.21 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,190,000 for "john mccain". (0.33 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,110,000 for "sam brownback". (0.21 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,810,000 for "mike huckabee". (0.19 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,810,000 for "dennis kucinich". (0.31 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,760,000 for "bill richardson". (0.16 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,750,000 for "joe biden". (0.33 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,750,000 for "duncan hunter". (0.19 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,730,000 for "tom tancredo". (0.27 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,680,000 for "mike gravel". (0.18 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 733,000 for "alan keyes". (0.34 seconds)

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 17 2007,16:33)]Google search results for each candidate. Each name was entered in quotes to avoid hits on just the names "Ron" or "Paul", etc...
Very interesting.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Oct. 17 2007,12:58)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 17 2007,11:33)]I'm sure once the curiosity of the masses is quenched by some understanding or misunderstanding of Mr. Paul they will be turned off by him.
He's been moving in an upward direction since February. I don't see a decline anytime soon as likely.
going from 1 to 100 in a sea of 300 million ain't much movement.

[nz3m]

Results 1 - 10 of about 30,200,000 for "boobs". (0.47 seconds)

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Oct. 17 2007,14:00)]How is Google Trends cherry picking?

Because it is subject to google spam and the L Ron Hubbard effect.

Quote[/b] ]Go to the site, enter all the names and hit enter. You will get a graph showing which name has generated the most searches and news hits from Google. That is not cherry picking, it is a direct comparison using the same website as a baseline.

Cherry picking picks data that's valid but not representative. The number of search hits, for example, tell you nothing about what caused the search request. I'm cynical. I suspect it's L Ron Hubbard effect, but since I can't be bothered to do the analysis necessary, I won't make that accusation.

Quote[/b] ]The other sites do the same thing. An equal comparison of the candidates from various sites.

But it's not the candidates they're comparing. It's some abstract metric of page references, with no study to indicate that there's any correlation at all between page references and popularity of the candidate.

That's the cherry picking bit, the logical leap from 'frequently googled' to any conclusion other than 'frequently googled.'

Quote[/b] ]
You complained last time that MySpace was not included, so I found you a site that includes Myspace data. Obama is the leader of Myspace, not Ron Paul. If I were cherry picking as you suggest, why would I give links to something that does not put Ron Paul as #1 for a particular website?

Actually, you didn't before I "complained". (For the record, I 'pointed out', which is different than 'complained.')

Quote[/b] ]We give links, you complain about the data and how it was collected, we give more data collected in a different manner (which shows the same results) and you still complain about it.

I don't "complain" about your data. I've not once questioned your assertion that google trends shows the number of queries you claim it shows.

Quote[/b] ]You will not be happy till you find something that supports your view. Everything else is skewed or false information in your view.

The word your looking for is 'incomplete'. As in "dramatically incomplete, to the point of being misleading."

Quote[/b] ]That is the sign of someone with a closed mind.

Oops, there goes another irony meter.

You guys are trying, desperately, to change random metrics associated with candidate's names into some sort of meaningful information, but you're not doing anywhere near the legwork necessary to make the connection.

It's an old advertising trick, and I applaud you for trying to build support for your candidate by using it, but I don't particularly intend to fall for it.

Just as I fully suspect that you won't take the knowledge that your numbers mostly show Obama doing better than Paul on the intarweb to mean you should switch to Obama.

Now remind me where the closed mind is, again?

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 17 2007,16:24)]Next Marty will tell you that because Obama has more MySpace friends he is more popular on MySpace than Paul is. This may or may not be true.

Thing is though, Marty conveniently leaves out the fact that Barack Obama's MySpace was created by someone else, almost three years ago, and was taken over by Obama when he became a presidential contender. At that point he already had a sizeable "fan base" of 30,000 friends.

But we don't call that "cherry picking" do we?

http://www.techpresident.com/node/301
oooh... getting desperate enough to raise strawmen of epic proportion.

Sorry, bad guess. If you knew as much about MySpace as I do (you may recall, Danger just released a MySpace application for our phones,) you would know not to take it seriously.

You guys are trying to hype the internet candidacy of a candidate whose internet canvasing pales in comparison to Howard Dean in '03 because you haven't got anything else to hype him on.

It's like your making a big deal out of him raising $20k out of a handful of people who put some military connection in their self description.

It's a clever advertising gimmick, by 1960s standards, but it's not saying what you're trying to make it appear to say.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 17 2007,16:33)]Google search results for each candidate.
except the ones you missed

The list of missing candidates is left as an exercise for the reader.

Also, a very suspect list, given that I get

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,140,000 for "ron paul". (0.10 seconds)

You seem to get a factor of 10 more results for Paul that I do.

Fascinating.

Then there's Google Fight (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Barak+Obama&word2=Ron+Paul) which gets a very different result than either of us.

[al2i]

Due to the massive efforts of Marty et al., Ron Paul dominates QRZ discussions. He is indeed King of the Net here. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kc7jty]

king of the net here is permanently reserved for n9xr Jerry.

[N3ATS]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Oct. 17 2007,21:44)]Also, a very suspect list, given that I get

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,140,000 for "ron paul". (0.10 seconds)

You seem to get a factor of 10 more results for Paul that I do.

Fascinating.
Okay then. Here is a screen shot of the Google search result.

Note the date and time. I am in the Mountain Time zone as I type this...

(resized to allow for PhotoBucket's size constraints.)

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j238/swweiss/ron_paul_google_search.jpg

[N3ATS]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Oct. 17 2007,21:38)]Sorry, bad guess. If you knew as much about MySpace as I do (you may recall, Danger just released a MySpace application for our phones,) you would know not to take it seriously.
Hey, you brought up the Paul/Obama MySpace comparison in the Alexa thread, not me pal.

Remember this? (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=17;t=170149)

Quote[/b] ]Yes, that's how cherry picking works. You pick one small data set by which your choice looks good, and trumpet it, ignoring the larger picture.

For instance, I notice that you picked a 3 month window, rather than the six month window which would not show Ron Paul's site in such a good light by trend analysis.

And you picked only campaign web sites which are a tiny of a fraction of the internet traffic representing 'interest in a candidate.' How does Ron Paul compare to, say, Obama, on, for example, myspace, which is where the young voters are to be reached?

And, of course you focused solely on the Internet, ignoring all of the other ways in which people express interest in a candidate.

Cherry picked, indeed.

Seems that you trumpeted Obama's MySpace performance as an indicator of internet popularity while ignoring the larger picture I pointed out in my previous post on this subject.

By your definition, that's "Cherry Picking".

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 17 2007,21:05)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Oct. 17 2007,21:44)]Also, a very suspect list, given that I get

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,140,000 for "ron paul". (0.10 seconds)

You seem to get a factor of 10 more results for Paul that I do.

Fascinating.
Okay then. Here is a screen shot of the Google search result.

Note the date and time. I am in the Mountain Time zone as I type this...

(resized to allow for PhotoBucket's size constraints.)

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j238/swweiss/ron_paul_google_search.jpg
You miss my point.

But if you think about it again, realizing I wasn't accusing you of fudging data, you might get it.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Oct. 17 2007,21:16)]Seems that you trumpeted Obama's MySpace performance as an indicator of internet popularity while ignoring the larger picture I pointed out in my previous post on this subject.
It certainly does seem that way.

Silly me, I should know better than to trumpet MySpace.

I was also wrong. MySpace is very last week. Facebook is the new black.

My bad.

[K6UEY]

I seem to remember another so called "KING of the NET" I believe his name was DEAN.
He had thousands of gals who would be willing to vote for him, as soon as they were old enough to vote !!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Lets face it if the Internet was limited to Honest thinking people, there would be far fewer than there are!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 17 2007,18:48)]going from 1 to 100 in a sea of 300 million ain't much movement.
Well, your analogy is mathematically incorrect in it's proportions. But assuming you are correct, Ron Paul has had over a 100 times increase from his previous position. That's more growth than any other candidate combined (with the possible exception of Obama).

Now for Ron, there is no plateau in site to his growing support and individual donations. As long as we can keep the curve steep enough Ron is going to win.

[al2n]

I thought most MySpace users were teenage girls?

[N3ATS]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Oct. 18 2007,02:20)]I thought most MySpace users were teenage girls?
BAD COP! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Oct. 18 2007,00:20)]I thought most MySpace users were teenage girls?
You thought wrong.

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (al2n @ Oct. 18 2007,00:20)]I thought most MySpace users were teenage girls?
No.

I work in the music industry and it is used for networking BIG TIME! (plus I've gotten a few dates off of it too) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kc7jty]

some are pedophiles there according to Katie Couric.

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 18 2007,22:40)]some are pedophiles there according to Katie Couric.
Please get your news from somewhere other than old media.