Ron Paul gets as much Google search traffic in Iowa as the other candidates combined

Fraud exposed.

someone just posted a few hours ago about how RP didnt make the top ten for google searches. mitt and rick were on the list..

all over the net you read about RP supporters.. twitter/FB, blogs where are all the Romany supporters? it just seems like RP has 3/4 of the country behind him


smells like a skunk, looks like a skunk, but the media tells us its not..

The strange thing is, Ron Paul kicked ass on Google searches 4 years ago too --

[link to newsusa.myfeedportal.com]

but still lost the primaries.


BUT

Barack Obama also did well online, better than Hilary and of course McCain:

[link to newsusa.myfeedportal.com]

AND won the election.

What gives?

So, the moron writing this thread thinks if you do a search for someone it means you support them.

Look how many google searches for Hitler. I guess people want to vote him in, right?

Paultards. They really ARE that stupid.

I've never done a google search on any current candidate that I didnt support.. Fortunately enough they do the job of exposing each others flaws quite nicely...

Equally, I've never seen so many people -go out of their way- (like you) to inject themselves into other candidates forums only to comment negatively of their followers..

I didn't know GLP was owned by Ron Paul and is a Ron Paul forum.

And just because you are a moron who doesn't research people and learn about them doesn't mean others do no research. Many people are looking for facts about Ron Paul, to see the two-faced history behind him.

bullshit
the "two-faced" history you speak of is the disinfo created and put on the internet to discredit Dr. Paul.

yea, that was my post. just to clarify, the top 10 trending Google news topics are driven more by what stories are being clicked on and less by what people are typing into a search box. i probably read over 20-30 stories a day, but it's not because i search for any of them. i see a story that interests me, and i click on it.

the question i think people should be asking is about HOW one story or another gains easy-clicking prominence on Google's news page. it's one of those chicken or the egg situations. is it an honest system, where Google is using benign algorithms to rank articles based on readership, or do they manually sort and filter what they want to influence public opinion? perhaps some of both?

in short, companies like Google CAN and DO control the flow of information. the internet is not immune from the same forces that shamelessly suppress candidates like RP in the MSM.