CNN Reports Ron Paul At 0% While CNN Online Poll Shows Him At 75%

Originally posted by schuyler
It's not really a disparity. These online polls are a joke. We saw this in the last election where every time there was a poll anywhere the clarion call to go vote in it was sounded and the Paulistas ran over to punch in their vote. There's a reason these polls usually state "This is not a scientific poll." If someone conducts a statistically valid truly randomized poll, then fine. Let's talk about it. But this isn't it and complaining about it makes people look like fools.

I was a delegate at my state's Republican convention last time where the Paulistas were out in force. What really shocked me was the extent to which they went to try to take over the convention. On a strict hand-count basis Paul simply did not have the support, but the Paulistas tried every trick in the book to disrupt the convention, something they did in many states that year. They were completely disruptive. They used procedural tricks. They harrassed the podium when anyone else was talking. It was disgusting. Paul lost a lot of sympathy just because his supporters used tactics like these. They didn't really care about democracy; they just wanted Paul in, period. There's really no difference between Paul's supporters tactics and those of the Leftists. It's all from the same Allinsky playbook.

There is no denying that Paul's supporters are enthusiastic, but they make him look like a puffer fish, blown way out of proportion in terms of his real support. Paul bombed out last time and he will bomb out this time. He serves as a distraction.

The fact is, Paul's supporters are his own worst enemy. If they acted civilized, he'd get more attention.

I was a Ron Paul supporter last time (and will be this time... if he isn't the candidate, I'm not voting next year) and actually had the exact OPPOSITE experience in the state of Georgia. While the "Paulista's" as you like to call us tried to play by the rules, the establishment used every trick in the book to block out any discussion around Paul, they were completely disruptive, they used procedural tricks and harassed the floor when anyone else was talking, it WAS disgusting.

The GOP lost a lot of sympathy with me because of the tactics they used, they didn't really care about democracy; they just wanted the establishment candidate in, period (lot of good THAT did them). There's really no difference between the establishment GOP and those of the Leftists. It's all from the same Allinsky playbook.

And this was at the COUNTY and DISTRICT conventions.

Originally posted by MrWendal
This does not surprise me and it is a tactic that actually works quite well. American voters have a tendency to view elections like a sporting event. They would rather back a person they think can "win" rather than back someone who they actually believe in.

Actually sports work exactly the opposite way. Take two teams that are about to play each other, find someone who has never heard of either of these teams or is neutral to both of them, then tell them that one team has a lower chance of winning than the other. They are more likely to support the team they were told would lose.

People like an underdog story.

This is what is happening.

Alduous Orwell was right.

And actually in the top right corner it says it's a 'NationalJournal.com' poll and those were indeed the results they got, although they only polled "Republican insiders".

Edit: It was a poll of 54 so called "Republican insiders".

Here's the poll in question.

www.nationaljournal.com...

reply to post by AshleyD


I can't believe this only has 66 flags.

Start calling the operators damnit.

S+F

Originally posted by Nosred

Originally posted by MrWendal
This does not surprise me and it is a tactic that actually works quite well. American voters have a tendency to view elections like a sporting event. They would rather back a person they think can "win" rather than back someone who they actually believe in.

Actually sports work exactly the opposite way. Take two teams that are about to play each other, find someone who has never heard of either of these teams or is neutral to both of them, then tell them that one team has a lower chance of winning than the other. They are more likely to support the team they were told would lose.

People like an underdog story.

but in this case, rooting for the 'underdog' would mean rooting for Bachmann or Gingrich, not the dude with ZERO percent. There's nothing exciting about having no fighting chance.

Originally posted by schuyler
It's not really a disparity. These online polls are a joke. We saw this in the last election where every time there was a poll anywhere the clarion call to go vote in it was sounded and the Paulistas ran over to punch in their vote. There's a reason these polls usually state "This is not a scientific poll." If someone conducts a statistically valid truly randomized poll, then fine. Let's talk about it. But this isn't it and complaining about it makes people look like fools.

I was a delegate at my state's Republican convention last time where the Paulistas were out in force. What really shocked me was the extent to which they went to try to take over the convention. On a strict hand-count basis Paul simply did not have the support, but the Paulistas tried every trick in the book to disrupt the convention, something they did in many states that year. They were completely disruptive. They used procedural tricks. They harrassed the podium when anyone else was talking. It was disgusting. Paul lost a lot of sympathy just because his supporters used tactics like these. They didn't really care about democracy; they just wanted Paul in, period. There's really no difference between Paul's supporters tactics and those of the Leftists. It's all from the same Allinsky playbook.

There is no denying that Paul's supporters are enthusiastic, but they make him look like a puffer fish, blown way out of proportion in terms of his real support. Paul bombed out last time and he will bomb out this time. He serves as a distraction.

The fact is, Paul's supporters are his own worst enemy. If they acted civilized, he'd get more attention.

that's because, as the OP is clear evidence of, Ron Paul is in an unfair fight. You can't deny how ridiculous it is. If they need to unleash the dirty tricks in order to get Ronnie some attention, so be it. It makes people say "why are these people so enthused for a guy I've never heard of?... guess I'll have to check him out". It's not as good as CNN telling you about them, but it's better than nothing.

Great digging, by the way, OP. I knew when I saw that it was completely BS. Glad somebody gathered some info to back it up

Originally posted by Carseller4
The poll that said Paul got 0% was made up of Republican voters. The other poll was your run of the mill online poll, which Ron Paul always dominates.

Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination, not President of the Internet.

----------------------------
They said the 0% poll was from "insiders"....like perhaps lobbyists, who don't even bother going to Ron Paul's office because they know he's not for sale! Or perhaps bought-and-paid-for politicians? Or????
Yes, for several years Ron Paul supporters have dominated online polls; however, not to the extent shown today. His popularity has increased no matter why you and others say. I've been posting/reading/supporting Ron Paul online since 2007, so his increased popularity and support is quite obvious to me. And except for paid shills, HB Gary and other nefarious shenanigans, the Internet is used by PEOPLE!

reply to post by nekawa


How many people will show up at the primaries and say, "I really like Rob Paul, but I don't see him on the ballot. Guess I'm voting for worthless candidate [fill in the blank]."

reply to post by AshleyD


A lot of the big stations seems to like to interview "political insiders" rather than see what the public thinks about who won the debate. Of course, they choose the insiders.

For example, after the last debate, they interviewed 27 people about who won the debate. They said it was Herman Cain. There's no way Herman Cain won the debate. While he may have increased the amount of people who will vote for him, he certainly did not win the debate. Herman Cain has not even held public office. Actually, I think they picked people who supported a different candidate (there was only one person who supported Herman Cain before the debate), but changed their position. That they changed their position after one debate, knowing nothing else about Herman Cain, shows that they are clearly not reputable people to ask about who won the debate.



I don't think Ron Paul is the real frontrunner, though, like a lot of these polls claim him to be. I think he simply has more zealous followers than other people, who want to make sure they do as much as they can to get Ron Paul. Ron Paul's followers tend to realize that their vote in the poll can have a drastic impact on how Ron Paul is presented.

I think it's accurate that Ron Paul has about 10-15% of the vote. However, 75% of Republicans say they would choose the person who has the best chance of beating Obama in the election, and that's Ron Paul. Also, it's very early. Ron Paul just started his campaign. Most people are saying Palin's not going to run. Some polls say Ron Paul has 60-70% of the vote.

One thing Ron Paul has is that the other candidates don't disagree much on the main issues. If someone become disgusted with a certain candidate, and saw they all had the same position, they'd probably either not vote or go to Ron Paul. It seems unlikely to me that Ron Paul will lose many supporters, at least not before the election.

Ron Paul also has the most funding of any candidate.

I think it's an advantage for Ron Paul that he is not talked much about on TV. They would have more a chance to frame him in a negative way. When people hear about Ron Paul and see signs of him, they have to look his website and videos; which can convince a lot of people.

Ron Paul got quite a bit of questions in this debate. If Ron Paul continues to get so much of a chance to talk about his views, the amount of people supporting him can be overwhelming.

A lot, of course, is riding on Super Tuesday. Ron Paul seems pick up supporters, so he could definitely win the primary at the last minute with that, especially seeing how quickly people change their mind of a candidate.

It's accurate that among the "political insiders" that these stations choose, none of them thought Ron Paul won the debate. That actually helps Ron Paul more than if they had an accurate poll of the debate. People will be suspicious seeing Ron Paul got zero. It will push them to investigate Ron Paul, where if they placed him in the 10-15% range, which I think would be the result of an accurate poll, no one would notice. A zero stands out, and is clearly inaccurate, even to people who nothing about Ron Paul. I doubt someone would actually think that Ron Paul doesn't have a single supporter. You see the signs everywhere. If nothing else, it will lead people to understand that TV polls don't mean anything.

Originally posted by Carseller4
The poll that said Paul got 0% was made up of Republican voters. The other poll was your run of the mill online poll, which Ron Paul always dominates.

Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination, not President of the Internet.

Originally posted by Nosred
And actually in the top right corner it says it's a 'NationalJournal.com' poll and those were indeed the results they got, although they only polled "Republican insiders".

Edit: It was a poll of 54 so called "Republican insiders".

Here's the poll in question.

www.nationaljournal.com...

I suppose I'm in the minority with the two above members who possess reading, hearing and comprehension skills. The female CNN newscaster CLEARLY states 51% "OF GOP INSIDERS" and the poll graphic CLEARLY denotes Republicans. ( Comparing apples to oranges.)

I'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion but I suspect the enthusiastic followers of Mr. Paul are a bit overzealous in their criticism. I like Mr. Paul btw due to his Anti war stance and I'm not defending CNN but simply striving to honor ATS Mission statement.

Didn't this sort of thing happen with FOX NEWS a few months ago at a RNC???

Where FOX NEWS edited the coverage of Ron Paul's speech and dubbed the audio with booing and negative feedback from the crowd, when in fact the crowd was actually cheering and applauding?

Can someone please post a link to that video, I cannot find it on Youtube. The ending was hilarious.

lol its funny how most fox news haters back cnn. there both the same!

Y'all don't need polls. Just listen to how many times the name of each potential candidate for POTUS is mentioned. Then you will get an idea. I already knew based on my "hunch". Bahahaha!

Originally posted by Nosred
And actually in the top right corner it says it's a 'NationalJournal.com' poll and those were indeed the results they got, although they only polled "Republican insiders".

Edit: It was a poll of 54 so called "Republican insiders".

Here's the poll in question.

www.nationaljournal.com...

This seems like something Fox News would pull. I can't say I'm surprised CNN did this, but come on...they are changing the narrative based on "Republican Insiders". Perhaps National Journal should release the names of these "Republican Insiders".

The poll they showed has nothing to do with how the public feel. This is bogus!

Originally posted by TXRabbit
Good find Ashley.

You can also expect the networks to begin their visual-onslaught of Dr Paul once again. You know - where whenever they show a picture of him in an article it's a "less-than-flattering" pose? Usually it's something along the lines of him looking a bit crazy or loony.

Politics just makes me sick sometimes

This morning I was listening to the radio, surprised that people seemed to think M. Bachmann actually was impressive. Then I saw msn.com and they showed her looking like a crazy witch, totally a Hillary Clinton style face expression.

It cracks me up that the MSM is so blatant with their biased reporting.

This is why Ron Paul will never win.(sadly)

As long as the people are dumb enough that politics is just a big game of popularity, TPTB will always put their people on top of the pyramid.

Even if the people woke up and actually tried to elect a good leader, they would just rig the elections and we could never prove it.

reply to post by kreese


Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed that. This is hilarious. I don't know if straw polls necessarily mean much, though, but it's clear that Fox really doesn't want him to win. They even refused to let him participate in a debate last time, leading to the Republican party not sponsoring that event. After Ron Paul was allowed in that debate, his approval rating fell below 1%, after which they were able to use that reason to not let him on again.

I don't think they'll be able to do something like that this time, though.

Anyways, here's the video:

Originally posted by TXRabbit
Good find Ashley.

You can also expect the networks to begin their visual-onslaught of Dr Paul once again. You know - where whenever they show a picture of him in an article it's a "less-than-flattering" pose? Usually it's something along the lines of him looking a bit crazy or loony.

Politics just makes me sick sometimes

This morning I was listening to the radio, surprised that people seemed to think M. Bachmann actually was impressive. Then I saw msn.com and they showed her looking like a crazy witch, totally a Hillary Clinton style face expression.

It cracks me up that the MSM is so blatant with their biased reporting.

This is why Ron Paul will never win.(sadly)

As long as the people are dumb enough that politics is just a big game of popularity, TPTB will always put their people on top of the pyramid.

Even if the people woke up and actually tried to elect a good leader, they would just rig the elections and we could never prove it.

Doing things to sway opinion and votes by the media gives me hope that our votes are even being counted.