CNBC to Ron Paul Supporters: Knock.It.Off. « The Van Der Galiën Gazette

CNBC to Ron Paul Supporters: Knock.It.Off.

October 12, 2007 by Michael van der Galiën

CNBC’s Managing Editor, Allen Wastler, has written an open letter to supporters of Congressman Ron Paul. In it, he expresses his frustration with the online behavior of some of Paul’s supporters: CNBC put an online poll up shortly after the Republican debate sponsored by the network had finished. Within a couple of hours, more than 7,000 people had voted, with 75% of the votes going to Ron Paul. Since Paul doesn’t poll quite so well in ‘legit’ polls, CNBC decided to do a little research and they saw that most Paul-voters came directly from Ron Paul message boards. Since they, in the opinion of Allen Wastler, hijacked the polls, he decided to take it down.

“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,” he writes. He explains that “[i]t 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.”

The conclusion: if Paul supporters don’t want internet polls to be taken down, they shouldn’t ‘hijack’ it.

Sadly, there is one problem. Paul supporters are, probably, just very active online. Once supporters of one candidate or another see a poll, they’ll vote. They won’t think: “if I vote, am I misrepresenting the nation-wide support for my candidate?” Once they start thinking like that, the numbers will be scewed as well, simply because they fear that if they vote the poll may be taken down.

Of course I understand the frustration of those who put up Internet polls, but you can’t ask people not to vote. As long as they don’t literally hijack the poll (sending bugs, one person finding a way to vote 100 times, etc.), it’s a bit silly to ask them not to vote. Considering that Paul’s supporters are incredibly active on the Internet, it’s quite logical that Internet polls give a distorted picture of reality. If you want a ‘real’ poll, a qualitatively good poll, you shouldn’t organize it online. Do it the old fashioned way.

And that’s the real lesson from all the online polls: they can be freely ignored. We all knew that already, but certain networks and newspapers seem to have lived in a different universe during the last couple of years. Internet polls are nice, they’re a good way to get one’s readers a bit more involved, but that’s it.

****More*****

Reader Téjon writes:

Michael, I hope you don’t mind me posting this here… I’ve put up an online petition with the express goal of laying to bed this particular line of FUD. Anyone who votes for Ron Paul in online polls is encouraged to sign this petition to demonstrate that they are a single, real individual.

When/if it hits six thousand signatures, I’ll email it to CNBC.

On-topic: you have a very valid point insofar as the online showing is not demographically representative of the American public as a whole, even if the results are valid. I offer the counterpoint that neither is the ballot turnout! Enthusiasm does count for something.

If you’re a Ron Paul supporter you might consider signing it.

****MORE****

Just look at the reception Ron Paul received at the University of Michigan:

Posted in 2008 elections | 120 Comments

120 Responses to “CNBC to Ron Paul Supporters: Knock.It.Off.”

on October 12, 2007 at 8:59 pm1 Interested

nice take on it Michael.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:00 pm2 Chris S.

“Here’s our quick-non-scientific -not -statistically -valid -but -really -quick -and -worth- some- more -talking- head comments- and now you guys have to go and ruin our good thing!”

Now having said that, Ron Paul supporters ARE irritating.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:01 pm3 Michael van der Galiën

Yeah I mean, I agree that it’s frustrating if you take these polls seriously, or if you want them to be taken seriously, but you just can’t. History has shown that. Poll the traditional way. Don’t start an internet poll.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:02 pm4 Chris

CNBC should lighten up. Those polls are used as an interactive element to drive traffic to the site. Nothing more.

And come on… couldn’t you have bought the $1 istockphoto?
on October 12, 2007 at 9:04 pm5 Michael van der Galiën

Chris: click here if you want to know what the answer to that question is
on October 12, 2007 at 9:04 pm6 Interested

And come on… couldn’t you have bought the $1 istockphoto?

I am sure Michael will gladly accept your $1 contribution.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:07 pm7 Shane

I still don’t understand what the problem is. What do want Paul supporters to do? note vote for their guy? not organize so well? not share their opinion on an article or blog about their guy? Not go to straw polls? Not create their own campaign signs and banners and stickers?

Not be passionate about the candidate because, why?

Seems like so much jealousy to me.

Ron Paul and his supporters do not have a monopoly on the internet, the street corners or the blogs. “flooding the polls” as if that’s a bad thing?!!?

I’m supposed to not vote for my candidate in a poll because other people are as well? that absurd. lets not forget that a huge part of paul’s base is on the internet and is younger than 35, the ones most likely to be voting in an online poll.

There is nothing stopping supporters from any other campaign from doing the same, in fact, i wish they did it would show that people want to participate in the system.

The thing is if the supporters of the other guys can’t even manage to get organized or passionate enough to vote online what makes you assume that they’ll bother to show up to vote in person, or that paul’s passionate followers will not?

“abuse the system”?

get real.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:10 pm8 Michael van der Galiën

Yes I will.

UPDATE this was in response to comment $6, oops a freudian slip of the fingers there, comment #6 I meant.

Shane: exactly. You can’t ask people not to vote.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:12 pm9 GeneG

They won’t think: “if I vote, am I misrepresenting the nation-wide support for my candidate?”

Mike, are you on crack? Stand back and look how stupid that sounds.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:13 pm10 Michael van der Galiën

No, I am on nicotine gum though. Does that count?
on October 12, 2007 at 9:15 pm11 Dennis

Ron Paul’s biggest supporters are from Internet. He’s number 1, 2 or top 4 in youtube, myspace and facebook. Lots of meetup. Why wouldn’t he be doing well in an internet poll if he’s the man in internet?

I’m sure if you did a poll from just actors Fred would win.

If you did a poll on just mormons, Mitt would win.

If you did a poll from just NY, Guliani would lose.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:19 pm12 Will

His logic is VERY flawed. While Paul might not be polling high in “traditional scientific” polls, he is winning many straw polls and raising much more money than all of the other “2nd tier”. Not only that, from what I understand there were over 2500 (live, in the flesh) Paul supporters outisde of the debate rallying for thier candidate. Maybe my logic isn’t sound here but from what I understand there were about 7500 votes in the online poll and Paul got about 75% of them. Most likely the people outside called home to get a friend or family member to vote or simply fired up laptops or blackberries to vote themselves. The people actually there, if voting, would have probably put him in the lead. And YES, we Paul supporters DO watch the debates, we DO “live blog” on our message boards, and WE DO VOTE! It’s not our fault that the other candidates don’t light the fire of passion in thier “supporters” enough to actually watch the debates and/or vote in the post-debate polls. Trust me, we’re not “spamming” or attempting to vote multiple times. It’s just that we Ron Paul supporters are VERY passionate in our support of this man. So much so that we vote! I think it’s ludicrous of CNBC to attempt to belittle us and our candidate this way. I guess it was to be expected though given that Ron Paul was given less questions and talk time in the debate (5.8% total talk time) than any other cadidate. It doesn’t matter to them that he’s raising money, winning straw polls, and speaking at rallies attended by thousands of cheering supporters everywhere he goes.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:20 pm13 GeneG

Well Mike, it’s really no mystery. Take a hard look at people, places and event numbers, they speak for themselves.

http://amongthese.com/2008_presidential_election_statistics

BTW, the guy at top of the (R) column’s numbers get larger each day.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:24 pm14 Michael van der Galiën

Ge: thanks that’s fascinating. But… how can there be Ron Paul meet-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe?

Having said that, he would still top the list if we’d only look at Northern America according to Meet-Up.

Will: again, I agree with that. I think that Ron Paul supporters are, quite simply, more passionate than supporters of the others and that they now their way around the Internet better.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:26 pm15 Confused Conservative

How come nobody votes for the other guys? Are Ron Paul fans stopping them from voting online? Do the other candidates’ backers live in the backwoods with no access to the internet?

Aren’t they excited about Rudy’s cross-dressing thrice-married morals? Mitt’s liberal-conservative message ambiguity? McCain’s “bomb Iran” rhetoric? Fred Thompson’s acting fame?

Certainly the $5,000,000+ raised by Ron Paul in the last quarter (from average Americans rather than corporate donors) means nothing. Absolutely nothing. No one likes Ron Paul…it’s just a kid in his dorm room with too much time on his hands (a 5 million to spend in support of a non forgetten ideal…the Constitution).

But anyway, I can’t wait until we invade Iran…I bet it’ll be as big a success as Iraq! (Not that I’ll be there, but I clamor for it!).
on October 12, 2007 at 9:28 pm16 Paul supporter

I tried to vote twice, but it said “only 1 vote per IP address, thank you for voting” Same thing with the Fox debate text message poll, which Ron Paul also won. I dunno, maybe we should just lay down and die…..
on October 12, 2007 at 9:29 pm17 Ben

If you don’t want to know who I plan to vote for… then don’t ask.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:29 pm18 Ike

Subject: In Sincere Apology

Dear Allen,

I’m sure you’re getting plenty of emails attacking your character and judgment after your latest admission of tampering with the polls due to activism that favored Ron Paul. I apologize for my fellow Americans who have foolishly clung to the oddball notion that politics is a participatory process and that by getting active and supporting their candidate, they are exercising the democratic imperative. As we both know, real election-day polling doesn’t rely on the activism of a voting base. I, like everyone else, am required to hand over my voters’ registration card to Zogby and wait for my phone call.

As a Ron Paul supporter, it’s embarrassing to see my fellow Americans taking steps to organize themselves in order to make a good showing in these online polls for their candidate, when it’s clear that the voting bases of these other, more popular candidates are not willing to match the efforts with the same kind of activist enthusiasm. As the saying goes: the nail that sticks out gets hammered down. America is truly being serviced by your hammer.

In Sincere Apology,
(me)
on October 12, 2007 at 9:34 pm19 J Jordan

It is amazing and amusing seeing this happen. Had the anointed one Guiliani achieved these online polls it would be plastered everywhere. When Ron Paul wins CNBC “pulls it”

I am really looking forward to the primarys. When Paul starts winning states, they will try to figure out how he beat the system. Hmmm, then maybe they will blame it on defective Diebold voting machines…
on October 12, 2007 at 9:41 pm20 Butler T. Reynolds

I’m sure that Allen Wastler is frustrated. But, he’s frustrated in the same way that many TV and Newspaper people are frustrated with the internet: the internet does not play by their rules. I’m sure that the loss of control is very frustrating.

I’m a computer programmer. The introduction of the world wide web rocked my world as well. I’ve done my share of pouting, but guess what? I had to adapt.

Allen Wastler should also learn to adapt.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:41 pm21 Fritz

Don’t forget, when asked to call in after the debate Paul wins as well. Every time they poll the people who watched, or people attending the event the results are the same. Traditional polls, wouldn’t work in a debate. “Random” people that likely didn’t see the debate? What the polls are really determining is that the people who care most about political issues and debates and how the country is doing, support Ron Paul. It doesn’t skew anything, it just doesn’t give the result “they” want. So, take away from that what you will, I for one consider myself proud to be amongst the group of people that care the most about this country, and not part of the group participating in a popularity contest. This isn’t high school, even though the media would have us believe otherwise. I would wager Britney Spears is covered more than any of the candidates. But, let’s trust these people to respect journalistic integrity and represent pertinent issues.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:45 pm22 MvdG

Stop messing with my poll. It’s supposed to make you all support either Rudy or Mitt, then eventually, Billary. Any other opinions will be delt with harshly.

Resistance is futile.

- Mike
on October 12, 2007 at 9:45 pm23 Phil Blanks

“how can there be Ron Paul meet-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe?” - The Military stationed abroud.
US Military has donated more money to Ron Paul than any other candidate.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:45 pm24 Guilanimarriedhiscousin

CNBC questions our morality for ruining their “legitimate show of hands” by voting. Ron Paul has an untouchable record and resume, so they attack his followers. We are immoral for voting…participating in democracy. Focus your attacks on Ron Paul……if you can. I haven’t seen an honest attack yet, not an accurate one at least. I challenge you to do so. In fact, for every bad thing you can come up with I can give you 3 good things about Ron, and six bad tings about Rudy and Hillary. Please accept this challenge.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:48 pm25 Brian

There are 50,000 on Ron Paul meet up alone. Thats ten times more than anyone else. Ron gets more views on his website than any other candidate and seeing how “Official National Polls” only poll the demographic they choose, I find it hularious that you think “RP Spammers” are spamming and not investigate how the “National Polls” are being run.

Atleast I can see evidence of his support on the internet. The National polls I have to trust that they are accurate and unbiased.

As a child, did you make all the rules when you played tag and then change them when you got tired of being it. Sounds like you’re the one hiding something.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:54 pm26 JL

yes, from now on if i see an online poll, i will refrain from “hijacking” it. i’ll either abstain from voting, or i’ll vote for a candidate i don’t support.
on October 12, 2007 at 9:56 pm27 Steve

This is getting out of control.

I have been a democrat all my life and was an administrator for the democartic party for 8 years and after the first debate i saw Ron Paul and found his views to be more like mine and i will vote for him.

Back to the online polls : Lets get serious guys you can not expect anyone to believe that NBC sets up online polls that can be hijacked for every computer is assigned a number that can be traced back to that computer as well as an ip address, now ip addresses if not static can be manipulated but COMPUTERS CAN NOT and you are not going to convince me that NBC has not set up the proper software to eliminate that.

Does anyone remember the online polls about the Iraq war on all major online polls before Ron Paul came into the picture? 75% of those polls wanted out of the war but those were praised by all the media and still are today.

Lets take this in perspective for a minute : Ok even if you believe that Ron Paul supporters are spamming the polls and are just well organized, WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT THE OTHERS? THAT QUESTION CAN WORK BOTH WAYS THEY COULD DO THE SAME THING COULDN’T THEY?

NOW LETS LOOK AT STRAW POLLS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE TO GET OFF THE COUCH AND VOTE, wouldn’t you think that those would be more scientific than any telephone poll that all the major polls use to determine thier numbers? yes of course they would so lets look at pauls numbers.

Tulsa State Fair, Oklahoma 10/07/2007 1 41.5%

Oregon Straw Poll- Portland, Oregon 10/06/2007 1 67.0%

Gwinnett County GOP, Atlanta, Georgia 9/30/2007 1 36.2%
CWA New Jersey GOP Straw Poll 9/29/2007 1 77.0%

South Sound Ronald Reagan Republican Club 9/26/2007 1 35.0%

Palmetto Family Council Straw Poll 9/20/2007 2 33.0%

Manchester, NH Straw Poll 9/16/2007 1 65.0%

Ronald Reagan Club (Washington) 8/21/2007 1 28.0%

West Alabama 8/18/2007 1 81.2%

Strafford County, NH 8/18/2007 1 72.2%

The list goes on and on, so are these people that actually have to leave the house spamming the polls too?

I find it amazing that people are willing to ignore the fact he is winning poll after poll and claim a conspiracy.

He raised over 5 million in the 3rd quarter with an average donation of $40 so i guess that was virtual dollars? do the math how many people doanted to get to 5 million at 40 bucks.

Most people didn’t even know who he was untill july and look at how many supporters he has so quickly.

Stop the propaganda people Ron Paul and his supporters are for real and the more you try to silence us the louder we get.

RONPAUL 2008
on October 12, 2007 at 9:59 pm28 TheWhatNow?

You can’t trust internet polls, you can’t trust old-fashioned polls because of the cell-phone/land-line issue….so what to do? The only reason Paul was able to distinguish himself so well from the pack in online polls was because he not only is America’s choice, but he’s also the WORLD’s top pick. People from across the globe know RP, wish him to be Pres, and pray for him daily. If CNBC wants a “legit” poll, they’ll limit the votes to Americans…they’ll make it a text message poll or some’n…otherwise we’re talking about a poll for the next leader of the free world, and I don’t think anyone wants to start that discussion, eh!
on October 12, 2007 at 10:00 pm29 Dennis

If they wanted a show of hands, I’m sure there was about 2000-2500 U of M supporters in their back door that could counted. I believe the other supporters had 1700 online votes all together…he still would have won if he had no online votes and just a head count.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:00 pm30 Interested

Aren’t they excited about Rudy’s cross-dressing thrice-married morals?

The word is that’s big in parts of Sweden.

Michaels take on it is pretty spot on. Mind you nowhere is he saying you shouldn’t vote or that the guys take is right.

Of course I understand the frustration of those who put up Internet polls, but you can’t ask people not to vote. As long as they don’t literally hijack the poll (sending bugs, one person finding a way to vote 100 times, etc.), it’s a bit silly to ask them not to vote. Considering that Paul’s supporters are incredibly active on the Internet, it’s quite logical that Internet polls give a distorted picture of reality. If you want a ‘real’ poll, a qualitatively good poll, you shouldn’t organize it online. Do it the old fashioned way.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:00 pm31 Peter Kay

I’m really sorry here guys. I went to my local library and voted on each computer there then drove to the nearest internet cafe and voted on every computer there. My two other friends did the same. We alone voted 6,342 times. I’m sorry about messing up the CNBC poll. It’s been me all along. I do it every time. I can’t help myself.

I also went down to my local costume shop and bought a bunch of costumes and drive to straw polls all over the country. I change into my costumes and vote for Ron Paul over and over again. Look at the vids on youtube. You may notice a pirate, a vampire, a werewolf, and the Frankenstein monster voting for Ron Paul. That’s all me. You might also see a transvestite there too. That wasn’t me. That was Rudy.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:01 pm32 bro7

This whole deal with cnbc removing the polls from their website really makes me laugh because I think all its doing is openening up people’s eyes to the mainstream media’s stupidity and bias. And it clearly shows that these neocons are scared and threatened by Ron Paul. I’m just going to sit back and watch the corruption grow and grow with these people while they are upseting the majority of the American people.

Vote Ron Paul!

I am a person not a robot!
on October 12, 2007 at 10:02 pm33 Steve

I am willing to bet if all the paul supporters voted for mccain and he received 75% they would blast that all over the world and i think we should try it.

Lets not vote for the guy we want lets vote for someone else because that is the right thing to do isn’t it? We should vote for the people we don’t like ahhh i get it that is democracy works.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:02 pm34 John Doe

I am going to apply for Allan Wastler’s job because its apparently obvious that I am completely over qualified for this high paying position…as a matter of fact I may very well be eliminated for the following:

1) Reviewing the facts of prior internet and straw polls 14+.
2) Analyzing the amount of momentum a certain candidate may be recieving over the last 8 months.
3) Campaign Fundraising ability.
4) My failure to come up with creative politically correct corporate name calling i.e. “Fans”, “Hijacking” “Legit”
5) My enormous amount of complacency to allow the poll to continue more than just a 2-3 hours.

Here is my question if these poll results were for Hillary or Obama what do you think the MSM would do?…Well I’ll tell you they would be celebrating as if they were at a Prince Concert on 1999. We would have to read about it on the front cover of every Associated Press Page for days…but since its a different winner(even though there was not a time frame to really determine such) but I think 7,000 plus is scientific enough considering most polls only consist of 800…well they needed to “fix the glitch” or “pull the poll”.

Why because “they got worried”…worried about what a 72 year old libertarian from Texas getting some traction you clowns have got to be kidding.

What are you really concerned about???
on October 12, 2007 at 10:02 pm35 Les

“Ge: thanks that’s fascinating. But… how can there be Ron Paul meet-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe?”

Easy… we are speaking about a canidate that has a large amount of support from America’s armed forces… and America is not the only place where Americans live… So between any interested ex-pats and and military members of like mind, it is entirely possible that there may be Ron Paul meets-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe. And now this American living in Sicily is going to see if there are any Ron Paul meet-ups in Italy… ciao!
on October 12, 2007 at 10:03 pm36 Phil Blanks

Today Rupert Murdoch’s Australian media accuses Ron Paul of running a ‘Fake Online Campaign’ ?!?

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22573763-38198,00.html
on October 12, 2007 at 10:06 pm37 Michael van der Galiën

Good point Les.

And just to those who didn’t take the time to read my article, I’m basically disagreeing with CNBC on this one. As I repeatedly make clear… in… the… article.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:08 pm38 Alan

Hey all you over thirty (or maybe forty): Whatever happened to “investigative journalism”? Twenty or thirty years ago, if polls were selectively altered or “disappeared”, or if a primary candidate was given less than half the questions or speaking time than all the other participants in a debate by a particular forum, the rest of the mainstream media would be screaming bloody murder, outrageous bias, ets.

Today, except on the Internet, not a peep. Hell, forget the “investigative journalism”, there is nothing to investigate here — it is all right out in the open! Yet, like the sudden announcement that the old EastAsian ally is the new “perpetual enemy” in Orwell’s 1984, we are supposed to just not notice when reality is denied. And the sad thing is, for the most part, the mainstream herd does not.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:09 pm39 Dennis

How many hits has this gotten so far? And this is just a blog, not a national debate.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:10 pm40 bro7

I cant drive from one friends house to another or cafe to vote online, I don’t have a car.

I wonder if the other supporters even have computers?
on October 12, 2007 at 10:13 pm41 Alan

Peter Kay: Brilliant!

Dennis (#29): I used to attend the University of Michigan, and the idea of 2500 students turning out for ANY political rally (well, since the 1970’s), much less that of a REPUBLICAN, is mind-blowing! Why isn’t the MSM picking up on this story of Ron Paul’s widespread support on campuses around the country? It rivals, if not exceeds, the much-covered campus support for Eugene McCarthy in 1968, who coincidentally was also a “peace candidate”.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:14 pm42 Bharat

A blog is a national debate.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:20 pm43 tejón

Michael, I hope you don’t mind me posting this here… I’ve put up an online petition with the express goal of laying to bed this particular line of FUD. Anyone who votes for Ron Paul in online polls is encouraged to sign this petition to demonstrate that they are a single, real individual.

When/if it hits six thousand signatures, I’ll email it to CNBC.

http://www.petitiononline.com/rpverify/petition.html

On-topic: you have a very valid point insofar as the online showing is not demographically representative of the American public as a whole, even if the results are valid. I offer the counterpoint that neither is the ballot turnout! Enthusiasm does count for something.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:20 pm44 Steve

Peter # 41 that is a great question that we all wish we could answer and for those of you that think there are only 10 of us here is the video link of the UM rally after the debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aP3LX4SSwg
on October 12, 2007 at 10:21 pm45 Michael van der Galiën

And just so you know - if people have proof that many many many people show up at Ron Paul rallies, photos etc., they can always send them to me or to one of the other co-bloggers.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:26 pm46 Steve

Michael please refer to think link after the debate on tuesday at the university of michigan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aP3LX4SSwg

That is one city and these are occuring all over the USA so you really think we are spamming?

Oh wait maybe we are now cloning ourselves?

We could all be harry houdini
on October 12, 2007 at 10:30 pm47 Michael van der Galiën

Post has been updated twice
on October 12, 2007 at 10:31 pm48 NobodySpecial

Seems to me that these continual Ron Paul landslides show that he is the only candidate with any real support, and thus the true front-runner. All the rest are just puppets fighting to sit on the lap of the puppeteer. Meanwhile the sheeple in the audience do not support anyone at this time, because the puppeteer has yet to clue them in on who to support. Undecided voters? How about yet to be programmed voters?

I just love Allen Wastler’s summary.

‘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.’

Funny, but that’s the same thing all of us Ron Paul supporters area worried about as well. In our case though, instead of the integrity of a self-directed poll to defend the status quo, the system we are concerned is the US Constitution.

Word to the MSM (Marginalized Senile Media), your complicity, as always, is gonna backfire. Go ahead though, keep up the trickery, all you are doing is throwing fuel on the fire.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:45 pm49 Nick

That Rupert Murdoch Australian news website repeatedly called him Senator Ron Paul. Do they even know what they are writing about? They are the slimiest of all news organizations, Fox News parent corp. Dispicable. If I ever meet Rupert I’m gonna kick him in the junk and call it news.
on October 12, 2007 at 10:58 pm50 Interested

Word to the MSM (Marginalized Senile Media), your complicity, as always, is gonna backfire. Go ahead though, keep up the trickery, all you are doing is throwing fuel on the fire.

lmao good one.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:03 pm51 Wildcat

[Ron Paul is winning primaries by landslide margins...]

“Good evening and welcome to Hannity and Colmes; I’m Sean Hannity here along with Alan Colmes, where tonight, Fox News has the exclusive - you heard it here first - Britney shaved her head again! Also, what is it like to be tall? Join us for our exclusive interview with a tall person for insight that may shock you… back in 90 seconds - don’t touch that dial…”
on October 12, 2007 at 11:23 pm52 tsoldrin

Boo-Hoo! IF the results are not what we expect, we’ll take our poll and go home.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:29 pm53 DennisT

It’s just too bad that Ron Paul supporters are making it more difficult than usual for the media to rig the Presidential Elections in favor of the status quo politicians. Americans are tired of being told how to vote and shame on anyone in the media for trying to influence the outocme.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:29 pm54 Alan

Wildcat,

Regarding Fox News (sic), you are right on the money!

But you forgot to add “… and afterward, an exclusive interview with Vice President Cheney, with the latest dire intelligence pointing to the imminent and coordinated terrrorist threats posed by Monaco, Andorra, and Bhutan. Will the US be forced to invade these rogue states? Stay tuned and find out!”
on October 12, 2007 at 11:36 pm55 Wildcat

LOL!… Bingo!
on October 12, 2007 at 11:38 pm56 Ivan

To: Michael van der Galiën

Post# 14

“Ge: thanks that’s fascinating. But… how can there be Ron Paul meet-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe?”

Have you considered we have permanent MILITARY bases all over the world. FYI look at the number of Ron Paul members in each of those meet ups they are like 5-10 members each. Could they be military personnel? Quite possibly they are.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:46 pm57 tony

I find this very funny. Ron Paul won the vote. Plain and simple. Why can’t we just say “Ron Paul won the vote”. To pull the poll because somebody won the poll by a landslide is nothing less than an attempt to meddle with the results. All this talk about rigging in cheating is just an attempt to weasle out of the truth. No evidence has been displayed to show any cheating. Only weak minded sheep are going to believe that statement without supporting evidence.

Just because people came from an online message board to vote in a poll means they are doing something wrong. To say that online polls don’t mean anything on the basis of who won the poll is bad journalism. I would agree that online polls should not be considered scientific just because they exist but neither should these telephone polls. I ask everyone I know “have you ever been called by one of these polls, do you know anyone that has been called by any of these polls?” the response I get every time is no. So tell me exactly who do these telephone polls represent?

It is not our fault the the other candidates cannot garner support enough to represent thier candidate. If a football team wins a game because the other football team sucks and doesn’t play well, do we negate the win because the other team sucks. No we don’t.

So stop accusing us of bad behavior just because we show up to win. I’ll say it right now. where are these supporters of the other candidates? I never see them. I don’t see any signs, I don’t see posts on how much they believe in their candidate. Where are they. All I see is Ron Paul bashing. If your candidate is so good, where are you. Show your face. I am not afraid to argue the merits of my candidates position and I need not spend one second bad mouthing your candidate. Show yourself.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:47 pm58 Jake

John Harwood wrote and open letter to Ron Paul supports about how he doesn’t think it was right for his staff to do it. Interesting read, even though he doesn’t believe RP has a chance, atleast he understands that this is the new political landscape they have to face.
on October 12, 2007 at 11:51 pm59 Alan

I sent this in to Mr. Harwood of CNBC a few minute ago:

To John Harwood,

Thank you for your well-written and thoughtful letter to Ron Paul supporters. It was, initially, gracious and appreciated. However, I was shocked by what follows. Your statement:

“To be clear: I believe that Ron Paul’s chances of winning the presidency are no greater than my own, which is to say zero.”

is still a reflection of the arrogance and “we-know-best” mentality that is turning off increasing numbers of people to the so-called Mainstream Media. I myself would NEVER presume to decide a political race more than a year before an election, and I believe no rational person could claim such ability. Please tell me where you bought your magical crystal ball that allows you to do so.

Arrogance — we’ve had it with you people!
on October 12, 2007 at 11:55 pm60 Dave

Written on another article:

If the CNBC site and internet polls are being hacked by Ron Paul supporters or anybody else they should fire their CIO immediately. Multi-billion dollar companies should be able to withstand the ‘hackings’ of the few Ron Paul nutcase supporters out there. Without doubt there are numerous ways of preventing a single computer from casting multiple votes.

Also, why is there never any PROOF of hackings or some kind of manipulation of a poll. CNBC should provide a detailed account (with proof) of precisely how their site was hacked so that the other incompetent IT departments at the other media outlets can get their IT houses in order. Until they can do so, they shouldn’t bother with polls. They obviously can’t handle them.

If the sites aren’t being hacked but are just being ‘flooded’ with individual votes by individual paul supporters then that is a different matter.

Taking a poll down boils down to one of the following:

1. We are a billion dollar company with an incompetent IT staff and an easily hackable web site;

2. We are nothing close to true journalists and believe in censoring the truth if it doesn’t match with our expectations; or

3. We have sold out and do what we are told.

Regardless of the answer, if I owned CNBC or GE I’d sell tomorrow.
on October 13, 2007 at 12:51 am61 Geoff Whittington

How is it the fault of Ron Paul supporters that Rudy McRomney supporters don’t bother to vote online?
on October 13, 2007 at 12:53 am62 Geoff Whittington

This was my email to Mr. Hardwood,

– snip –

Dear Mr. Hardwood,

Thank-you for acknowledging the error in your colleagues’ having the taken down the post-debate poll.

Allow me to reference your article:

“He lacks the support needed to win the GOP nomination, and would even if the media covered him as heavily as we cover Rudy Giuliani. Why? Because Paul’s views–respectable, well-articulated and sincerely held as they are–are plainly out of step with the mainstream sentiment of the party he is running in.”

Whether Ron Paul is, or is not, out of step with the Republican Party should have no bearing on whether or not you share news about his message. When did CNBC become an official vehicle of the Republican Party?

It is for exactly this reason that the ‘mainstream media’ alienates more and more readers/watchers. There is no such thing as ‘fair debate’ in your news media because ideas are picked and chosen. Some ideas are suppressed and others are forced on the reader/watcher.

The Internet is here and decentralized ideas are here to stay. Be sure that media like CNBC is not going to go out of business anytime soon - but I assure you that it will lose more and more of its credibility as a place for fair debate of ideas.

I wonder often how mainstream reporters became Idea Dictators.

Yours Truly,

Geoff Whittington
on October 13, 2007 at 1:19 am63 Jefferson

It never occurred to me as I met with a group of friends to watch the debate that I must not clink on a link in a website, but actually open up the page from the CSNBC website itself.

If you want us all to open the CSNBC webpage, then tell us that. We will.

What you are missing is that apparently only Ron Paul supporters are actually watching your debates. It is sad too, because this big demographic rarely gets much more than a few crumbs thrown to them. (Ron Paul was allowed fewer words than any other candidate on the stage.)

So, your main audience is Ron Paul supporters and yet, you will not allow the man to utter a word unless it is to answer some inane question about whether or not he will support the other people on the stage? How do you expect to get any audience at all.

With any luck, most of your audience watched the debates on YouTube or something so that your advertisers received nothing - because that is what you deserve.

Face it, you know nothing about how the world works. Just because people vote from a message board does NOT mean they are all in the same place. Actually, they are all across the country, but this fact seems to allude you. We were not all squished together in a virtual chat room. I promise you.

You are doing the GOP and the country a great disservice with this monkeying around with polling data. There is a trend here you are ignoring. That is why you are so “shocked” when Ron Paul’s contribution numbers are so high.

You do realize you are looking like idiots to the rest of us, don’t you? The mainstream media is joke these days. We see it when you remove polls because you don’t like where the person clicked on the link from. We see it when you don’t allow the one man in the debate who is rising in popularity to get any time at all. We see it when you call all these supporters “spammers”. Clearly you don’t know the definition of spamming and again, that makes you look very foolish.

We the people are angry at you. We are angry at being blatantly manipulated. We are angry that you are trying to take away our only hope in centuries. We are angry that you are trying to herd the sheep to your pre-determined winner and manipulating the election process.

I agree with someone above - where is the outrage that Ron Paul got so little time to talk? Where is the disgust with the station that treats the American people like idiots? Why are there not more stories about this hijacking of the political process!

Shame on you CSNBC! Shame. Learn what the Internet is, and how it works. Learn what the people want and stop STEALING RON PAUL’s message of hope and liberty and freedom from the American people. They deserve to hear it.
on October 13, 2007 at 1:22 am64 Jefferson

Please excuse my misspelling of your name above - apparently it is CNBC. That just shows how little time I waste on your actual network. You could have impressed me, but instead you just reinforced my views of how distrustful you are.

Sigh.
on October 13, 2007 at 1:51 am65 Alan

Jefferson,

I hope you mail that off to Mr. Harwood of CNBC (edited for clarity, of course). Here is his email address:

politicalcapital@cnbc.com
on October 13, 2007 at 2:57 am66 Harold White

What a pathetic response this Wastler dude whoever he is. So, he’s basically saying that he’s proud he took down the results of the poll because Ron Paul supporters voted en masse.

Is this coming across as purely ridiculous logic? How can someone from a well regarded outlet like CNBC give such a pathetic reply.

Goes to show you that many of these guys in those cushiony jobs should be flicked off for their incompetence and flushed down the toilet of oblivion. I can’t take these morons any more.

It’s almost like the “you’re doing a heck of job brownie” stunt.

If we need reporters to place their own interpretation of the facts above the reporting itself, then we don’t need them. Please if you’re a reporter, then first and foremost report the facts. Don’t hide them when it suits you and show them and spin them when it doesn’t.

If nothing else, it’s worth noting that you got almost 18000 votes, and if they’re all Ron Paul supporters, report that as well. If you have no reason to believe there was any foul play, then just report the facts. Geez! If you want to be a politician, then pick a number — we have enough corrupt incompetence in high places as it is.
on October 13, 2007 at 4:15 am67 zenpiper

Much ado about CNBC. They’re a corporate entity, backed by the CFR with oversight by the CIA. Clever lads, but hardly representative of a free press. What did you expect? Fairness? Not in this country.
on October 13, 2007 at 4:49 am68 speakingoutworld

I personally believe all polls are bias. They never show the accurate readings of the peoples vote. AS of tonights speaking that John Paul gave, he now has my support. He wants to bring us back to the way this country was originally formed and ran ( By the constitution). And as I see it the main stream media see him as a threat to their party favorites so they are trying to bring him down. GGGGGGOOOOOO John Paul, set things straight.

The Spokesman
on October 13, 2007 at 4:55 am69 Kevin Santoro

A bunch of garbage. Online polls are more legit because in “scientific” offline polls YOU CHOOSE WHO VOTES.
Online polls people Choose to Vote!
It’s total lies people claim Paul supporters “Hyjack” polls. Especially the text polls after debates. You can’t vote more then once with your phone. Ron Paul only having 1% of “Scientific” offline polls MY ASS.
Stop the lies. Start reporting facts.
Wake up America your Freedom is really at stake here.
on October 13, 2007 at 7:26 am70 Leo Frare

A part of the frustration with the on line poll is symptomatic of the total coverage of the 2008 campaign.

Watching the debates I was irritated by the lack of time given to Ron Paul. It seems to follow a patter that is prevalent in the main stream media. I am supported in this opinion by others.

Paul Levinson BA, MA, PhD professor at Fordham University in New York has done a review of the media bias. He presented it to his class at Fordham, it was captured on video

It is on You Tube in five segments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSuf...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzQ4...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKju...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_bG...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1o-...

It would seem to me to be in the best interest of responsible media to not give Professor Fordham any more evidence for his classes. I am sure this issue will be a part of his next class should he decide to continue his review. It would seem to me to be in CNBC’s best interest not to be included as an example.

Sincerely

Leo Frare
mailto:lafrare@timberinnor.com
on October 13, 2007 at 7:55 am71 Barney Palmerston

Are we to believe Ron Paul backers have a monopoly on computers? And that supporters of Giuliani, Romney, Thompson, McCain, et al sat with abacus in hand and watch the CNBC poll in frustration?

That must be awful! Seeing as they just recently endure a similar injustice as they sat by their telegraph machines while Ron Paul supporters with their monopoly on cell phones swept the FOX phone text poll.
on October 13, 2007 at 8:00 am72 David Avina

Dear Mr. Galien,
Very interesting point of view. I am a dyed in the wool republican and I believe in the constitution. So Sir please refrain from these poor assumptions.
We checked the IP addresses would have to be different to be entered. Unlike the Bush election the web truly is one man one vote.
No Die Bolt here.
on October 13, 2007 at 8:39 am73 Julian

Steve said everything that needed to be said. Thanks for nailing it all down so well.

Really though…Ive been wondering about this for about a month now: Why on earth are landline-based phone polls (which the Center for Disease Control considers too inaccurate to be relied upon) where they sample a couple hundred old people at a time who are listed in the phonebook and/or voted Republican in the last election…WHY are THESE polls considered gospel while the straw polls are all but COMPLETELY ignored?

I’ve been intensely interested in politics since I was eleven years old- straw polls are generally held in fairly high esteem. Suddenly they dont matter at all and we are repeatedly hammered with “official polls” where someone at Gallup calls 400-500 old people sitting at home next to a landline.

I think part of the issue here being ignored is that these “scientific, official” polls arent held to the same levels of scrutiny as online polls are.

For example, anyone with ANY background in statistics sees a fundamental problem with the selection process here:

- Polls are supposed to indicate likely VOTER support for candidates, correct?

Then why are those polled chosen like so-

ALL VOTERS
\/
Republican voters (Ind, Dem, Lib, etc. are eliminated)
\/
Who are already registered Republican
\/
Who voted Republican in the last election
\/
Who have landlines
\/
Who were at home near their landline phone when the polling agency called
\/
Who didnt hang up once they answered
(These are the people who are represented in the “official scientific poll)

Now lets ask ourselves; would the final selection pool accurately represent “ALL VOTERS,” the pool we started with?
on October 13, 2007 at 8:58 am74 Brad Linzy, Evansville, IN

Here’s the deal…

I signed the ‘petition’ for the hell of it, but if you people really want to support Ron Paul, get off the internet and at least go hold some Ron Paul signs for traffic a few hours a week.

If you’re just one of these armchair quarterbacks who thinks posting on the internet is going to get Ron Paul elected, you’re not worth my time.
on October 13, 2007 at 11:59 am75 Terry Hamel

Better yet Brad, let’s encourage them to join their local Ron Paul meetup group so they can do more than hold signs such as canvassing their neighborhoods with Ron Paul info, getting people registered, and getting signatures on an affidavit for a Ron Paul vote as a way to verify election votes. We’re taking back America, one person at a time, and we’re motivated because we understand this is probably the people’s last chance. Join now! ronpaul.meetup.com
on October 13, 2007 at 1:01 pm76 tejón

Brad/Terry,

I’m the one who put the petition up, and I’ll assure you that it’s the very least of my campaign-related time investments! I’ve printed and passed out countless flyers, and as there’s no Meetup local to me, I’ll be founding one as soon as I activate some plastic money (the group is already configured, but they don’t take cash on the internet). This was just something quick on the side, and motivated more by curiosity than by the impression that it would actually make a difference.

When people tell me “Ron Paul isn’t going to win,” I reply “Not with that attitude.” The biggest hurdle is simple lack of awareness, and I spend time trying to fix that and encouraging others to do the same, especially if they’re going to be somewhere I’m not.

Active enough for ya?
on October 13, 2007 at 1:37 pm77 gao xia en

I don’t have a landline or a TV. I get all my news from the internet. Why would I want to watch CNBS (not a typo) and their behind-the-times adverisers?
on October 13, 2007 at 1:38 pm78 gao xia en

advertisers- that was a typo
on October 13, 2007 at 2:43 pm79 Alex Ritz

Ron Paul has people actually passionate about the message of freedom.
The other canidates are bought and paid for.
Why not just call it an internet poll and mention the internet’s demographics:
http://www.pewinternet.org/trends.asp
According to that pole 70% of adults are online. That’s a significant number.
Respect the people!
I can’t wait until YOU realize that the people are sick and tired of the ’spinned’ information the media has been delivering.
on October 13, 2007 at 2:56 pm80 Vigilante

On my blog each week, Friday is Be-Kind-to-a-Republican-Day! I try to feature a Redeemable GOP-er once every seven days. Ron Paul was my headliner yesterday! Most weeks I have to settle for an Ex-GOP conservative. The pickings are just so slim. Maybe I’m just looking in the wrong places, huh? Can you help me? “It’s hard work!”

I’ll check back on this thread in six days to see if anyone has any nominations!
on October 13, 2007 at 3:31 pm81 B W Warner

Why are the people at CNBC afraid that the results being published affect their cash revenues from the millions from (TheGood old Boys network)
on October 13, 2007 at 4:06 pm82 Daniel

I am curious what Ron Paul supporters will do once he starts not winning any primary. He got only 9% in the Iowa straw poll (I know he won some other ones in other states, and polled relatively well elsewhere). I really hope he goes third-party and siphon off Republican votes. You guys are a key to Democrats winning office, and you know that.
on October 13, 2007 at 4:32 pm83 speakingoutworld

To Daniel

I don’t see us as a key. If you noticed people like me who voted for the independent last election, were making a statement that we are tired of party politics. If everyone that was tired of it voted for who they thought should be in office and not just the best out of the two parties, except for Ron Paul no republican or Democrat would win. Everyone that I talk to has this idea that if they don’t vote republican or democrat they’ll just let the one they don’t want into office. If all those people actually voted for the independent last election he would have won. This personally will be the first time in my voting history (if he wins the primary) that I’ll vote for a party canidate for President.

The spokesman
on October 13, 2007 at 4:54 pm84 stlytm

Have you ever heard of the silent majority?
Don’t worry about online or offline polls.
If you really believe in Ron Paul, Surprise
the so called main stream candidates.
If you are not a republican, switch parties
and vote. Knock the sock off the others.

Tom
on October 13, 2007 at 5:07 pm85 Yong Hwee

I think Ron Paul stands a good chance in the elections next year. From the perspective of a non-American, I think he’s the only Republican to look out for.
on October 13, 2007 at 6:16 pm86 Dave

John Harwood has delusions of grandeur if he thinks his chances are on a par with Ron Paul. If he thinks for a second that he could personally inspire the enthusiasm and support that has spontaneously erupted for Dr. Paul, he certainly doesn’t lack any of the blind arrogance so necessary to a modern “journalist”. I know he was just trying to be cute, but the reality that a real journalist would be hip to by now, as so many others are, is that Paul really does “have a shot”.
on October 13, 2007 at 6:35 pm87 William Huddleston

Face it Ron Paul is the answer! You are bad mouthing supporters for doing what they have the right to and don’t let me mention the constitution either or I’ll be escorted out of sight. It’s okay though I’ll see you in a FEMA concentration camp then we can discuss it further.
on October 13, 2007 at 6:52 pm88 Stan

They know better we just have the wolves backed into a corner . This is the best lie they can come up with . They are the master spinners . Dont forget that everyone !
on October 13, 2007 at 7:09 pm89 Vivian

Hello,
I have been a registered Republican for 28 years and have never been asked to participate in a so called ‘real’ poll, a qualitatively good poll, an old fashioned poll.
Finally with the internet I am able to voice my opinion and when I see a political poll online you can bet your sweet cookies that I’ll vote in it. The way I see it, most of us who are using the internet are educated, well informed folks who
are actually researching the candidates and making choices we believe to be best for our country. The folks who are being polled “the old fashioned” way are just going by name recognition and are probably out of touch with what’s going on in the real world.
on October 13, 2007 at 7:21 pm90 Melanie

We, Ron Paul supporters have no other choice than to “hijack” the polls. The media won’t accurately report on Ron Paul’s progress. Besides, the other candidates supporters can do the same. And as for the so called “real” polls, in my state, (IL) Mitt Romney brought in 10 busses of people from Chicago, paying for their trip, their lunch, and a free T-shirt, to vote for him in the Straw Poll. So if they can “hijack” the “real” polls, we are left with the polls on the internet. The more they try to deny us the LOUDER WE GET!!!

MITT ROMNEY BOUGHT 10 BUSLOADS OF VOTERS TO WIN IL. STRAW POLL!!!!!
on October 13, 2007 at 7:23 pm91 Mark W.

CNBC ought to be pleased that they even had 8000 viewers. Seems to me that either a) Ron Paul supporters were the only ones to watch the damn thing, b) that the rest of the public is just sick of CNBC and Chris Matthews, or c) the general public was too busy with their heads in the sand.
on October 13, 2007 at 7:52 pm92 Dale Mastarone

In legal terms, the MSM owes a fiduciary duty to the American people. It can be nothing less than fraud and misrepresentation to on the part of MSM keep from the people the welcome news that it just isn’t Tweedledee and Tweedledum running for office, and that a true American is winning polls left and right! What part of Ron Paul’s message doesn’t MSM want America to know about?
on October 13, 2007 at 9:12 pm93 Cliff

I don’t get the excitement over Ron Paul. He’s weak on social issues. He hasn’t said much on economic issues. He thinks we should pull from Iraq. That’s great in my book. He thinks we should use more diplomacy in the Middle East. Super.

But he’s far from the most qualified for the job. In fact, some of his opinions if enacted as policy would be detrimental to the success made by the Civil Rights Movement.
on October 13, 2007 at 10:04 pm94 Stephen Himes

Michael van der Galiën you are stuck in a cave and most importantly, that cave doesn’t have internet. The reason that this is happening only on the internet is because the fake news put out is owned by the same special interests that will profit from the other candidates elections. All this spending is bankrupting the country and you are paid by the same bilderberg groups destroying this nation trying to bring in the amero and the north American union. Try getting some real new, from the war for your mind, infowars(DOT)com.
on October 13, 2007 at 10:15 pm95 thom1776

Can you blame people for being so enthusiastic over the opportunity to reverse the course towards tyranny on which we have been for so many years?

Can you blame people for being so excited and happy that an actual man of integrity is putting it all on the line to return freedom and liberty to a nation that was founded on these very principles?
on October 13, 2007 at 10:50 pm96 Daydreamer

It’s time for us to put our boots on the street and show the mainstream media that we are real.
The ignorance within our leaders controlling our sacred rights to vote need to be reconstructed for our voices to be heard and the constitution to live on…..
We are very tired of the corruption in our very own Government, we have a great nation and the corruption must leave now.
We are real people with real feelings and we are having our freedom of expression violated and our rights for legitaminate participation in the voting process deminished.
We need to Stand for our RIGHTS no matter what.
Daydreamer NH
on October 14, 2007 at 12:10 am97 Ron Paul 2008

Talk about MAJOR censorship by the media. It is a proven FACT that Ron Paul is winning by a landslide. The media is pressed to censor candiates like Ron Paul, because of the total corruption from this gov. that wants to take over your life. You CANNOT vote more than 1 time on the phone. It simply will not allow you. It is a FACT. If your not pissed off, then your not paying attention. Come on people pull your head out of your ass.
on October 14, 2007 at 12:27 am98 Fredhorn Leghorn

“just very active online”. Hm. I just returned from a Ron Paul Freedom Walk in which 200 Ron Paul supporters carried signs and banners on a 4 mile route through downtown Chicago. There were some 60 similar walks around the country today. I guess all the people in Millennium Park were just holographic images put out by some kook in a shack with an Internet connection.
on October 14, 2007 at 2:58 am99 tekel

my 2 cents: Ron Paul is the only candidate I’ve seen lawn signs for in Eugene, Oregon. And I’ve been seeing them for about six months now. And there are LOTS of them.

Just to be very clear: Eugene, Oregon. Full of DFH voters, very solid democratic city in a solid democratic state. No signs for Rudy. No signs for the heretic. No signs for Torture McCain. No signs for Billary or Obama or Edwards. No signs for Gore.

Lots of signs for Ron Paul.
on October 14, 2007 at 3:10 am100 Henry Tiggerson

The other candidates and CNN who comment that Ron Paul is only ahead due to internet shenanigans are perfectly free to utilize the internet to rally support in exactly the same way as Dr Ron Paul.

Please Please support Ron Paul.
Survival of the U.S.A. and possible the planet most likely depend on your support.

Thank you.
on October 14, 2007 at 5:06 am101 ericgonzalez

Stupid question - why would CNBC take the results on an online pool even semi-seriously?
on October 14, 2007 at 5:21 am102 Richard

Phil Blanks, I did a simple google search on the title, and found this:

http://fredthompsonforum.com/showthread.php?p=15046

Apparently it was a fake article that was picked up by other news media!
on October 14, 2007 at 6:15 am103 James Hoppe

Mr. van der Galiën, I’m sorry you feel that people who BELIEVE in a candidate should NOT demonstrate their support in any (legal) way possible. Yes, Paul supporters have a well organized presence, both on and offline, that doesn’t keep the supporters of the other candidates from doing the same. That’s assuming that there ARE any real numbers of supporters for the other candidates and the “scientific” polling institutions aren’t just calling the same batch of numbers over and over. Take a look at the Straw Poll numbers from the last several months, in most of those Dr. Paul has been in the top 5. Maybe Gallup and the others should try calling a wider range of people and giving ALL of the candidates names as options to choose. I was called by them recently, the poll taker didn’t mention Dr. Paul. When I asked “What about Ron Paul?” She said thank you and hung up on me. With pollsters like that it is no wonder Dr. Paul does so poorly in the “Official polls.
on October 14, 2007 at 10:04 am104 Something Different. More of the Same with a Different Twist « Living the Justopian Life

[...] Something Different. More of the Same with a Different Twist Ron Paul from a Different Viewpoint [...]
on October 14, 2007 at 11:24 am105 Robert

Re: “how can there be Ron Paul meet-ups in Australia, the Middle East and Europe?” - The Military stationed abroud.
US Military has donated more money to Ron Paul than any other candidate.”

—- No, it’s not the military - It’s ordinary, well-read people with conscience who know what a good U.S. leader can do. I’m a Ron Paul meet-up member in Australia, trying to help the world with my support for RP. Cheers all.
on October 14, 2007 at 3:25 pm106 Mary Kaisler

This is the most absurd thing I have ever heard! Why can’t we be passionate about our candidate? The media is sure passionate about theirs! I am not an internet savy person. I am 52 years old. Every online poll I have voted in only allows you to vote once. There have been a couple of times that I couldn’t remember if I had voted in a certain poll and re-voted, but it always denies that vote and tells me I have already voted. HIJACKING the internet is something the establishment that wants to rule us would say to discourage people from participating in our government. This just makes me want to go find another poll where I can vote for Ron Paul.
on October 14, 2007 at 3:50 pm107 Elizabeth Comeau

It is laughable that CNBC is accusing us of hijacking the poll or skewing its results in any way.

Isn’t that what THEY did to the debate? They gave Ron Paul a paltry few questions, and he spoke for about 20% of the time that Giuliani did. (They all have to pay the same participation fee by the way, which is often as much as $25,000)

On a daily basis, NBC gives a fraction of the coverage they do to the media-chosen favorites, namely “Rudy McRomson”.

Now tell me again, CNBC, WHO IS SKEWING THE RESULTS???
on October 14, 2007 at 9:08 pm108 koby

its clear to me from the comments offered up on this tiny blog, that we are in the midst of History being made. a REAL war is on between those of us who have had it with the “system” thats been running the United States (and the rest of the world) into the crapper.

I was at the Ann Arbor post debate speech. To the Paul detractors, you need to know that Ann Arbor is THE democratic epicenter of my state…its as liberal as it gets. Over 2000 show up on a Tuesday work night to hear a real Republican speak? If any other Republican would have stepped foot in Ann Arbor, they’d be run out of town on a rail.

What this proves is the wide spectrum of people Dr. Pauls message of Liberty appeals to. Its like this EVERYWHERE he speaks…people of ALL political flavors are waking up to the fact that we’ve been had by the Establishment, one party system…and that its time to put an end to it. If it takes an end run around the MSM to make this happen, then thats just what we are going to do.
on October 14, 2007 at 9:20 pm109 Michael van der Galiën

Umh. We’re actually constantly in the top 100 of wordpress.com blogs. More often than not in the top 50 and top 20 even.
on October 14, 2007 at 10:58 pm110 Lydia

I just went to a Walk for Ron Paul in Tyler Tx Oct 13. I held my sign and walked for awareness.
Its not enough to vote, you have to educate others too.
on October 15, 2007 at 4:54 am111 Jay Herrera

Our meetup group, based in Macon, Georgia, had a Ron Paul booth at the Georgia National Fair Oct 4-14th.
This is an annual event, which brings thousands of visitors to the central Georgia area. I was able to volunteer some time at the booth and had a great time doing so.
We reached out to so many people, as Ron Paul was the ONLY candidate with a dedicated booth at this fair.

When I hear of those who say that Ron Paul’s fanbase is a few hundred people working tirelessly to skew polls, inflate their candidate I think to myself “Why don’t the other candidates have this type of grassroots support?” The other candidates’ messages must not encite activism and excite volunteerism.

It makes me more determined to represent Ron Paul’s message that freedom and liberty are still popular and show Americans that there is a new direction possible for 2008.

I am a conservative GOP voter and I am proud to support Ron Paul.
on October 15, 2007 at 1:52 pm112 david a dudenhoefer

I’d like to know what you mean by “ruined the purpose of the poll”, arn’t we supposed to vote for who we wish? And because the other so called candidates and their supporters did not follow suit, all that it shows is the weakness of their positions, therefore your articla and position is weak.
RONPAUL2008!!!!!
on October 15, 2007 at 1:53 pm113 david a dudenhoefer

BTW ….I shot that video above

1877ronpaul to voluteer
on October 15, 2007 at 2:52 pm114 The Philosopher

Can anybody do or fund a couple ‘INDEPENDANT’ offline POLLS ?
on October 15, 2007 at 5:26 pm115 Jamie David

He wins hearts, he wins minds and he seems to win polls. Internet, or straw. He is however the worst nightmare for the established media and parties. He talks simple truths.

Press say that paulites are messing with their beloved polls. For a bunch of reporters one would think that is the story. “The evil paulites exposed! film at 11.” But nay. They don’t report, they give opinions. They whine. They ignore. They talk about a looser in a straw poll not the winner. For god forbid it is that damn Ron Paul again.

It is fast becomming a joke that the voters see. The more they see the more support he seems to get.

I wonder what they viewership numbers of the last debate were. How many watched it on TV via antenna or cable vs. those who watched it on the net?

One last point. In that the users got to the poll via a ron paul supporters web sites is as much a statement of his support as any. Where oh where are the opposition?
on October 15, 2007 at 8:10 pm116 therealmrbig

Online polls should still exist, however, they should all be prefaced with, “Since CNBC understands that votes for Ron Paul in this online poll will so far exceed those of all other candidates as to make their entire campaigns seem like a huge waste of money, Ron Paul supporters are urged either not to participate or to choose the candidate they believe will kill the second-fewest amount of American children.”
on October 15, 2007 at 9:02 pm117 tom davis

Better title for this article:

Will all Ron Paul supporters please be quiet. No one planned on a real conservative invading the neocon party called the Republican primary. So rude of you to bring up, of all things, the Constitution….just a g.d. piece of paper according to our Fearless Learder W!!!
on October 15, 2007 at 9:07 pm118 tom davis

Has everyone read Ann Coulters’ latest article….it concerns the conservative credentials of Huckabee and Thompson. You can read it at anncoulter.com, but for a summation:
Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson are NOT CONSERVATIVE ALTERNATIVES to Giuliani and Romney.

Both sucked up to Bill Clinton, and they fall far short on Amnesty and Free Speech.

Prediction: within two months, Ann Coulter will have gotten over her pro-Iraq war fettish long enough to begin endorsing Ron Paul for the Republican nomination.
on October 16, 2007 at 3:35 am119 FLash

If Guilliani or Clinton’s messageboards did the same thing (which they do but their numbers are smaller) there would be little outrage from these people. Yet for some reason when Ron Paul fans hear about new polls and decided to VOTE fairly, they’re criticized for it.
on October 17, 2007 at 8:09 pm120 James M

As an American who loves his Country, I see Ron Paul as an honest man who has done more to serve we the people than any other politition, since the Founding Father, and as I want to believe in that most of us understand the purpose of the Constituion I firmly believe that Corp Gov doesn’t so shame on you for telling us ” REAL American’s” to” BACK OFF” shame on you sir and I hope HR 3773 shut’s your site down. Oh and by the way!! Vote RON