It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul winning MSNBC poll. Poll promptly disappears from Google.

page: 7
22
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


Yeah sounds like a paid Rick Romney or Mitt Perry guy
edit on 8-9-2011 by flguy29 because: wrong reply too




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


You mean you are part of the new Republican Fascist Party! I bet you want to take the vote from those with a $0.00 tax liability. I bet you are a fan of dismantling the only real tool we have to manage or prevent extreme poverty and all the problems that come along with it.

Do you want to see American labor compete with Chinese labor?

Do you want to see an end to our right to assemble to seek reproach to our grievances?

Do you want to see the EPA dismantled for the benefit of big business?

Do you love the patriot act?.

Am I wrong? If so, what part?

Ron has my vote even if I am penciling in his name, because I think he is the only candidate without a hidden agenda! It is a real shame, I thought we got the last you guys back in the 40's.

Ron Paul 2012!!!
edit on 8-9-2011 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
did it ever occur to you that it "promptly disappeared" from Google because Google discovered nobody cared?

just a thought...



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Just thought I'd bring a little reality into this thread.

Here is the latest credible poll (not an internet poll)

www.washingtonpost.com...



Yep...Ron Paul is losing to Sara Palin...and she isn't even running.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by lkpuede
 


Google removes stuff when nobody cares???, heh I wish they would remove all the stuff I looked at, watched, clicked, favored, and deleted.

Funny they remove something when "nobody cares" yet will save and track everything you do

Head of google at the bilderburg meeting, I look at it as google removing stuff because people DO care, thats why they removed it...get it...they don't want him as president...they want...oh screw it......



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by PhantomLimb
 



I never said he was a non-factor. I was merely pointing out that you only consider him a non-factor in the debate because of the little time he was given to speak. If he was such a non-factor then why did MSNBC go through the trouble of trying to shut him up?

He got his points across in the time he was given and did a good job at that. Obviously, polls are people's opinions.

Who do you think won?


believe Rick Perry will get the biggest boost out of this debate....so I would say he is the winner.

I don't agree with any of them, so I don't have a personal winner.

But Ron Paul can't "win" a debate he was hardly a part of...sorry.


Who are you, and what exactly entitles you to personally invalidate the results of the poll for the rest of us?
Are you going to repeat the claim that a "non-factor" cannot win a poll that he is clearly winning, until everyone accepts your version of events, rather than the truth?
Your claims that Ron Paul supporters are "flooding" the MSNBC website, and out-voting the liberal population of this country is amazingly asinine.

It seems that all you are doing in this thread is arguing, not debating.

Ieditby]edit on 8-9-2011 by Banjamin Jefferson Madiso because: none

edit on 8-9-2011 by Banjamin Jefferson Madiso because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   
allow me to explain the results of the poll.

it isnt so much ron paul won,

the others just lost horribly.

thus is the opinion of those watching.

this is precisely how a "non-factor" wins a debate he was hardly part of.

a debate is not like a race where the 1 winner turns the rest of the competitors into losers...each candidate can turn themselves into a loser on their own merit. if all but 1 achieves this, then the one left appears as a winner.

had he been given the chance to be a factor, the results would be the same, only it would have been him winning on his own merit.

kapish?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Just thought I'd bring a little reality into this thread.

Here is the latest credible poll (not an internet poll)

www.washingtonpost.com...



Yep...Ron Paul is losing to Sara Palin...and she isn't even running.



How was this poll conducted? Was it an open poll to all people, or were only select people called? What makes this poll more credible, the fact that its from the Washington Post? If I provide evidence that the Post is a biased, will you admit this poll is not credible? Even if you do happen to find the answers to these questions, I guarantee you didn't look any of it up before asserting it was credible.

Anyone who doesn't know that any poll can be rigged by loading questions, asking only select people, etc. should really look into them. I put almost no stock into polls, but apparently you and the other Ron Paul haters do, as does the media.

So when we look at polls they conducted and Ron Paul wins the majority of them, you say those polls are able to be rigged so we should only look at your super select polls because there somehow infallible.

When Paul does well in the Iowa straw poll, everyone finds reasons to claim it doesn't matter. I bet that if he did terrible in Iowa you would have claimed it mattered, same with these polls.

Starting to see the hypocrisy? Paul doesn't deserve time in the debate because according to some select polls hes only third out of the candidates in the debate (according to your "credible poll", and by the way according to you then he should have been allowed to speak third most which clearly he wasn't), so no one hears his message and he doesn't get exposure. That in turn is used as an excuse to exclude him from further exposure.
Catch-22.

Make up your mind, polls matter or they don't.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


You need to learn where to get unbiased non-propaganda information, The Washington Post is not a credible source for the truth. It is a Rothschild controlled publication. Do you really think that THEY are going to present the truth to you???



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Just thought I'd bring a little reality into this thread.

Yep...Ron Paul is losing to Sara Palin...and she isn't even running.


Your poll shows something important. Look over at the 3% candidate Herman Cain. In the previous debate, he was considered the biggest factor and the WINNER OF THE DEBATE. So yes, that poll shows very well someone at or near the bottom of the statistical pile can make very big waves in a television debate. The Paul vs. Perry confrontation pictures were hands down the most notable thing about the debate... even ahead of the "social security is a ponzi scheme" line of Perry... which was yet another line ripped off from Ron Paul's play-book. Ron Paul's silver dime moment was also a very memorable and notable thing.

While Romney vs. Perry was the mainstream news, Paul vs. Perry was the obvious take-away story there from any objective viewpoint and its ridiculous you can't see that. Ron Paul going on the attack? Unheard of. That is news. Not Perry vs. Romney which was 2nd hat if you think about the big picture. We all knew the Romney vs. Perry would be an interesting story, but few expected the Paul vs. Perry main event.

Ron Paul is hands down the biggest factor in the entire political stage in the US. Look how his opponents all are imitating him. Look how he is the hands-down winner among people under age 30. Ron Paul is the biggest factor in politics period... let alone that debate which of course he was yet again a big factor (as always). And again, Perry ripping off Paul's "ponzi scheme" message should make this obvious to you. Do you honestly think that comment could exist without Ron Paul throwing the entire GOP off balance?

Paul is polling poorly with the over-60 crowd but absolutely dominating the younger crowd. What that means is there is a serious sea change going on and Ron Paul is the biggest factor.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Media polls are useless anyways, especially using the viewer base of the liberal leaning msnbc network.

1: the poll is not scientific because it is not a random study is skewed based on its viewer base
2: It doesn't provide extra data that would allow further statistical analysis regarding the viewing demographics and the likeliness of voters participating in the republican nomination.

These debates are for the republican nomination. The primary goal of the canidates is to show their viability by energizing the political base of the party. An MSNBC poll is absolutely meaningless in that regard.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grambler

How was this poll conducted? Was it an open poll to all people, or were only select people called? What makes this poll more credible, the fact that its from the Washington Post? If I provide evidence that the Post is a biased, will you admit this poll is not credible? Even if you do happen to find the answers to these questions, I guarantee you didn't look any of it up before asserting it was credible.


Read the poll it lists exactly how it is taken, how the questions are worded, adds additional information to account for bias.
The washington post- ABC poll is a legitimate polling service, just like gallop and others. Online polls through media outlets are not. They are skewed based on viewer base. MSNBC is on the liberal end of American news media and the poll will skew that way. Its polling sample is not random; therefore it has no validity



Anyone who doesn't know that any poll can be rigged by loading questions, asking only select people, etc. should really look into them. I put almost no stock into polls, but apparently you and the other Ron Paul haters do, as does the media.

The questions tend to be standard and worded relatively the same between polling services. The polling services are reliant on maintaining their reputation for compiling statistical data through the polling of random subjects. Polls done properly are a major tool for political scientists, public administrators, sociologists etc.



So when we look at polls they conducted and Ron Paul wins the majority of them, you say those polls are able to be rigged so we should only look at your super select polls because there somehow infallible.


Provide a legitimate poll from a reputable statistical polling service and there will not be any reason to claim its rigged. The polls are not designed to favor ideology, it only provides random statistical data designed to monitor public opinon at large. Internet polls are not random, its that simple.



When Paul does well in the Iowa straw poll, everyone finds reasons to claim it doesn't matter. I bet that if he did terrible in Iowa you would have claimed it mattered, same with these polls.


Polls matter as long as they are scientific, they are not designed to play to one ideology or another. Its merely a statistical tool. As i said before in order to remain a valid statistical tool they must use random samples. Internet polls or media outlets polling viewers is not random and therefore not scientific and have no validity.



Starting to see the hypocrisy? Paul doesn't deserve time in the debate because according to some select polls hes only third out of the candidates in the debate (according to your "credible poll", and by the way according to you then he should have been allowed to speak third most which clearly he wasn't), so no one hears his message and he doesn't get exposure. That in turn is used as an excuse to exclude him from further exposure.
Catch-22.


No hypocrisy, those certain polls are statistically reliable. Internet polls are not. Thats after hours upon hours upon years of statistical research. internet polls are not done scientifically with any statistical relevance. Unfortunately, for most people on this site Ron Paul is a fringe canidate for the republican nomination. He always has been and he always will be. He doesn't garner the support of the base.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Banjamin Jefferson Madiso
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


You need to learn where to get unbiased non-propaganda information, The Washington Post is not a credible source for the truth. It is a Rothschild controlled publication. Do you really think that THEY are going to present the truth to you???


I realize its a conspiracy site but the abc news polls are scientifically relevant. Even if you want to get into the whole TPTB scene, they would still poll accurately to gain an accurate understanding of perspective from likely voters, in order to control the populace and all



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
I dont know why everyone keeps claiming "Ron Paul won a poll and it suddenly vanished!!!"

Grow up. These are probably the same people who actually thought Ralph Nader was a presidential contender.

I have family members who are privy to these sorts of topics either because they have enough money to buy their way in to politics, or they're private investors and "donate" campaign contributions that number in the seven figure region.

Yes, there is defiinitely a Ron Paul movement going on. Will it make a difference? No.

At best, even if somehow he was able to ascertain the repubic nomination, he would likely get at most 15% of the votes, which would mean we would have to deal with another four agonizing years of Hussein Obama, or some random democratic upstart who challenges Barack in the primary.

Either way this country is screwed, I'm going to back to cleaning my guns and re-stocking my BOB. Good luck.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by PhantomLimb
 


It may have been because MSNBC removed the poll at first, then put up another one with altered results. After Alex Jones and others called them out on it, they put up the real on this morning, after another attempted alteration. But I wouldn't put it past Google either.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by seachange
 


The older crowd tends to be the largest voting demographic. Ron Paul is also seen as being radical which may go over well with the younger crowd but doesn't mean anything unless he can bring in the base and delegates for the nomination. These debates are all about getting the name recognition and energizing the base. As for Ron Paul being the model for all the republicans following suit, the republican campaign model has been set since Regean and they all continue to use it.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
The amount of bickering back and forth on this thread makes me feel like I'm in a 3rd grade classroom. How many of you are past puberty? Please don't say "all of us"; that will really be a let down because then you won't have an excuse.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Scientific polls are valid, but when the mainstream media decided that Ron Paul was a threat and started tampering with his results, polls, spinning his policies and the like, they've automatically lost all credibility. I've been following Ron Paul closely since his 08 bid and things aren't much different, the media still treats him the same way, if anybody would like to google or youtube it, you could find so much proof of media manipulation.

The truth of the matter is, if the establishment is already manipulating the public's perception of Ron Paul (or the lack of) there is now way to 100% trust them.

Now that we got that out of the way.

Most polls have Ron Paul at around 9-12% nationally, state polling has him higher. If anybody has ever heard of political momentum, Ron Paul has huge potential for it. Rick Perry has peaked and will only drop as people find out about his real political record. That leaves Romney, which is the real one to take down since Bachmann is dropping off the radar. If Paul starts winning or getting second place in the opening primaries and caucuses he has a really good chance to domino effect many other states. When Bachmann and Cain drop out and Palin doesn't announce, Paul will gain most of the Tea Party votes.

Ron Paul is hitting Iowa and New Hampshire hard, I'm seeing 1st place Iowa and 2nd for New Hampshire. I think he has a great chance of taking Nevada, Florida, California, Texas and Louisiana as well.

For anybody that says Ron Paul has no chance, I'd say that is incorrect, does his campaign have a lot of work to do? hell yea...

I guess the point Im trying to make is, don't look down on Paul just because he is the one to doubt, his support quadrupled since 08.


edit on 8-9-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by cypruswolf
reply to post by seachange
 


As for Ron Paul being the model for all the republicans following suit, the republican campaign model has been set since Regean and they all continue to use it.


Count the number of times "constitution" appears in a 2000 GOP debate:
www.pbs.org...

Count the number of times "constitution" appears in a 2011 GOP debate:
transcripts.cnn.com...

The constitution and the federal reserve are topics now in part because Ron Paul has made them into topics.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheSnowman
As much as I'm in favor of Ron Paul, these online polls are meaningless. Google incognito window = unlimited votes.


try it?

i just did, using google chrome, didnt work,

soooooooooo your wrong.

therefor the polls are meaningfull after all


besides if what you said was true then supporters of all the other candidates could do the same for them

so either way you cut it, this poll does show that ron paul has the most support by the people


google chromes incognito window does not allow you multiple votes, it didnt let me when i tried xD

however good for you getting that post on the first page of the thread, now your inaccuracy may sway some of the people who only read the first page,

thx to you only the people who cruise to this page 7 will see the truth that what you said is not correct.

isnt it fun when you spread ignorance like you have


edit on 9/9/11 by pryingopen3rdeye because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
22
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join