Ron Paul Winning the Info War in New Hampshire and IowaSubmitted by zeekmort on Sat, 10/15/2011 - 04:28
Hello everyone, my name is Brandon. I'm an SEO marketer, so I decided to look at the Paul campain from the standpoint of Google Trends.
This data has probably been seen before, but not so recently, and I wanted to provide an analysis regarding what it meant for the effectiveness of the various candidates' campaigns.
The conclusions I was able to come to are interesting, and I'm curious to hear your take on it.
Data on number of Google Searches over time, during the last 30 days (Compares Paul, Romney, Cain and Perry)
The lesson of the graph is that on the long term, Ron Paul handily trounces his opponents in a measure of online interest in the candidate.
And in the short term, though it is a closer race, he beats all other "top tier" candidates in the past 30 days in Iowa and New Hampshire.
On interesting thing to note on the 12 month graph, for all candidates, one can use it to measure where their candidacies are most effective, and where in the USA (down to the CITY level!) that they have been spending their time.
Ron Paul's graph seems to line up with the fact that he's been heavily campaigning in Iowa, New Hamphsire, Nevada (and recently, Louisiana). These are the states he's been focusing on. Texas is not the state that is "most interested" in him - in other words, he's not only appealing to his "hometown" crowd (though he does have interest from Texas.)
By contrast, in some cases, the other candidates show the unfortunate result of being most searched-for not in early primary states, but in their home states/home demographics. For Romney, this turns out to be Utah, not Massachusetts - Paul beats him there. For Cain, Georgia (South Carolina for now as well - Cain's biggest draw is in the South). For Perry, Texas and the South.
Also, the MSM has the least consistent coverage of Paul compared to the other candidates, but yet he continues to be showing up well online using searches of his name as a measure of intensity of user interest.
The data that I take away on this is that a) We don't need the Mainstream Media nearly as much as IT thinks we do, and news coverage does not generate grass roots support b) REAL support outside of one's home turf is somewhat hard to come by on the long term, unless you are Ron Paul c) many average Joe Voters are not thinking about who to vote for in any real meaningful manner (a habit encouraged by the media), and are susceptible therefore to Paulian education in economics and foreign policy d) looking at the city-by-city data, the Paul campaign's strategy to target local areas in Town Meetings, etc. may really be generating interest in those areas he touches.
The biggest thing I'd like to confirm is d) above. If anyone has the time and interest, I'd be curious to see exactly how Paul "hitting the Turf" or touching down in certain areas of Iowa, NH, Nevada etc correspond to a raising of interest in THAT area specifically, as measured through Google Trends.
One could also focus on major ad buys and see what the effect was on this graph, if you had the dates for the ad buys and knew what cities were purchased and for how long.
Sorry if this type of analysis is a little dry, though I find it intensely interesting and validating of the campaign's strategy as a whole.
We'll be here long after the Cain train is firmly de-railed by its own lack of direction, long after Romney returns to his Mittness Protection Program, long after Plastic Perry melts in the spotlight.
Anyone who says that our man can't win doesn't understand. Ron Paul HAS won - these graphs show it - all we're doing now is proving that fact to everyone else, in Spades!
Curious to see all y'all's interpretation of the data :)