Time to get mad and take action: Politico.com

[itshappening]

I'm sorry but we cannot let this one pass.

We need an action alert to deal with these two disgraceful reporters and this dislikable rag, who actually have a reporter registered here looking for co-operation.

Well, co-opererate no more. Josh should henceforth BAN this organization from RPF:

-
‘The congressman may run for president again, but his prospects for winning the GOP nomination are nil,’ said Jonathan Martin and James Hohmann at Politico.com.

‘Yet because he has an intense following among anti-war youths, and has supporters are willing to organise his effort, the libertarian-leaning Paul dominates the balloting and renders the survey as largely irrelevant.’

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49414.html
-

If this is the kind of snide, sniping coverage we can expect from Politico.com then it is going to be a long campaign.

Contact Jonathan Martin and James Hohmann and tell them how wrong they are and to demand fair coverage of Congressman Ron Paul

http://www.politico.com/reporters/JonathanMartin.html

http://www.politico.com/reporters/JamesHohmann.html

[Kludge]

Well... "nil" obviously was the wrong word to use. I'd accept "near-nil"... the authors' poor grasp on English should disqualify them from being allowed to make the news. Giuliani was given a book on blowback, maybe we can send these two reporters a copy of Merriam-Webster.

As to whether or not criticizing their strong bias is going to change how they write in the future, especially considering likely 1/5 or more of the emails will be heavily insulting -- eh.

[AGRP]

People cannot change the culture at a statist outlet such as Politico.

From what I can decipher, it's a Democrat party flavored mouthpiece devoted to the state.

[lester1/2jr]

getting mad is futile. it just plays into the stereotype.

[itshappening]

How do these geniuses proclaim that Ron Paul's chances are "virtually nil", even when he has demonstrated double digits in actual caucuses in 2008, when he has demonstrated tremendous organization, financing and grassroots support?

So he doesn't even have a 10% chance, a 20% chance in a crowded field?

No, the geniuses at Politico.com have declared his chance to be nil.

What a thorough ridiculous piece of hack like journalism.

Politico.com is an establishment tool attempting to define the narrative for whatever bought and paid for candidate their masters have cleared and we need to expose them and show them how wrong they are.

[itshappening]

Well... "nil" obviously was the wrong word to use. I'd accept "near-nil"... the authors' poor grasp on English should disqualify them from being allowed to make the news. Giuliani was given a book on blowback, maybe we can send these two reporters a copy of Merriam-Webster.

As to whether or not criticizing their strong bias is going to change how they write in the future, especially considering likely 1/5 or more of the emails will be heavily insulting -- eh.

Lets not forget they have operatives here on RPF looking for member co-operation.

Josh needs to kick their ass to the curb and write a letter to their editor explaining why.

[Kludge]

Lets not forget they have operatives here on RPF looking for member co-operation.

Josh needs to kick their ass to the curb and write a letter to their editor explaining why.

The article that particular reporter wrote was decent. Maybe if these two knuckleheads spent some time here before writing Journolist talking-points, they'd have a better article.

[sailingaway]

We draw attention to it when we get mad and rant. If people want to marshal some real arguments, such as that Ron had 'passionate supporters' in 2007 but never came near to winning the straw poll so SOMETHING must have changed.... or listing the number of 2d place finishes he had in the last presidential primary, fine. But we are too predictable and manipulatable in our anger, and they use it to make us look bad, often. We have to consider how much attention it serves OUR purposes to bestow upon them.

[itshappening]

The article that particular reporter wrote was decent. Maybe if these two knuckleheads spent some time here before writing Journolist talking-points, they'd have a better article.

No, it wasn't. There were several problems with the article such as "he may not be as well financed as other potential candidates" (who is more well financed than Ron Paul? guess those HISTORICAL one day money bombs didn't register in her biased brain)

Politico.com as an organization operates under an editor who obviously allows snide, sniping, false and hack like analysis through the editorial process. They are one organization and therefore we should ban them.

Members should NOT co-operate with this organization, we should NOT give them ammunition to use against us.

They have to be nice about Ron if they want co-operation, research, material or quotes.

Until then they should be banned and/or members should NOT co-operate.

These assholes cannot be trusted, as I have demonstrated.

[Kludge]

"This year, [Newt's PAC] brought in a total of $9.9 million, more than the PAC fundraising of Gingrich’s next three most active fundraising potential rivals for the nomination. According to reports filed this week, former Gov. Massachusetts Mitt Romney’s PACs raised a total of $5.1 million this year, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s PAC brought in $2.5 million, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s groups raised nearly $2.1 million."

compared to the Liberty PAC which had just $90k @ end of last year. Given the news stories on Mitt & Newt's PAC funds, it seems like a valid point to make.

(src (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43688.html)for $ #s -- src (http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00234641) for Liberty PAC $ #s)

[itshappening]

PACs are NOT campaign committee's, either way any reporting on Ron Paul and his potential financing whilst not mentioning HISTORICAL one day money bombs and fundraisers from 07/08 that his supporters have demonstrated being able to hold, is biased garbage.

And that was just from the first paragraph of this so called "decent" article!

[TNforPaul45]

Duplicate thread is duplicate:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?279305-Politico-quot-Ron-Paul-Wins-CPAC.-.-.renders-it-irrelevant-.-quot