Paul had 62% of the vote when they took the poll down.
http://civiliansnews.com/2011/11/10/cnbc-poll/Ron Paul WHITEWASHED from CNBC PollEvery Republican debate over the course of the past year has usually been followed by an online poll posing a simple question to the viewer: Who do you feel won tonight’s debate?
So far, Ron Paul has surged in every post-debate online poll. Civilians News is unable to provide links to previous post-debate polls, as extensive searching concludes they have been removed. However, having taken part in every single one of them, take my word for it, Paul has done well.
Well, last night was no different. Immediately following the debate, an interactive CNBC poll was launched on, and Ron Paul took an overwhelming lead. That is, until the poll was deactivated. That’s right, it was taken offline after only 25 minutes of voting.
Commenting on the CNBC poll, Managing Editor Allen Wastler issued the following statement:
Gamed Poll… So We Took It Down
We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn’t so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate’s political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down. Yes, we’ve gone through this exercise before.
Apparently a CNBC poll did the same thing to Ron Paul during the last election cycle. Read this statement by Wastler from 2007.
They are claiming that the results of the poll don’t accurately represent their viewing audience. As far as Wastler is concerned, the high Ron Paul numbers are nothing, but the result of his base being so active on the internet.
This is spurious logic.
Online polls, at least ones that expect to be taken seriously, are designed to limit people to one response per IP address. Therefore, assuming the CNBC poll is a reputable, we should be able to assume that Ron Paul supporters weren’t casting votes by the dozen. If that is a given, then what is Wastler really arguing? Is he arguing that young people who support Ron Paul tend to use the internet more, so their voices don’t count on the online poll? Judging by the number of You Tube views the other candidates are receiving, not to mention their Twitter followings, it’s clear that the Internet is not some sort of magical power reserved solely by the coven of Ron Paul.
Ron Paul may have some kind of an edge with internet support, but isn’t that the risk when running an online poll? You know, getting responses from internet users? Actually, there is one candidate who has a strong, if not stronger, internet presence than Ron Paul – Barack Obama. Would CNBC whitewash an online poll that Obama ran away with? I highly doubt it.
Who’s to say exactly who cast the votes in the CNBC poll and why? Maybe it was a shadowy group of Paul supporters looking to drop a polling bomb. There’s just as much of a chance that some voters are possibly getting tired of Herman Cain’s flurry of food metaphors and patronizing slogans, or disgusted by Rick Perry’s utterly embarrassing moment. CNBC shouldn’t play judge, jury and executioner when it comes to a matter like this. If they really felt strongly about potential skewed results, an asterisk or an editorial article would have sufficed. Instead, in true Ministry of Truth fashion, they blacked out the poll completely. Now the talking heads chime in near unanimity that Mitt Romney was the clear winner.
The CNBC poll is just another example of subtle censorship practiced by corporate media. It serves as a literal example of how democracy is threatened by our media.
