Media Manipulation Against The Ron Paul Candidacy

In my last post here in February, I reprinted the Joel Skousen article UNDERMINING THE CANDIDACY OF RON PAUL. I haven’t checked back since. Careful not get caught in politics at this stage of the great game. Careful not to admire Ron Paul more that I already did. Careful not to read any more articles by Ron Paul’s grandson, lest I grow to like him as well.

Truth is though, when the advantage and power is to your favor, very little bravery is needed. Fighting against all odds is a genuine measure of courage. And fighting for what’s right is a true measure of character. Ron Paul is clearly the one and you got to stand by that. I’m throwing my small voice in support of Ron Paul, for as long as he’s running, for what it’s worth. - the stranger

The article below is reprinted with permission, from Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief; from the May 11, 2007 edition World Affairs Brief.


Evidence continues to show that those sponsoring the GOP debates are engaged in a conspiracy to undermine the candidacy of Rep. Ron Paul for president. It's one thing to tweak the numbers 10 or 20 percent to give one candidate the edge over another, but to make a landslide of polling results in favor of Dr. Paul go away takes a blatant conspiracy.

Joseph Paul Watson of has done the most consistent reporting on this growing story: "Every single major online poll shows conclusively that Ron Paul won the debate by a mammoth margin, trouncing the bought-and paid-for shill Neo-Con candidates that the establishment press are sworn to uphold. After just over 18,000 votes, the ABC News poll showed Ron Paul with 15,568 compared with nearest rival Mitt Romney, who had a paltry 245. After initially scrubbing Paul from the poll altogether, ABC was forced to add his name after a deluge of furious calls and e mails."

This is the first tactic in a conspiracy--deny the public the ability to even consider Paul by excluding him from the debate, and then when that fails (thanks to internet complaints to the networks), exclude him from the "who won?" straw poll. Even in the post debate discussions, the hosts acted as if Paul wasn't there. Keith Olbermann and his MSNBC co-host Chris Matthews who hosted the actual debate ignored Ron Paul's clear anti-war stance and claimed that none of the Republican candidates opposed the occupation of Iraq. Incredible. Ron Paul was absolutely clear about his opposition--a fact that most likely produced the great public outpouring in favorable polling results. But you would only know that if you saw the initial polls. As soon as the media masters saw that Paul had a landslide of support, they started changing the results. Here's more data from Watson's research on the media justifying their changing of the results:

"However, as Alex Wallenwein points out in his article, the establishment media completely ignored public sentiment and handed the victory to either McCain or Romney, barely even mentioning Ron Paul's sterling performance and popular approval.

"Unsurprisingly, not a single report of the actual political news story of the decade, namely, that a virtually unknown 'dark horse beat the media favorite Romney handily--and utterly crushed the rest of the field,' writes [Alex] Wallenwein. The headlines seen from a Google News search using the keyword 'debate,' at the time of this writing show only this: 'Romney Won Debate' (NewsMax), 'John McCain Wins First GOP Debate' (Fox News), 'Who Won the First GOP Presidential Debate? Answer provided in article: Mitt Romney (National Review Online).

"Readers tell us that ABC didn't even include Ron Paul on their original list and his name was only added to the poll after furious calls to ABC's head office. This website also claims that comments on ABC's message boards expressing outrage at the fact that Paul had been censored were soon deleted. ...

"Ron Paul led MSNBC's poll right from the start and before it had even been widely circulated. ABC News claims that activist voting and multiple voting by individuals artificially inflated Paul's numbers, but both claims are demonstrably false. Keith Olbermann reported that Paul was ahead before the link was spread around message boards and blogs and to vote multiple times is impossible--the poll only allows one vote per IP address. At time of press, Paul currently has 40 % approval and 25 % disapproval, compared with 43 % disapproval and only 22 % approval for Giuliani.

"Capital News, an arm of CSPAN, had Paul leading his nearest rival Mitt Romney by 60 % shortly before voting closed. Rudy Giuliani garnered just 6 % of the vote.

"Yahoo! News is still censoring Ron Paul by not including him in the list of candidates on their 2008 presidential coverage page, despite the fact that he is wildly popular and has trounced every other Republican candidate in every online poll. After receiving a flood of angry complaints, Yahoo promised to review the situation, but 24 hours later their page is still absent any mention of Ron Paul."

Watson correctly concludes, "This whole fiasco underscores the reality that the President of the United States is not elected by the popular will of the people, but instead is selected from a highly restricted gaggle of pre-approved establishment lackeys."

Thomas E. Woods recounted even more evidence of mainstream manipulation: "How does the Establishment deal with a Ron Paul candidacy? What else did you expect? By ignoring him as much as possible.

"On the Liberty and Power blog, David Beito reports: 'Later that night, CNN's post-debate spin segment sank to an even greater low. The panel included Arianna Huffington and some neo-con guy from The Weekly Standard. Nobody mentioned Paul's views. The ever-insufferable Huffington, who either did not watch the debate or lied about what she saw, self-righteously proclaimed that all of the ten candidates supported the war. Nobody challenged her. Are we to be spared nothing?'

"... Dick Morris is in a category all his own... Morris ignored Paul altogether. Now he managed to find time to mention Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson -- heck, he mentioned every other candidate besides Ron Paul, even listing specific winners and losers. Since a candidate like Ron Paul isn't allowed to exist in Dick Morris' world, he apparently couldn't win or lose.

"Now we have the phenomenon of Yahoo News inexplicably excluding Ron Paul from its list of GOP candidates. Yet right there are Mike Huckabee and Duncan Hunter, whose combined support in the polls trails Ron Paul's. Stunned, I actually called Yahoo and left a voicemail message for their chief communications officer, and included my email address. In their emailed reply, I was told: 'According to the latest FEC filings, it is our understanding that Congressman Paul has not officially entered the 2008 Presidential race, but has only gotten to the stage of forming an exploratory committee.'

"Huh? Unannounced candidates are allowed into the debates? Can't possibly be true, I thought. So I simply went to the Federal Election Commission website, and after three seconds of searching I found Ron Paul's filing statement, dated March 12... To Yahoo's credit, after I sent them this documentation I was told that they would have a page for Ron Paul up within a week.

"But apparently it's going to take persistence and vigilance to ensure that Paul is treated fairly. As of yesterday, for example, ABC News began deleting and banning posts about Ron Paul, as well as posts complaining about this deletion policy. Since that post was written, ABC has begun blocking all comments about Ron Paul."

These tactics of purposeful exclusion are starting to backfired on the establishment media. The manipulation of the GOP debate polls was the top story circulating the internet this past week, and it made a lot of people very angry. To be fair, it must be said that the internet crowd is really not typical of the dumbed-down American voter who gets all his or her news and opinions from establishment sources. Thus, internet polls that come in very high for Dr. Paul would not translate equally to the entire electorate. But news of such a showing certainly would go a long way toward alerting the general public that there is a dark horse candidate that has considerable backing by thinking people.

With that said, by no means is the internet crowd big enough to overcome the media's ability to continue to play like Paul is not a serious candidate. But internet forces been powerful enough to force the debate operators to at least allow Paul to participate--something they were not planning on doing.

Watson comments in this regard: "The corporate media offered the excuse that Ron Paul is not a mainstream candidate and has little chance of winning, therefore their decision to afford him little coverage is justified. But this is a chicken and egg scenario--if the media routinely ignores so-called marginal candidates then they are never going to attain the exposure of a Giuliani or a Romney, thus the media bias becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.” But even with the media blackout against Paul, his campaign has been given a real shot in the arm by this first debate. Due to grass roots demands via email, debate sponsors of the May 15 and June 5 debates will include Ron Paul. The New Hampshire debate in June will be televised on CNN. According to his staff's recent press release, "Congressman Ron Paul's support has soared since the first Republican presidential debate. Conservative commentator John McLaughlin, host of The McLaughlin Group, cited Ron Paul as having given "the best performance of the debate." In fact, the Paul campaign's apparent strength has many other pundits scrambling to explain it. Paul campaign officials offer the following examples of the candidate's rising success:

"Since the debate on May 3, Ron Paul: Handily won two post-debate polls posted by event sponsor MSNBC.Placed a close third (18 %) in a post-debate poll on the conservative Drudge Report. Won an online debate poll with 84 %. Won a C-SPAN online GOP candidate poll with 69 %. ... Became a 'most searched' term on Google and Yahoo! Saw a quadrupling of daily visitors to ." Go there and click on the YouTube video showcasing Dr. Paul's clear and principled responses to his questions.