This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Be Honest CNBC - You Are Biased Against Ron Paul

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Brandon Smith from Alt Market

Be Honest CNBC-You Are Biased Against Ron Paul

Those of us who have supported Ron Paul since his presidential run in 2008 (and some who supported him long before that) have come to expect an astonishing array of mainstream media tricks, lies, and censorship when it comes to the “journalistic” examination of the good doctor. This doesn’t mean, however, that we have ever or will ever come to ACCEPT this consistent trend of deception and disinformation as a forgone conclusion of our political lives. We will never throw up our hands and walk away from the mess the MSM has deliberately created, because that is exactly what they would like us to do; give up, shut up, go home, vote for Romney (an establishment crony with the creepy grin of a pedophile), and watch him lose to Obama (yet another establishment crony) in 2012.

With this stated up front, it was brought to my attention that CNBC was running a poll asking readers who they thought won the recent Republican Presidential Debates in Michigan. Now, as in many polls in 2008, the name “Ron Paul” has been rising to the top of the charts in 2011 despite all efforts by media lapdogs to dissuade the public from even considering such a candidate. CNBC did not fail to play its roll this time around either. Ron Paul won by a substantial margin, and of course, their response was to take the poll down! Here was the explanation given by CNBC Managing Editor and all around bottom feeder, Allen Wastler:

Gamed Poll...So We Took It Down

We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn't so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate's political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down.

Yes, we've gone through this exercise before.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45233756/

Wastler then provides a link to a rather patronizing statement he made back in 2007 to explain why CNBC dumped polling results then as well:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/21257762/?An_Open_Letter_to_the_Ron_Paul_Faithful

First of all, let’s be serious, folks! Regardless of what you might feel personally about Ron Paul or his political position, it has become painfully obvious to even the most oblivious subsections of the American populace that the MSM, from supposed “right wing” outlets like FOX, to supposed “left wing” outlets like CNBC, have gone WAY out of their way to ridicule, suppress, or completely ignore him.

Now, you really need to ask yourself, why is that?

If Ron Paul is such a “fringe” candidate with “no chance” of winning, then why all the trickery and subversion? If his political methodologies are so ridiculous or out of sync with the American people, then why not plaster his face on every TV screen in the country and let him destroy his own career? Why hide him from public view?

The answer is simple; because he IS a threat. His position is one of government transparency, limited power, and financial independence. He predicted the credit crisis and the mortgage bubble implosion long before they ever occurred. The guy wants to shut down the Federal Reserve and the cartoonish brute squad otherwise known as the IRS. He wants to end the costly and fraudulent wars in the Middle East and bring the troops home (really bring them home, not make fake statements about bringing them home and then keep them on the ground for another few years). Of course the MSM, a corporately controlled monopolistic sham, is working overtime to keep Paul down!

Think about it. Sit back and consider. If Ron Paul was actually allowed to stand on the same stage as Barack Obama in a fair debate, there would be no half hearted girly-slap pansy sparring going on as there would be in a match between Obama and Romney. Ron Paul would destroy Obama! It would be a massacre of historic proportions! The establishment, which represents a minority of elitists in this country and not the citizenry in any capacity, will not let this happen.

Allen Wastler would call the above statement “conspiracy theory”. All I have to say to Wastler is; prove me wrong! Give Ron Paul fair coverage. Leave your own polls to represent the actual results regardless of whether you like the outcome. But first, answer me these questions, Allen:

1) If your poll was “gamed”, or in other words “hacked”, then I imagine that you and CNBC have some kind of proof of this. Please, do show it to us, so we can better understand your suppression of the poll results. I continuously hear from the MSM that Ron Paul supporters are all master hackers, and that there are only a dozen of us huddled around basement computers posing as millions (and I thought they didn’t believe in conspiracies…), but I have yet to see any concrete evidence to support this notion. Do you have any, Allen?

2) If CNBC’s poll is so easily tampered with, then why continue to run it at all?

3) If Mitt Romney had won the poll by a landslide, would CNBC have suppressed the results then? Or is it only farfetched when Ron Paul prevails in the final calculations? (This is a bit of a rhetorical question, because we all know Mr. Wastler would have danced a jig and sung the glory of Romney over Paul if the roles had been reversed).

4) Why is it that whenever Ron Paul wins a poll, MSM pundits claim the results are unscientific, or that they really don’t represent the true position of the general public? Why is it that a Romney or Cain win brings resounding words of vindication for the nature of the democratic process?

5) What margin of success does CNBC consider “realistic” for a presidential candidate? I mean, is it really necessary for you to punish Ron Paul for being a popular candidate, or to punish his supporters for being well organized and showing up for the vote? Do you not see the half-assed absurdity of your claim that Ron Paul won by “too much”?

6) Isn’t it conceivable that Ron Paul is doing well in the polls because his ideas and views are shared by many Americans? Who are you to claim this is not possible, Mr. Allen?

7) Do you really believe you and CNBC will not be held accountable for misinforming the American people and hiding information pertinent to their political knowledge? The last time I checked, CNBC’s viewership has been in pitiful decline since at least 2009.

8) When are you going to man up, Allen, and admit that you dumped the poll because you are biased against Ron Paul? It’s not as if it is a big secret. Hiding behind superficial excuses such as “hackers” and “poll gaming” is at bottom pretty cowardly. Why not embrace your blatant disapproval of Paul and the considerable movement of Americans surrounding him so that we can have a real discussion, instead of putting on a pretentiously counterfeit smile and talking down your nose at us? Wouldn’t that be more fun?

Let’s bring some honesty, and perhaps finally some true competition, back to the presidential race, and say what is actually on our minds for once. This goes for the staff of CNBC! If Allen Wastler or any other MSM lackey wants to bash Ron Paul, then he should do it openly as a private citizen, not use the CNBC media apparatus as a Hearst-like yellow journalism weapon for misinforming the public, or for indirectly slandering a candidate or his supporters. This should not be a problem for him at all, unless, of course, the corporate owners of CNBC over at G&E play a much greater role in the actions of their news subsidiary than is readily admitted. Then, Allen Wastler’s apprehension in laying out the truth plainly would make a little more sense…

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 11/10/2011 - 12:46 | 1866358 getplaning
getplaning's picture

Polls get hacked. Free Republic was famous for sending out email blasts telling people to "go freep this poll."

Israel has a well known application that you can download to your desktop called GIYUS that alerts users to go and "freep" polls or post comments at news sites and discussion boards.

So it is not only possible, it is likely.

That said, I like Ron Paul not so much because he is the Papa Libertarian, but he and perhaps John Huntsman are the only right wingers with a shred of integrity about them.  I agree with some of his positions, disagree with most, but at least I know that what he says is what he really believes. At least you can work with the guy.

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 16:25 | 1867390 The Laughing Man
The Laughing Man's picture

"I agree with some of his positions, disagree with most, but at least I know that what he says is what he really believes. At least you can work with the guy."

Agreed.

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 12:59 | 1866449 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Hmmm? Has Comcast taken control of NBC yet?

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 13:13 | 1866510 pupton
pupton's picture

http://www.dailypaul.com/186482/who-won-the-debate-some-polls?page=1

Daily Paul .com has a list of Ron Paul Polls you can view/take.  Some have already been tampered with or pulled.  Others show skewed lines (Paul's line at 30% is the same length as Romney and Cain's lines at 22%, but the rest are graduated proportionally.)

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 13:40 | 1866605 pupton
pupton's picture

PLEASE VOTE HERE!!! Dr. Paul is losing badly.

http://www.nationalreview.com/

Ron Paul is losing in this Poll, but Gingrich is winning by such a huge margin that he should be disqualified. <sarc>

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 14:05 | 1866724 Manny
Manny's picture

Ahh...You guys are a tough crowd to please. Here MSM is doing all it can to avoid you the effort and make your choices for you.  And instead of thanking them for their efforts all you guys do is criticize!

 

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 14:57 | 1866971 Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

 

Yawn.  Yellow journalism by Federasts.  So what else is new.  Let's smoke their asses and be done with the corruption.

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 15:54 | 1867277 madgreek
madgreek's picture

They can't get away with this landslide...

http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/09/8726049-which-candidate-won-the-gop-debate?pc=20&sp=60#discussion_nav

The key to bringing about change is simply a grass roots viral serum to repress the contamination in the United States.

Talk about contagion!!!

Your points on a head to head debate are valid. Paul however, refuses to address a third party candidacy that would eviscerate either candidate.

In order for him to win the Republican nomination, he needs a strong and continued movement of grass roots coverage and a push from the Libertarians and Independent registered voters, as well as Gary Johnson supporters to get on his bandwagon. In fact, I am disappointed and surprised that Gary Johnson, a solid candidate in his own right, does not boost for Ron Paul the way Newt Gingrich has boosted himself through a cleverly designed ruse with Herman Cain.

Allegiances and alliances will be paramount in the weeks to come. 

Ron Paul's endorsement of Jim Grant as a replacement for Ben Bernanke was a good start. He must start to think of how he forms his government for the task of downsizing his government, including taking a page from Pres. Clinton's doings of the same when he took office in 1992.

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 16:19 | 1867368 The Laughing Man
The Laughing Man's picture

Since this is the internet, I've come to expect the kind of comments I'm seeing for this particular article so I'll be blunt:

Yes, the media (on both sides, though more so the left-wing outlets) are biased against Ron Paul. Yes CNBC's explanation for taking down the poll is obviously bogus. However it is true that Ron Paul's performance at the online polls does not accurately reflect his standing with the American populace as a whole. You can deny it all you like, but the truth of the matter is that his online followers are fanatically devoted to supporting to him in any manner they can, whenever they can. I know somebody will say that I am just being biased, but consider this: if Ron Paul is doing so well at the polls then why did he garner such a low voter percentage during the '08 campaign when he posted similar poll numbers.

I like Ron Paul like many ZH-goers, but as much as I do I am unable to bring myself to vote for him for the same reasons as many people in this country: as intelligent as he is regarding economic related issues, his social and foreign policy stances are a stark contrast both to his economic stance as well as the general views held by most Republican voters on all three areas -- this is the core problem that he has never been able to overcome in the presidental elections: he is using libertarian principles to run as a republican candidate.

So can't he just run as an actual libertarian? I hope I don't have to remind everyone of the infamous balldropping that happened with the libertarian platform back in the '04 campaign where the first issue they chose to address (out of all the matters concerning the war on terror, reforming the tax code, social security, medicare, etc etc), the single most-important issue they chose to mark the beginning of their platform... was none other than legalizing marijuana... and the libertarian platform to this day has not really recovered from that gaffe in priorities.

You may think I'm overstating this, but all of this details the exact problems that prevent Ron Paul from ever having a shot at the presidency. His voter base, while dedicated, is too niche to hold up at the national level. Also remember that there are, and will always be, lots of stupid, deaf, easily swayed blind-sheep idiots (again, on all sides) who will believe any load of crap the media says about him if you feed it to them long enough and frequently enough. There are lots of people who like Ron Paul for his bluntness and honesty (myself included), but these same people will never actually vote for him because he has too many social and political stances that are at odds with those of many voters.

So in short, it doesn't matter how much attention or lack-there-of that the media decides to give to him because Ron Paul will never ever be president.

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 16:45 | 1867499 The Heart
The Heart's picture

OCCUPY CNBC!!!

Occupy the lame stream media!!!

(Paging WB7)(Was posting this and noticed you posted here Mr B. OCCUPY THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA?)

If all the good hearts here ALL DO their best to support and ask others to support and vote for Ron Paul, he will win. You can already see his victory smile as he waves at America in gratitude live on all the media stations.

So shall it be IF, we get to another election barring any and all possibilities in the economic picture, a possible false flag Event, or more lie based war for profits.

Thank you all for the great input and comments here on ZH. Truly, a unique group of contributers.

 

Thu, 11/10/2011 - 21:19 | 1868459 reggiehammond
reggiehammond's picture

OCCUPY HEADS SHOULD DEFINiTELY BE IN FRONT OF CNBC HEADQUARTERS CHANTING AND DRUMMING ASKING WHY CNBC HOSTS SUCK CORPORATE AMERICA'S DICK ALL DAY EVERY DAY? I HATE CNBC AND EVERY SINGLE ON AIR PERSONALITY UP IN THERE. NONE OF THEM EVEN HAS A SPINE OR CIRCULATORY SYSTEM WHICH MEANS THEY AREN"T MAMMALS WHICH ALSO HINTS THAT THEY SHOULD BE TREATED LIKE EUKARYOYTES.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!