Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

CNBC Takes Down Debate Poll Because Ron Paul Won

page: 2
59
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by redrose123
 


Well, if it makes you feel better, everyone vying for the Republican ticket has the same basic stance. "Screw the poor, sell off the country, make millions, then retire"

Granted the Democratic platform doesn't seem to be very different.

But let's be sure to kick and scream over who's better




posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
This is sickening. I watched the debates. I didn't even have a chance to vote on their silly poll. Newt didn't do badly in this debate. He did quite well, but the candidate who had the solutions to our problems was Ron Paul. Sadly he only received about six questions during the whole debate while the others received double that. How is it possible that Ron Paul wins many straw polls and internet polls, he is in the top three, yet is treated as if he was at the very bottom??? How is it possible that he gets grouped with Bachman, and then Bachman receives more attention than he does in the post-debate interview???? Her support is falling like a rock while Ron Paul's support is becoming stronger. Is Communism and their propaganda machine following me across the oceans??? I thought I left that behind 20 years ago, but now I can clearly see I was wrong. Disgusting.

If this isn't proof that Corporatism/Fascism is alive and well in this country, I don't know what is. It's clear as day that CNBC, FOX and all the other "news" channels are huge corporations making billions of dollars a year and creating their own reality, trying to suck us into it.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by maddog99
 


Nope. Because 400 people is not large enough to reduce the margin of error to an acceptable level.

Any other silly questions?

Obviously, I was being sarcastic toward MSM and your stupid Paul bashing post. Any other silly answers troll?



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 


"Troll," huh? I suppose you're hoping for some sort of dumb namecalling slapfight? Might I suggest 4chan for your inane online needs?

Open online polls are meaningless, and they always have been. They're simply too easy to manipulate to provide any meaningful data. If Ron Paul supporters want to how the world how much they live the guy, well, there are much more demonstrative and meaningful ways than sitting on your butt and clicking a CNBC poll link.

Is this a problem for you?



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by 27jd
 


Once again, Ron Paul supporters are hinging hteir support on easily-gamed internet polls.

Really, guys... You like the guy so much, why not do something that gets you out from in front of the computer screen? Why not hold some sort of "Holy &*$% RON PAUL IS AWESOME!" rally, hashtag it #HSRPIA or something, and really show it all off.

Granted this will mean associating with people who support Ron Paul, so I can understand your reluctance


But really guys. open Internet polls don't tell you anything.

So tell me, who's looking for what?
See, I know the online polls are meaningless. I also know most national polls are bull#. And guess what? Most people do know this. But if you must know why RP supporters flood the polls...if your superior intellect hasn't figured it out already, I'll tell you. It's because the MSM DOES use those 400 call polls to put bafoons like Herman Cain in the spotlight while they purposely diss RP because he is against the status quo. But you know this already, don't you? You spend a lot of time on RP threads lately...you should!



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Thanks for the info. Now I can see why they get pissed. I actually voted legit. But I also know a lot most likely did do it from that site. It's not that hard to navigate on your own either. Maybe a lesson learned.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 


You really do think Ron Paul is some sort of threat to the status quo, don't you? Sigh. Ron Paul has two - TWO - positions that set him apart from the other eight candidates.

1) He wants to audit the fed
2) he wants to end the war on terror

And good for him, I say. These are both good ideas. The trouble is... this doesn't make him the revolutionary leader pressing for massive, sweeping change that you guys have in your heads. Everywhere else, he's pretty orthodox. In fact, you're not going to find any significant differences between his domestic plan and the plans of the other republican candidates. They're all the same.

1) cut taxes massively at the top
2) Cut government services everywhere else.
3) Claim that the government you just defunded and slashed "isn't working"
4) Sell off the public assets to your buddies in assorted private industries
5) Enjoy your kickbacks and retire in some warm nation with no extradition treaty.

This is why I haunt Ron Paul threads. You guys keep breaking your arms to pat yourself on the back about how smart you all are, so I'm trying to get you guys to realize just what you're trying so hard to get into here. So far as I can tell, you're all of the mind that you don't really give a good goddamn what happens so long as "your guy" wins.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 04:56 AM
link   
I hope all this backfires. Jon Stewart did a amazing skit a while ago, too bad Jon Stewart seems to ignore Ron Paul lately. Lets see what he do on his show tonight.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Hinge our support on them? No. We hinge our support on his message and his plans to get this country back on track. And are you seriously saying we don't go out with signs? You're completely clueless if that's the case.

I don't put too much stock in any polls, except on election day. But, I could see them taking down the polls if there is evidence of actual cheating, but that's not the case. They don't like our "organization", even though on the fb pages of other candidates they try to emulate our organization, and link to polls, etc. But they fail, because people aren't as enthusiastic. It's not cheating to show support, yet the media acts like spoiled kids who don't like the way a game they are playing is going, so they pack their toys up.

So called "scientific" polls aren't so scientific themselves...


Follow the money

Before a poll is done, the pollster is contracted by a client who pays for it. In theory the client explains what information is needed from the public and the pollster designs the sample methodology to accurately gather this information with a poll.

In real life, things work quite differently.

To survive in the business, a pollster learns very quickly that the most important factor in polling is the relationship between the pollster and client. The pollster realizes that the client has to be satisfied with the results of the poll. Otherwise, no more business. Human nature being what it is, a pollster understands the client isn’t looking for negativity from the poll. So the most critical part of this process is the pollster trying to figure out in advance of the poll, what would make the client happy. Once a pollster has learned that important truth, he/she can proceed to successfully do the job — provide polling data that will make the client happy.

As the reader can appreciate, this “understanding” has flipped everything upside down. Instead of polls bringing us “truths” from the public domain, they have become marketing tools that provide “scientific” validation to the speculative ideas of the client. While I have exaggerated this dynamic between pollster and client slightly for purpose of clarity, have no doubt that this is the operative equation in organizing and conducting surveys in just about every domain of interest. This is the dirty little secret that all pollsters share.
biasinonlinesurveys.idiary.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Other candidates were doing the SAME thing. On O'Reilly's fb page people posted links to several of the other candidate's pages sending out notices to vote in his poll.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


1) cut taxes massively at the top- He wants to cut taxes for everybody, not just the top. He wants to reduce the size and scope of the federal government, and leave more money in the hands of the people.

2) Cut government services everywhere else.- Good, they cost too much, and are inefficient. They have no competition, and no accountability, which is why the government should NOT be in the business of providing such services.

3) Claim that the government you just defunded and slashed "isn't working"- Because it isn't.

4) Sell off the public assets to your buddies in assorted private industries- Please be more specific, we're talking about Ron Paul, so please tell us which public assets he's gonna sell to which buddies.

5) Enjoy your kickbacks and retire in some warm nation with no extradition treaty.- You are aware that Ron Paul consistently rejects any "kickbacks" he is offered, so you're just being dishonest, again. He refuses the pension, has never taken a taxpayer funded junket, and lobbyists don't even bother trying anymore.

You don't 'haunt' these threads, you give yourself far too much credit. You troll them, with the same BS talking points that have been refuted time and time again. I'm sure Tinfoil will be here soon as well, the two of you have dedicated a LOT of time to trolling RP threads, to tell us how insignificant he is. But your actions prove that he is very significant.
edit on 10-11-2011 by 27jd because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by maddog99
 


You really do think Ron Paul is some sort of threat to the status quo, don't you? Sigh. Ron Paul has two - TWO - positions that set him apart from the other eight candidates.

1) He wants to audit the fed
2) he wants to end the war on terror


Truly laudable goals that I support fully.


And good for him, I say. These are both good ideas. The trouble is... this doesn't make him the revolutionary leader pressing for massive, sweeping change that you guys have in your heads. Everywhere else, he's pretty orthodox. In fact, you're not going to find any significant differences between his domestic plan and the plans of the other republican candidates. They're all the same.

1) cut taxes massively at the top
2) Cut government services everywhere else.
3) Claim that the government you just defunded and slashed "isn't working"
4) Sell off the public assets to your buddies in assorted private industries
5) Enjoy your kickbacks and retire in some warm nation with no extradition treaty.


1) He wants to cut taxes across the board, starting with the federal income tax.
2) He wants to phase out services over time, and combine other services into areas they belong in.
3) The government is already not working, he wants a return to Constitutionalism. I approve.
4) Sorry, gotta say prove it on this one.
5) See # 4


This is why I haunt Ron Paul threads. You guys keep breaking your arms to pat yourself on the back about how smart you all are, so I'm trying to get you guys to realize just what you're trying so hard to get into here. So far as I can tell, you're all of the mind that you don't really give a good goddamn what happens so long as "your guy" wins.


Actually, I do give a "good goddamn" what happens, that is why I support Ron Paul, for 30 years his line has not changed and his voting record has supported it. That is something you can't say for any other candidate, especially Herman Cain, no public office, no voting record, but he does have a history.

I don't agree with everything that RP espouses; in fact, I disagree with quite a bit of it, but at least he appears more honest than any candidate I have seen in 50 years.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
It seems the MSM will continue to downplay and ignore Ron Paul and his supporters in hopes that he'll fade away. Well, I hope these tactics only bring more attention to his candidacy.



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Here's the poll's final results, it's on the right side of the image:






posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Here's an article about REAL people who were watching the debate, the headline reads "Crowd at GOP debate ranks Mitt Romney, Ron Paul as favorites"....How could this be? These people weren't on the internet.
But, of course, the article goes on and on about Cain, and Gingrich. Doesn't mention Ron Paul but once, to try and cast him in a bad light about federal student loans that have driven up the costs of tuition, and down the quality of education.


When the Republican presidential debate began tonight, a crowd of about 400 people gathered at a watch party in Oakland University’s student center ranked Mitt Romney and Ron Paul as their favorites.
www.freep.com...



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
i can understand that- CNBC would not want an experienced candidate in office.
especially one that :
sits on the Financial board.
wrote a book entitled "END the FED" and "the Revolution: A Manifesto" as well as many others.
calls for a fed audit.
wants to do away w/ the board of special ed and other useless alphabet departments such as the 80k a year condom czar.
bring home the troops.
end the socalled wars.
protect our borders.
reduce his salary to 39k a year - what the average U.S wage earner makes.
do away w/ the income tax.
ya - i can see why CNBC would dis the guy.
edit on 10-11-2011 by jibajaba because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
From CNBC:

An Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful


Dear folks,

You guys are good. Real good. You are truly a force on World Wide Web and I tip my hat to you.

That's based on my first hand experience of your work regarding our CNBC Republican candidate debate. After the debate, we put up a poll on our Web site asking who readers thought won the debate. You guys flooded it.

Now these Internet polls are admittedly unscientific and subject to hacking. In the end, they are really just a way to engage the reader and take a quick temperature reading of your audience. Nothing more and nothing less. The cyber equivalent of asking the room for a show of hands on a certain question.

So there was our after-debate poll. The numbers grew ... 7,000-plus votes after a couple of hours ... and Ron Paul was at 75%.

Now Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate, but I haven't seen him pull those kind of numbers in any "legit" poll. Our poll was either hacked or the target of a campaign. So we took the poll down.

The next day, our email basket was flooded with Ron Paul support messages. And the computer logs showed the poll had been hit with traffic from Ron Paul chat sites. I learned other Internet polls that night had been hit in similar fashion. Congratulations. You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can't help but admire that.

But you also ruined the purpose of the poll. It was no longer an honest "show of hands" -- it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn't our intention and certainly doesn't serve our readers ... at least those who aren't already in the Ron Paul camp.

Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed "few" can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of "the many," I get a little worried. I'd take it down again.

Sincerely,

Allen Wastler
Managing Editor, CNBC.com


Server logs will show if there was indeed poll flooding from specific IPs. I would agree with this editor that any poll showing a 75% lead for a particular candidate has probably been rigged. But then again, if real living persons that are RP followers voted in an honest fashion - i.e., no hacking, then what does it matter if they "got organized"? Isn't that very same organization the sort of thing that would win RP the primary then the general elections?
edit on 10-11-2011 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-11-2011 by Backbiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
This happens on polls all the time. You don't think supporters of other candidates are sharing the poll and encouraging friends and fellow supporters to head over to website x and vote for candidate y?

Lets be honest here, that is nothing out of the ordinary. What's out of the ordinary is the fact Ron Paul has more online supporters than everyone else. It's that simple. They're not necessarily better organised, he's just, plain and simple, more popular on the internet.

Whether it reflects the support offline is completely irrelevant. Paul is the dominate candidate on the web, so he dominates polls, naturally. You could have the best organisation in the world but without the actual supporters you aren't going to win polls.

It's not Ron Pauls fault that his rivals are supported more or less by hicks who probably use internet explorer and don't know how to properly work a computer.

RP is being punished for being head and shoulders more popular than other candidates. I don't even like the man but everyone knows that's the truth.

If CNBC don't like the opinions of internet users they can take a walk



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
CBS admits Paul was doing well, then admits it's not about substance.

"As always, Ron Paul was a strong voice for his libertarian beliefs. Too bad the Perry disaster means nobody's going to be paying much attention. A debate free of dramatic moments would have allowed for more discussion of the ideas bandied about in a debate focused on the economy and been a prime opportunity for Paul to make his case against the Federal Reserve and big government. It looked for the first hour or so that's exactly what was taking place. Then came the YouTube moment to end all YouTube moments, a screw-up so memorable that substance couldn't possibly compete."



posted on Nov, 10 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Okay I voted for Paul but since the MSM is convinced we hack the poll how about a phone in poll. Because I would vote that way too....





new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join