Why is it that presidential candidate Ron Paul is almost never mentioned in any of the news channels or websites including Yahoo. When Fox News had the republicans debate Ron Paul received more support from viewers than any other republican yet it seems like the media treats him as an outsider and tries to ignore him completely. Is this some sort of a mafia where only the rich candidates get to be featured in the news?
2007-10-08 21:59:48 · 14 answers · asked by kokitch 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I so agree with you. They always have how Hillary Clinton has "outearned" Obama, and nobody talks about who isn't trying to generate cash but is still out there. It sure was telltale when John McCain's camp got big press for running out of money.
DON'T VOTE FOR ANY CANDIDATE GETTING RICH ON CAMPAIGNS.
Do you really think these people want what's best for the non-rich?
2007-10-08 22:04:38 · answer #1 · answered by Your Uncle Dodge! 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The media worships government as if it is our ultimate God, so anyone who thinks the power of government should be limited is treated like a heretic.
Even Republicans consider the government to be the solution to all our problems, so liberal Republicans like Gulianni don't have any respect for Ron Paul.
2007-10-09 00:44:12 · answer #2 · answered by freedom_vs_slavery 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The supposed conspiracy to keep Ron Paul out of the news is in fact driven by an inflated sense of importance his supporters give him.
In all national polls Paul is showing as a very insignificant minor candidate. His numbers are running on par with Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Browback, Hunter and Tancredo - none of whom are really getting any press either.
2007-10-08 22:51:15 · answer #3 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You have to make sense to be president. I agree that the media plays too much of a role in announcing (rather than reporting) who is going to be president, but Ron Paul? The man is sincere, but that's the best thing I can say about him. Not a single bill Ron Paul sponsored has ever been made into law, and his positions on federalism and international cooperation are straight out of the early 1800s.
2007-10-08 22:29:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
One must obviously buy the way too overpriced add space in all the American rags. The fact that newspapers are a near dead media simply hasn't occurred to most of us. Paul and Kucinitch need to jump fences to be independents and offer us the only true change Arguements we can possibly hear in the 08 election. The others remain to be the same old same old same old. Thank God for giving me the balls to be radical to the max. All of the other candidates have nothing new enough to actually change anything that's broken down in our corrupt system.
2007-10-08 22:26:21 · answer #5 · answered by ancientcityentertainment 2 · 5⤊ 1⤋
See the work of media critics such as Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, and the "filters" at work in our state-corporate capitalist system that prevent and distort news and editorial coverage of certain subjects and issues.
Also see the specific stories about coverage of Ron Paul by media watchdogs such as Media Matters for America (http://mediamatters.org/ ) and FAIR (http://www.fair.org/whats-new.html ).
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/
2007-10-12 06:26:51 · answer #6 · answered by clore333 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why don't we see Mike Gravel?
Ron Paul has made a couple million, it just seems like the media wants to control who is going to become the next president...
2007-10-08 22:04:05 · answer #7 · answered by ruthless 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Ron Paul will be in Michigan for the debates today,
2007-10-08 22:40:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If elections were truly about ideas you would hear news stories on Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kocinich, etc. Obviously it is not. The news media has already declared a winner in both parties. This is unfair and biased.
It also points out the necessity of additional political parties. There should be at least three.
2007-10-08 22:32:34 · answer #9 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Haha he lost 80% of americans while raising more than John McCain! That's funny. What does that say for McCain's campaign? The neo-con warmongers are getting more and more scared of Ron Paul every day. Lets invade every god$amn country we can until we RULE!!!!! Sounds kinda like the start of the fall of the Roman Empire. History does repeat itself.
EDIT: Hey Adam, when was the last time we had a sincere President? Think about it. Btw, your "facts" on Ron's legislative record aren't facts. Read up and stop listening to Hannity.
2007-10-08 22:27:58 · answer #10 · answered by crucial_master 3 · 4⤊ 5⤋