PDA

View Full Version : NY Times and CBS understate Ron's GOP primary vote - 5.6%, not 'less than 2%'




sailingaway
12-13-2010, 11:27 AM
http://www.ballot-access.org/2010/12/13/ron-paul-tells-new-york-times-it-is-at-least-50-50-that-he-will-run-for-president-in-2012/

not 'less than 2%', new york times and CBS.

So there.
:p

And that of course was BEFORE the bailouts with the economy cratering just the way he said it would....

but the NY times front page article says he got 'less than 2%' so you know that will be the meme going forward...

sailingaway
12-13-2010, 12:01 PM
self bump. I'd appreciate bumps to this, because people are googling him today because of the NYTimes front page article, and I'd like this to be something they see.

garyallen59
12-13-2010, 12:36 PM
bump

Thomas
12-13-2010, 12:42 PM
someone tell them!

RonPaulCult
12-13-2010, 01:00 PM
GOOD CALL! I knew that didn't sound right.

sailingaway
12-13-2010, 02:06 PM
thanks, guys

HOLLYWOOD
12-13-2010, 02:59 PM
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2008&off=0&f=0&elect=2&fips=36

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/2008_GOP_New_York_Primary_Results.png

Jordan
12-13-2010, 03:14 PM
Meh, the Tea Party isn't going to care about bailouts, health care or stimulus any more. They'll pick the first Republican with a clear lead and put them in office.

fisharmor
12-13-2010, 03:45 PM
Yeah, someone needs to point out to these brain surgeons that despite the fact that they were shoving Ghouliani into our eyes and ears for a year, Ron Paul still got almost twice the number of primary votes.

And if the entire fourth estate wasn't actively trying to bury him, and cutting off his mic, and banning him from debates, that would have been double digits at the very least.

Bern
12-13-2010, 03:53 PM
He got 1,127,071 votes in the 2008 primary according to CNN (not counting caucus states):

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/candidates/#val=302

% of the vote ranged from 3% to 25% state to state.

Promontorium
12-13-2010, 04:01 PM
Meh, the Tea Party isn't going to care about bailouts, health care or stimulus any more. They'll pick the first Republican with a clear lead and put them in office.

Is the Tea Party already dead? You know, the media declared the Tea Party dead about 15 times over a year and a half, was the 2010 slight success the death knell?

p.s. bump for actual NY Times article.

malkusm
12-13-2010, 04:02 PM
Should I document this as part of my "media bias" thread in the RP 2012 subforum? Sounds like a good candidate.

Jordan
12-13-2010, 04:05 PM
Is the Tea Party already dead? You know, the media declared the Tea Party dead about 15 times over a year and a half, was the 2010 slight success the death knell?


Have you seen a protest from the anti-war left lately?

sailingaway
12-13-2010, 04:14 PM
To tell you the truth, if obamacare is overturned a lot of the anger
may fade unless they shove something else down our throats they know well we don't want

sailingaway
12-13-2010, 08:37 PM
Someone asked about this on the other link, so I'm bumping it.

Suzu
12-13-2010, 08:54 PM
Add the correct info to the comments on the NYT article. Also, letters to the editor asking for a correction.

sailingaway
12-13-2010, 10:05 PM
Add the correct info to the comments on the NYT article. Also, letters to the editor asking for a correction.

I did leave a comment there. I don't know if it ever showed up.