They made a big deal about the straw poll victory because everyone expected Perry, who was leading the polls and competing hard in the straw poll, to win it. So it was a big story. Ron Paul wins a bunch of straw polls that no one cares about and no one competes to win, so they are non-stories. He sucks in the actual straw polls where other candidates try to win. Paying attention. Romney was trying to hold on, and everyone was stunned that a guy who had been polling around 2% for the entire campaign was suddenly surging out of nowhere. Except it's not. The other candidates got attention for accomplishing things. Ron Paul seems to want the attention first. Go win a state or lead some national polls, and maybe he'd get some attention. But the reality is that everyone knows he can't do it. Yes, and why shouldn't they? You admitted Ron Paul wasn't even trying to win. Every other candidate (minus Cain, who I believe became an accidental frontrunner) actually was trying to win the nomination, even if they sucked at it. Given that the coverage is about trying to pick the GOP nominee, why on earth should they talk about someone who's not even trying to win?
Too bad for Ron Paul fans straw polls, internet polls, crowd sizes and chatboard fervency don't decide elections. It's all they have. Makes me thankful for democracy.
So no one was competing in the straw polls Ron Paul won? But they were competing in the ones he lost? Ok....I'll let you keep your little double standard here.... Okay, let me explain to you what happened. CNN does an Iowa poll in which they only poll registered Republicans (even though Independents and Democrats are allowed to vote in Iowa). It shows Rick Santorum at 16% instead of his normal 10%. Polls conducted by PPP and others at the same time show no such Santorum surge. Nevertheless, CNN decides to run with their "SANTORUM IS SURGING" story and proceeds to give him endless airtime on their network. Other networks pick up on this and do the same. The rest is history... Herman Cain and Rick Santorum were DEAD in the national polls when they got attention (mind you - this is before any actual votes were cast). You really don't have any idea what you are talking about here.... Rick Perry wasn't a serious contender at that point. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich both were trailing Paul in New Hampshire. Given that there was a good chance Paul was going to get 2nd in NH, he deserved AT LEAST ONE MENTION in a 12 minute segment about the NH primary. If you believe what CBS did there to be fair then you are just another irrational Paul hater...
That is all they have? You sure? Ever heard of Justin Amash (MI)? Rand Paul (KY)? Also, Thomas Massie (KY) & Carl Wimmer (UT) will likely join them in 2012 and there are other Ron Paul candidates too. Ron Paul is leaving, but there will be more 'Paulbots' coming to Congress... Spoiler If you are so worried about them maybe you can donate money to the Neo-Cons they are running against. It is not like those Neo-Cons gave us Bush and all those fear-mongering Republicans who screwed up the US or anything...
I'm not worried about Paulbots at all. When it comes to elective office, you are few and far between and will remain that way. In a democracy, being loud & repetitive and always getting in the last word doesn't make your vote count more than anyone else's. Keep burning the calories if that floats your boat.
There are two dozen according to a Politico article. I only named the ones I personally knew about.... http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/74940.html
That article says a guy who runs a Ron Paul website says there are 2 dozen Paul "backers" running for office. That doesn't mean a thing.
I guess if you don't want to believe it is your choice. However, I tend to believe it since some 10% of Republicans support Paul. It isn't inconceivable that some two dozen Ron Paul supporters are running for office nationwide - unless you believe Paul supporters are less politically active than your typical Republican. In which case I completely disagree with you....
There is a huge difference in saying paul backers are running for office, and labeling them as "paulbots" ie, saying they are in the same mold with like minded ideas. I don't think it is far fetched, in fact I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were true, but what you threw out there doesn't support that claim.
So how many delegates does Ron Paul have? 2,000? 20,000? Eleventy-Billion? 27? Oh, snap! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...john-mccain-super-tuesday-2008_n_1406827.html Where the Ron Paul trolls at now?
The thing about the "Ron Paul isn't covered fairly by the media" thing is.... so what? No, really, so what? Let us assume that CNN's media executives hate Ron Paul and decided that he shouldn't "fair" media time, whatever that is. But it's their right to do that. Free speech, letting the free market decide, and all that. And they're not actually hurting anyone by doing it. So, what's actually "wrong" about CNN not covering Ron Paul for a 12 minute segment? They have the right to do that, just like a business has the right to deny black people from sitting at a lunch counter.
Who is trolling?? Just becuase an ex democrat like myself left the party, becuase Obama promised change and government transperancy in his 2008 campaign and could not deliver in his first term. Do you enjoy all those bailouts from Bush and Obama??? What is going to affect Obama is his own track record as president. But he will still win, becuase who the hell will vote for Mitt romney other than his number one supporter Kiojoire.
Look at this crap the GOP is running against the cacuase to remove delegates from Ron Paul. See the GOP bickers of voting fraud when the democrats do it, but it is ok that they do it. Eff that, Let the GOP fail and get embaressed in the presidentail election. <iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pyAHBtnTFSM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
You just knew that seeing Santorum exit wouldn't be pretty. There's just no way for that to be graceful.
