FOX News afraid of mentioning Ron Paul in new poll

reply to post by HauntWok

It's because Ron Paul's worshipers are only on the internet and don't actually exist in reality.

So where are all those fake Rick Perry worshipers?

don't actually exist in reality.

sadly your qutie wrong.

reply to post by HauntWok

Ron Paul would only guarantee an Obama victory in the election, there are many people that support him (on the internet, mostly underage non voters) and backing that horse isn't going to fulfill the goal of getting Obama out of office.

and so will Rick Perry only guarantee an Obama victory in the election.

, there are many people that support him (on the internet

Not just on the internet

That guy named someone else is doing really well.

'Someone else' is doing very well indeed.



Don't forget to tune into 'America's Newsroom with Bill Hemmer and Martha Maccallum' tomorrow 9AM to 11AM ET.

(Saying that just caused me to involuntary vomit, I apologize)

I'm sure they will spend a lot of time talking about the results of their poll, and who this 'someone else' might be.

reply to post by HauntWok


Yes but what about when Ron Pauls supporters aren't on the internet? When they go and live their lives, does their support for Ron Paul not count because they support him equally on the internet as well as in reality?

Well, I tried to watch a few minutes of their show this morning....


...My apologies. Apparently watching contrived people spewing effluvium causes me to involuntarily throw up a little in my mouth.


I heard them mention something about their new poll, but nothing about the results of their poll yesterday where 'Someone else' had well over 80% of the votes. No surprise there. They only mention these things when it supports their agenda.

Did anyone else watch it and hear any mention of the poll?

reply to post by rwfresh

I'm not even American.

then stay out of it! lol!

duh!

stick your nose back where it belongs.

if ron paul wins the nomination i will sell my les paul.

reply to post by Teebs
Not so long ago I actually believed fox was the 'alternative' news source. Boy, was I wrong. O'reilly is a perfect example of how much power these people have. The guy is not stupid, and yet he supports the OS about 9/11, and he's done everything in his power to ridicule Ron Paul. Why is that? Because he does what he's told, it's just that simple. I don't know how we can elect someone like Paul, but I know now that he's probably the only guy who can pull us out of this tailspin we're in. If he starts to gain traction, look for the internet to 'crash'. Like Tupak said, he's 'kryptonite' to the establishment.

reply to post by TupacShakur

Yes but what about when Ron Pauls supporters aren't on the internet? When they go and live their lives, does their support for Ron Paul not count because they support him equally on the internet as well as in reality?

I am sure that he has a huge supporter base among the middle school age children of America and they do support him when not playing World of Warcraft, posting on /b/, or posting "Ron Paul 2012" on every single YouTube video ever uploaded.

Unfortunately many that like Ron Paul have the unfortunate stigma of being under the age of 18 or have never registered to vote or live outside the United States.

reply to post by HauntWok
I'm sorry, did I miss who it was that you support, or are you just here to slam Ron Paul?

Originally posted by HauntWok
It's because Ron Paul's worshipers are only on the internet and don't actually exist in reality.

.

edit on 26-9-2011 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)

Ya I guess when he recieved the money bomb from his supporters which broke fundraising records was all fake internet money? Fail.

reply to post by dillweed


I am waiting for the Independent presidential candidates to start lining up before making a determination. I will of course carefully review each candidate and make my determination based on which Independent I feel is right for the job. As of right now, there is only Stewart Alexander who is running for the Socialist party and I simply won't be supporting that person for the job.

I know a lot of people get personally offended when I bash Ron Paul and his supporters. The fact is, I do not like his platform and I don't think that his brand of hickish, inbred, folksy leadership style is what this country needs. I am sure that many find his platform appealing. But one thing I don't understand is the shear fanaticism this 30 year career politician incites in others.

Of course Ron Paul is being ignored largely by the Main Stream Media. He doesn't have a hope in hell. He's OLD for one, he should frankly retire and live out his days writing books. His ideas on issues in my mind are reflective of a 1950s era gone bad. And what some point out as a strength (him not being able to compromise on anything) is actually a weakness if he is going to govern this nation.

One cannot be a president and be as rigid as an old oak tree, one must have some flexibility. Some see this as a weakness, but in reality it's a strength, and Ron Paul doesn't have that flexibility.

Sure, some of his ideas sound good, that is, till you find out that most of his ideas are inept and undo-able.

reply to post by HauntWok
Obviously, you know what 'spin' is.

Originally posted by HauntWok
It's because Ron Paul's worshipers are only on the internet and don't actually exist in reality.

Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance in the real world of Presidential politics. He may be a good Congressman, but he would be disastrous as a President and the Conservatives at FOX News know this.

A Ron Paul presidential campaign would solidify a 2nd Obama term.

edit on 26-9-2011 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)

Ummm I guess you didn't get the memo but I have some bad news for you here...

99% of the population is on the internet.... Wouldn't that imply that if he has followers on the "internet" then they would also have a physical form of someone sitting at a computer? Unless that defies your understanding of conceptual physics...

reply to post by HauntWok


So what specifically about his platform appalls you so.. I mean you've more than mentioned that you don't like it but I have yet to see any examples... This seems to be a common theme amongst the RP haters..

Instead of telling us you don't like him.. tell us why... Might be a tad more productive.

reply to post by DaMod


I have specified many many times specifically why I don't like Ron Paul's platform. I simply don't understand why I type it down if people aren't going to bother to read it.

His stance on Abortion is tyrannical. He wants to usurp the judicial branch of government giving more power to the executive branch and outlaw abortion. (sure he states that he wants the States to have the sole responsibility to determine if abortion will remain legal, except that he wants to also define life as beginning at conception, which would make it a federal murder charge if a doctor preforms an abortion.)

His stance on Education is counter productive. His idea is that the poor should home school their children, and the rich should have the opportunity to give their children a decent education. Sure that's fine if you have enough money to send your children off to a private school, but if you aren't wealthy enough to afford tuition, you will be forced to home school your children, which means that a parent won't be able to work because they will have to stay home schooling their kids. For the under educated parents out there this means that their children will have far fewer opportunities in life because they simply won't have the education needed to succeed in this world.

His stance on Immigration is disastrous, he wants to repeal the 14th Amendment and if that goes, then no child born in this country whether or not their parents are citizens will be citizens of this country. He doesn't specify who will have the privilege of being a citizen, but if his education stance is anything to go by it will only be the people that can afford to pay for their children to be citizens. Sure, on the surface this seems like it would be a great way to get rid of those darn dirty illegals (to the TEA Party, anyone who's Latino that speaks Spanish regardless of their actual immigration status) But in reality all it will do is further cause a rift between the rich and the poor, now the poor won't even have the right to be a citizen of the country of their birth.

And finally his religion is also an issue. This religious zealot wants to bring Cannon Law (the Christian version of Sharia law) to the United States. Stating that “I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate.” Don't get me wrong, we do have freedom of religion in this country, and his personal religious beliefs are his own business. But the second he uses those beliefs in our government, I feel he has crossed a serious line, and I for one will not live under Cannon Law, Sharia Law, or any other religious dogma, he can keep his faith to himself and if he wants to govern this country, he can keep his archaic violent religion out of my life.

Maybe that's why FOX News won't give him the time of day, maybe he's too much of an extremist even for them.

reply to post by HauntWok


Yes, those are the reasons why fox won't give him the time of day.

Nothing to do with his desire to phase out the federal reserve, IRS, CIA and income tax as well as immediately end all wars and militarism.

Fox "News" - is a joke anyway . . .

Originally posted by HauntWok
It's because Ron Paul's worshipers are only on the internet and don't actually exist in reality.

Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance in the real world of Presidential politics. He may be a good Congressman, but he would be disastrous as a President and the Conservatives at FOX News know this.

A Ron Paul presidential campaign would solidify a 2nd Obama term.

edit on 26-9-2011 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)

I think it is exactly the opposite. Ron Paul will struggle to get support of his own party, but he is the only candidate that can defeat Obama in the real election. Perry/Romney won't defeat Obama. Paul can defeat Obama and Palin can defeat Obama, but they probably won't get their own party's nomination.

If Paul does get the nomination, or if he is named as a running mate for somebody, then the Republicans have a shot at the Whitehouse. In reality, I'm not sure the Republicans want the Whitehouse. The economy and wars and global scene is still a mess. It might be easier to put up a patsy like Perry, let Obama win, and then keep pounding him for all of the problems.

If I were a political strategist for Cain or Paul right now. I would name my running mate, and name the key positions in my cabinet, and lay out my recovery plan for the economy, and my foreign policy, and let the other candidates try to ride my coat tails with their puny talking points and no real action of their own.

Originally posted by HauntWok
It's because Ron Paul's worshipers are only on the internet and don't actually exist in reality.

Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance in the real world of Presidential politics. He may be a good Congressman, but he would be disastrous as a President and the Conservatives at FOX News know this.

A Ron Paul presidential campaign would solidify a 2nd Obama term.

edit on 26-9-2011 by HauntWok because: (no reason given)

Really? In Harris Poll Paul Beats Obama 51-49 Currently

That argument was invented by FOX media ( and other outlets ) for someone like you to parrot.

Job well done.