CNN Inside Politics Covers CPAC/ Ignore Rand until end of show!

[YoBabyYoBabyYo]

They went on and on about Bush, and Walker and even Christe. Rand Paul who was the winner was not mentioned until the last 30 seconds of the show and they stated he should not be measuring the "White House Drapes quite yet."

Unbelievable, the headline on CNN.com last night was "Bush comes in fifth at CPAC!" The whole thing is just plan sad.

 

[Warlord]

They went on and on about Bush, and Walker and even Christe. Rand Paul who was the winner was not mentioned until the last 30 seconds of the show and they stated he should not be measuring the "White House Drapes quite yet."

Unbelievable, the headline on CNN.com last night was "Bush comes in fifth at CPAC!" The whole thing is just plan sad.

They're irrelevant.

 

[YoBabyYoBabyYo]

They are irrelevant to people like you and I, but still despite dismal ratings there is still plenty of trust that the public has for this network. That is what makes it relevant.

 

[kpitcher]

Anyone keeping a list of instances Rand is ignored?

The media really really wants a Clinton / Bush fight

 

[JK/SEA]

can't wait for the peanut gallery to start that old chant...''i like Rand except for....''...you insert your own critique.

 

[Mr Tansill]

Anyone keeping a list of instances Rand is ignored?

The media really really wants a Clinton / Bush fight

Yes:

While we're documenting bias, I thought I would add this little tidbit: it's from this weekend's USA Today. It's the back cover of the front section. I've taken the liberty of highlighting the references to political figures throughout. Here's the tally:

[table="width: 400, class: grid, align: middle"]
[tr]
[td]Obama[/td]
[td]8[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Clinton[/td]
[td]6[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Bush[/td]
[td]3[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Ronald Regan[/td]
[td]1[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Mitt Romney[/td]
[td]1[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Laura Ingraham[/td]
[td]1[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Rand Paul[/td]
[td]1; at the bottom...[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Total:[/td]
[td]21[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

Also note that I did not include references to Obamacare or the Clinton Foundation...the only relevant quote I see in the entire article is "which for the past two years has been won by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who speaks today..."

Thanks for the shout-out...

References to dead people, political figures not running, and radio talk-show hosts: 3.
References to the guy who has won now three years in a row: 1.

We should understand that not talking about something is as much propaganda as anything else.

 

[WD-NY]

Woah - is there a facing page you didn't take a picture of or did USAToday really not include a headshot and blurb on Rand in their "CPAC Highlights" feature??

 

[Rudeman]

Surprised they didn't have a section on Jeb.

 

[Mr Tansill]

Woah - is there a facing page you didn't take a picture of or did USAToday really not include a headshot and blurb on Rand in their "CPAC Highlights" feature??

Nope...that's the extent of the article.

 

[Krugminator2]

It is pretty sad how the press has basically decided that Paul should be ignored. I usually think these kinds of things are overblown. But it is to point of derangement.

Here is an example. Rich Lowry gave an account of everyone's speech who is a serious candidate, except the person who shall not be named .........

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414597/walker-rubio-shine-rich-lowry

 

[kpitcher]

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcmanus-cpac-20150301-column.html

The fervent Republicans who throng the Conservative Political Action Conference every year aren't representative of the American electorate. They aren't even representative of the GOP electorate. For four of the last five years, their straw poll for president has chosen Rand Paul or Ron Paul. These are not everyday Republicans.

Article was all about Walker and Bush with a few snide blurbs about Rand

The author's twitter feed
https://twitter.com/DoyleMcManus
The GOP race is beginning to look less chaotic. The top tier so far: Bush, Walker, Paul, plus Cruz and Rubio.

 

[Matt Collins]

It's ok... first off, Rand winning isn't exactly "news".... however the important thing is that we just denied anyone else being called "the victor" of CPAC which goes a long way in and of itself.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

It's ok... first off, Rand winning isn't exactly "news".... however the important thing is that we just denied anyone else being called "the victor" of CPAC which goes a long way in and of itself.

Since when has "news" been the criteria for covering a Presidential candidate, when it comes to Jeb or Hillary? "Bush/Clinton has not decided yet on a Presidential run" stories for the last few years aren't exactly "news," but it never stopped the MSM from running them, over and over. Two years ago, on the week of Rand's filibuster, Rand was exactly news, yet the weekend news shows were devoted to Jeb, not Rand. And the post CPAC coverage this weekend was cluttered with "the real winner was Walker" type banter.

 

[rich34]

And the post CPAC coverage this weekend was cluttered with "the real winner was Walker" type banter.

Makes you wonder if Jeb was using his money to bus people in to vote for Walker. It would have been in his best interest for Walker to come in second rather than anyone else. The media plus Bush needs to solidify the thought that Walker NOT Paul is the top anti-Bush candidate. They already know Rand has a ton of support that is real not just an anti Bush vote. They know if Rand gets the anti Bush vote to go along with his already existing support, it could very well be game over. This is what they did to Ron in 2012 by using the fake cnn poll of to create the "surging" Santorum and deny Ron the anti Romney vote. The MSM then held up Santorum the rest of the race labeling him not Ron the anti Romney vote. I hope the grassroots and Rand's campaign truly grasps their method's of denying him the nomination. The bad thing is it's a catch 22. If Rand or the grassroots is perceived as going after Walker then we create enemies and once he bows out his supporters go to Jeb or another candidate simply out of spite for taking out Walker. I'm sure Team Bush/MSM is counting on something like this with their manipulative tactics. I just hope the grassroots/campaign after running two consecutive elections have learned how to have better foresight in seeing their snares being laid, and how to counter them before Rand slips into the pit..

 

[DP714]

I don't buy it. I mean yes, that was moronic of them to not include Rand. And Yes, there will likely be a concerted effort to downplay Rand's "successes" and they will try to ignore him as much as they can. They did this with Ron, and they succeeded because he was not "mainstream." Here, they cannot and will not succeed in doing the same with Rand. He is too popular and trying the same sort of shenanigans to the same extent as they did with Ron will be damn near impossible because doing so would cost them (the establishment media) whatever hint of credibility that they still have. The man is way too savvy and has way too much momentum and my feeling is that just about everyone who will vote for him already knows how big of a deal he is (even if they don't know that they will vote for him, yet). And my feeling also is that this will be enough to pull out the win, at least for the nomination.
So yeah, the oopposition will pull every trick in their playbook, but oh well...let em. They will fail at each turn.

 

[Brett85]

This is still an instant classic.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

It's ok... first off, Rand winning isn't exactly "news".... however the important thing is that we just denied anyone else being called "the victor" of CPAC which goes a long way in and of itself.

I was waiting for your spin Collins and I liked it.

I do think, however, the media ignoring Rand like they did Ron is going to be a big problem for you guys again and I am curious if you've heard anything on how they plan on combating this nonsense?

The one thing I will say is the media completely ignoring Ron is what got people like my parents to start asking why... if they do it to Rand people like my parents are going to be up in arms about it... I hope anyway... :/

 

[Valli6]

Bush most likely helping Walker

Makes you wonder if Jeb was using his money to bus people in to vote for Walker. It would have been in his best interest for Walker to come in second rather than anyone else. The media plus Bush needs to solidify the thought that Walker NOT Paul is the top anti-Bush candidate. They already know Rand has a ton of support that is real not just an anti Bush vote. They know if Rand gets the anti Bush vote to go along with his already existing support, it could very well be game over. This is what they did to Ron in 2012 by using the fake cnn poll of to create the "surging" ...

Exactly my thoughts! Obviously, they didn't vote for Jeb with his 8%. AND on FOX news, they laughed at the "conspiracy theorists" who "probably still" think Bush bused people in to stack the straw poll!

Someone who actually attended CPAC posted on this forum that they saw no evidence of support for Walker - but huge support (signs, stickers, t-shirts,...) for Carson and Rand Paul! It would benefit the establishment just to cut back on the size of Rand's win, so they could pretend he's less significant.

Didn't ya'll just see this coming when the media began pushing coverage of Walker's "surge" over the last few weeks?

 

[satchelmcqueen]

yes just how WILL rand and team turn the media bias against them, to light? ron had a few chances to do this very thing and he did very well those few times. like before iowa. then it seemed the media just wouldnt get themselves in the situation again to allow ron to show the truth.

in other words, is there a way to go around the media for real, with real results that the average masses will notice?

 

[limequat]

yes just how WILL rand and team turn the media bias against them, to light? ron had a few chances to do this very thing and he did very well those few times. like before iowa. then it seemed the media just wouldnt get themselves in the situation again to allow ron to show the truth.

in other words, is there a way to go around the media for real, with real results that the average masses will notice?

Social media. MSM is dying and facebook/twitter/instagram etc are taking its place. If the MSM keeps this up, I'm sure team Rand will come out with some sharp-tongued tweets that will cause an even greater story.