How many states would Ron Paul win without media bias?

[airdata]

I guess I'll help some of you out who seem to be incapable of processing certain facts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR7oBdgazJI

This isn't the particular video I was looking for but still shows plenty of examples of ignoring or slandering Ron Paul in the media. Once or twice... sure, you could call it a coincidence but it's happened non stop since early last year.

If you think that the media has no effect on voters, you're beyond hope. There are hundreds of thousands of voters in our country who vote based on who they're presented in the media. And if the media is simply leaving Ron Paul out of the equation they are effectively manipulating the election.

 

[thraashman]

I think if the media gave him the attention and scrutiny that they gave to the front running candidates and the current President, Paul wouldn't even have the support he does. The media giving him attention means that more than just his few good ideas would be brought up. His mountain-load of crazy ideas would be brought to attention as well. I'd say in fact that were the media to give Ron Paul the same level of attention that Romney or Santorum got, that Paul would never again reach an elected office.

Virtually all of my knowledge of Ron Paul has come from independent research I did after seeing him in a debate. After that first debate, I liked his mention of blowback. It was something I'd been wishing a Republican would recognize for years. Then I looked into his view overall ... and I realized he was a loony tunes character. And his economic views are so bad that he may be the most dangerous candidate.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Ron Paul's pointless Internet presidency

 

[Ausm]

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.

I agree!

 

[Anarchist420]

I think if the media gave him the attention and scrutiny that they gave to the front running candidates and the current President, Paul wouldn't even have the support he does. The media giving him attention means that more than just his few good ideas would be brought up. His mountain-load of crazy ideas would be brought to attention as well. I'd say in fact that were the media to give Ron Paul the same level of attention that Romney or Santorum got, that Paul would never again reach an elected office.

Virtually all of my knowledge of Ron Paul has come from independent research I did after seeing him in a debate. After that first debate, I liked his mention of blowback. It was something I'd been wishing a Republican would recognize for years. Then I looked into his view overall ... and I realized he was a loony tunes character. And his economic views are so bad that he may be the most dangerous candidate.

I'm not trying to be a dick but... there is something wrong with you if you liked his anti-war policy but you think he's worse because you want tax revenues to go to you and well connected corporations. You're a really selfish person to put your handouts ahead of all the dying American troops and the innocent brown people that are getting murdered.

 

[fskimospy]

I guess I'll help some of you out who seem to be incapable of processing certain facts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR7oBdgazJI

This isn't the particular video I was looking for but still shows plenty of examples of ignoring or slandering Ron Paul in the media. Once or twice... sure, you could call it a coincidence but it's happened non stop since early last year.

If you think that the media has no effect on voters, you're beyond hope. There are hundreds of thousands of voters in our country who vote based on who they're presented in the media. And if the media is simply leaving Ron Paul out of the equation they are effectively manipulating the election.

As others mentioned, he lost his OWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. Did the media conspire to defeat him there as well? Are his district members afflicted with amnesia?

This is another one of those article of faith conspiracies just like the truthers and the birthers. (in fact, I'm willing to bet that truthers are quite over-represented among Paul supporters)

 

[Anarchist420]

(in fact, I'm willing to bet that truthers are quite over-represented among Paul supporters)

That's because supporters o' Dr. Paul are the smartest

 

[Londo_Jowo]

As others mentioned, he lost his OWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. Did the media conspire to defeat him there as well? Are his district members afflicted with amnesia?

This is another one of those article of faith conspiracies just like the truthers and the birthers. (in fact, I'm willing to bet that truthers are quite over-represented among Paul supporters)

This poll was done several weeks ago. I can find where they published the local Houston polling but the report was that it was very close to the statewide poll.

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-p...ection/santorum-leads-republican-field-texas/

 

[fskimospy]

That's because supporters o' Dr. Paul are the smartest

How do we explain you then?

 

[Thump553]

So I'm reading this thread thinking the paulbots are expecailly cranky and far out today, then I remember full moon and it all makes sense.

Still trying to figure out my connection with the CIA because I'm sure not making millions off the federal government.

 

[halik]

Zero.

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

Truth;

 

[JEDIYoda]

That's because supporters o' Dr. Paul are the smartest

With that statement alone all the people who have supported Ron whats his name are shaking their heads in shame to even be associated with you...lolol

 

[First]

His stances have been debunked many times before and the media correctly calls out his nutter theories for exactly what they are; nuts. Sometimes the media rightly dismisses or even ridicules a candidate, and for once they got it right with Paul. Take any policy position and try and have a debate about it with any poster here; be it the Constitution, economics, health care, etc. Paul's stances are awful on all those issues, it's well documented, and much of it isn't even debatable because there are literally centuries of history to back up why in belief in, say, Austrian economics or the illegality of tax laws are complete, utterly worthless bunk.

 

[DrPizza]

I think if the media gave him the attention and scrutiny that they gave to the front running candidates and the current President, Paul wouldn't even have the support he does. The media giving him attention means that more than just his few good ideas would be brought up. His mountain-load of crazy ideas would be brought to attention as well. I'd say in fact that were the media to give Ron Paul the same level of attention that Romney or Santorum got, that Paul would never again reach an elected office.

Virtually all of my knowledge of Ron Paul has come from independent research I did after seeing him in a debate. After that first debate, I liked his mention of blowback. It was something I'd been wishing a Republican would recognize for years. Then I looked into his view overall ... and I realized he was a loony tunes character. And his economic views are so bad that he may be the most dangerous candidate.

Ditto me, except I researched his ideas after he had been brought up numerous times on this forum. I used his own website for my preliminary research. Some good ideas, plenty of unrealistic dreams, and tons of nutty ideas.

Oddly though, Santorum also has some of these same faults, though not in the same quantities. I'm not quite sure how he's doing as well as he is - seems he keeps trying to shoot himself in the foot.

 

[chowderhead]

One.
Ron Paul would carry the state of denial.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Ditto me, except I researched his ideas after he had been brought up numerous times on this forum. I used his own website for my preliminary research. Some good ideas, plenty of unrealistic dreams, and tons of nutty ideas.

Oddly though, Santorum also has some of these same faults, though not in the same quantities. I'm not quite sure how he's doing as well as he is - seems he keeps trying to shoot himself in the foot.

Senator Santorum's faults are shared by a larger portion of the Republican electorate. Theocracy is remarkably popular with "Social Conservatives", at least so long as it is their own religious beliefs that are to be imposed.

 

[Karl Agathon]

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.

I agree....

I actually like some of his ideas. They are however canceled out by the batshit crazy ones though.

 

[homercles337]

There's been a well documented campaign against Ron Paul in the media.

This is where you provide proof. Paul is a fucking loon, as are his "ideas." He is a Regressive and a majority of the populace hate him for a reason. "Media bias?" No. The Corporate Media loves "controversy." Airing Paul's ideas make him irrelevant, and not good for the Corporate Media.

 

[schneiderguy]

Ron Paul won five of the states on Tuesday. He got the most delegates (something the media won't tell you).

 

[Fern]

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.

I think the term "voter fraud" is incorrect here. I believe you are looking for the term "election fraud", meaning the counting was rigged, not individual voters actually committing fraud (voting twice, fictitious persons voting etc.)

Pretty much every supporter of every candidate feels their candidate is treated unfairly. And they are likely correct to a certain degree.

I did notice in the beginning that Ron Paul was always placed on the outside during debates. Frankly, that's normal for someone who polls as low as he does. And no, the media groups hosting the debates don't care about internet polls, they have paid for scientific polls and going to rely on those.

I also noted that in the early debates Ron Paul had fewer speaking opportunities. To an extent he was unfairly overlooked by the panel. So I agree there was a point there. However, if you watch the debates closely, or check out their rules, those with the most speaking time are the ones most attacked by other candidates. When you get attacked, you get an opportunity to respond. Ron Paul was rarely attacked by his fellow candidates so he rarely got the 'extra' opportunity to speak afforded by attacks.

I think you'd have a much better case if the media started hammering him in debates or interviews for his supposed racists views etc. IMO, they've been fairly deferential to him. They clearly have shown no intent to 'destroy' him.

Nor have they drilled down on some of his more 'exotic' policy views. If they wanted, they could have really turned up the heat on those.

If he has in any way been ignored, it's been to his advantage as well as his detriment.

They say hell is getting what you wish for. I'd say that may well apply in the case of Dr Ron Paul's supporters.

Fern

 

[Fern]

As others mentioned, he lost his OWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
-snip-

Texas hasn't voted yet. (I'm assuming you're referring to the Texas primary. I don't know what else it could, I've heard he's not running for reelection to the House.)

Fern

 

[allenk09]

This is where you provide proof. Paul is a fucking loon, as are his "ideas." He is a Regressive and a majority of the populace hate him for a reason. "Media bias?" No. The Corporate Media loves "controversy." Airing Paul's ideas make him irrelevant, and not good for the Corporate Media.

Wait, so is Santorum also a 'fucking loon'?

I think a lot of people on this forum simply don't understand Ron Paul's ideas, and we might as well include...not knowing anything about government or the USA at all. It's sad to see people want someone who is going to make government bigger, go into more wars, and continue to fuck us over for another 4-8 years. It's ridiculous! This is my last post in the politics forum as it's full of a bunch retards who hate being free and having liberty.

 

[Fern]

Wait, so is Santorum also a 'fucking loon'?
-snip-

Hehe.

If you'd have spent much time here in P&N you would certainly know that many see Santorum as a loon, or much worse.

'Beauty is the eye of the beholder'. So, one person's loon is another person's candidate of choice etc.

Fern

 

[Rainsford]

Hehe.

If you'd have spent much time here in P&N you would certainly know that many see Santorum as a loon, or much worse.

'Beauty is the eye of the beholder'. So, one person's loon is another person's candidate of choice etc.

Fern

That's definitely true. And to some extent that's perfectly reasonable. We disagree on important issues, so disagreement on the quality of the candidates is natural. If we DIDN'T disagree on candidates, that would be troubling...

With Ron Paul, or Santorum for that matter, the problem isn't that the media is biased against them. The "problem" is that the media accurately reports contentious ideas. Santorum's conservative social views and Ron Paul's very libertarian viewpoints on a large number of issues aren't unfair distortions by the media. They're accurate representations of views that are highly unpopular with at least some percentage of the population. In Ron Paul's case, that is a majority of the population.

No conspiracy, no media bias. It's simply the result of a politician in a democracy holding views that aren't shared by the majority of the people. And to make it worse, him and his supporters (ESPECIALLY his supporters) are doing a terrible job of convincing anyone.

 

[spittledip]

How many states would Ron Paul win without media bias?

49