Are people LISTENING to Ron Paul? Check this poll.

[wgadget]

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20080208/47abe1d0_3ca6_1552620080208-1042951934

[WilliamC]

Naw, it can't be.

We all know Ron Paul's message only appeals to a fringe group of voters.

The media told us so!

heh heh.

[Sarge]

They will be when they get their January statements. Mine came today.

Wake up call, and I moved mostly to foreign last year.

Those mostly in US stocks, the shock will likely be much greater.

[MattMinnesota]

They might agree with Ron Paul's message, but they are Obama supporters.

[liberteebell]

Naw, it can't be.

We all know Ron Paul's message only appeals to a fringe group of voters.

The media told us so!

heh heh.

+1

(I was looking at meetup members today during a sign wave and thinking, if this is fringe, I want to be part of it forever. Sometimes the packaging isn't perfect but the intelligence level is beyond compare!)

[nodope0695]

If that poll is correct, why in God's name are people voting for McCain - can you say RIGGED ELECTIONS? I knew you could. Just read the Thomas Jefferson quote in my signature, and you'll learn all ya need to know.

[LEK]

More than half - 56 percent - pointed the finger at mortgage lenders. Forty-four percent said Bush deserves a lot of the blame. After that come Congress, Wall Street, consumers themselves and in last place the Federal Reserve.

I seem to remember those compassionate conservatives booing Ron Paul for this very same logic at CPAC. They could care less about the average American.

Ron Paul 2008!

[SolusSLX]

It's worked well for them. The media and government have succeeded in keeping the people ignorant of the Federal Reserve and instead, putting the blame on the scapegoat so he can be replaced by a new one next year.



Who deserves most of the blame for the economy's troubles?

More than half - 56 percent - pointed the finger at mortgage lenders. Forty-four percent said Bush deserves a lot of the blame. After that come Congress, Wall Street, consumers themselves and in last place the Federal Reserve.

The Fed(eral Reserve) has the public's confidence that it will be able to right the economy. [HUH !?!?!?!?]

More than half - 55 percent - said they have a great deal or some confidence in [the] Fed(eral Reserve) to turn things around. Forty-one percent said that about Congress, only 28 percent about Bush.

In fact, economic problems have contributed to pulling the president's approval ratings to all-time lows. Only 29 percent approve of his handling of the economy, the lowest mark yet in this polling. Bush's overall job-approval rating slid to 30 percent, also a record low.

Like Ron Paul says, the economic problems are mainly caused by the Federal Reserve through low intrest rates (printing money/inflation) which made the lenders able to make bad loans (I think). By blaming economic problems on the "President" then he becomes a scapegoat that can simply be replaced to keep the people pacified, thinking "maybe the next President will manage the economy correctly." But not the President, the Federal Reserve, nor any part of the government can correctly "manage the economy."

The Federal Reserve and the government can't "right the economy" or "turn things around," because every time the Federal Reserve and government try to manipulate the economy it ends up creating more problems down the road (kind of like how we got the current problems in the first place, and of course it always makes the elites a lot of profit in the process). And the parts of the government that made the problem are rarely correctly blamed (thanks to the media).

The President's role in the economic problems has been relatively miniscule compared to the corruption surrounding him, which will stay in place after he leaves (the Federal Reserve, the corrupt Republican and Democrat Congresses kowtowing to the President/Neo-Cons and financial/economic elites (check out all the bankers donating to campaigns @ opensecrets.org, every time the Fed prints money the banks make even more money through fractional reserve banking), etc). Congress is also responsible for some of the bills early on in the decade that helped encourage the mortgage lenders to make all the loans, in addition to the Federal Reserve's low interst rates.

We need to do a LOT of educating to change the situation, that's hundreds of millions of people (or at least about 1000 in this survey...) that have no idea of what's really going on. And the corporate media certainly aren't going to tell people about it. The question is how to effectively package the message to get it across to people that are conditioned to not think too deeply about things, and then to work on getting that message out. Maybe it's just too difficult for most older people to understand (for a variety of psychological reasons), and younger people can more easily learn how things work.

(or tl;dr? :p)

[amy31416]

They might agree with Ron Paul's message, but they are Obama supporters.

I had a discussion with an Obama supporter who knew Ron Paul's positions on all the issues far better than he knew Obama's due to him having a Ron Paul friend.

And he likes Ron Paul, but supports Obama.

I just don't get it. I think part of it is the "Republican" problem.

:rolleyes:

[Proemio]

"Forty-eight percent said a pullout would help fix the country's economic problems "a great deal," and an additional 20 percent said it would help at least somewhat."

Let's think about this one for a second (I heard an astonished Blitzer talk about it earlier).

48 + 20 = 68% of "sheeple" (he), think the best course to fix the economy - or at least help - would be to "just come home"!

Where would the people get this 'kooky' idea?
- certainly not from the media...
- certainly not from any 'viable' presidential candidate. They all subscribe to the rebate make-believe...

The people could only have gotten the idea from the tireless repetition by the only credible candidate and his army of supporters.
As an aside: it's interesting that exactly at this moment, the suggestion is floated to stop talking about the war - to help Ron Paul, of course...

Having established where the sudden wisdom of the masses must from ( for the most part), are we then to believe that only 0.5 to 1% of them would vote for "the man with the answer" to "the most critical issue for the voters"? Would it not be much more reasonable to assume at least one quarter (12-17% of population at large), which just happens to be the numbers observed in various caucuses...