Mainstream Media ignoring and sidelining Ron Paul

[maple_leafs182]

Ron Paul is not new to Americans or American news media....he's run in enough presidential campaigns to firmly establish his record as a consistent libertarian voice that will never win a nomination or election. Just because he is the "new" darling for some Canadians for yet another round doesn't mean he is being ignored. Remember, 15% of polled Canadians wanted to vote for Obama too.

Not new to me, I was rooting for him in '08. As for wining an election, he has won several times since this is his 13th time in congress. Put Paul in a debate against Obama and Paul would destroy him. I don't know why you don't want him as your President, which of his views do you not agree with. Do you think the wars should end?

Here is another video that RT did about the media ignoring Ron Paul:

[dre]

Not new to me, I was rooting for him in '08. As for wining an election, he has won several times since this is his 13th time in congress. Put Paul in a debate against Obama and Paul would destroy him. I don't know why you don't want him as your President, which of his views do you not agree with. Do you think the wars should end?

Here is another video that RT did about the media ignoring Ron Paul:

BC and a lot of other Americans are proud of its nations wars, and proud of its ability to project its power globally. Theyve never known anything else.

When youre used to being a citizen of the biggest military, economic, and industrial powerhouse in the history of the human race, it seems.... well... "boring" to go back to just being a regular country.

Thats what Paul is up against. AND of course all the powerfull institutions that have lined their pockets under the status quo. Defense contractors, oil companies, media companies etc etc dont want the gravy train to dry up and they have a lot of clout.

[bush_cheney2004]

Not new to me, I was rooting for him in '08. As for wining an election, he has won several times since this is his 13th time in congress. Put Paul in a debate against Obama and Paul would destroy him. I don't know why you don't want him as your President, which of his views do you not agree with. Do you think the wars should end?

2008 eh? Try 1988...20 years earlier. Were you even born yet?

I don't want him to be my president because he is an isolationist and gold standard quack.

Wars will never end.

[dre]

2008 eh? Try 1988...20 years earlier. Were you even born yet?

I don't want him to be my president because he is an isolationist and gold standard quack.

Wars will never end.

Hes not an isolationist, hes just not a foreign interventionalist. He thinks trade is a more effective way to influence other countries than exploding stuff.

Wars will never end.

Maybe! But that doesnt necessarily mean you have to go out of your way to start them!

Edited August 17, 2011 by dre

[Guest American Woman]

Put Paul in a debate against Obama and Paul would destroy him.

That's a matter of opinion - and of course someone who supports him would be of that opinion.

I don't know why you don't want him as your President,

Most of America doesn't want him as their president, which is why the media is "ignoring" him. He's just not that news worthy as a presidential candidate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hes not an isolationist, hes just not a foreign interventionalist. He thinks trade is a more effective way to influence other countries than exploding stuff.

One compliments the other.

Maybe! But that doesnt necessarily mean you have to go out of your way to start them!

Why not? Did Libya attack Canada?

[bush_cheney2004]

Most of America doesn't want him as their president, which is why the media is "ignoring" him. He's just not that news worthy as a presidential candidate.

He's had his 15 minutes....in 2008, it was pathetic when he hired aircraft to tow an election banner just to get attention during the GOP convention.

[maple_leafs182]

2008 eh? Try 1988...20 years earlier. Were you even born yet?

I know he ran as a libertarian and no I wasn't born yet.

I don't want him to be my president because he is an isolationist and gold standard quack.

Starting wars and putting trade sanctions on countries is what is isolating America, how is your countries relationship with Cuba? Trading and talking with countries has nothing to do with being an isolationist.

I don't agree with him on everything but he is the most honest and caring politician I have seen in my lifetime. Look at the other GOP candidates, they continue to spread a message of fear, he is telling you guys not to worry, to not be afraid, that may not seem like a lot to you but that speaks volumes to me.

As for a gold standard, he doesn't want your economy and by extension the American people's lives to be manipulated by banks. His campaign really is a campaign for liberty. He doesn't want to run the world, the economy or anybodies life, he wants your people to be free so they can be the master of their own fate.

Wars will never end.

I hope you are wrong here.

[bush_cheney2004]

Starting wars and putting trade sanctions on countries is what is isolating America, how is your countries relationship with Cuba? Trading and talking with countries has nothing to do with being an isolationist.

Relations with Cuba are improving, as is trade compared to Cold War "isolation".

I don't agree with him on everything but he is the most honest and caring politician I have seen in my lifetime. Look at the other GOP candidates, they continue to spread a message of fear, he is telling you guys not to worry, to not be afraid, that may not seem like a lot to you but that speaks volumes to me.

Your lifetime has been relatively short....I don't understand how a foreign politician / candidate can have such say over your outlook.

As for a gold standard, he doesn't want your economy and by extension the American people's lives to be manipulated by banks. His campaign really is a campaign for liberty. He doesn't want to run the world, the economy or anybodies life, he wants your people to be free so they can be the master of their own fate.

His (and your) definition of freedom do not apply to all Americans, and it is arrogant to think so. America has a poliical process and framework that denies such absolute power to good intentioned fools.

Edited August 17, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[Black Dog]

They are biases in many ways, so yes that is a factor. And he has been polling higher than everyone but Bachman it seems (obviously depending on the poll). In the end it is politics of getting back to the true founding of the USA and getting back to adhering to the constitution. Last time I checked the right side panel on Foxnews.com showed Paul polling at 75%. But that fact is ignored and he is not really mentioned as the winner, they instead talk about how good Perry will be for the USA.

Has Paul clocked in any real scientific poll? Straw polls and online polls don't count. I'm genuinely curious.

So the media bias seems have worked it's majic on you as well.

Again, you're begging the question and proving my point.

And he does not agree with abortion, or gay marriage, but he won't prevent others from living the way they want.

Correction: he wants to make abortion illegal.

There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist.-Ron Paul, Nov 28, 2007

To me he is the only person that really represents freedom in any fashion. Because what the USA got after 9/11, everything is geared towards security and less of true freedom.

What he represents is a political viewpoint that is completely impractical at best and self-destructive at worst. Do you really think cancelling every government funded social program (as Paul would) would be a good thing for the country? Do you really think anything he says would actually work? Jesus Christ-the fucking gold standard???

Looks like you are buying into whatever the MSM tells you instead of looking into what he is actually saying.

To turn the tables, it seems you're swallowing whatever the Paulbots will tell you. I don't need a circular media-bias "just-so" stories to tell you that.

The things he talks about today are the exact same things he has been talking about for a very long time.

Which is exactly why he hasn't a chance in hell.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Black Dog

[Yukon Jack]

Let us face it: Since the election of the most charismatic President (JFK) (and similarly, PET in Canada)

charisma has beaten substance every time. Or almost every time, with Carter and the Bush's being the obvious exceptions. With that in mind, charisma, more often than not, means EMPTY SUIT. Ronald Reagan being the exception.

Let us face it: Ron Paul has NO charisma. Gravitas and substance, yes, charisma, NO. Kind of like Bob Dole and John McCain.

[Oleg Bach]

The Daily Show is sort of fun at first...then as you actually listen to it closely you notice that the way they diseminate information is manipulative and weasily...I don't like the guy - He is the classic liberal idiot that will do and say just about anything for a pay cheaque...If the conservative faction offered him twice the money he would be their taiking funny head.

[Oleg Bach]

Let us face it: Since the election of the most charismatic President (JFK) (and similarly, PET in Canada)

charisma has beaten substance every time. Or almost every time, with Carter and the Bush's being the obvious exceptions. With that in mind, charisma, more often than not, means EMPTY SUIT. Ronald Reagan being the exception.

Let us face it: Ron Paul has NO charisma. Gravitas and substance, yes, charisma, NO. Kind of like Bob Dole and John McCain.

I don't want damned charisma - I want substance.

[Yukon Jack]

I don't want damned charisma - I want substance.

Here is 'substance' (as related to 0bama) for you, and as added bonus, being proud as a Canadian:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/canucklehead_obama_bus_ted_gyztvw89k5MyKNS4B7Qp7O

[maple_leafs182]

Your lifetime has been relatively short....I don't understand how a foreign politician / candidate can have such say over your outlook.

I tend to gravitate to people who speak truth. I also liked people like Bill Hicks and George Carlin. As for what country or what career they have is irrelevant to me.

His (and your) definition of freedom do not apply to all Americans, and it is arrogant to think so. America has a poliical process and framework that denies such absolute power to good intentioned fools.

Ya, your political process gives all the power too greedy self interested fools instead. As for freedom, how is what he's preaching not a message of freedom. Ben Bernake is an economic dictator, he has more power then Obama, he could bring your nation to its knees in a matter of minutes if he wanted to.

[bush_cheney2004]

I tend to gravitate to people who speak truth. I also liked people like Bill Hicks and George Carlin. As for what country or what career they have is irrelevant to me.

Then there is no need to focus on American comedians....search the world over for the best! George Carlin died as a cynical and angry man, and would have never been a politician like Paul.

Ya, your political process gives all the power too greedy self interested fools instead. As for freedom, how is what he's preaching not a message of freedom. Ben Bernake is an economic dictator, he has more power then Obama, he could bring your nation to its knees in a matter of minutes if he wanted to.

No single man has the definition of freedom....worship Paul if you wish, but he is just another politician. He could bring your nation to its knees as well.

[GostHacked]

Did Libya attack Canada?

Did they attack the USA?

[GostHacked]

I don't want damned charisma - I want substance.

Agreed. With charisma you get the likes of Obama .. and where did that lead the USA??

[maple_leafs182]

Has Paul clocked in any real scientific poll? Straw polls and online polls don't count. I'm genuinely curious.

He won cpac two years in a row.

[Guest American Woman]

He's had his 15 minutes....

15 minutes, eh? I wouldn't have even given him credit for that much - in the U.S.

[Guest American Woman]

This is an interesting article and it explains a lot:

Why Ron Paul keeps winning straw polls

A couple of excerpts:

Paul won the RLC straw poll on Saturday with 612 votes out of 1,542 cast; at CPAC this year, a total of 3,742 votes were cast.

To put that in perspective, Paul finished fifth in the 2008 Iowa Republican caucuses — behind Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) who didn’t even compete in the state

— with 11,817 votes. There were nearly 119,000 total votes cast.

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

The tiny voter universe of straw polls plays into Paul’s greatest strength — the deep and abiding loyalty that a relatively narrow group of supporters have for him.

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

Remember that Paul did not win a single primary or caucus in the 2008 presidential race despite raising tens of millions of dollars via the Internet and emerging as one of the stories of the campaign.

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

What all of that suggests is that Paul tends to win these minor straw poll skirmishes for two basic reasons:

1. His ardent base of supporters is large enough to have a determinative impact on events where so few votes are cast.

2. None of the other, more establishment candidates care enough to make a concerted effort to win. (When they do, they tend to win; Romney won the CPAC straw poll in 2007, 2008 and 2009.)

......don’t mistake winning straw polls for winning elections. History suggests they are two totally different animals.

[Kiraly]

Has Paul clocked in any real scientific poll? Straw polls and online polls don't count. I'm genuinely curious.

I found this:

http://www.azimuthpolls.com/

In the State of Texas they have Ron Paul leading with 22% followed by Rick Perry with 17% support. The poll was conducted at the end of May and the beginning of June. This is just after Paul announced his candidacy and before Perry announced his.

[Guest American Woman]

I found this:

http://www.azimuthpolls.com/

In the State of Texas they have Ron Paul leading with 22% followed by Rick Perry with 17% support. The poll was conducted at the end of May and the beginning of June. This is just after Paul announced his candidacy and before Perry announced his.

Worth looking at - The Truth About Ron Paul’s Texas Poll Win Conducted By Azimuth Research Group

[GostHacked]

don’t mistake winning straw polls for winning elections. History suggests they are two totally different animals.[/i]

Don't mistake winning an election as an indication that a president that can bring 'hope and change'.

[Guest American Woman]

Don't mistake winning an election as an indication that a president that can bring 'hope and change'.

Never have, never will. But the World At Large sure did, eh?