CNBC learns not to mess with Ron Paul

[HeXploiT]

I've been following the story and debate concerning the last cnbc poll on the republican debates and it has been interesting to say the least. To sum up cnbc took down its poll because Paul was dominating with something like 71% by supposedly "hacking" the poll. Then another cnbc editor responded days later and apologized for taking it down.

It has culminated in the following article at RawStory.com.

There's a great video at the bottom of the page as well. 😀




--------------------

 

[Pabster]

RawStory propaganda FTL. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[RaiderJ]

Interesting to see that whenever RP wins a poll online, it must be hackers. Those same hackers have apparently taken over Digg too.

 

[techs]

And once again Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejebsus out of me.
Seriously, you guys make the Hitler Youth seem like they were mildly supportive of Der Fuehrer.

 

[dualsmp]

Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

Other polls = gallup polls, which he is at 5%. The reason is that a more general audience, which is what gallup goes after, have actually heard about him.

Whereas all of the straw polls combined, Paul overall is ranking #1 in. That's because people that are involved in politics know Paul, and the GOP is losing base fast right now (turnouts are really low). People will just say that straw polls don't matter, but his movement is real. I'm seeing posters, bumper stickers, and people at work talk about him. But they all must be spammers, huh?

You can claim hacking, spamming, but even with text polls after Fox News debates, he gets a high percentage. You can only vote once per mobile phone. Call it spamming if you'd like, but I call it organization.

He's going to be on Jay Leno on the 30th, and he's going to begin advertising. Since his financial numbers for Q3 were reported, the media is beginning to take him seriously.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Legend

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

Other polls = gallup polls, which he is at 5%. The reason is that a more general audience, which is what gallup goes after, have actually heard about him.

Whereas all of the straw polls combined, Paul overall is ranking #1 in. That's because people that are involved in politics know Paul, and the GOP is losing base fast right now (turnouts are really low). People will just say that straw polls don't matter, but his movement is real. I'm seeing posters, bumper stickers, and people at work talk about him. But they all must be spammers, huh?

You can claim hacking, spamming, but even with text polls after Fox News debates, he gets a high percentage. You can only vote once per mobile phone. Call it spamming if you'd like, but I call it organization.

He's going to be on Jay Leno on the 30th, and he's going to begin advertising. Since his financial numbers for Q3 were reported, the media is beginning to take him seriously.

Like I said, Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejeebers out of me.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: techs
And once again Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejebsus out of me.

Good.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Topic Title: CNBC learns not to mess with Ron Paul

Now if we could only get Perry404 to stop messing with P&N :thumbsdown:

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Legend

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

Other polls = gallup polls, which he is at 5%. The reason is that a more general audience, which is what gallup goes after, have actually heard about him.

Whereas all of the straw polls combined, Paul overall is ranking #1 in. That's because people that are involved in politics know Paul, and the GOP is losing base fast right now (turnouts are really low). People will just say that straw polls don't matter, but his movement is real. I'm seeing posters, bumper stickers, and people at work talk about him. But they all must be spammers, huh?

You can claim hacking, spamming, but even with text polls after Fox News debates, he gets a high percentage. You can only vote once per mobile phone. Call it spamming if you'd like, but I call it organization.

He's going to be on Jay Leno on the 30th, and he's going to begin advertising. Since his financial numbers for Q3 were reported, the media is beginning to take him seriously.

Like I said, Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejeebers out of me.

Scare you because we have a disagreement with how government should be managed? Or scare you because you don't follow or believe in the things that I said?

If the second case is what you think, then I can provide a bunch of links about news articles of Paul winning dozens of Straw Polls, a bunch of mass media videos following his 5 million reported (he's already raised another 1 million since early October).

If it's the first case, then I'll take that as a complement because I strongly disagree with you about economics and I think I disagree with you about Iraq because I suspect you support Democratic Candidates that will continue our occupation of the Middle East.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Legend

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

Other polls = gallup polls, which he is at 5%. The reason is that a more general audience, which is what gallup goes after, have actually heard about him.

Whereas all of the straw polls combined, Paul overall is ranking #1 in. That's because people that are involved in politics know Paul, and the GOP is losing base fast right now (turnouts are really low). People will just say that straw polls don't matter, but his movement is real. I'm seeing posters, bumper stickers, and people at work talk about him. But they all must be spammers, huh?

You can claim hacking, spamming, but even with text polls after Fox News debates, he gets a high percentage. You can only vote once per mobile phone. Call it spamming if you'd like, but I call it organization.

He's going to be on Jay Leno on the 30th, and he's going to begin advertising. Since his financial numbers for Q3 were reported, the media is beginning to take him seriously.

It doesn't matter if it's hacking or just really good organization, the point is that the polls do not even come close to reflecting any sort of reality because of the intentional actions of Ron Paul supporters. I think online and text message polls are pretty pointless anyways, but at least they are usually only mildly innacurate due to sampling problems. If a group is intentionally skewing them, I say ditch the polls alltogether. Ron Paul can win as many internet polls as he likes, it won't matter at all come election day.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

5%-6% percent in the latest polls. He has doubled and tripled his support in these major polls in a very short period of time.
Please keep in mind also that those republicans being polled are those that registered for the last election in which there was no major opposition to Bush and turnout was a record low. Look up the numbers yourself. Ron Paul sweeps online polls for the same reason he sweeps straw polls. His supporters are 10x as motivated as other supporters. They are knocking on more doors, donating more money and time by far than any other. This is why he is climbing in the polls at such an astounding pace. Get ready for a surprise America. By the time New Hampshire rolls around Paul will be at 12% in these "scientific polls" which don't even include previous independents & democrats who are crossing over in droves to vote for Paul.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

5%-6% percent in the latest polls. He has doubled and tripled his support in these major polls in a very short period of time.
Please keep in mind also that those republicans being polled are those that registered for the last election in which there was no major opposition to Bush and turnout was a record low. Look up the numbers yourself. Ron Paul sweeps online polls for the same reason he sweeps straw polls. His supporters are 10x as motivated as other supporters. They are knocking on more doors, donating more money and time by far than any other. This is why he is climbing in the polls at such an astounding pace. Get ready for a surprise America. By the time New Hampshire rolls around Paul will be at 12% in these "scientific polls" which don't even include previous independents & democrats who are crossing over in droves to vote for Paul.

Look, you can tell yourself whatever you want...but do you REALLY believe that explanation makes up for a gap of 70%? I'd be willing to believe that there will be SOME new voters this time around, but unless there are 50 million Ron Paul supporters hiding in the woodwork, I'd say the scientific polls are a lot closer to reality.

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's not likely that they track the IP address, it would deny too many possible participants (like people behind a corporate NAT/PAT, or only one member of a family/house/home/building). Aside from that, it's just too much work for a trivial and admitted "un-scientific" poll. That's disclaimed right up front.

Also, again, spamming an online, web-based poll is a fairly trivial script in Perl (using LWP), and I'm sure it's pretty easy in Python as well, and probably Ruby and a dozen other languages.. LWP is a very common "screen scraper" module for Perl, it can accept a cookie and ignore it.

Setting up a variety of source addresses is also not really that hard either, since the destination site is almost certainly not checking the validity of the destination address.

I have no evidence one way or the other, and I don't really care; I'm just pointing out that it's not that difficult to script a screen scraper & responder, we do it in the Lab all the time to try and bomb our internal (lab)websites.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Legend

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

Other polls = gallup polls, which he is at 5%. The reason is that a more general audience, which is what gallup goes after, have actually heard about him.

Whereas all of the straw polls combined, Paul overall is ranking #1 in. That's because people that are involved in politics know Paul, and the GOP is losing base fast right now (turnouts are really low). People will just say that straw polls don't matter, but his movement is real. I'm seeing posters, bumper stickers, and people at work talk about him. But they all must be spammers, huh?

You can claim hacking, spamming, but even with text polls after Fox News debates, he gets a high percentage. You can only vote once per mobile phone. Call it spamming if you'd like, but I call it organization.

He's going to be on Jay Leno on the 30th, and he's going to begin advertising. Since his financial numbers for Q3 were reported, the media is beginning to take him seriously.

It doesn't matter if it's hacking or just really good organization, the point is that the polls do not even come close to reflecting any sort of reality because of the intentional actions of Ron Paul supporters. I think online and text message polls are pretty pointless anyways, but at least they are usually only mildly innacurate due to sampling problems. If a group is intentionally skewing them, I say ditch the polls alltogether. Ron Paul can win as many internet polls as he likes, it won't matter at all come election day.

Money talks the best, and the rate at which Paul is building up cash is increasing. Your post also ignored his straw poll results.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/

You can't seriously call all of these straw polls worthless and gallup as supreme. Not when stuff like this is happening.

The embarrassing part is that Mitt Romney actually showed up...and Ron Paul didn't.

Ron Paul won the GOP presidential straw poll conducted by organizers at the Conservative Leadership Conference held at the Nugget Casino this weekend "by a large margin," according to an organizer.

Paul won with 33 percent, Romney came in second with 16 percent and Duncan Hunter was just behind with 15 percent. "Undecided" was fourth with 11 percent, and Thompson and Giuliani were next and ahead of the rest of the pack--all in single digits. Raw numbers haven't been provided, but there were approximately 430 registrants at the opening of the conference.

Although many of the Republican presidential teams had surrogates representing them at the conference, Mitt Romney and Duncan Hunter were the only candidates to speak at the conference, and the victor himself was not there.

http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/10/mitt_romney_los.php
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com...2007/10/14/410525.aspx

 

[dualsmp]

Please don't feed the Loons - Ignore "Ron Paul" threads

You need to follow your own advice.. There's plenty of loony Hillary supporter threads going. Give those a try.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

5%-6% percent in the latest polls. He has doubled and tripled his support in these major polls in a very short period of time.
Please keep in mind also that those republicans being polled are those that registered for the last election in which there was no major opposition to Bush and turnout was a record low. Look up the numbers yourself. Ron Paul sweeps online polls for the same reason he sweeps straw polls. His supporters are 10x as motivated as other supporters. They are knocking on more doors, donating more money and time by far than any other. This is why he is climbing in the polls at such an astounding pace. Get ready for a surprise America. By the time New Hampshire rolls around Paul will be at 12% in these "scientific polls" which don't even include previous independents & democrats who are crossing over in droves to vote for Paul.

Look, you can tell yourself whatever you want...but do you REALLY believe that explanation makes up for a gap of 70%? I'd be willing to believe that there will be SOME new voters this time around, but unless there are 50 million Ron Paul supporters hiding in the woodwork, I'd say the scientific polls are a lot closer to reality.

I would agree that reality is much closer to 6% then 70%. I also believe it is closer to 8-9%.
And finally i think most people can agree that his support is growing at an astounding rate.
Where will it go? Who knows. No doubt the odds are against us but the future looks bright! 🙂

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Those mischievous internet Ron Paul hackers! Has he gone through the logs, sussed out the IP's, and put them in the "Ron hacker" database? Or are all these "Ron hackers" based on conjecture and conspiracy theories on the part of CNBC? Maybe they can post the entire log of actual votes cast vs. IP address. Most of these online polls allow only one vote per IP, even if deleting the cookie and trying to vote again. I say CNBC show the evidence of all these hackers.

It's probably based on the fact that the chance of Ron Paul receiving 71% of the votes in a poll with 30,000 votes or so votes is astronomically low when taking into account the other polls that put him at 2% or less.

5%-6% percent in the latest polls. He has doubled and tripled his support in these major polls in a very short period of time.
Please keep in mind also that those republicans being polled are those that registered for the last election in which there was no major opposition to Bush and turnout was a record low. Look up the numbers yourself. Ron Paul sweeps online polls for the same reason he sweeps straw polls. His supporters are 10x as motivated as other supporters. They are knocking on more doors, donating more money and time by far than any other. This is why he is climbing in the polls at such an astounding pace. Get ready for a surprise America. By the time New Hampshire rolls around Paul will be at 12% in these "scientific polls" which don't even include previous independents & democrats who are crossing over in droves to vote for Paul.

Look, you can tell yourself whatever you want...but do you REALLY believe that explanation makes up for a gap of 70%? I'd be willing to believe that there will be SOME new voters this time around, but unless there are 50 million Ron Paul supporters hiding in the woodwork, I'd say the scientific polls are a lot closer to reality.

I would agree that reality is much closer to 6% then 70%. I also believe it is closer to 8-9%.
And finally i think most people can agree that his support is growing at an astounding rate.
Where will it go? Who knows. No doubt the odds are against us but the future looks bright! 🙂

For what it's worth, I think Ron Paul will be an important lesson. Since he would make a terrible President, I think his contributing in losing will be more important than any he could make if he won. He is such a fringe candidate compared to anyone else that any support outside of the margin of error is going to make people sit up and take notice. 2004 was a bad election because it was so completely polarized around two bad choices. If it starts to look at all like people are moving away from the mainstream in disgust, it could shake things up enough to maybe give us some better candidates. I don't think we'll move away from Democrat vs Republican any time soon, but maybe we could move away from re-running Kerry vs Bush.

 

[ProfJohn]

There is going to be some serious crow eating when the voting starts.

I would guess that Paul is a non-issue by the second or third week of January.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: techs
And once again Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejebsus out of me.
Seriously, you guys make the Hitler Youth seem like they were mildly supportive of Der Fuehrer.

LOL, the only guy who can get the US out of Iraq and you don't like the people who support that... man you are a joke. You think Hillary and Obama can take time away from their lobbists to get us out?

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: techs
And once again Ron Pauls supporters scare the bejebsus out of me.
Seriously, you guys make the Hitler Youth seem like they were mildly supportive of Der Fuehrer.

^^^
that is what a nutjob does to peoples

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
There is going to be some serious crow eating when the voting starts.

I would guess that Paul is a non-issue by the second or third week of January.

I'm not sure that's a good thing. I've made no secret of my dislike of Ron Paul's politics, but I think our system is a little too good at turning everyone who isn't some middle of the road goober into a "non-issue". Am I the only one who keeps being surprised that in a nation of 300 million people, the two gomers who end up squaring off are the best we can do?

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: dualsmp

Please don't feed the Loons - Ignore "Ron Paul" threads

You need to follow your own advice.. There's plenty of loony Hillary supporter threads going. Give those a try.

I didn't even mention the candidate (positive or negative); I'm just pointing out that scripted online manipulation is generally a fairly easy thing, unless the site takes a great deal of pain to filter (most do not, it would break many search engine crawlers).

Just trying to keep the technical stuff straight. It's not magic.

Besides, I wait until the threads are already bumped so it doesn't substantially add to the "top time."

By and large, there doesn't seem to be the same level of fanaticism toward (possibly some against) HRC, or any of the other candidates, for that matter; but that's not why I posted.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
There is going to be some serious crow eating when the voting starts.

I would guess that Paul is a non-issue by the second or third week of January.

I'd say he's toast after January 3. But we'll see :laugh: