Did Fox News remove and hide their debate polls because Ron Paul was leading them?

reply to post by neo96


Neo, this is a strange day for both of us.

We're sharing a laugh at the same thing. 3% say Santorum won? What happened, did he call his family and ask them to vote? 'Cause... he was pathetic. And it's not like the competition was especially fierce.

This is what I see- THIS IS NOT the same poll they did have that they took down, but isn't the font placement odd.

I look and just glance and think Newt has RP's numbers.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/03657d0acfb8.jpg[/atsimg]

I had no idea there was a debate so i missed it. i searched youtube and found this video. id still like to find the whole debate before i make a judgment but so far what Ive heard sounds like a win for Ron Paul.

reply to post by hadriana


Yeah I do see that too. Not sure if its intentional or not though but when you factor in the other poll being removed, it does kind of make sense.

reply to post by strafgod


Part one


Part two:


Part three:


Part four:


Part five:


There ya go

I'm tired of that bs excuse from the devils advocates of poll results, that Ron Paul supporters skew the numbers. If anything, the results re-verify and enforce the fact that RP supporters are large in numbers and/or care enough to show their enthusiasm. Truth is, an entire spectrum of people watch Fox News, and supporters of every candidate were watching the debate tonight. They had their chance to vote online. So don't give me this low reasoning that RP's poll results don't matter, or are invalid; because it doesn't change the fact that he's the best choice for our country at this crossroad.

I would like to add another point. Lets say perhaps that RP's outstanding numbers online are mainly because those voting for him are above-average internet users. Meaning, the rest of the supporters of the other 2012 'hopefuls' tend to base their entire political view based on the [incredibly skewed] bias of mainstream media, i.e Fox, CNN, etc; and don't use the internet as their main source of information. They're also less likely to participate in online polls and such. This in and of itself provides evidence that the people voting for other candidates may possibly outnumber RP on the complete census, but they're also the most prone to political brainwashing tactics via MSM.

Maybe it is also some laziness in addition to being set against him.

Seems like Drudge and Fox had picked the winners before the stupid thing started.
I checked drudge about 1/2 of the way in and he gave it to Romney and Bachman. My husband said no, that was up right after the thing started, He said the debate started and he was at his computer watching so he flipped to Drudge and saw that up.

He was angry at Drudge as well as Fox.

Like, what I mean about them being lazy is maybe part of it was that they had their stories written and ready to post. They wanted to be first or something, so the news had to go by what they already had called.


In any event, there is an out for them. They need to right their wrong.

reply to post by hadriana


Yeah this does seem odd for Drudge. The article that I believe you're talking about links directly to Fox though.

reply to post by hadriana


I hate to tell you, Ron Paul will never win. He may be sided against Obama, but not to win. He is a make up of many agencies.

CJ

They should just post a disclaimer that reads as follows -



"Dear Ron Paul supporters,

It is with great regret that we must inform you that Dr Ron Paul can never and will never be allowed to represent the Republican party as candidate for President of the United States, and as such will never be given a fair opportunity to do so, regardless of public opinion.

Ron Paul stands against everything that we stand for, and has been found to be bad for business. We can't have our candidates running around telling the truth or trying to do the right thing. What would our corporate sponsors say? Let's just do our best to keep things the way they are - profitable.


Kind regards - the Grand Old Party"

Originally posted by Raelsatu
I'm tired of that bs excuse from the devils advocates of poll results, that Ron Paul supporters skew the numbers. If anything, the results re-verify and enforce the fact that RP supporters are large in numbers and/or care enough to show their enthusiasm.

Fewer than five thousand isn't really "large numbers." it looks impressive set against the few hundred collected by the other candidates, I suppose. But yes, sorry, vote-slamming does result in the poll results being rendered useless. Doesn't matter if it's about Ron Paul or your favorite water park. It eradicates the core foundation of a poll - random sampling.

And taking 15 seconds to click a link isn't a huge show of enthusiasm. You sound like those doofuses who thought baking a red white and blue cake was "doing their part" after 9/11.

Truth is, an entire spectrum of people watch Fox News, and supporters of every candidate were watching the debate tonight. They had their chance to vote online. So don't give me this low reasoning that RP's poll results don't matter, or are invalid; because it doesn't change the fact that he's the best choice for our country at this crossroad.

And truth is, I could, right now, go to DemocraticUnderground, link the poll, and ask everyone there to "DU this poll" in favor of, hell I dunno, Herman Cain, and in 15 minutes, Mr. Cain would have over twenty-one thousand votes. Why? for the lulz.

Please don't tell me that an online poll matters. i know better. I have experience in making them not matter.

I would like to add another point. Lets say perhaps that RP's outstanding numbers online are mainly because those voting for him are above-average internet users. Meaning, the rest of the supporters of the other 2012 'hopefuls' tend to base their entire political view based on the [incredibly skewed] bias of mainstream media, i.e Fox, CNN, etc; and don't use the internet as their main source of information. They're also less likely to participate in online polls and such. This in and of itself provides evidence that the people voting for other candidates may possibly outnumber RP on the complete census, but they're also the most prone to political brainwashing tactics via MSM.

It also means there would be a significant portion of Ron Paul online voters who are actually ineligible to vote for him in 2012. I was a wild-eyed libertarian at 16, too. Then I got a job.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


I really don't have the time to respond to every one of your irrational notes. The media has on innumerable occasions, smeared Ron Paul with ad homs, blatant deceit, excluded him from poll results, utterly skewed results to suit their favorite sheeple candidate, and more. But when he comes out far ahead in the majority of polls, cynical bastards like you crawl out the woodwork to debunk the notion that Ron Paul may not only have a large number of supporters, but are comparatively more intelligent than the rest of the drones voting for the status quo poster children.

I would also like to know your debunking logic for how Ron Paul won the CPAC straw polls 2 years in a row by a landslide. And the fact that he has more support and donations from those in the military than the rest of the other candidates combined. Are all these other RP "nutjobs" just skewing the FACTS??

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
I have experience in making them not matter.

Curious. How so?

Originally posted by Raelsatu
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

I really don't have the time to respond to every one of your irrational notes.

My "irrational notes" are that internet polls don't matter. period. Not for Ron Paul, not for Barack Obama, not for Betty Crocker. They're garbage. They're too easy to manipulate. Also, this poll will be gone in a day anyway, replaced with some other poll. Will you have felt great accomplishment? Will you have made a real difference? No, because internet polls are about as useful as tits on a boar.

The media has on innumerable occasions, smeared Ron Paul with ad homs, blatant deceit, excluded him from poll results, utterly skewed results to suit their favorite sheeple candidate, and more. But when he comes out far ahead in the majority of polls, cynical bastards like you crawl out the woodwork to debunk the notion that Ron Paul may not only have a large number of supporters, but are comparatively more intelligent than the rest of the drones voting for the status quo poster children.

I don't give a crap who's coming out ahead on what internet poll. Because at the end of the day, it's still an internet poll. if your support for this guy hinges on whether or not his line on the graph is longer than Pawlenty's... well, I'm happy you're happy. I'm just telling you that an internet poll is of no actual value.

I would also like to know your debunking logic for how Ron Paul won the CPAC straw polls 2 years in a row by a landslide. And the fact that he has more support and donations from those in the military than the rest of the other candidates combined. Are all these other RP "nutjobs" just skewing the FACTS??

Couldn't say, I'm not familiar with how the straw poll was conducted. if it was an open poll on the internet, yeah, i'll dump it with the rest. if it was an actual poll performed by random sampling, of enough people to have at most a 3% margin of error, then good for Mr. Paul.

And why the hell would I care who mercenaries are giving more of my tax dollars to?

reply to post by e11888


Same way I described. A poll is presented on some forum I frequent - for example, DemocraticUnderground - and the general population is asked to put an answer into it. A swarm of people from the nethers of the internet then descend on this poor poll and ratchet up the selected option. This is done at other places such as 4chan, freerepublic, all sorts of places - I'm pretty sure I've seen it done here on ATS at times, as well. And you can bet your ass that actual interest groups get involved in it as well.

I've participated in such "swarms." The fact that the tactic functions at all leads me to conclude that all open internet polls are basically worthless.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Yes you can research the straw poll results and deduct a conclusion for yourself. Whether or not internet polls are useless doesn't change the fact that the mainstream news stations conducts the polls themselves, and then deletes or manipulates the numbers to suite their preferred candidate afterwards. THAT is the main point of this thread, yet somehow you've gone off on a tangent about they don't matter in the first place so we might as well let Fox and CNN release false results on tv.

Why would you care about "mercenaries" giving your tax dollars? What the hell are you talking about? The very individuals who risk their lives day in and day out in these immoral, irrational wars are sending a message. 71 percent of all donation receipts go to Ron Paul, showing that the troops themselves are begging for a leader that will bring them back home. NO more wars and random invasions/occupations; NO more Americans going to die for a infinitely corrupt, amoral military industrial complex; NO more senseless murdering of innocent people wherever they live on this planet. I seriously can't believe you just said that.

Originally posted by Raelsatu
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

Yes you can research the straw poll results and deduct a conclusion for yourself. Whether or not internet polls are useless doesn't change the fact that the mainstream news stations conducts the polls themselves, and then deletes or manipulates the numbers to suite their preferred candidate afterwards. THAT is the main point of this thread, yet somehow you've gone off on a tangent about they don't matter in the first place so we might as well let Fox and CNN release false results on tv.

As I said before, I was giving a devil's advocate reason as to why the initial poll may have been dropped.

Are you just now noticing that the "news" outlets don't engage in truth? Well, holy sheep #, I'm glad you caught on. Now are you aware that, in light of the fact that they just make crap up and skew facts, there are probably biger issues than whether Ron Paul is properly represented in an online poll?

Why would you care about "mercenaries" giving your tax dollars? What the hell are you talking about? The very individuals who risk their lives day in and day out in these immoral, irrational wars are sending a message. 71 percent of all donation receipts go to Ron Paul, showing that the troops themselves are begging for a leader that will bring them back home. NO more wars and random invasions/occupations; NO more Americans going to die for a infinitely corrupt, amoral military industrial complex; NO more senseless murdering of innocent people wherever they live on this planet.

And yet, they stay on the job. Know what happens in my profession if 71% of the employees are so opposed to the policies of management? We go on strike. Back in Vietnam, the enlisted men of our armed forces were in literal armed rebellion against their officers - that's where we got the term "fragging," after all.

So no, I'm not impressed with people who send a chunk of their paycheck to Ron Paul, if they're still happy to sit in the dirt and shoot other human beings for a living.

I seriously can't believe you just said that.

edit on 12-8-2011 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)

I know, even the Paultopians start fainting when someone criticizes the military.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Random straw man? Of course I've known about the propaganda-fortified position of mainstream news. So your statement is null. This also doesn't take away from the fact that you've come into a topic regarding that very news corruption and derailing it with comments about how any any all Ron Paul lead polls are negligible. I'm not impressed.

Did you read what I said? Not that 71 percent of all military personnel are in opposition to their organization, but that 71 percent of all DONATORS --- towards the Republican candidates side specifically--- sent their money to the only man truly willing to pull them out. And if you really think it's that easy for this handful of "rebels" to go on strike against their ruthless military industrial complex puppeteers, then think again. Please for now on thoroughly read my replies before making responses based on straw men.

One other note. I'm not "fainting" because you criticize the military in general. What you're doing is belittling each and every enlisted individual that's decided to support RP because they choose to take a different approach other than rebellion. Maybe many of these people entered into service believing they'd be doing good things for the freedom of their country but realized that war is ugly; and that killing both soldiers and innocents alike is an endless, pointless process to fill the pockets of the rich (and enact population control tactics on the poor).

Originally posted by Raelsatu
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

Random straw man? Of course I've known about the propaganda-fortified position of mainstream news. So your statement is null. This also doesn't take away from the fact that you've come into a topic regarding that very news corruption and derailing it with comments about how any any all Ron Paul lead polls are negligible. I'm not impressed.

You know about it, but you're not only deeply emotionally invested in the results of the polls they come up with, but you're also apparently surprised if they jigger the results? Results which you apparently unquestioningly trust.

Also, please re-read. I've stated many times now that I don't give a rat's ass who's in the lead. it's an internet poll. All of them are garbage. Ron Paul winning? Garbage. Ron Paul losing? Garbage. Ron Paul not on there because the poll is about cupcakes? Garbage. My point has nothing to do with the results, it has to do with the medium itself. Internet polls are by their very nature trash. They are terribly easy to skew and manipulate.

Did you read what I said? Not that 71 percent of all military personnel are in opposition to their organization, but that 71 percent of all DONATORS --- towards the Republican candidates side specifically--- sent their money to the only man truly willing to pull them out.

Oh, okay. I misunderstood because you had initially made a point of how many donations were coming to him from the military personnel. To which I asked why I should give a damn. Which left you shocked and appaled.

And if you really think it's that easy for this handful of "rebels" to go on strike against their ruthless military industrial complex puppeteers, then think again. Please for now on thoroughly read my replies before making responses based on straw men.

it's called "Standing by your principles." If you despise the war so much, then stop fighting. No, it's not going to be easy. it's not meant to be. But complaining about it without taking any action to stop it just makes you a whiner and a coward.

Good find S+F.

RP seems to be doing quite well. TPTB argue that these polls are rigged by RP supporters. While I would agree that much of RP's support comes from the online community, his message is getting out there. As more people are exposed to his ideals, his following is growing.

Ron Paul is no longer a "fringe" candidate as much as the establishment would love him to be.