glamourmodels

Be Honest CNBC-You Are Biased Against Ron Paul



Those of us who have supported Ron Paul since his presidential run in 2008 (and some who supported him long before that) have come to expect an astonishing array of mainstream media tricks, lies, and censorship when it comes to the ?journalistic? examination of the good doctor. This doesn?t mean, however, that we have ever or will ever come to ACCEPT this consistent trend of deception and disinformation as a forgone conclusion of our political lives. We will never throw up our hands and walk away from the mess the MSM has deliberately created, because that is exactly what they would like us to do; give up, shut up, go home, vote for Romney (an establishment crony with the creepy grin of a pedophile), and watch him lose to Obama (yet another establishment crony) in 2012.

With this stated up front, it was brought to my attention that CNBC was running a poll asking readers who they thought won the recent Republican Presidential Debates in Michigan. Now, as in many polls in 2008, the name ?Ron Paul? has been rising to the top of the charts in 2011 despite all efforts by media lapdogs to dissuade the public from even considering such a candidate. CNBC did not fail to play its roll this time around either. Ron Paul won by a substantial margin, and of course, their response was to take the poll down! Here was the explanation given by CNBC Managing Editor and all around bottom feeder, Allen Wastler:

Gamed Poll...So We Took It Down

We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn't so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate's political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down.

Yes, we've gone through this exercise before.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45233756/

Wastler then provides a link to a rather patronizing statement he made back in 2007 to explain why CNBC dumped polling results then as well:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/21257762/?An_..._Paul_Faithful

First of all, let?s be serious, folks! Regardless of what you might feel personally about Ron Paul or his political position, it has become painfully obvious to even the most oblivious subsections of the American populace that the MSM, from supposed ?right wing? outlets like FOX, to supposed ?left wing? outlets like CNBC, have gone WAY out of their way to ridicule, suppress, or completely ignore him.

Now, you really need to ask yourself, why is that?

If Ron Paul is such a ?fringe? candidate with ?no chance? of winning, then why all the trickery and subversion? If his political methodologies are so ridiculous or out of sync with the American people, then why not plaster his face on every TV screen in the country and let him destroy his own career? Why hide him from public view?

The answer is simple; because he IS a threat. His position is one of government transparency, limited power, and financial independence. He predicted the credit crisis and the mortgage bubble implosion long before they ever occurred. The guy wants to shut down the Federal Reserve and the cartoonish brute squad otherwise known as the IRS. He wants to end the costly and fraudulent wars in the Middle East and bring the troops home (really bring them home, not make fake statements about bringing them home and then keep them on the ground for another few years). Of course the MSM, a corporately controlled monopolistic sham, is working overtime to keep Paul down!

Think about it. Sit back and consider. If Ron Paul was actually allowed to stand on the same stage as Barack Obama in a fair debate, there would be no half hearted girly-slap pansy sparring going on as there would be in a match between Obama and Romney. Ron Paul would destroy Obama! It would be a massacre of historic proportions! The establishment, which represents a minority of elitists in this country and not the citizenry in any capacity, will not let this happen.

Allen Wastler would call the above statement ?conspiracy theory?. All I have to say to Wastler is; prove me wrong! Give Ron Paul fair coverage. Leave your own polls to represent the actual results regardless of whether you like the outcome. But first, answer me these questions, Allen:

1) If your poll was ?gamed?, or in other words ?hacked?, then I imagine that you and CNBC have some kind of proof of this. Please, do show it to us, so we can better understand your suppression of the poll results. I continuously hear from the MSM that Ron Paul supporters are all master hackers, and that there are only a dozen of us huddled around basement computers posing as millions (and I thought they didn?t believe in conspiracies?), but I have yet to see any concrete evidence to support this notion. Do you have any, Allen?

2) If CNBC?s poll is so easily tampered with, then why continue to run it at all?

3) If Mitt Romney had won the poll by a landslide, would CNBC have suppressed the results then? Or is it only farfetched when Ron Paul prevails in the final calculations? (This is a bit of a rhetorical question, because we all know Mr. Wastler would have danced a jig and sung the glory of Romney over Paul if the roles had been reversed).

4) Why is it that whenever Ron Paul wins a poll, MSM pundits claim the results are unscientific, or that they really don?t represent the true position of the general public? Why is it that a Romney or Cain win brings resounding words of vindication for the nature of the democratic process?

5) What margin of success does CNBC consider ?realistic? for a presidential candidate? I mean, is it really necessary for you to punish Ron Paul for being a popular candidate, or to punish his supporters for being well organized and showing up for the vote? Do you not see the half-assed absurdity of your claim that Ron Paul won by ?too much??

6) Isn?t it conceivable that Ron Paul is doing well in the polls because his ideas and views are shared by many Americans? Who are you to claim this is not possible, Mr. Allen?

7) Do you really believe you and CNBC will not be held accountable for misinforming the American people and hiding information pertinent to their political knowledge? The last time I checked, CNBC?s viewership has been in pitiful decline since at least 2009.

8) When are you going to man up, Allen, and admit that you dumped the poll because you are biased against Ron Paul? It?s not as if it is a big secret. Hiding behind superficial excuses such as ?hackers? and ?poll gaming? is at bottom pretty cowardly. Why not embrace your blatant disapproval of Paul and the considerable movement of Americans surrounding him so that we can have a real discussion, instead of putting on a pretentiously counterfeit smile and talking down your nose at us? Wouldn?t that be more fun?

Let?s bring some honesty, and perhaps finally some true competition, back to the presidential race, and say what is actually on our minds for once. This goes for the staff of CNBC! If Allen Wastler or any other MSM lackey wants to bash Ron Paul, then he should do it openly as a private citizen, not use the CNBC media apparatus as a Hearst-like yellow journalism weapon for misinforming the public, or for indirectly slandering a candidate or his supporters. This should not be a problem for him at all, unless, of course, the corporate owners of CNBC over at G&E play a much greater role in the actions of their news subsidiary than is readily admitted. Then, Allen Wastler?s apprehension in laying out the truth plainly would make a little more sense?

From alt-market.com via zerohedge.com

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

glamourmodels

Since i know people in GFY are so snarky they will try to insinuate that CNBC actually had a basis for this and that somehow the poll was hacked I would refer you to CNBC's own page where the poll appeared and look at their comments, of which there are 12 pages of them currently. This is a cut and paste of the first page, unedited...

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

Paultards... gaming an online poll? They wouldn't dream of such a thing.

glamourmodels

115 Comments Total
COMMENTS
EconPol | Nov 9, 2011 11:17 PM ET
I'm undecided as to vote for so far (I might have to vote for Obama), but the amount of bias CNBC shows is just ridiculous.

When anyone else wins: "This is a very accurate projection of who will win the race."

When Ron wins: "This is not a scientific poll, and they must have hacked it."

If your polls are this unreliable, you might as well just not put them up in the first place.

It was pretty obvious. Although I might not agree with all of his ideas, it is an undeniable fact that he's the only Republican candidate who predicted the housing bubble. They asked every candidate EXCEPT him the housing questions. And he's higher in the polls than Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman, etc. but got a lot less screen time. Anyone who has respect for journalistic integrity should be ticked off. I will decide who the best candidate is, not you, CNBC.
Report Abuse

hammy3000 | Nov 9, 2011 11:18 PM ET
What would've happened if Mitt Romney was leading the poll? Eh, Mr. Wastler? What a pathetic excuse for journalism. You report the results whether or not you agree with them. You have lost a supporter and a viewer. I used to have respect for NBC. I will -never- purchase another product from you again. I will -never- watch your programming again. You have lost my faith in your network and your overall judgment. Please stick to your kindergarten reports about Kim Kardashian. It is the only thing you are qualified to talk about.
Report Abuse

SoCalDude | Nov 9, 2011 11:25 PM ET
CNBC fails at almost everything. They suck at reporting the news. They suck at making a real life Million Dollar Portfolio Challenge. And they suck at objective political discourse. Idiots.
Report Abuse

MGY | Nov 9, 2011 11:25 PM ET
Again????? The media is what got us the worst president in history in 2008. You are NOT going to elect the next one. Ever heard of the Internet? In the famous words of Gomer Pyle...Shame shame shame
Report Abuse

buy_the_dip | Nov 9, 2011 11:31 PM ET
CNBC...

Did it ever occur to you that Ron Paul is smashing all the polls because the PEOPLE love him??
Report Abuse

mcclain194 | Nov 9, 2011 11:33 PM ET
So as long as I vote for anyone but Dr. Paul my vote counts? WTF is that BS. You saying my vote does not count? And you claim to be NEWS more like the left hand of FOX!!!
Report Abuse

ThaddeusSKaczor | Nov 9, 2011 11:37 PM ET
Yeah, and you dismiss Ron Paul's Straw Poll wins because TOO MANY PEOPLE SHOW UP to vote for him! When he wins the Iowa caucuses (most LOCAL Iowa media say he's the front-runner with the best organization) are you going to try to have his delegates taken away, because 'TOO MANY PEOPLE VOTED FOR HIM'? Please- all you have to do you techno-luddites is limit ONE VOTE to ONE i.p. address! Or maybe you did, and he won ANYWAY! Either way, you look like idiots to anyone with more than two neurons rubbing together...
Report Abuse

RonPaulFan | Nov 9, 2011 11:44 PM ET
I would like to reply to this and I hope CNBC reads my response as the media consistently spins Ron Paul's poll wins to try and make RP supporters look devious.

I'll be fair and say that I'm sure not all voters watched the debates -- but I would bet that MOST did.

This debate has been plastered on the dailypaul and ronpaulforums website for the past several days. Both sites have thousands of visitors each day and most are very politically active for Ron Paul including debate participation, straw-poll participation and local GOP participation. So, the people who are true Ron Paul fans are quite dedicated to his cause.

We do not spam polls or make any sort of effort to make him win. We just all participate -- and we get punished for doing so.

Mitt has publicized the poll on his campaign page: http://mittromneycentral.com

Is it our fault that his people don't organize and vote for him?

We don't understand why we get punished for doing the very thing that we were asked to do. Watch, talk about, twitter and vote after the debate.

We do not spam the polls. We do as asked.
Report Abuse

poodylou | Nov 9, 2011 11:45 PM ET
If the poll was gamed so was your audience. I participated in the online chat on your site during the debate. The majority was Ron Paul supporters begging you to address him. The media makes me want to puke, they dis a candidate and then call the polls that he is obviously winning. I truly pray that the day comes and Ron Paul is President, and he wont acknowledge that the MSM newscasters that have ignored and belittled him, even exist. I am truly sorry I tuned to CNBC tonight and vow to never do it again. And, while all of us supporters are gaming, I will ask that we "game" your news channel. The only reason I tuned in in the first place was to hear a little something from Ron Paul.
Report Abuse

oliver1974 | Nov 9, 2011 11:46 PM ET
I just saw the poll: Who win the debate and i wanna vote for Ron Paul and then i see it was down. I like him and he was the winner of the debate and he get a lot of good credit from the other candidate. Thats so sad what you do, to take him down. Thats remind me of East Germany. I hope more people see, that Ron Paul has the best ideas to restore America.
Report Abuse

EconPol | Nov 9, 2011 11:17 PM ET
I'm undecided as to vote for so far (I might have to vote for Obama), but the amount of bias CNBC shows is just ridiculous.

When anyone else wins: "This is a very accurate projection of who will win the race."

When Ron wins: "This is not a scientific poll, and they must have hacked it."

If your polls are this unreliable, you might as well just not put them up in the first place.

It was pretty obvious. Although I might not agree with all of his ideas, it is an undeniable fact that he's the only Republican candidate who predicted the housing bubble. They asked every candidate EXCEPT him the housing questions. And he's higher in the polls than Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman, etc. but got a lot less screen time. Anyone who has respect for journalistic integrity should be ticked off. I will decide who the best candidate is, not you, CNBC.
Report Abuse

hammy3000 | Nov 9, 2011 11:18 PM ET
What would've happened if Mitt Romney was leading the poll? Eh, Mr. Wastler? What a pathetic excuse for journalism. You report the results whether or not you agree with them. You have lost a supporter and a viewer. I used to have respect for NBC. I will -never- purchase another product from you again. I will -never- watch your programming again. You have lost my faith in your network and your overall judgment. Please stick to your kindergarten reports about Kim Kardashian. It is the only thing you are qualified to talk about.
Report Abuse

SoCalDude | Nov 9, 2011 11:25 PM ET
CNBC fails at almost everything. They suck at reporting the news. They suck at making a real life Million Dollar Portfolio Challenge. And they suck at objective political discourse. Idiots.
Report Abuse

MGY | Nov 9, 2011 11:25 PM ET
Again????? The media is what got us the worst president in history in 2008. You are NOT going to elect the next one. Ever heard of the Internet? In the famous words of Gomer Pyle...Shame shame shame
Report Abuse

buy_the_dip | Nov 9, 2011 11:31 PM ET
CNBC...

Did it ever occur to you that Ron Paul is smashing all the polls because the PEOPLE love him??
Report Abuse

mcclain194 | Nov 9, 2011 11:33 PM ET
So as long as I vote for anyone but Dr. Paul my vote counts? WTF is that BS. You saying my vote does not count? And you claim to be NEWS more like the left hand of FOX!!!
Report Abuse

ThaddeusSKaczor | Nov 9, 2011 11:37 PM ET
Yeah, and you dismiss Ron Paul's Straw Poll wins because TOO MANY PEOPLE SHOW UP to vote for him! When he wins the Iowa caucuses (most LOCAL Iowa media say he's the front-runner with the best organization) are you going to try to have his delegates taken away, because 'TOO MANY PEOPLE VOTED FOR HIM'? Please- all you have to do you techno-luddites is limit ONE VOTE to ONE i.p. address! Or maybe you did, and he won ANYWAY! Either way, you look like idiots to anyone with more than two neurons rubbing together...
Report Abuse

poodylou | Nov 9, 2011 11:45 PM ET
If the poll was gamed so was your audience. I participated in the online chat on your site during the debate. The majority was Ron Paul supporters begging you to address him. The media makes me want to puke, they dis a candidate and then call the polls that he is obviously winning. I truly pray that the day comes and Ron Paul is President, and he wont acknowledge that the MSM newscasters that have ignored and belittled him, even exist. I am truly sorry I tuned to CNBC tonight and vow to never do it again. And, while all of us supporters are gaming, I will ask that we "game" your news channel. The only reason I tuned in in the first place was to hear a little something from Ron Paul.
Report Abuse

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

glamourmodels

Just so I understand your position... you are saying that if Paul supporters who are not cheating, yet are internet savvy and exercise their free speech to vote in a poll that it should be yanked offline? I just want to clarify your position. Is that what you are saying??

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

tl;dr Thousands of paultards whine because CNBC took down an online poll that they very clearly swarmed on mass.

Coup

Paultards still haven't figured out that no one gives a flying fuck about online polls.

Coup

CNBC wanted natural poll results. Not to be overwhelmed by thousands of neckbearded paultards.

glamourmodels

Assuming that were true... big assumption but ok... your position is that all the other candidates' supporters were "blocked" somehow from exercising their rights?? They were prevented somehow from voting in this poll?? How does your presumptive assertion make relevant them pulling it? For the record I did not vote in this poll and did not attempt to. I simply read about it on zerohedge.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

Paultards are infamous for swarming, (read: GAMING) online polls that even mention ron pauls name. Some people, CNBC included, are completely fed up with that bullshit. So bye-bye poll.

glamourmodels

Which one is it? If no one gives a fuck about online polls then why care if it was not "natural" as you say?

Let me make this simple for you. You wont win. I am smarter than you. Smarmy little jabs wont win your point and I am a better debater than anyone here I can promise you. You will have to give me a substantive answer if you want to participate in this thread and have any credibility. So which one is it? You contradicted yourself there in the space of like 30 seconds.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

If you're so smart, why are you not demonstrating any reading comprehension what so ever?

Those two quotes don't even come close to contradicting each other you retard. lmao

Coup

Here let me explain:

CNBC POSTS AN ONLINE POLL THAT NO ONE REALLY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT, THEY GET SWARMED BY A BUNCH OF FOAMING AT THE MOUTH RON PAUL FANATICS, JUST LIKE YOURSELF. THEY DECIDE TO PULL THEIR ALREADY WORTHLESS POLL BECAUSE IT'S BEEN RENDERED TO BE AN EVEN BIGGER JOKE. PAULTARDS ALL OVER THE INTERNET RAGE AGAINST THIS TERRIBLE INJUSTICE, WHICH LEADS TO YOU POSTING THIS THREAD IN RETARDED INDIGNATION ABOUT BEING STRIPPED OF YOUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS TO USELESS ONLINE POLLS.

glamourmodels

That may or may not be true. The point is debatable yet as I said I did not participate in this poll and no intention to do so so what evidence do you have that the people that did post are a disproportionate amount of supporters and the assumption that one had to be a Paul supporter to decide he won this debate and thus vote for him?

p.s.- you should take down that graphic of Noam Chomsky, I am quite sure he would be offended that you associate yourself with him just FYI, he has defended Ron Paul's positions publicly so you are at odds with someone you purport to identify with.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

LMAO. no one cares ron paul won a fucking online poll you lunatic. go cry into your damn pillow.


P.S. Noam Chomsky, Ron Paul, Santa Claus or any other man on this planet will not tell me how to think.

Also Noam Chomsky does not support Ron Pauls policies in full. If you knew shit about anything you would know that. He simply found himself in agreement with what ron paul had to say in that short sound bite.

Noam Chomsky = Libertarian Socialist / Ron Paul = Right-Wing Libertarian.

The two ideologies are about as different as night and day. But of course you knew that.. Because you're so fucking brilliant.

SleazyDream

bahhh, you Yankees already had the 'change' president. face it, whether you like it or not, the bible bangers will win and you're going republican next time. the only reason you won last time is cause obama secretly flipped a few bible bangers wives into secretly wanting some BBC, but they're over that now.

american public vote with intelligence, BUUUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

back to iraq, it's republican time baby

__________________
This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog!

Now read without the word dog.

iSpyCams

I guess you lose then because SANTA CLAUSE LIVES ON THE MOON!

glamourmodels

I am not crying, sorry to disappoint you. And dont flatter yourself, you dont think at all.

Regardless of telling you how to think, the issue is that someone you have on your avatar who presumably you agree or identify with in terms of his positions has been a defender of Ron paul. Have you even read the guys book?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufac... e_Mass_Media

"Manufacturing Consent" is the issue and how the media shapes public opinion to achieve a desired outcome. Pulling a poll where one candidate does well is precisely the kind of thing that Chomsky is talking about, or do you not have the requisite brain cell capacity to fathom that congruity?

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

Since when does Noam Chomsky have anything to do with what this thread was about anyway? Stop deflecting from the fact no one outside of raving lunatic fans of ron paul give a flying fuck about this poll.

If CNBC were "Manufacturing Consent" they would've gamed the poll in favor of someone else you retard. Not simply pulled it.

glamourmodels

I notice you edited your comment subsequent to my response so I will respond to this absudity as well. I never claimed they were ideological soul mates. Please tell me where I said he agrees with him in full. I said with regard to how consent is manufactured as per Chomsky's book the media blacking out someone whom they find threatening is precisely what Chomsky was getting at in his book so i find it ironic you are using his avatar when it seems painfully obvious you dont even comprehend the positions of the man you purport to identify or agree with. Furthermore, regardless of labels , I will speak slow here since you are obviously one of the suckers that has been baited into the left-right paradigm... the reality is that if you actually comprehended Chomsky's positions it would be clear to you that absent some idiotic label that they agree on much including ending the drug war, ending the foreign wars, and the economy. That is not to say that they agree on everything or the way to fix the problem but there is much common ground there, clearly more so than you understand.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

What part of I think for myself that you do not understand? So what if chomsky is in my avatar?

Stop trying to use chomsky against me because this thread was never about him in the first place. lol

You're simply deflecting.

glamourmodels

I am not deflecting anything. I am simply pointing out that someone on your avatar agrees more with me than agrees with you which I find ironic. As to the point of the poll being gamed... what could CNBC have done that would have met your requirements for gaming the poll? Polls can be easily gamed in general by what questions you ask and how, but in this case it's pretty straightforward. Who won the Republican debate? How could they have gamed this poll?

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Ayla_SquareTurtle

The bullshit he spews on his own official site is enough to make me want to punch the old fogie in the nose. Fuck the debate.

__________________

glamourmodels

I am not deflecting no matter how many times you repeat it does not make it true. First of all a deflection is a defensive maneuver - that presupposes that you have made an offensive maneuver and made some kind of point that I would need to deflect, you havent. If you really want to know why I brought him up it's because A) As I said I find it ironic that someone you identify with agrees with me more than agrees with you and B) Frankly I am offended that such an imbecile as you would put him on your avatar. Chomsky is a great man, you on the other hand are a dipshit and if I was Chomsky I would sue you to remove to avoid being tainted by association with such a dipshit.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

crockett

It's a conspiracy.. I bet CNBC blew up the WTC as well.

D Ghost

If they wanted it to just be from the "CNBC audience" they should have not made it publicly accessible ;)

glamourmodels

Can you be more specific and not speak in generalizations?

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

nation-x

The Republican Party doesn't want Ron Paul to win... if he would just quit letting them use him for fundraising and run as an Independent, he might have a chance to win.

Ayla_SquareTurtle

His whole stance on abortion is fucking stupid. States rights is a red herring and just a way to be anti-woman without having to be honest about it. Fuck Ron Paul.

__________________

Coup

They could have you know.. shown someone else winning before pulling it?
That's simply for the viewers to decide for themselves I guess unless an official winner was declared after the debate was over. Was an official winner declared? I wouldn't know because I don't give a shit about republican nor democratic debates.

glamourmodels

Saying it's a conspiracy and making a snarky comment about it is a psychological ploy and tactic to dissuade people from expressing a affirmative view. I never used the word conspiracy but there does seem to clearly be an agenda amongst the media to black Paul out as this has happened multiple times in multiple news outlets including Fox news

http://rt.com/usa/news/fox-paul-debate-poll-257/

If you?ve noticed a lack of Ron Paul in the mainstream media?s coverage of the 2012 presidential race, it might not be an accident. After he placed first in a Fox News poll, the outlet has removed the results from their website without explanation.

Fox had launched an online poll to gauge readers? opinions on last night?s Republican show-down and asked their audience, ?Which GOP presidential candidate do you think won the Fox News/Google debate?? At one point Paul placed in first, with 30 percent of the votes, but a reader of Infowars.com has pointed out that the poll has disappeared from the website, or has been shuffled to another page far from the front of Fox?s political coverage.

Logging onto the poll now produces an error in which the user is told ?No content item selected.?

A screen shot of the poll produced by Infowars shows that Paul led with 24,894 votes, with Mitt Romney trailing in second place with 22,656 votes, of 27 percent of the total. Rick Perry placed third with 15 percent of the votes, followed by Herman Cain with 9 percent.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Tempest

I really don't understand the entire fascination for Ron Paul... Oh sure some of the things he says sound great but in practice would be detrimental to everyone.. He has no chance of winning so all his followers are wasting their time and effort.. and even if by some slim chance he did win, he couldn't do anything anyway since it's the congress and senate that actually get things done and since he would adhere to the constitution, he wouldn't be doing any executive orders etc. So what would he do? Veto every bill that comes to his desk? yeah.. like he would be in office very long if he did that.. and so at the end of the day he'd either be a very short term president, probably end up getting impeached, or he would play ball and show everyone that he's just a politician like everyone else.

glamourmodels

I think while he hopes for the Republican nomination, I believe he might jump over to the Libertarian Party if it becomes evident he cant win the GOP nom, but he has not said as much, it's just my personal opinion.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Ayla_SquareTurtle

__________________

Coup

Ron Paul never gets mainstream coverage boohoo
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=of...1360&bih =583

Coup

The guy wins every online poll. Paultards still whine. Pathetic.

Coup

If online polls meant anything he would already be president. lol

Get over it.. online polls mean nothing.

glamourmodels

Completely untrue and a total misrepresentation of his position on the issue. You clearly have no conception of how the United States was set up. States rights is not a red herring no matter how many times that lie is repeated. The whole reason the US was set up that way with States rights was so that if you did not like the laws in one State you could move to another. At worst case under a President Paul some radical southern States could bar it but people would be free to simply cross the border to a neighboring State to get the proceedure. Think people in LA going to Vegas for the weekend to gamble. I am sure that with all the pro choice groups around they could have chartered bus excursions if that happened which is unlikely. Plus he is against a constitutional amendment and you have to remember that if an amendment to guarantee abortions on demand can be apssed, an amendment to ban all abortions could be passed which could not happen under a Paul presidency so your whole comment is the red herring, sorry. Next-

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

WarChild

If the poll was correct and not gamed in anyway then it should be an accurate reflection, within its margin of error, of how the people really feel. If this is the case Ron Paul will win hands down. So what's the issue exactly?

__________________
.

Ayla_SquareTurtle

I don't have time today to tell you everything wrong with that. Next.

__________________

WarChild

I'm confused as to what the issue is? Polls are not meant to shape the views of others but rather measure them.

Is your problem that you don't think MSNBC is being fair to Mr. Paul? What would you suggest happen? Maybe the government steps in and legislates the media so they have to be "fair"? Isn't there something in your beloved constitution about allowing the media to be free?

__________________
.

glamourmodels

Yes true, and I would not put it past them at all, however then it requires letting people in on it and then leaks can occur. The manufactured consent paradigm is more subtle than that. This poll was the official declaration of the winner as far as I know. As I said I just saw the zerohedge article I am not sure. I dont give a shit either specifically as you do. What I do give a shit about is the media manipulating public opinion to generate an outcome vis a vis Chomsky's premise which is why as I said I was irritated with your comment because I like him as you do. I am not a right winger, I just dont like manipulation of the population to achieve a desired result. We are probably not so far apart on issues as you might think, you should give Ron Paul a second look. If you hate him after that look then thats perfectly fine with me but as YOU said- dont let anyone tell you how to think... yanking a poll because it does not give you the result you want is de facto TELLING PEOPLE WHAT TO THINK, you should be on my side if you really are as independent as you claim.

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

glamourmodels

Well you are a canadian so your opinion on this really doesnt matter anyway LOL, but for clarity's sake, can you be specific? What things?

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Poindexterity

That worst case scenario can still result in quite a few absolute nightmares for quite a few people. I think we can do better than that.

If your argument were in a void, i could almost get in that car with you, but it's on ron paul road, which unfortunately for us, leads to coat hanger lane.

__________________
no sig

Ayla_SquareTurtle

Don't blame others for having higher standards than you.

__________________

glamourmodels

Who are you referring to exactly? Do you mean me?? And if you are then how exactly is being a watchdog of the media whining exactly?? Defending free speech is pathetic in your book? Ok, I see where you stand LOL

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Coup

Stop trying to tell me what to think, I thought you were against that sort of thing.


I don't support Ron Paul because I don't think there should even be a US President, nor US Federal government. And I'm not going to support that horseshit circus in any way shape or form.

You know. Just kinda like how Noam Chomsky sees it.

Coup

Watch Dog of the Media?

Defending Free Speech?

No one cares about obscure online polls. This thread is nothing more than a whine-fest.

glamourmodels

Here, let me translate that for you... you dont have the intellectual capacity to debate me and you know you are full of shit so you will just throw out some non response and hope nobody notices. There, fixed that for you. Next-

__________________
Hot london escorts and international escort directory

Ayla_SquareTurtle

Yeah, whatever you need to believe. I know more about the issue of abortion than probably everyone else in this thread combined.

If you really want to know what I think and why I think it, I agree with what Poindexterity said as well as almost every website you can find on the topic of Ron Paul and his asstard "states rights" opinions.

I've debated people with much better points to make than you made, so been there, done that, don't feel like going back.

__________________