He won the debate based upon the MSNBC poll with 36%. Romney was the closest behind with 29%. But MSNBC's coverage of Congressman Paul's positions left a great deal to be desired.
Keith Olbermann's Countdown on May 3rd, "Debate Catch Phrases" segment Olbermann says, "The front runners unwilling, certainly, to directly criticize the President, only Senator McCain choosing to acknowledge previous mistakes in Iraq. But still saving his strongest words for someone else, Osama bin Laden."
Olbermann chooses to only talk about the front runners. (This ignores the fact that any minute now the candidates copious amounts of fund-raising will inundate everyone of us with commercial after commercial from the front runners until our eyes bleed.)
MSNBC has been consistent in their coverage. Olbermann's conduct was the same when he and Mathews commented after the debate.
Chris Mathews acknowledged that the front runners were given more time because the people were more interested in them, and Why not?
Of course they are not just a front runner because more people are familiar with them. (Oh, wait! We cannot let reason dictate our actions. I mean it only makes sense to overlook those candidates the media already ignores. Why should the MSNBC concern itself with informing the public?)
On May 4, Chris Mathew's Hardball the segment titled, "Who won the debate?"
During the analysis of the debate, which appears to be just a string of clips, the reporter omits Congressman Paul's opposition to the war.
They just ignore it.
As opposed to supporting a moderate Conservative, Olbermann and Mathews just want to characterize Republicans in general.
Why point out the differences between the candidates? Why acknowledge the stance of a moderate, when the similarities make for "good" news?
When Olbermann discusses conservatism in his segment "Debate Catch Phrases," he does not include Paul's comment about the role of government.
Actually I did not find in any of their clip montages a Ron Paul soundbite.
On May 3, 2007, MSNBC's Tom Curry wrote an article titled "No Social conservatives on the '08 ballot: McCain, Guiliani, Romney not wholly in tune with the Right." This is not news and is misleading.
First, every one should know that McCain, Guiliani, and Romney are not social conservatives. That is obvious.
Guiliani is pro-abortion, anti gun, pro illegal immigrant
Romney advocates Socialized health care,
McCain is anti gun
Second, Congressman Paul is a conservative and is running.
So by creating this piece of non-news, this "journalist" has conjured up something to write about.
Well if your so devoid of ideas, use these topics.
"Republican Congressman Ron Paul did not vote for Iraq War, but wants to win everything to win it any way."
"Social conservative Congressman Ron Paul vows to kill the inflation tax, which gorges on the wealth of the middle class."
"Congressman Ron Paul wants to help the middle class by stopping the flow of illegal immigration." (I hear Lou Dobbs is making a killing in the ratings with this topic.)
During the analysis of the debate, which appears to be just a string of clips, the reporter omits Congressman Paul's opposition to the war.
They just ignore it.
As opposed to supporting a moderate Conservative, Olbermann and Mathews just want to characterize Republicans in general.
Why point out the differences between the candidates? Why acknowledge the stance of a moderate, when the similarities make for "good" news?
When Olbermann discusses conservatism in his segment "Debate Catch Phrases," he does not include Paul's comment about the role of government.
Actually I did not find in any of their clip montages a Ron Paul soundbite.
On May 3, 2007, MSNBC's Tom Curry wrote an article titled "No Social conservatives on the '08 ballot: McCain, Guiliani, Romney not wholly in tune with the Right." This is not news and is misleading.
First, every one should know that McCain, Guiliani, and Romney are not social conservatives. That is obvious.
Guiliani is pro-abortion, anti gun, pro illegal immigrant
Romney advocates Socialized health care,
McCain is anti gun
Second, Congressman Paul is a conservative and is running.
So by creating this piece of non-news, this "journalist" has conjured up something to write about.
Well if your so devoid of ideas, use these topics.
"Republican Congressman Ron Paul did not vote for Iraq War, but wants to win everything to win it any way."
"Congressman Ron Paul wants to help the middle class by stopping the flow of illegal immigration." (I hear Lou Dobbs is making a killing in the ratings with this topic.)
Or
"Media misleads Public and ignores true conservative in the GOP."
Don't worry, I will not charge you for these ideas.
