Post by cmkxer on Dec 28, 2007 23:01:05 GMT -6
Have you ever wonder why Ron Paul always win live straw polls but the media always tells you that he's not even close to the top in their national polls?
The reason is because mainstream media does not include him in their polls.
Mainstream media is owned by the power to be and they will choose the candidates for you to vote on. What a farce!!!
LET'S SHOW THEM THAT DEMOCRACY WILL PREVAIL PEOPLE. WE HAVE STRENGTH IN NUMBER. SO LET'S STAND STRONG FOR RON PAUL!
It's do or die time for us and we have to do everything we can to support him.
----------------------------------
'Despite trailing in Polls' seems to be the media's description of Ron Paul in the 2008 election, and now is itself a talking point used when referencing Paul by almost every major media outlet. His chances at becoming nominated, let alone elected president, seem to range from barely a blip on the radar at 8%, all the way down to an 'also ran' at 1% in national polls. But where are they getting these statistics, and who is doing the polling?
Well, once again, media bias is neither hidden nor spun properly, even by the demagogues that pimp the information on television, radio, and in print. If an orchestrated attempt by the national media corporations are intent on drowning Ron Paul's campaign in a sea of lies, treachery, and media spin, then surely they must at least try to conceal their tactics. They have not.
A cursory glance of national polling data will reveal to anyone, even the most diehard supporter of corporate media's integrity, that the mainstream polls used as statistical proof of Ron Paul's low chances more often than not do NOT include Ron Paul in the polls. There have been dozens of major media polls, from the largest corporations to small college campus polls, supported by marketing firms and the like, and a large percentage of these showcase what seems a concerted effort to remove Ron Paul from pollsters lips, minds, and choices. Talking heads on FOX or MSNBC might often refer to Ron Paul as a 'third tier' candidate, or even a 'dark horse', but the comment is usually always followed with a remark about how he has no chances at winning, and the polls are cited as proof. Well, that might sound well and good. But how many voters or concerned media watchdogs actually then go out and read these national polls? Is it possible that the mainstream media could be united in purpose in suppressing a 'rogue' candidate such as Ron Paul? Yes, it is.
CBS recently ran a Republican presidential poll from October 12-16, asking 1282 respondents who their pick for president would be. The poll itself opens with a description of current leaders in the race, so sets itself off with an already pre-chosen list of candidates. Giuliani won the poll with 29% of the vote among primary Republican voters, with Thompson coming in second with 21%, and McCain coming in third with 18%. Usual front runner Romney was listed in fourth with 12%, and Huckabee trailing the end with 8%. Ron Paul was not listed at all. Several dozen questions were leveled at the voters polled, yet only one question in the CBS poll even mentions Ron Paul as a choice, and he was only listed as a replacement choice for the top candidates listed in all the other questions.
www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBSNews_poll_reps_101807.pdf
A combined Cook national poll from May-September was one poll that did list Paul openly along with the other candidates, but the combined poll used a pool of 4,249 voters, 3,638 of which were listed as 'leaners', or registered voters that are neither strongly convicted in their beliefs, and even admit to often NOT voting in elections.
www.cookpolitical.com/races/report_pdfs/2007%20poll_tpline_sep7.pdf
A Fox News poll conducted by phone from October 9-10 asked a group of 900 registered voters who their pick for president would be. Of the Republicans, only Giuliani, Romney, Thompson, and McCain were listed as choices to run against the Democrat lead, Hillary Clinton. Ron Paul was nowhere in sight, yet even Huckabee was listed in one of the questions, but he is also determined by the mainstream media to not be a viable candidate. If a 'third tier' candidate such as Huckabee was included, why not Ron Paul?
www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/101707_2008_matchups_web.pdf
An NPR poll from October 4-7 bombarded voters with a slate of questions, yet only Giuliani, Thompson, Clinton, and Obama, were listed as candidate choices.
www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2007/oct/nprpoll/questionnaire.pdf
A George Washington University poll, done back in July, also did not list Ron Paul as a choice, though the no-show Michael Bloomberg did get a nod.
www.tarrance.com/11363Qper.pdf
Then of course there's the polling roundup sites like pollingreport.com and usaelectionpolls.com that collate polling data. Of course they cite their data back to the polls that leave out Ron Paul, such as the ones described above - but hey, who's to know? As of September 30th numbers at Sportsbook.com, one of the leading betting and percentages site, Ron Paul is listed at having a 6-1 odds, better than all the other Republican candidates, save for Giuliani and Thompson, though their leads are but 5-1 and 4-1 compared to Ron Paul's 6-1. Ron Paul also currently has over $5,443,667 on hand to spend in his coffers, which is more than the all the other candidates except the 'top tier' media darlings Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson - and most of these corporately sponsored candidates have millions in their own private accounts to pull from.
Ron Paul has more youtube subscribers than any other candidate, more videos watched, more meet-up groups, more grassroots support, and more active campaigners and volunteers than any other candidate. His campaign is one based on real passion, real ideas, real solutions. Only a coordinated effort by the mainstream media can try and shut him out before the election, and only a coordinated effort by the American people can combat media lies and put Ron Paul where he deserves: in the white house!
AAPOR Code of Professional Ethics and Practices
ethics.iit.edu/codes/coe/amer.assoc.public.opinion.researchers.1970.html
1. We shall employ only research tools and methods of analysis which, in our professional judgment, are well suited to the research problem at hand.
2. We shall not select research tools and methods of analysis because of their special capacity to yield a desired conclusion.
3. We shall not knowingly make interpretations of research results, nor shall we tacitly permit interpretations, which are inconsistent with the data available.
4. We shall not knowingly imply that interpretations should be accorded greater confidence than the data actually warrant.
via rougegovernment.com
The reason is because mainstream media does not include him in their polls.
Mainstream media is owned by the power to be and they will choose the candidates for you to vote on. What a farce!!!
LET'S SHOW THEM THAT DEMOCRACY WILL PREVAIL PEOPLE. WE HAVE STRENGTH IN NUMBER. SO LET'S STAND STRONG FOR RON PAUL!
It's do or die time for us and we have to do everything we can to support him.
----------------------------------
'Despite trailing in Polls' seems to be the media's description of Ron Paul in the 2008 election, and now is itself a talking point used when referencing Paul by almost every major media outlet. His chances at becoming nominated, let alone elected president, seem to range from barely a blip on the radar at 8%, all the way down to an 'also ran' at 1% in national polls. But where are they getting these statistics, and who is doing the polling?
Well, once again, media bias is neither hidden nor spun properly, even by the demagogues that pimp the information on television, radio, and in print. If an orchestrated attempt by the national media corporations are intent on drowning Ron Paul's campaign in a sea of lies, treachery, and media spin, then surely they must at least try to conceal their tactics. They have not.
A cursory glance of national polling data will reveal to anyone, even the most diehard supporter of corporate media's integrity, that the mainstream polls used as statistical proof of Ron Paul's low chances more often than not do NOT include Ron Paul in the polls. There have been dozens of major media polls, from the largest corporations to small college campus polls, supported by marketing firms and the like, and a large percentage of these showcase what seems a concerted effort to remove Ron Paul from pollsters lips, minds, and choices. Talking heads on FOX or MSNBC might often refer to Ron Paul as a 'third tier' candidate, or even a 'dark horse', but the comment is usually always followed with a remark about how he has no chances at winning, and the polls are cited as proof. Well, that might sound well and good. But how many voters or concerned media watchdogs actually then go out and read these national polls? Is it possible that the mainstream media could be united in purpose in suppressing a 'rogue' candidate such as Ron Paul? Yes, it is.
CBS recently ran a Republican presidential poll from October 12-16, asking 1282 respondents who their pick for president would be. The poll itself opens with a description of current leaders in the race, so sets itself off with an already pre-chosen list of candidates. Giuliani won the poll with 29% of the vote among primary Republican voters, with Thompson coming in second with 21%, and McCain coming in third with 18%. Usual front runner Romney was listed in fourth with 12%, and Huckabee trailing the end with 8%. Ron Paul was not listed at all. Several dozen questions were leveled at the voters polled, yet only one question in the CBS poll even mentions Ron Paul as a choice, and he was only listed as a replacement choice for the top candidates listed in all the other questions.
www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/CBSNews_poll_reps_101807.pdf
A combined Cook national poll from May-September was one poll that did list Paul openly along with the other candidates, but the combined poll used a pool of 4,249 voters, 3,638 of which were listed as 'leaners', or registered voters that are neither strongly convicted in their beliefs, and even admit to often NOT voting in elections.
www.cookpolitical.com/races/report_pdfs/2007%20poll_tpline_sep7.pdf
A Fox News poll conducted by phone from October 9-10 asked a group of 900 registered voters who their pick for president would be. Of the Republicans, only Giuliani, Romney, Thompson, and McCain were listed as choices to run against the Democrat lead, Hillary Clinton. Ron Paul was nowhere in sight, yet even Huckabee was listed in one of the questions, but he is also determined by the mainstream media to not be a viable candidate. If a 'third tier' candidate such as Huckabee was included, why not Ron Paul?
www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/101707_2008_matchups_web.pdf
An NPR poll from October 4-7 bombarded voters with a slate of questions, yet only Giuliani, Thompson, Clinton, and Obama, were listed as candidate choices.
www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2007/oct/nprpoll/questionnaire.pdf
A George Washington University poll, done back in July, also did not list Ron Paul as a choice, though the no-show Michael Bloomberg did get a nod.
www.tarrance.com/11363Qper.pdf
Then of course there's the polling roundup sites like pollingreport.com and usaelectionpolls.com that collate polling data. Of course they cite their data back to the polls that leave out Ron Paul, such as the ones described above - but hey, who's to know? As of September 30th numbers at Sportsbook.com, one of the leading betting and percentages site, Ron Paul is listed at having a 6-1 odds, better than all the other Republican candidates, save for Giuliani and Thompson, though their leads are but 5-1 and 4-1 compared to Ron Paul's 6-1. Ron Paul also currently has over $5,443,667 on hand to spend in his coffers, which is more than the all the other candidates except the 'top tier' media darlings Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson - and most of these corporately sponsored candidates have millions in their own private accounts to pull from.
Ron Paul has more youtube subscribers than any other candidate, more videos watched, more meet-up groups, more grassroots support, and more active campaigners and volunteers than any other candidate. His campaign is one based on real passion, real ideas, real solutions. Only a coordinated effort by the mainstream media can try and shut him out before the election, and only a coordinated effort by the American people can combat media lies and put Ron Paul where he deserves: in the white house!
AAPOR Code of Professional Ethics and Practices
ethics.iit.edu/codes/coe/amer.assoc.public.opinion.researchers.1970.html
1. We shall employ only research tools and methods of analysis which, in our professional judgment, are well suited to the research problem at hand.
2. We shall not select research tools and methods of analysis because of their special capacity to yield a desired conclusion.
3. We shall not knowingly make interpretations of research results, nor shall we tacitly permit interpretations, which are inconsistent with the data available.
4. We shall not knowingly imply that interpretations should be accorded greater confidence than the data actually warrant.
via rougegovernment.com