If you don't think the media tries to steer elections.....

[fullautovalmet76]

Consider the coverage, or lack thereof, to Ron Paul.

You all know I am a supporter of Ron Paul. And I know several of you support other candidates. This isn't about saying my guy is better than your guy/gal. And this thread is not about who is right or wrong for supporting their candidate. What I want you to think about, is if the media is this blatant in their outright bias against Ron Paul, think what they will do to your candidate when the big push is on for their guy/gal?

Here's a clip from Jon Stewart's show where he sums it up nicely:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-15-2011/indecision-2012---corn-polled-edition---ron-paul---the-top-tier

There's alot about his political views I completely disagree, but he will call it right every now and then. And this is one of those times.

Thanks!
-FA

[fightingquaker13]

Bachman and Santorum as the Moral Majority in tricorn hats is both priceless and very true. Paul is the real deal. A little crazy, but I have to say he does not get the respect he deserves even on this board. I mean honestly, Paul is "unelectable" but a black guy who sells pizzas is? Oh! What about a half term Cuban Senator with some financial issues? Or how about some junior representative whose husband tries to "cure" gays, because we all know we can be cured of heterosexuality? Or better yet a three term governor railing against the established politicians? C'mon folks, lets not diss Ron Paul too much.
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

I've brought this up in other threads, RINO Romney is the media darling.
After his 7th place finish in the Iowa straw poll they admitted he might be facing a challenge from Bachmann and Perry.
Herman who ? Pawlenty was hardly mentioned until he dropped out after his "poor" 3rd place.
Based on news media, did you know that Gingrich is still in the race ?
I honestly believe it is an intentional effort by the liberal dominated media to promote the one candidate who has the ability to lose to Obama.
Kind of like McCain last time around.
The most important vote is not in the General election, D's will vote D, R's will vote R.
It's the primary when you choose who wears the D and the R.

[Hazcat]

Bachman and Santorum as the Moral Majority in tricorn hats is both priceless and very true. Paul is the real deal. A little crazy, but I have to say he does not get the respect he deserves even on this board. I mean honestly, Paul is "unelectable" but a black guy who sells pizzas is? Oh! What about a half term Cuban Senator with some financial issues? Or how about some junior representative whose husband tries to "cure" gays, because we all know we can be cured of heterosexuality? Or better yet a three term governor railing against the established politicians? C'mon folks, lets not diss Ron Paul too much.
FQ13

And was head of the Kansas Federal Reserve.

[fullautovalmet76]

....I honestly believe it is an intentional effort by the liberal dominated media to promote the one candidate who has the ability to lose to Obama.....

That crossed my mind too. I really don't think Jon Stewart is really so concerned about Ron Paul. And you're probably right about his long term chances too, the history doesn't bode well for him. But he is the only candidate since Reagan whose views completely resonate with me.

I can't remember who the democrat candidate was but he ran for President multiple times and lost. But his ideas eventually took hold in the democrat party and they became doctrine for many years. I am starting to see the same thing happen with Paul's ideas (not really HIS ideas but you get the point). I read a quote from Rick Perry the other day stating that it would be treasonous for the Fed to provide more stimulus (i.e. print more money). That kind of talk used to be never heard from a mainline Republican......

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

The MSM has found its niche in bashing the "R" candidates it fears the most. A conservative woman, a Texas Gov., a media darling like Romney, and the "others".....

Not posted in a bad way, just agreeing with the OP who the MSM actually thinks has the best chance of beating BHO. (because they are scared, especially after Nov. 2010.) The Dems cannot attest, or run,  on the last 3 years, with NO accomplishments, so they resort to the Saul Alinsky playbook.

Ron Paul is somewhat popular here in S. Florida. Michael Savage thinks Sec. Of Treas. would be good for Paul. He is a smart guy, rather intellectual, and we have discussed his foreign policy, and other positions here many times.

Does he have great ideas?

Yes.

Does the media take him seriously?

No. (Just like Cain).

The MSM "gave us" McCain last go round,.....and many of the Republican/Conservative ilk, sad,....okay,....at least it's a vote not for BHO.

But he was not the candidate of choice the majority of Reps. in this country wanted.

This can't happen again. Regardless of who becomes the nominee, BHO must not be re-elected. The "blazing of the trail" over the next 15 months, will really be important.

The sheeple need to be reminded of the truth. Those of us here at DRTV, seem to be a bit more savvy in current events than many others, so spread the word, get folks involved, tell them there is more at stake than Dancing With The Stars,,,whatever...

This time next year, we need to be a wall of informed voters,....and BHO's lame duck final months a reminder, that it's a one term session for you,....go back to Rev. Wright, Chicago, and tell Darth Rahm hello,...your DONE.

[Rastus]

<snip>
I honestly believe it is an intentional effort by the liberal dominated media to promote the one candidate who has the ability to lose to Obama.
<snip>

Intentional and unintentional. I sure hope we don't get another McCain...the lesser of two evils is still evil...that would be Romney and anybody else running who thought Bohnner had a good idea with that 7 trillion dollar spending bill they passed a couple of weeks ago. 

[tombogan03884]

That crossed my mind too. I really don't think Jon Stewart is really so concerned about Ron Paul. And you're probably right about his long term chances too, the history doesn't bode well for him. But he is the only candidate since Reagan whose views completely resonate with me.

I can't remember who the democrat candidate was but he ran for President multiple times and lost. But his ideas eventually took hold in the democrat party and they became doctrine for many years. I am starting to see the same thing happen with Paul's ideas (not really HIS ideas but you get the point). I read a quote from Rick Perry the other day stating that it would be treasonous for the Fed to provide more stimulus (i.e. print more money). That kind of talk used to be never heard from a mainline Republican......

If I found a candidate who's views "completely resonate with me" even I would worry   

To avoid losing sight of an important topic I will submit that our personal views on a particular candidate don't have any bearing on the fact that the guy who finished 2 in their  widely acclaimed Straw poll barely gets mentioned, while the media favorite who finished 7th of 9 is said to be in a 3 way race for the nomination.

I honestly believe it is an intentional effort by the liberal dominated media to promote the one candidate who has the ability to lose to Obama.

I have another thought to present.
Boner, and the Rep party leadership are complicit in this. They would intentionally give Obama a 2nd term in order to put the TEA party and the rest of us "Terrorist Hobbits" in our place.
It's simply the Republican version of "it's for the children".
"We've been here pulling the strings, we know whats best, you little people just STFU and vote how we tell you."

[Solus]

If I found a candidate who's views "completely resonate with me" even I would worry   

To avoid losing sight of an important topic I will submit that our personal views on a particular candidate don't have any bearing on the fact that the guy who finished 2 in their  widely acclaimed Straw poll barely gets mentioned, while the media favorite who finished 7th of 9 is said to be in a 3 way race for the nomination.

I have another thought to present.
Boner, and the Rep party leadership are complicit in this. They would intentionally give Obama a 2nd term in order to put the TEA party and the rest of us "Terrorist Hobbits" in our place.
It's simply the Republican version of "it's for the children".
"We've been here pulling the strings, we know whats best, you little people just STFU and vote how we tell you."

Absolutely correct.   Neither the Dems or Repubs want to to stop what is happening to the country.  They all know they will, sooner or later, be riding the cat bird seat for their party's turn.  Neither want to work to put the country back on the course it should have stayed on because that would ruin their cushy jobs. 

I saw this some time ago and stopped voting for either of them. 

I choose to support the Libertarian party and I will admit that they have not a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected.....as long as everyone falls for the same line of crap the have been swallowing from the Dems and Repubs.

[tombogan03884]

Absolutely correct.   Neither the Dems or Repubs want to to stop what is happening to the country.  They all know they will, sooner or later, be riding the cat bird seat for their party's turn.  Neither want to work to put the country back on the course it should have stayed on because that would ruin their cushy jobs. 

I saw this some time ago and stopped voting for either of them. 

I choose to support the Libertarian party and I will admit that they have not a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected.....as long as everyone falls for the same line of crap the have been swallowing from the Dems and Repubs.

While I basically agree with you, my reasoning is somewhat different.
Only one 3rd part candidate ever won the Presidency, and that was just over 150 years ago, so the chances of it happening again are slim.
Since I don't want to throw away my vote uselessly I'm left with 2 choices, R or D.
My reading has showed me that while many R's are either unable to make a difference against the tide or venal, self serving, and/or RINO's, the party platform itself of small Govt, strong defense , minimal taxation etc. is sound.
The D's on the other hand, while some of them may be fine Patriotic people, have historically been connected to organized crime and corruption, the term bag man was coined to describe a Dem tradition. Also the Dem party platform of , Pro Union, big govt, punitive taxation and meddlesome regulation, is contrary to the intentions of the Founding Fathers, and for the last century has promoted a socialist agenda that can only be described as subversive.
So I, rather than vote 3rd party will vote for any one who has a chance of keeping the D candidate out of office.