Originally posted by Bat Dude
Why would they not cover him, though? I thought news stations were supposed to cover all candidates... Just because his policies were different doesn't mean they couldn't at least give him the attention the other candidates got... They were purposely censoring him from the voters who get their news from the TV (which, sadly, is a lot)... That's why Ron Paul has such a following on the internet... They can look at his policies for themselves, and decide whether they like him for president or not...
there were 26 candidates that started the presidential campaign...why dont i hear the same bleating about the other 22 who recieved virtually no media coverage?....this would include people who recieved the backing of alot more delegates than Ron Paul...even Mitt Romney got more backing in the initial stages of campaigning
here's the full list
Joe Biden (Democratic)
Sam Brownback (Republican)
Eric Chester (Socialist)
Hillary Clinton (Democratic)
Chris Dodd (Democratic)
Mike Gravel (Democratic, Libertarian)
Rudy Giuliani (Republican)
Mike Huckabee (Republican)
Duncan Hunter (Republican)
Jesse Johnson (Green)
Alan Keyes (Republican, Constitution)
Steve Kubby (Libertarian)
Dennis Kucinich (Democratic)
Cynthia McKinney (Green)
Kent Mesplay (Green)
Ron Paul (Republican)
George Phillies (Libertarian)
Bill Richardson (Democratic)
Mitt Romney (Republican)
Wayne Allyn Root (Libertarian)
Mary Ruwart (Libertarian)
Kat Swift (Green)
Tom Tancredo (Republican)
Fred Thompson (Republican)
Tom Vilsack (Democratic)
3 of the green party members are still battling for their parties nomination but you dont hear a thing about that...why?...cause nobody cares
as for the republican nominees
here's the pledged delegate results for how much support they had in their parties
John McCain 1,378
Mike Huckabee 240
Mitt Romney 148
Ron Paul 14
so should think that the real reason he never got covered is that he never had any support
it's the political equivalent of putting on the Rochdale match on prime time TV and ingoring the chelsea v man u game....the fact is...nobody cares about him
And non-intervention does not equal isolationism... Just because he doesn't want to bother anyone doesn't mean he wants to completely isolate America... He's said time and again that he wants open trade relations with almost all countries... He just doesn't want to interfere in their business...
so he wants all the benefits of excercising the US's economic strength but none of the responsibility for what that does to the coutries it trades with?
there are already countless examples of the US abusing it's power into forcing countries to trade with them and handing over their goods for ridiculously low and insustainable prices...as i've said before, even the US's allies aren't immune to this behavious...UK supermarkets refused to by their Bananas from US controlled plantations, instead trying to introduce fair trade policies with poorer countries...and the US said they would embargo many UK made products if they didn't cooperate
the US is solely responsible for the poor living conditions in Cuba because they put complete embargo'
s on anyone who trades with them....did you know that anyone who works, even for a day in Cuba, is no longer allowed to work in the US
i 1st found that out when the manic street preachers played there in 2001 and were subsequently told they could never play in the US again
not to mention the countless examples of the US exploiting low wages in other countries and effectively outsourcing slavery to reap the rewards
he's quite happy to allow these things to continue....but he wants to wash his hands of the problems these policies cause
nice bloke really eh?