Example: media distorts reality subliminally - Ron Paul MSNBC poll results.

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Isn't it all the more amazing then that Ron Paul is doing so well and has such a loyal fan base?

Here is the person with the least amount of funding consistently decimating his competition in polls...

... ought to tell you something




posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Isn't it all the more amazing then that Ron Paul is doing so well and has such a loyal fan base?

Here is the person with the least amount of funding consistently decimating his competition in polls...

... ought to tell you something


Except he's not...that's what I'm trying to tell you.

Keep up the fantasy....I guess.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


you're right. i'm not saying he has Romney money. i wasn't making a comparison.
and i look forward to seeing Paul's new numbers when they release. if anything it shows how well his ideas resonate with the American people, seeing as he doesn't get the big corporate dollars as well as displaying that he's a bit more frugal.


if he loses? bummer. the political machine wins again. it's always a shame when the underdog, who espouses the correct views of the proper roles of government , loses....and probably a bit saddened that this, more than likely, will be his last go of it. what were you expecting?
edit on 10-9-2011 by slowisfast because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   


reply to Outkast Searcher



A little information about realclearpolotics.com
Malcolm Stevenson "Steve" Forbes Jr. owns 51% of this website and in 2008 Forbes served as John McCain's Economic Adviser on Taxes, Energy and the Budget during McCain's bid for the 2008 Presidential election.

So I am supposed to believe that this website is 100% unbiased ?

Political poll averaging (taken from wikipedia.org/wiki/RealClearPolitics)
Statisticians explain that it is sometimes misleading to average results from multiple polls. Richard Gott III, a professor at Princeton, and Wes Colley, a researcher at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, published findings in the journal Mathematical and Computer Modeling. New York Times contributor Neil Tyson, wrote in an Op-Ed piece that “in swing states, the median result of all the polls conducted in the weeks prior to an election is an especially effective predictor of which candidate will win that election — even in states where the polls consistently fall within the margin of error.”



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by slowisfast
if he loses? bummer. the political machine wins again. it's always a shame when the underdog, who espouses the correct views of the proper roles of government , loses....and probably a bit saddened that this, more than likely, will be his last go of it. what were you expecting?
edit on 10-9-2011 by slowisfast because: (no reason given)


I'm afraid if he looses the "political machine" which = CFR will attempt to demolish our country. They are in the midst of a huge global push for control right now. They have been using Obama for this purpose.

Feels like we are running out of time to fix this mess and get our country back on track. This might be the last chance...

Just a feeling... still...



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Give them time. It is a radical change in their world view. Imagine the shock to realize one day that, gasp, you have been wrong in supporting the terrorizing wars around this globe and been taken for a ride of belief.

Remember the 5 stages of denial?

Denial — This can't be happening, the internet polls are skewed."
Denial is usually only a temporary defense for the individual.

Anger — "Why my candidate? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to my candidate?"; '"Who is to blame?"
Once in the second stage, the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue. Because of anger, the person is very difficult to care for due to misplaced feelings of rage and envy.

Bargaining — "I'll do anything for a few more votes, just as long as they go to my candidate."
The third stage involves the hope that the individual can somehow postpone or delay embarrassment. Psychologically, the individual is saying, "I understand my candidate will lose, but if I could just do something to buy my dignity back..."

Depression — "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to face the facts soon so whats the point... What's the point?"; "I miss my belief filled euphoria, why continue to care?"
During the fourth stage, the beaten person begins to understand the certainty of defeat. Because of this, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time crying and grieving.

Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well go with it."
In this last stage, the individual begins to come to terms with her/his miss-beliefs.

Most people denying Pauls success are still at stages one through three. As i said, give them time, the time has come, and there is nothing in this world to stop an idea whose time has come.
edit on 10-9-2011 by varikonniemi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


i understand where you're coming from but they are conspiracy theories until they become conspiracy fact.
don't get me wrong, i love a good conspiracy. while you might have feelings, feelings are arbitrary.

i try and worry about only that which i can control.
and i can control my vote and who i support with my dollars.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 



They have been using Obama for this purpose.


Exactly what has Obama done to further this "agenda" you are talking about???


Specifics would be great.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Here is another resource for you guys.

If you don't believe polls...maybe you will believe predictive markets.

If you don't know how these work, it is basically like this. The website puts up an event...and you can by "shares" if you think that event will take place. If it happens...you make money. Simple right.

www.intrade.com...


Ron Paul to be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012

3.0% CHANCE


So you can go buy a "share" for $0.30. If you guys are so confident that these polls are accurate...go make some easy money...buy up those cheap shares and make a ton of money.


On the other hand...you may want to check out Romney and Perry on the prediction markets first.

www.intrade.com...


Rick Perry to be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012

35.7% CHANCE



www.intrade.com...


Mitt Romney to be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012

36.9% CHANCE



Gee...thsoe look a lot more like the polls I find credible...and a lot less like the internet polls.


But go ahead...put your money where your mouth is.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Atleast MSNBC put his name on this poll. Most MSM just leaves him off. Talk about manipulation!



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
Hey folks: I thought I'd work up a nice printable sheet you can use to show people how this manipulation stuff occurs right under their noses. Hope it helps wake someone up





posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
This is what I'm talking about...FACTS...Ron Paul doesn't have "a ton of money".


About 910,000 dollar bills weigh one metric ton. He has a ton of money, and then some.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Of course it does. It does this all the time, with everything. From the trivial to the profound. Most people just don't know enough, or pay enough attention to notice. Its normally more subtle than it has been lately.

Whats even more amusing is that the same is prevalent on the BBC. You would think that a news service from abroad would be non biased right? Wrong. Coverage in the UK mentions Romney and Perry exclusively.

There is no unbiased news on TV. Sources like RT are biased too, it just happens to be opposite polarity bias pushing a different agenda. If you watch any one news source exclusively, or more than the others, you are being programmed. Likewise with spending too much time here.

The problem with really weighing all the sources is that it means you are rarely certain of anything because the truth is often complex, messy, and morally ambiguous. People would rather have false certainty. Thats why all mechanisms of control function.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by pianopraze
 


So what is your opinion of all these polls on this site?

www.realclearpolitics.com...


Are they all fixed? Are all those organizations working together to make it look like Ron Paul is doing very poorly in the nomination race???

What do you think of all these polls that don't back up the results of "internet polls"???


These polls are a joke. The reason why I say this is because you have people voting for Palin who isn't even in the race. This throws the numbers off so they are in no way accurate.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Here is another resource for you guys.

If you don't believe polls...maybe you will believe predictive markets.


HaHaHa before you go here does anyone remember the housing bubble?



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Step back and examine what you are saying.

You are saying they purposely want to misrepresnt Ron Paul...and yet they allow him to win an internet poll ON THEIR WEBSITE.

Have you lived under a rock the last few months?

Jon Steward did a skit on it
www.thedailyshow.com...

and there was a thread on ATS about the polls..
www.abovetopsecret.com...



After watching these, you have to admit they purposely want to misrepresnt Ron Paul, mr OutKast Searcher....
edit on 10-9-2011 by conar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Link was removed by Rasmussen.

I will be making an updated post later.

New poll numbers must be coming.
edit on 9/10/2011 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Wow, really, I see a big difference between 14% and 57%



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Most major media outlets like CNN, Fox, and MSNBC have polls online as to who won the debate, and in the MSNBC one in particular, over 100,000 people voted for Ron Paul. One must assume that the majority support Ron Paul based on this data. On Fox, within a few short hours of the debate ending, Ron Paul had 8000 votes and beat every other candidate by thousands. (despite being ignored during the debate)

theswash.com...

This link also shows a state-by-state break down of the debate, showing that Ron Paul takes nearly every state.

Just because one site reports Ron Paul as losing does not mean its fact, and if you look at MOST polls, he wins by a significant amount. Casting these polls as "flooded by Ron Paul supporters to skew the polls" means nothing other than the fact that indeed, Ron Paul has many followers.

turner.mo2do.net...;jsessionid=1D5BBB2A9AACBACC9BF9C5C7C0E747B9?optPollOption=Rep.+Ron+Paul%2FTexas&vote=Vote

This link shows CNN's results of the poll. How can anyone discount that Ron Paul has a massive movement with devout supporters? and furthermore, that the media is desperately trying to hide that fact?



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Talk about sore losers


These people have been sore losers since 2008.





new topics
top topics
 
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join