Ron Paul gets his first win, but the media ignores it

Discussion in 'Politics' started by purple grapes, Mar 11, 2012.

  1. The Virgin Islands' cherry was popped by liberty!
  2. lol virgin islands.. too small to fix... so they'll just announce a different winner instead.
  3. If this hypocrisy is exposed it could do better than had they reported a win.
  4. I'm sure it has nothing to do with it being the US Virgin Islands? An unincorporated territory with less political autonomy than Nunavut? These people can't even cast a ballot in a presidential election.

    And you wonder why a profit-driven media is languishing to give a fuck?
  5. Nah. I mean, sure, it may be an fairly small and insignificant territory, and I'm sure any logical Paul supporter would admit that.

    But it's not that the media is not giving a fuck, they're obviously reporting the story. It's the fact that they are reporting Romney as the winner and leaving out of their articles/reports the actual results of the straw poll - which Ron Paul actually won.

    It's clearer than ever who the establishment and big corporate enterprise wants in office.
  6. they can if they have residence in one of the 50 states.
  7. Right and that might explain why some news organizations decide not to cover it at all. Moving on...

    They're selling a product. Can I dare ask you to postulate an alternative theory on why it might be more productive to report on it the way they did?

    The amount of assumptions required to assume this premise as true is mind-boggling.

    Do you realize that consumers are the basis of "the establishment"? If you're not putting your dimes in the jukebox, they're going to sing a different tune.

    You and your peers and the collective driving force behind their product.

    I'm sure that accounts for literally dozens of votes. :rolleyes:
  8. [quote name='"Sam_Spade"']And you wonder why a profit-driven media is languishing to give a fuck?[/quote]

    Are you saying that reporting this caucus as they have every other one would be detrimental to their profits? :confused:

    If anything a Ron Paul victory would draw more traffic and attention...

    Not sure i understand
  9. Sure, but it doesn't explain why the one's that DID report it, reported Romney as the winner.

    Oh I agree with you, so I won't postulate. And it may serve their bottom line better reporting Romney as the winner, but that doesn't make what I said wrong - and it doesn't justify their reporting, considering they're supposed to be objective journalists.

    It was meant more as on offhand comment, not to be take so seriously. And by "establishment", I was meaning the powerful Republicans that control congress and the party. By corporate enterprise I meant the powerful banks that fund Romney's campaign.
  10. [ame=]Just How Corrupt Will The United States Voting System Be In 2012? - VIRALIZE - YouTube[/ame]

    Interesting video I found in the comments of that article, worth the watch...:eek:
  11. big media doesnt like Ron Paul, and theyll never let him become president even if he ad been winning.
  12. 'they' don't want Ron Paul as president.

    Get over it, they won, not the people.
  13. thats exactly what i mean, idk if your trying to ague or something lol:confused:
  14. there votes don't count anyway in the main election. let me know when he wins a actual state..then ill be stoked.
  15. #16 Norma Stits, Mar 11, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2012
    well, dozens of votes are dozens of votes.

    to say "these people can't vote in an election" is false... and has nothing really to do with the media reporting the wrong winner.
  17. Who sets the dialogue?

    Ron Paul can poll better than the other candidates and still be ignored, you obviously don't follow US politics very closely.

Share This Page