How many states would Ron Paul win without media bias?

[airdata]

I'd really be curious to know. There's been a well documented campaign against Ron Paul in the media. What it really boils down to is voter fraud. So many votes come directly from what people see in the media.

When the media perpetuates lies about the most honest candidate in the field, well, it's not fair and it's not moral. The funny thing here is that the people against Ron Paul always pretend to take the moral high ground and yet they go along with these morally bankrupt tactics to defeat Ron Paul.

I think that if Ron Paul was treated fair in the media that he would no doubt have already won several states. He's come in close 2nd or 3rd place in many states behind mr frothy and the #1 corporate sponsored Romney.

There's no doubt that if the rampant voter fraud were not occurring that Ron Paul would be leading the field.

 

[fskimospy]

Zero.

Ron Paul has enormously unpopular political positions on a variety of issues. He is a victim of his own insane ideology.

 

[soundforbjt]

Same as he's won so far. He has some good ideas and alot of wacky ones. The sheer amount of wacky ones cancel out the few good ones.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Same as he's won so far. He has some good ideas and alot of wacky ones. The sheer amount of wacky ones cancel out the few good ones.

This. A few awesome ideas. A ton of "holy shit what are you thinking" bad ideas.

 

[micrometers]

Zero.

Ron Paul has enormously unpopular political positions on a variety of issues. He is a victim of his own insane ideology.

lol.

the thing about libertarians is that they are good at criticizing but not really good at putting forth solutions.

 

[Demo24]

There's no doubt that if the rampant voter fraud were not occurring that Ron Paul would be leading the field.

And if you actually had proof of this then you could actually write something other than an opinion post.

 

[momeNt]

He probably would have won every state if the media gave him the same bias they give the candidates they are pushing. A lack of bias would have still left him at 0, he would have needed media SUPPORT to win states not lack of bias against.

 

[soundforbjt]

Shouldn't you Paul supporters just give up and start threads on Rand Paul for 2016?

 

[FerrelGeek]

Zero.

Ron Paul has enormously unpopular political positions on a variety of issues. He is a victim of his own insane ideology.

Same as he's won so far. He has some good ideas and alot of wacky ones. The sheer amount of wacky ones cancel out the few good ones.

lol.

the thing about libertarians is that they are good at criticizing but not really good at putting forth solutions.

/Thread

 

[dphantom]

Zero

 

[Nintendesert]

The same number he's winning now.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

He'd probably win as many states as he's had sponsored bills signed into law in his 22 years in Congress, which is exactly 1. Yep, in 22 years he has 1 win and 620 losses.

 

[momeNt]

He'd probably win as many states as he's had sponsored bills signed into law in his 22 years in Congress, which is exactly 1. Yep, in 22 years he has 1 win and 620 losses.

It's not baseball you idiot. Nearly every law grows government in some way or another. So a man whose goal is to specifically shrink government, going against politicians looking to specifically grow government, is probably going to have a hard time getting government to be smaller by passing legislation that removes laws.

I'd be a lot more worried about the man who in 20 years or something passes 800 laws. Just what freedoms did he take away from me in those 800 laws!

 

[PokerGuy]

I'd really be curious to know. There's been a well documented campaign against Ron Paul in the media.

Well documented campaign? Really? Where? Paul bots running around screaming Paul doesn't get a fair shake does not constitute a "well documented campaign"

There's no doubt that if the rampant voter fraud were not occurring that Ron Paul would be leading the field.

Rampant voter fraud? So when polling companies go out and ask people who they will vote for, and the vote comes pretty close to matching those polls, you seriously think there's some massive voter fraud going on?

Anyway, in answer to the question: 0, same as he's actually won.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

It's not baseball you idiot. Nearly every law grows government in some way or another. So a man whose goal is to specifically shrink government, going against politicians looking to specifically grow government, is probably going to have a hard time getting government to be smaller by passing legislation that removes laws.

I'd be a lot more worried about the man who in 20 years or something passes 800 laws. Just what freedoms did he take away from me in those 800 laws!

Of course it's not baseball. If it was he probably wouldn't have lasted a year with such a lousy record.

What it indicates is that he's so thoroughly entrenched in trying to pass his wacky ideas into law that he isn't actually getting anything done for the people he repesents. Apparently he's perfectly happy obstinately pissing directly into a gale force wind instead of turning just a bit to avoid getting urine soaked. Why would anyone want a guy for president who is clearly so wrapped up in his own egotistical ideologies that he doesn't actually get anything done?

 

[a777pilot]

LOL!

If it were not for media bias and the MSM's political agenda, we would not have the Fool, Bobo, the Post Turtle, as President in the first place.

 

[Anarchist420]

People who vote but not for him are stupid or are making millions of dollars due to the federal government.

The root of the problem is the CIA. The state increases its control to maintain and even increase control over society. The big stations (Faux, CNN, MSNBC, ABC) are controlled by the CIA. If people actually knew some history, then we'd be somewhere good. Unfortunately, people believe what they're told in their government run or government subsidized schools via their government-sponsored textbooks.

 

[woodie1]

As has already been stated above, I seriously doubt that the number of delegates he has would change much even if there wasn't this purported media bias you claim to see.

 

[airdata]

And if you actually had proof of this then you could actually write something other than an opinion post.

The proof has been posted in other threads countless times. It's not my responsibility that you understand common knowledge.

 

[airdata]

As has already been stated above, I seriously doubt that the number of delegates he has would change much even if there wasn't this purported media bias you claim to see.

Same w\ the last post... it's not a claim. The media bias against Ron Paul has been well documented. It ranges from him being totally omitted from top 3 results on numerous occasions to sanctioned debate moderators calling him out during debates in attempts to make their viewers doubt him.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Zero, based on recent polling he can't win the GOP nomination in the Congressional District he currently represents.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Zero, based on recent polling he can't win the GOP nomination in the Congressional District he currently represents.

But clearly the people he's represented all these years know nothing of Ron Paul due to the media bias. Or is this one going to be the rampant obvious fraud Paulbots can't even slightly prove at play?

 

[woodie1]

Same w\ the last post... it's not a claim. The media bias against Ron Paul has been well documented. It ranges from him being totally omitted from top 3 results on numerous occasions to sanctioned debate moderators calling him out during debates in attempts to make their viewers doubt him.

Since nobody takes him seriously as a Republican candidate why doesn't he run as an independent?

 

[BoberFett]

Zero.

Ron Paul has enormously unpopular political positions on a variety of issues. He is a victim of the stupidity of the average person voting for the slickest liar.

You were half right.

 

[micrometers]

The thing about Ron Paul is that yes, he didn't accomplish anything in the House and Senate.

Now, to hold this up as a virtue, you would have to take the position that the House and Senate bills had no virtue whatsoever in them. You would have to paint the legislators as evil or idiots or something like that.

Well, sorry to say, but most legislators know a heck a lot more about issues than the average person. The average person wants a big expensive military, big expensive social security and medicare, and tax cuts on top of it all.

So what you're left with in Ron Paul is someone who doesn't possess the people skills to get legislators to go along with him. Even if by some magic you could replace the House and Senate with card carrying libertarians, I doubt Ron Paul would be able to get anything done.