Ron Paul Dissed By Fox Focus Group
January 11th, 2008A bunch of commentors on my blog here have expressed support for Ron Paul. And I have found some of his ideas intriguing myself.
However, Congressman Paul set a record for the lowest favorability ratings with focus group watchers in any debate in the history of Fox News coverage during a televised South Carolina debate last night.
Here’s coverage, including audience reaction to what he said.
Loading ...
January 11th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
And the results of the ratings surprises you? It’s FOX…you know, the same news source that once omitted Paul from national discussion..? The same news source that asks questions during a national debate whether a candidate is viable..? Keep one thing in mind before you think of taking stock in FOX’s idea of favorability…those folks were hand-picked, cleaned, pruned for FOX’s idea of “legitimate” candidates, not Ron Paul. Paul never stood a chance. I wonder, in your discovery of this unpresedented moment, was there ever a single comment made by Paul during that debate that brought a positive rating? My guess is no.
January 11th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Ron Paul has some excellent ideas. As witnessed by last night’s debate (focus group said he tanked, not just Beers) his message is getting lost in the lyrics…
as the Beatles said…
The man of a thousand voices talking perfectly loud
January 11th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Yeah, we know that polls are ALWAYS 100% correct, right? (LOL) Not to mention that yes, we now know that the Tonkin incident was a complete farce “false flag” operation designed to enhance our involvement.
This administration (at one point with the aid of the UK) has been attempting to provoke Iran into war for months. I just wish they would be a little less obvious about it.
And you have to look at this: http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Cut_from_re_air_What_Fox_News_doesn_t_want_you_too_see
This rebuttal received the HIGHEST rating of the night and was definitely the best and most earth shaking rebuttal of the evening. Of course Faux helped us little people out by editing this out. It is sick what the media is doing. They are electing our president - and with the aid of the Republican party who can’t seem to remember what its core principles are. And why the hell are debates being edited? Better watch quick though. Faux doesn’t mind their clips being used normally, but are trying to hush hush this one big time.
Maybe polls aren’t always wrong though…
In the Faux text poll (in which you can only vote from each phone number once), Ron Paul won (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEdcvUek6-s) with 32% followed by Thompson with 22%. He also won the last Faux debate text poll in Iowa.
And maybe they were right in N.H. anyway: http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3220/81/ I find it difficult (”Bev Harris, the single most important activist in the United States on the issue of votefraud contacted Jennifer Call, the head clerk in Sutton County, ‘who was forced to admit that the 31 votes Ron Paul received were completely omitted from the final report sheet, claiming “human error” was responsible for the mistake’.” Um yeah, right.
Every single person I know with a few crazy azz radical democrat exceptions are voting for Ron Paul. Maybe I just don’t know a lot of people.
January 11th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Sure enough Fox is attempting to purge every copy of this, rebuttal, but here is the video: http://nyletterpress.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/faux-news-debate-11008/
And again, according to Fox, he won: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEdcvUek6-s
Go figure. And remember Buchanan said he won the last one as well.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:13 am
All of you that think someone other than Ron Paul is right for America only goes to show you really do not care about America. If you get your head out of the sand, you know that this Once Great Country is is deep trouble. The wrong people are in charge, the Media and the Legal community, and the politicians. If MR. Bob Beers can’t see this, I guess I suppoted the wrong man. Yes, Ron Paul has a tough road, but if our voting system accounts for anything, he is the right choice.
Vern
January 12th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Doesn’t look like he’s going to miss any of the votes from this blogging group. Not mine either, or my brothers(3)
sisters(2),friends both Republican and Democrat and even those
crazy tv people from California. Now, we know the establishment is SCARED TO DEATH of DR. Ron Paul. And we know
they will do anything including killing him to get him off the ballot. According to the ads he’s running, he’ll kick some
ISLAMIC ASS if they come anywhere near us. He will BAN students from Terrorist countries from coming to school here
and will secure our borders with the troops we have in 136 countries. Once the IRS and Federal Reserve (one and the same)is eliminated the people of America will experience the freedom we have a right to!
Love you Bob, but I’M VOTING FOR A RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!
I have studied the corruption of our form of government with its corporate overlay and nexus to the social security number.
We are slave class citizens with no rights due to this hijacking of our government. The NEW WORLD ORDER Crowd (all of the rest of the candidates) are all part of this. If you have any doubt look at Billary, Obama, Huckabee, McCain et all and all the give-aways to illegals.
Active military support Ron Paul more than any other candidate. I’ve had conversations with Navy personnel who are
incensed that they are forced to wear UN hats when in international waters. I have no doubt Dr.Ron Paul is tough enough to stand up to anything. He’s been doing it for 30 years!!! FOX SUCKS!!! RON PAUL ROCKS!!! EVERYWHERE I GO I SEE RON PAUL SIGNS PUT THERE BY GRASS ROOTS ACTIVISTS FOR DR. PAUL!!! YEAHH!!!!
January 12th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Please go to
http://www.thenewamerican.com/epublish/2/v23n25
and read an honest evaluation of the candidates.
Then go to http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/6428 to read about Fred Thompson:
An area of concern about Thompson that is likely to cast doubts about his constitutional credentials is his membership in the internationalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
In summation, we find in Fred Thompson the latest in a long line of Republicans who are “middle-of-the-road” on domestic issues and whose ties to the internationalist, neocon wing of the GOP are too close for comfort when projecting his probable foreign policy. As a CFR member himself, Thompson would very likely choose another CFR member as his secretary of state, continuing the disastrous U.S. foreign policy that has persisted since the days of George Marshall, Dean Acheson, and John Foster Dulles.
Then go to http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/6424 and read about Ron Paul:
A review of Dr. Paul’s 10-term congressional career in the House of Representatives reveals him to be a leading advocate for freedom. He is the only member of the House or Senate to earn a 100-percent cumulative score in the Freedom Index in the current Congress. His voting record shows that he favors limited government, low taxes, a noninterventionist foreign policy, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He uses the Constitution as a guide as to how to vote. In fact, Dr. Paul makes a point of never voting for a bill unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. As a result, this has earned him the nickname “Dr. No.”
If you were a true Republican, one of the old GOP, instead of the party that was destroyed by Dwight D. Eisenhower, you would not prefer Thompson over Paul.
Frank Pelteson
Life Member
The John Birch Society
January 12th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Why is the Ron Paul rebuttal video no longer available here?
Use some common sense and vote for Ron Paul!
January 12th, 2008 at 10:22 am
RP’s not a republican to begin w Why would he be treated as such?
He clearly was the dullest person on the stage……..Made Rodney King look like a Rhodes scholar.
January 12th, 2008 at 10:31 am
I just got off the phone with my sister who saw the debate
(I didn’t get to see it, no cable). She said Ron Paul did very well. Got lots of applause. All of the other candidates were taking personal shots at Dr. Paul, Dr. Paul never took
personal shots at any of them. She said he got LOTS of applause. I also read the Fox website and from what was posted there, it looks like Dr. Paul did VERY WELL!
Fox is doing it’s best to ignore him, of course.
RON PAUL ROCKS!!! She also said Fred did do very well and she could live with him or Rudy, but she’s still going with
Ron Paul!!! (She is a Bush voter and staunch Republican and
business owner).
January 12th, 2008 at 10:43 am
I am surprised at you Bob. Ron Paul did anything but tank. It would take a very informed and dedicated person to stand up to the obviously insulting questions to Ron Paul. That he did, and turned the tables completely on the questioners to expose them for what they are, dupes for the elite establishment. Mr.Beers if you cannot support Ron Paul so be it. However any more derogatory remarks about Ron Paul and what he stands for then I am afraid I can no longer support you.
January 12th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Bob,
I am dissappointed that you have failed to fully endorse what Dr. Paul is saying and that you would take seriously the “opinions” of a paid focus group put together by a fraud like Frank Luntz. You also fail to mention that Ron paul the S.C. debate by 32% to Thompson’s 18% and Huckabee’s 17%. Fox has done everything it can to marginalize Dr. Paul’s message from cutting him out of debates, to not giving him his fair share of talk-time, to pumping up the candidates that they see are best suited to capture votes in a particular stateand challege Ron Paul’s message of freedom. Examples of this are when Fox gave Mike Huckabee far more time during a fall debate than any other candidate and declared him the winner despite their own text polls; then they gave Huck an inordinate amount of press coverage relative to his actual polling and fund raising support prior to Iowa. next Fox cut Dr. Paul out of the New Hampshire debate with arbitrary criteria even though the New hampshire GOP withdrew their support. Finally, Fox has made Thompson and Huckabee the focus of the South Carolina race and the media found it convenient to turn attention to the old discredited racism allegations just prior to the debate. Ron Paul is the only electable candidate among the GOP contenders; he is the most conservative and principled statesman among them - his record proves it, the others don’t. He raises funds, the others don’t. he has the grassroots support, the others don’t. Ron paul has won the majority of Republican straw polls in the nation and has won ALL of the GOP straw polls in Nevada, in case you weren’t paying attention. Romney may take Boulder City and most of Clark County when the LDS folks get bussed to the caucus locations by their church but Ron Paul will take the State of Nevada and his supporters will force a brokered convention.
Wake up and join the Republican Revolution Bob, it’s time to take our party back and if you are not with us you are just in the way and will be left behind. The Ron paul meetup folks now outnumber nonsupporters in the CCGOP and we are holding an election for party officer next week. This is happening across the nation and will not stop with Dr. Paul’s candidacy.
Sincerely,
Andrew Brownson
P.S. I voted for you for governor because your opinions about government most reflected my own. Good luck in the future.
January 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Ron Paul gets hias education from Liberal BLOGS and has no place calling himself a Republican. His ideas of the Mid East are repetitous and bordering on booring! He should be running as a Democrat or Liberterian.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Ron Rocked! from the transcript
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/01/11/the-gloves-come-off-dr-pauls-best-debate-yet/
January 13th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Faux News: We Report; We Decide. Sean Hannity is perhaps the biggest wind bag to ever grace the screen at Faux News. His personal dissing of Dr. Paul is deplorable. Time & again, this Long Island Loser slams the antiestablishmentarian Ron Paul while cheerleading for the failed policies of his hero, GW Bush. Ron Rocks; Sean Sucks.
61
January 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am
What would Ron Paul do if he was elected President?
I am not really sure.
I think he says that ……
A . He would withdraw all of forces around the world (Afghanistan, Iraq, S. Korea, etc.)
B. He would stop supporting Israel in terms of money and military protection.
C. He says that he would only attack if someone starts attacking us and if Congress declares a war.
D. He says that he would revoke the entire Patriot Act.
It is my belief that there are a large group of people that access to money and material to acquire nuclear weapons if given enough time. These same people have shouted over and over again one goal which is the destruction of Israel. They see the US as the main protector of Israel. To destroy the US will allow them to destroy Israel.
Ahmadinejad (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48225) is looking forward for the end of the world because he believes that is when he is thinks the Messiah will come. In this article (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53430), this statement is made, “With Iran’s continued development of nuclear technology in defiance of the West, some analysts fear Ahmadinejad’s intent is to trigger the kind of global conflagration he envisions will set the stage for the end of the world.”
I believe that within the next 50 years, these people will set off a large nuclear weapon in NYC.
After 9/11 our economy lost over a trillion dollars in GDP value. If NYC gets nuked, then the economic impact will be much larger. I believe that it will push the country into a depression and probably the entire world.
If NYC gets nuked, then the government will enact measures that will make the Patriot Act look like rules for a day care center.
If NYC gets nuked, then there will be a good chance that it will push the world into a new round of global wars.
If the prevention of this event is not the top priority of the government then I am not sure if anything else matters.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:39 am
For those of you out there supporting Ron Paul I would like to know how pulling our troops out of every forward base in the world will make us safer? Ron Paul’s answer is that our presence there is what angers them, and if we just leave they will not want to kill us anymore. With all due respect, that position can only be held by someone that is ignorant in the extreem about jihadist islam and their intentions for non-believers. I can forgive part-time political analysts for their lack of knowledge, but a 10 term congressman running for President should be ashamed for espousing this sophmoric nonsense during a national debate. (he sounds as ignorant as the Democrats on this issue)
I agree with Ron Paul when he is discussing domestic policy matters, and believe that his grounding in the constitution is something all candidates can learn from. However, voting for someone who is not serious enough about national defense to educate himself on the subject is just irresponsible.
January 16th, 2008 at 11:33 am
TO: Jim Nance,
Sorry that you’re cowering in fear. Good luck with that. Fact is, there is a specific reason for us being attacked 9/11 - and it wasn’t for our “freedom” like moron boy professes.
PATRIOT in all of its forms needs to be repealed. All of the information needed to prevent 9/11 was there without PATRIOT - and there is no need to violate the rights and privacy of AMERICANS. I don’t buy this “if you’re not doing anything you have nothing to worry about” crap. We have watched PATRIOT misued for every stupid kind of cases imaginable from crooked politicians to strip club owners. Can you name a single terror case successfully prosecuted as a result of PATRIOT? Probably not. Abuses, you could probably name many.
Without the restoration of the constitution, there is no America.
January 16th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
To Doug:
I guess name calling either demonstrates your level of intellect or the weakness of your position.
As for a coward, at least I display my full name.
As for who is right, I pray that you are.
It seems that your route is the track that the next president will take.
January 18th, 2008 at 11:16 am
For Jim Nance,
About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787,Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
‘A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.’
‘A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.’
‘From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.’
‘The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years’
‘During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage’
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29
Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000 Bush: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million Bush: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:Gore:13.2 Bush:2.1
Professor Olson adds:
‘In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Gore’s territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare…’
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the ‘complacency and apathy’ phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation’s population already having reached the ‘governmental dependency’ phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.(end)
We MUST return to the constitution and the rule of that law.You do not correctly interpret some of Ron Pauls statements. A couple of examples. Not to stop supporting Isreal but to stop giving them AND the Arab states money and arms to continue this war. We give much more to the Arab States because of oil. Bring all of our troups home. Use that money to benefit Americans. Keep trade and dialog lines open. Remember the cold war? We were not attacked because everyone knew that retaliation would be nore severe that the attack.
January 18th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
To Jerry:
I agree that our country might be past its glory days.
“Not to stop supporting Israel but to stop giving them AND the Arab states money and arms to continue this war.”
I think Paul says that he would not attack another country unless that country attacked the US first. So, if somebody attacks Israel then Paul would not use the US military. I think this does not matter. There is no way that the powerful Jewish interest would ever let Ron Paul become President.
“Remember the cold war? We were not attacked because everyone knew that retaliation would be more severe that the attack.” I do not think that people who are willing to blow themselves up are really worrying about retaliation.
“We MUST return to the constitution and the rule of that law”.
I guess you are taking about the Patriot Act and other things.
The Constitution has a funky history. For over first 100 years, there were groups of people that have no freedom whatsoever. For another 50 years they were second class citizens. During the Civil “War” Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus and restricted newspapers. FDR pack the court and the government greatly expanded its powers. Many of the presidents order troops into combat onto the shores of other countries without declaring war. Almost all the presidents since FDR have order unconstitutional spying on follow citizens.
Considering all the above, Bush is probably just your average US President.
Ron Paul talks about how unconstitutional the Education department is. He does not speak the same about Social Security. Don’t know why. I would like an explanation on that one.
Ron Paul or any other libertarian candidate will never get elected in this country.
But I think it is great that we live in country were we can support any candidate.
January 19th, 2008 at 5:54 am
I want to compliment everyone for expressing your views. That is great and why I say we live in the greatest country in the world, and try as they may the Government has not suceeded in dumbing down everyone. We go to vote today, and I’m supporting Ron Paul because I know that is what America needs. He has plenty of time to convince the voting public to get elected. More people are waking up everyday. I hear people say he can’t get elected because the media refuses to say his name and you are wasting your vote. I say your vote is wasted only if you vote for anyone else, because you could vote for anyone of them and it will not make any difference because they are all alike!! They are In it only to be elected, think they care about you?? Get Real!!
January 19th, 2008 at 5:57 am
Hey Jim.
Check my post, I never resorted to name calling - and I’m sorry if my passion for the revocation of PATRIOT and the restoration of the United States Constitution offends you so much.
I am dissapointed that you apparently are ready to give away freely the rights given to you had that were paid for in blood on the sands of Normandie and Iwo Jima at the highest cost by American boys that probably didn’t make it to 1/2 your age. What do you think they would say?
We lost 3,000 lives on 9/11. We’ve lost 4,000 more in Iraq (so far). We’ve killed hundreds of thousands of civilians there. (and bear in mind that try as we might, there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11). The question is… how many 10’s of thousands of lives lives did we lose in wars to enact and preserve the liberties we had that made us the envy of the globe? Quite a few. And we gave them away over 9/11 for a pittance? To put the then terrorist threat in perspective… more people die every year from misfilled prescriptions than died on 9/11. Of course now we really do have a more substantial terrorist threat, but that is largely because of our own doing.
10 years ago, I would simply suggest that you move to a “safer” country like Red China where all of your communications are monitored, suspects on a crime whether committed or not are held without bail, there is no access to attorneys or a fair trial, and where the government could snoop through your house, bank account, library records, etc. without a warrant - all this for your protection of course! - but now your’e already in that country. Very sad.
~d
January 19th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
I find myself agreeing with Ron Paul’s message, but I fail to see how he is different than any of the others in the ability to implement. No plans here. We can all wave our hands around and talk about the Federalist Papers, the Roman and Greek civilizations, and the great evils of socialism. The bottom line remains: We, the people have to take back our country. Not Ron Paul, Not Bob Beers, Not Reagan, Not even Hillary Clinton…. US. We lost it and we have to get it back. We can either keep falling for platitudes (analyzing “debates”, they are not really debates, using buzz words to get cheers from a crowd, and simply adding taxes to pay for things, only from the rich, of course), or do the tough work and get our country back from the political machine. In 1776, we had to fight a war. Today, all we have to do is vote objectively.
I will say this up front: Bob Beers is the only major party candidate who has impressed me. He speaks out despite the party machine. He would be a very impressive third party candidate, but I agree with his premise that you have to use the system to change it. Bravo, Bob. I defy you to find another major party candidate so disposed. Also, Bob is in a position in which he makes less money to serve. Just something to think about when you consider other candidates.
I submit my perspective to see if anyone can refute it (please help me on this as everyone else has just ignored it):
Socialism can only prevail here if we, the people, ignore our constitutional rights and submit to Federal control. For the last 60+ years, the Federal Government has usurped our transportation systems, our schools, our State lands (especially in Nevada), our retirement funds, our medical funds, our borrowing power, and completely controls our economy (The Federal Reserve System). I won’t mention the IRS, but you know what I mean. It is the most systematic enslavement of a civilization in the history of the world. And what do we do? We comment on “debates”, we accept the “candidates” thrown in front of us. We focus on “feel-good” talk instead of demanding solid answers. We are far more oppressed than the subjects of the crown were in America in 1776, and we will not even raise our voting hand to defeat the basic cause: The two-party system.
There are no “core Republican values” anymore. Republicans have raised the federal budget “in a bipartisan manner” with the Democrats since FDR was in office. Both parties agree to raise the debt limit when they want a vacation. Earmarks and lobbyists are more proliferant now than before the “Pelosi promise”. Now that we are in pretty deep, Bush wants to print some money to get us out (Hitler tried the same thing, but it didn’t work). Ron Paul talks a good game, but he is a politician just like the rest. He is gambling on the message of “go back to the Constitution” will make you feel better than the “free stuff” message of others. There is absolutely no detailed plan brought to the table to evaluate. Want to feel good? Take a hot bath. Our country is too valuable to waste on feel-good talk.
Nevertheless, we are humans, and we have the same instincts as humans thoughout history. We will be selfish until we no longer can suck off the tit, and then we will parish. We have plenty of enemies around the world to fight over the scraps (in fact, I defy anyone to define a friend who would side with us without foreign aid).
Here is a quick case-in-point. Voters in this country cast over 40 million votes each for both Gore and Kerry. In an objective system, you could infer that these men represented the best solution for a president, or, why would anyone vote for them? Fast forward to this election and it is easy to predict that nobody will vote for them. They are still the same upstanding citizens and leaders they were 4 and 8 years ago, right? So what has changed? Only one thing: people are being told to vote for someone else…..so they do.
Sad commentary on a “free” country, at least in my eyes. I know you are all afraid of voting outside the embrace of “two evils”. If you cannot be persuaded, there is no hope. Some of you protest by not voting. Brilliant. That is just the protest these people care about. However, there is one thing they do care about. If you vote for another party, you break the mold. You free yourself from the yolk of oppressive campaign funding and endless rhetoric. You take freedom into your bosom and embrace it. Just a thought. I know it is scary to try and free ourselves from this great system, but, know this: Support either party and you support the last 60+ years of the trip into the chains and shackles. I don’t like it, but all I can do is speak out about it. I must acceed to your choices or move out of the country. I will not move out. I will fight for this country to my last breath because I am convinced our children will be smarter than we have been. Ron Paul? Yeah, a good message, but note his two leading issues for Nevada:
no taxes on tips and,
no Yucca Mountain. Is this an objective message or an pandering political hype? I leave the answer to you.