Robyn Hamlin’s False Logic

Tonight Robyn Hamlin, posted the picture below on Facebook.

It compares the internet searches for “Ron Paul”, “Mitt Romney” and “Barrack Obama”, and then uses the graph to insinuate that there is a media conspiracy to pick Romney as the candidate and not cover Ron Paul despite his obvious superior support.

Unfortunately just because there a numerous searches for the term “Ron Paul” does not mean that such a graph is any indication of electoral support. That is why we have a system of primaries and caucuses to pick our nominees.

I know I have searched for “Ron Paul” many times. I have searched for “Ron Paul and Chemtrails” and “Ron Paul, Alex Jones” and of course “Ron Paul Macaw.” But I have never considered voting for him.

There is also another problem with the graph above. It MISSPELLS Barack Obama’s name “Barrack Obama” Which can drastically effect the results as we see below, when all names are spelled correctly.

Seriously? You don’t know how to spell the President’s name? And then base a conspiracy theory off false logic based on false results? Really? Why am I not surprised.

What is even worse about this post is that Robyn Hamlin is involved in a primary of her own to be the Republican Party’s Congressional nominee in the 1st District.

Is this how she thinks races should be decided, by sloppy internet searches? Perhaps so, since she earlier used a Facebook poll to decide whether or not to run as a Republican. If she is unsure of her party affiliation, why should she expect members of that party to support her candidacy? Lucky for us there is a superior conservative Republican candidate already in the race.

We have real problems in the 1st District and we need serious people to address them, not someone spouting conspiracy theories.

Please support Martin Baker in the Republican Primary.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Robyn Hamlin’s False Logic”

  1. I think its fair to say that media coverage should correlate to general interest. The graph shows it does not. Of course, misspelling (or mistyping) Obama’s name is embarrassing but hardly bad logic. I actually think the trends graph is pretty good proxy for caucus interest, at least on my own anecdotal evidence level…

    Like

  2. Sorry, can’t resist:

    “It MISSPELLS Barack Obama’s name “Barrack Obama” Which can drastically effect the results as we see below, when all names are spelled correctly.”

    “Which” should not be capitalized, and you misspelled the word “affect”.

    Irony. 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s