Ron Paul in 2008!

[InfamousOne]

Did anyone notice they took away the call in voting? Instead they had some "response" study that made no sense from some unknown group. Nothing about the "response study" was detailed, and it was some no name group that ran it.

At the end of the study, for a brief second, you could see Ron Paul on the bottom right of the screen with a small amount of "positive feedback" from thier "study." Then, the main announcer accidentally says "Ron Paul" and corrects himself right after with a word that sounds similiar. What's the matter, nervous slip while you screw Ron Paul out of attention?

Ron Paul got almost no attention. The other candidates got most of the air time. If you look at the photos of the debate all of the pictures exclude Ron Paul. He got only a small amount of the time other candidates did to answer questions. He still looked to be the only honest candidate on the stage.

The "pundit" (wtf is a pundit besides an actor, anyway?) at thier post debate interview stated that "none of the republican candidates are against the war (pause) ... wait, none of the top tier republican candidates are against the war."

The media is destroying democracy and we have to do something about it. We have a system that only mega rich people can run for office due to media influence in televison. This is an oligarchy! These people will never support the average or poor people of this country. Why do you think they ignore our opinion on illegal immigration - it matters only about dollars and cents to the mega corporations who have no fealty to America.

The democrats are more of the same, mega company war mongers who will use our military to further thier monetary gains at the expense of other people's freedoms.

I am now even more driven to get others to notice Ron Paul. We can truly enact change if we believe enough in it. Sign up for the primaries and vote Ron Paul into office. We will count the ballot boxes and force the media and "politicans" to be honest! We deserve the right to honesty from the media and our governement! This country was made for the people, not for a small group of super rich elite!

 

[Bart]

Who won the debate?Poll questions. Dr.Ron Paul far out in front once again.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18963731/

 

[Bart]

News report covering the debate headlined at the Drudge Report. Bush Bash in New Hampshire.In reading the article, it seems all candidates are mentioned in one way or another, but unless I missed it, nothing about Ron Paul.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070606/D8PJ2E482.html

 

[Kaptain]

CNN reported this morning about who was doing well on the blogsphere. They mentioned all the top candidates as doing well and I think declared that Romney seems to be the unofficial winner of the blogshere. Then I went to there site and voted. Ron Paul led the vote with 55% - CNN did not report it.

Watching for certain things in this debate, I am absolutely convinced of media-driven planned blackout of Ron Paul. The first question dealt with whether the Iraq war was a mistake. I think all candidates answered the question. Paul waited his turn, even raised his hand, and Wolf Blitzer moved on to the next question. It was about 20-30 minutes into the debate before Paul was allowed to speak - after most have already spoken at least twice. The wide-panning camera views often cut one candidate out of the picture - Paul. I kept thinking - Can this actually be happening? Is anyone else noticing?

How does Paul win every single debate poll by the news organizating running the debate in all three debates and yet it goes unreported?

 

[hedgehog]

The talking heads on the left and right are all spewing the same thing. "The debate was a loss for the 2nd tier candidates" (this means everyone but Mcain, Guiliani and Romney). Personally I thought Romney had the worst performance of all candidates in this latest debate.

 

[White Shogun]

The deliberately put Ron Paul on the far end of the line as well, so that he will not be in the picture that often. They deliberately group Rudy McRomney next to each other so that every time one of them answers a question the other two are in the picture.

The funniest moment had to be when Giuliani started to answer the question about the Catholic bishop who said Giuliani shouldn't be permitted to take the eucachrist at Mass, and lightning hit the tower!! All the other candidates backed away from Giuliani. It was hilarious.

The only answer that Romney gave that made an impression on me was the one about his faith. At least he didn't try to spin that one, he was very direct and plain spoken.

Did anyone notice that the only candidates they asked about evolution were those who had previously expressed some faith in God? I didn't see them ask Giuliani if he believe in evolution. Huckabee certainly seemed to notice that he was being asked a lot of questions about morals.

The pundits reactions are as scripted and rehearsed as the politician's themselves. I saw only one talking head after the debate who said anything positive about anyone besides Rudy McRomney, and that was Huckabee.

The marginilization of the other candidates is only going to get worse when Fred Thompson enters the race.

 

[guest301]

The talking heads on the left and right are all spewing the same thing. "The debate was a loss for the 2nd tier candidates" (this means everyone but Mcain, Guiliani and Romney). Personally I thought Romney had the worst performance of all candidates in this latest debate.

Romney seemed somewhere else last night. He tried to get across his version of Reagan's "shining city on a hill" theme and he couldn't quite pull it off. It's obviously strategy on his part but it didn't work last night. I had it rated Tancredo, Huckabee and Hunter. I like some of what Paul had to say but he has, with alot of help from the media marginalized himself and why is he always on the last seat of the debating platform.. Do the seat them according to the polls? McCain was the clear loser last night with the unpopularity of his amnesty-immigration bill clearly having conservatives all riled up.

 

[White Shogun]

I like some of what Paul had to say but he has, with alot of help from the media marginalized himself and why is he always on the last seat of the debating platform.. Do the seat them according to the polls?

I answered this question in the post above (unless you don't believe me.) It is no accident that Ron Paul is seated at the end of the line. It reinforces the opinion that he is truly a 'fringe' candidate.' They deliberately seat Paul at the end to keep him out of the picture, and they deliberately group Rudy, Romney, and McCain together to ensure more face time. After all, aren't they the 'real' candidates of the Republican party?

How is Ron Paul marginalizing himself? Because he doesn't repeat the party line and say the same old sh*t every other candidate says? He is one of the few candidates who actually believes what he says and says what he believes.

 

[InfamousOne]

The audience question about Romney running ads in Spanish - with his kids speaking spanish on it - was priceless. Mitt's face was classic. He really looked the fool trying to answer, also.

Guest301 - How could you rank Huckabee so highly? All he had were questions of religion and evolution, which are not important topics in this debate.

Fred Thompson is an actor, brought in to offer a conservative alternative for those unsatisfied with the the others on the platform. I noticed CNN touting that he "is unorthodox". Why would they promote something like this? Becuase they are trying to put in a lackey that will attract both Ron Paul fans and have name recognition with the general public.

They have analyzed the demographic that Ron Paul attracts, and they are attacking you psychologically. How is this a democracy when the people speak and the media stifles it, pushing thier "top tier" candidates alone? If any of the "top tier" candidates had Ron's Paul's internet following it would be the political story of the decade! We like him because he is honest and encourages us to communicate with each other. How they must fear thier monopoly over information!

 

[White Shogun]

Good point about Romney and the Spanish question, InfamousOne. But I felt it was a very easy question to answer - English should be the official language, which means government need not publish official documents in any language other than English; but every person or business, and yes, politician, is free to conduct his affairs in what ever language he sees fit.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

The Globalist Elite controlled "mainstream" media will continue to bury Dr.Paul and push the NeoCON "frontrunners". I think Dr.Paul will have to run 3rd party eventually...probably Consitution, Reform, Libertarian or Independent. I'll support him irregardless of what party's card he runs on. IF he were to drop out (for whatever reason), I'd then support Tancredo. We need to keep spreading the word about Dr.Paul folks!!!

 

[InfamousOne]

Shogun -I have to disagree. Most likely it angered the anti-immigration crew,(aka 70% of the country) including me. It is a testament to how many spanish speaking people we have in this country, and a it is a concession to them from a presidential candidate. I don't want any more concessions to people who are not willing to integrate into America.

If someone has the ability to vote in this country they can speak English, plain and simple. Otherwise you give a group of people not willing to integrate with our culture influence over our culture, and that seems dangerous to me.

 

[White Shogun]

InfamousOne,
I meant only that Romney could have explained his position that way, not that I necessarily agree with him.

I do believe that the United States should have an official language: English. I don't agree that people can't advertise or conduct their business or their affairs in whatever language they choose. But if official ballots and other government documents are printed only in English, what would be the point of a politician advertising in any language except English?

 

[guest301]

I like some of what Paul had to say but he has, with alot of help from the media marginalized himself and why is he always on the last seat of the debating platform.. Do the seat them according to the polls?

I answered this question in the post above (unless you don't believe me.) It is no accident that Ron Paul is seated at the end of the line. It reinforces the opinion that he is truly a 'fringe' candidate.' They deliberately seat Paul at the end to keep him out of the picture, and they deliberately group Rudy, Romney, and McCain together to ensure more face time. After all, aren't they the 'real' candidates of the Republican party?

How is Ron Paul marginalizing himself? Because he doesn't repeat the party line and say the same old sh*t every other candidate says? He is one of the few candidates who actually believes what he says and says what he believes.

Shogun..check out the timing of our two posts..I didn't read yours because I think we were writing our posts at the same time and the reason I think Paul marginalizes himself is becuase he is a one trick pony in these debates and he can't possibly win a Republican primary or even make a good showing if all he is seen as is a anti-warcandidate..I mean we already have 11 Democrats running with that stance...if he's in it to win it...he will talk and run on other things besides the war..if he justs want to be a idealist and to have his voice out there..that's cool with me ..no problem..

 

[guest301]

The audience question about Romney running ads in Spanish - with his kids speaking spanish on it - was priceless. Mitt's face was classic. He really looked the fool trying to answer, also.

Guest301 - How could you rank Huckabee so highly? All he had were questions of religion and evolution, which are not important topics in this debate.

They are important to me and millions of other evangelicals. He spoke on more than that and most pundits think he did a pretty good job last night. He was eloquent and he never got flustered or seemed at a loss for words.

 

[White Shogun]

Sorry Aragorn, I should have paid more attention to the date stamps. What do you think, do you agree they're setting up Ron Paul deliberately, and staging the 'big three' together for more face time?

I don't think it is axiomatic that a Republican candidate has to be pro-war to run for nomination of the Republican party. Many Democrats voted for the war, too, but they can still be Democrats.

 

[Mr. Lutefisk]

Here is a link to vote on CNN's poll. Guest 301, In no way is Ron Paul a one trick pony. He is a leader on many issues especially the two main issues of this country..the war and illegal immigration. [url]http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/debates/scorecard/gop.debat e/[/url]

 

[InfamousOne]

Did we watch the same debate? Huckabee was irate enough to mention all of the "moral" questions he was getting. I think they marginalized Huckabee into this role and he was angry about it, as there is more to his platform then just that.

Yes, religion is important. Did the other candidates claim they were christians? Yes. And they also discussed important things like immigration, war, etc. They never gave Huckabee much of a chance to debate those things, so I can't say he won the debate.

Most likely the media is screwing him over like they are screwing over Ron Paul. Say something to your millions of friends. We need to hold the media to a standard of fair play in politics. It's repulsive what they have done to the Democratic process.

 

[White Shogun]

InfamousOne,
I think Huckabee did extremely well because he didn't run from the questions they asked him. He answered the questions, forthrightly and it seemed with sincerity. He didn't bring up other topics, twist his answers so you wouldn't know what the hell he was talking about. That's one of the things I watch for - who is avoiding the questions and who uses their prepared answer regardless of the question asked. In that regard, Rudy McRomney are always losing the debates!

 

[InfamousOne]

I agree. I think that he, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Tom Thompson are the only politicians on that stage. The others are actors.

Seriously, snappiest dresser? How is that relevant to a debate? Shame on you CNN. You are not journalists, you are the Ministry of Truth.

 

[guest301]

Sorry Aragorn, I should have paid more attention to the date stamps. What do you think, do you agree they're setting up Ron Paul deliberately, and staging the 'big three' together for more face time?

I don't think it is axiomatic that a Republican candidate has to be pro-war to run for nomination of the Republican party. Many Democrats voted for the war, too, but they can still be Democrats.

That's ok Shogun, no problem. In responce to Lutefisk's comment...I personally don't think Ron Paul is a one trick pony but that is how he is perceived. Whenever he gets a question in the debates he inevitably turns it wround to address the war issue. Immigration and this stupid amnesty bill is the most important thing going on in the Republican party today, even more important that the war issue at the moment. The war issue won't fracture the party, the amnesty bill will. Paul should touch on that more.
I am not a Paul guy because I disagree with him about the war. Don't ask me to explain why, I just don't care too right now, been there, done that. I do have some advice for him though. I was a Pat Buchannan supporter back in 96 and I contributed financially to his campaign and attended a politically rally in Dallas for Pat. The reason he won the New Hampshire primary and was a suprisngly close challenger to Dole was because he had a broad message to the conservative base as well as to the populists and independants out there and Paul could take a lesson from Buchannan and do some of the same things he did and who knows maybe he could sneak into third place in Iowa and gain some traction from there.

 

[White Shogun]

Aragorn, are you a single issue voter as far as the war in Iraq (and / or Iran?) In other words, will you not vote for a candidate like Ron Paul no matter his stance on immigration, personal liberty, gun control, abortion, or any other subject, because he is against the war in Iraq? You'd be willing to sell everything else short to ensure we maintain a presence in Iraq?

 

[InfamousOne]

Perhaps he repeats his stance on the war so often because the media keeps stating that there "is no republican candidate against the war", which is a flat out lie.

 

[InfamousOne]

CNN has now removed thier comments section. Here is the link to the pre-deleted comments, if you would like to see why the thread was deleted.

I guess voters who don't side with CNN's "top tier" are now called "spammers".

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/missingcomments.php

 

[Rise]

I was excited about watching the debate last night because I have been wanting to see more of Ron Paul and where he stands on the issues. He's been making a lot of sense and echoing my own sentiments. I also wanted to see if he and Giuliani were going to have any more words with one another.
In the end I was severely disappointed by the obvious favoritism displayed in the debate. Guiliani was asked "14 questions and spoke for 17 minutes" according to one analysis. That's twice as many questions and triple the amount of time as Ron Paul!
On top of this, when a question on health care was asked Dr. Ron Paul, the only medical doctor on the stage, was not given the opportunity to answer. WTF?