Browse By

Ben Carson For President Flops After Infomercial

Last weekend, right wing Creationist Dr. Ben Carson tried to jump start a campaign for the Republican Party presidential nomination with an hour-long infomercial. Carson paid for the production and airing of a “documentary” that talks about what a great guy he is, suggesting that Americans are clamoring for a Ben Carson for President campaign.

If Americans were really prepared to support a Ben Carson presidential campaign for the 2016 election, though, the Carson for President infomercial would have touched off a grassroots response, a wave of word of mouth that would have made Ben Carson’s candidacy one of the top news stories of the week.

ben carson and vegetariansThat’s exactly the opposite of what actually happened.

The chart here shows the attention provoked by the Ben Carson for President appointment, as reflected in the Google Trends search engine. The blue line represents news stories about Ben Carson. The red line represents news stories about “vegetarian” people or food.

As you can see, only on one day was Ben Carson able to garner more attention than vegetarian news – quite a small niche. Interest in Ben Carson was a flash in the plan, a blip that failed to garner any sustained attention.

Will Ben Carson be elected President in 2016? I think we’re more likely to see tofu burgers for sale at McDonald’s.

14 thoughts on “Ben Carson For President Flops After Infomercial”

  1. Gus Wu says:

    The chart? You gotta be kidding. Where did you get the chart, which incidentally has no parameters or identifying values, nor any source information, from McDonald’s projection of how many people like you may actually eat tofu burgers. What you have written here and the lame chart you have presented indicates that you actually are clueless about Dr. Carson, and are trying to feebly convince other people that they should agree with your take on the video. It may not have been that great of a video, but you know what, this effort here is definitely a FLOP!

  2. J Clifford says:

    Gus, Ben Carson says he thinks literacy is important. Try literacy. Try reading the article again. It states that the data is from the Google Trends search engine, with the two entered variables being Ben Carson and “vegetarian”. Search Google Trends for these two, and you’ll see the exact same thing that I’ve shown here.

    If you think it’s a “lame chart”, then you think that news coverage of Ben Carson is a lame indicator of how much attention he got with his piece of vain self-promotion.

    Exactly what in this article indicates that I am clueless about Ben Carson?

  3. Brick says:

    Wow congrats. Never before have I seen a tagline more apropos to the lack of quality of writing as your piece; News Unfit for Print!

    For the life of me, I cannot figure out how you can possibly put forth an argument without any semblance of proper form of your graph comparison. What you present above is first of all, unverifiable without proper context and complete parameters. i.e. how do you know anyone person’s numbers would be any better than Dr. Carson’s? Nor for that matter; how you compare a single individual person, who is neither a known A-list celebrity, icon or famous politician, to an entire segment of the world’s population (vegetarians) nor the style of food they espouse to consume. Are you so stupid (to quote Jonathan Gruber) that you do not understand the principal of what defines a ‘hit’ of recognition in trending on the internet? Just the ‘hits’ on the food network alone for vegetarian dish recipes on their sole site, should out-perform most individual person’s ‘hits’…Carson’s or otherwise.

    Here’s a case in point Clifford using your own infantile logic; who is the father of algorithms and algebra? Why it’s a name on every mathematician’s tongue; Iraqi Mohammed ibn-Musa al-Khwarizmiportion. Why don’t you see how his ‘hits’ compare to the internet hits for only one single word: Tofu? What kind of argument is that; it’s nonsense, that’s what it is…but it’s your nonsense in essence. Nice try.

    My point is this; I’ve just proven your logic is wrong…and why. Therefore your entire argument is flawed…so your conclusions and/or accusations of Dr. Carson’s chances are erroneous and unfair, as it is a completely stupid comparison from the aforementioned logical perspective. Good going putz…perhaps your next piece can be written while your on a break from your new career flipping Tofu burgers at McDonalds yourself, just sayin.

    P.S. I also researched a couple of your points as well, and found them to be equally erroneous; such as the Doctor paying for the ad, as that’s unethical as only one example.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Brick, your argument that vegetarian diets are inherently more interesting than the Ben Carson for President campaign really doesn’t contradict the point of this article. It supports it.

      The point of Google Trends Brick, is that it observes trends as time passes. The pattern here is quite clear. Ben Carson’s self-promotion created no lasting interest among American voters. It brought about some attention while the ad was on the air, but soon afterwards, Ben Carson went right back down into the obscurity where he has been for quite some time.

      Do you seriously want to argue, Brick, that the graph shows a surging interest in Ben Carson’s vanity campaign?

      Show me evidence to the contrary, Brick. Show me evidence that Americans are clamoring for Ben Carson’s right wing extremist nonsense.

  4. Quacker says:

    J. Clifford,
    How’s this for evidence:

    The National Draft Ben Carson for President Committee (also known as Draft Ben Carson) has raised over $11 million since it was founded in August 2013, more than $8 million of which has come from contributions under $200. This showing dwarfs similar efforts on behalf of other possible GOP candidates and exceeded the $10.2 million raised so far by Ready for Hillary — the comparable effort for Dem frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

    Draft Ben Carson sports over 20,000 registered volunteers and over 100,000 individual donors. At last count, well over 400,000 signatures had been gathered petitioning Carson to run. Can you name any other presidential candidate with anywhere near this level of grass roots support before announcing his or her candidacy?

    Carson’s most recent book, “One Nation,” spent over 16 straight weeks in the top 5 of the NYTimes Bestseller List. Sales have outpaced those of Clinton’s far more widely publicized “Hard Choices,” providing another example of how excited his supporters are about a prospective White House run.

    Draft Ben Carson has already signed up chairmen in all 99 Iowa counties, an especially notable accomplishment considering that many official presidential campaigns fail to ever reach it.

    These are all hard facts, and given the numbers it would seem that DR. Carson’s message is anything but “right wing extremist nonsense.”

    1. J Clifford says:

      Quacker, the numbers that you provide do absolutely nothing to contradict my assertion that Ben Carson’s political message is right wing extremist nonsense.

      If right wing extremist nonsense were to be well-funded and to have widespread popular support, that wouldn’t mean it wasn’t right wing extremist nonsense. The right wing extremist nonsense of the Nazis in Germany and of the Fascists in Italy was popular and well-funded, but it was still right wing extremist nonsense.

      None of what you say addresses the failure of Ben Carson’s infomercial of a week ago to gather much additional interest in his campaign. It also doesn’t square with the latest ABC / Washington Post poll, which finds Ben Carson tied for 6th place among Republican presidential contenders, with only 6 percent support among registered Republicans. (See:

      Before that poll, pollsters didn’t even bother to include Ben Carson in their surveys.

      How do you explain the discrepancy?

      Ben Carson hasn’t even written a single blog post at his web site for 10 days. He doesn’t seem to have much fire in the belly.

      1. Quacker says:

        You asked for “evidence that Americans are clamoring for Ben Carson’s right wing extremist nonsense.” I gave you plenty.

        What is nonsensical is equating Ben Carson’s writings and speeches with those of Hitler and Mussolini, by lumping them all together under the label “right wing extremist nonsense.”

        Would you be equally comfortable considering Obama’s writings and speeches just like those of Marx, Stalin, and Chairman Mao, all just left wing extremist nonsense?

        1. juniper says:

          Quackery, you are aware that Ben Carson equates Barack Obama and health care reform with Nazism, aren’t you? J. Clifford didn’t equate Ben Carson with Hitler and Mussolini, but Hitler and Mussolini WERE both right wing extremists, and so is Ben Carson. Ben Carson is a right wing extremist of a different kind in that he is not violent and racist, but he is an extremist and right wing nonetheless. The point is that you have equated popularity and money with lack of extremism, which is absurd, and not a good reflection on the Ben Carson campaign.

  5. juniper says:

    Ben Carson says Obama is using Lenin’s tactics to install Communism by passing health care reform : “And why did they want to pass it so badly? Well, as I said the other night on television, Vladimir Lenin, one of the fathers of socialism and communism, said that socialized medicine is the keystone to the establishment of a socialist state.”

  6. juniper says:

    Ben Carson says liberals are like Hitler and America is like Nazi Germany :

    Ben Carson actually says that there are “PC Police” in America that are like the Gestapo. Does he know what the Gestapo did? Is Ben Carson stupid or just crazy?

  7. Brick says:

    I never said that vegetarian issues are more interesting, those are your words. Here was my point. Yes, by looking at your ‘trending’ graph, it would appear that vegetarians and their food are far more numerous by the fact that their line is approximately three times higher on your graph, which as I’ve previously eluded to, has no parameters to judge by. By using these two different ‘trending topics of interest’, you are making it appear that the Doctor is far less popular by being so far below the level of the Vegan/Food line on the graph. The problem with that, is that Carson’s line represents one person; Dr. Carson, while the Vegan/Food line (far above it) is directly caused by perhaps more than several million separate topics that are all tagged to Vegan/Food key words in their search. That’s like comparing one very specific one-off custom car concept at a car show, to every Ford Model T built between 1909 and 1928, and seeing which one will trend higher.

    This is simply flawed and I don’t give a rat’s a** how you argue it putz…can I supersize my Tofu burger please.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Brick, you’re welcome to eat as many tofu burgers as you like, but you’ll have to get them outside of McDonald’s.

      A presidential candidacy cannot be successful if it only includes one person. The entire purpose of Ben Carson’s vanity infomercial was to inspire an entire movement of people to become involved in his political campaign. The chart from Google Trends shows very clearly that Americans were not inspired by what they saw. There has been no surge of interest in Ben Carson – just a blip.

  8. Steve Bowen says:

    It sure seems to me a bit early in the process to be trying to write someone off as a prospective presidential candidate regardless of any social media data, pro or con. I could get into technical issues regarding how many people might have had the opportunity to see the little film on Carson’s life, not to mention how many actually did see it. There is a reason the networks run $millions of trailers to try to get audiences to tune in to a new program….none of which was done i assume with this film.

    But a media discussion or gross social media mentions data are not the issue here.

    What is and will be of interest is to gauge Americans’ interest in Dr Carson’s potential candidacy as they come to know him and evaluate his positions and competence v alternatives. You will likely see a very different picture.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Well, we can also write off Ben Carson because he’s a conspiracy theorist Creationist who constantly gets his American history wrong.

      As Americans come to know these weird positions, do you see a reason for their support to increase rather than decrease?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!