Very true. You only need to observe the Obama phenomenon. An unqualified candidate with no experience and recycled "ideas" blabbering about "change" and the media is having orgasms. Or McCain, a media favorite because he has always been available to trash other republicans and support liberal ideas. If Paul were a liberal promoting big government, the media couldn't get enough of him.
Indeed it looks like they did. I'm surprised and really happy to see that. I also noticed yesterday and this morning that he wasn't mentioned in any of the NYT online stories covering NV and SC. Even the story directly discussing each candidate's showing in NV. All I found was a one paragraph AP piece in the NYT on Paul's NV result, and it was only by doing a search for his name. I couldn't find even a single mention of him in any of the coverage, browsing from the front page into the expanded coverage. Same for CNN. Only one small obscured piece, but none of the comprehensive coverage even contained his name. The most thorough coverage seems to have been the LA Times.
Also perhaps a bit revealing in a more subtle way. Observe the photograph selection for each candidate in the NYT profiles. http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/candidates/index.html Most of them are flattering, optimistic looking, chin-up, smiling shots. Paul? Depicted looking down, darkly, and as though he's about to gnaw someone's face off.
the mainstream media is losing all credibility in the way they treat Ron Paul. these are subtle.. they are much more overt in other ways. as the economy worsens, more and more people will wake up to these shenanigans.
unfortunately, i agree and have felt that way for a long time. money is increasingly the primary medium of representation in our society
You're right... wow. So, they just conveniently replaced Rudy with Ron (assuming that Rudy had been included in that chart before). That makes perfect sense - hey, let's drop the only major contender (other than any notable carpetbaggers) hailing from the Times' own backyard. Wait, I get it: clearly, their graphic design software is limited to 10 columns max... date, state, 8 candidates.
The press wants Mccain and Clinton as the nominees. That way, no matter who wins, they get their guy/gal in office.
Yeah, look at the delegate counts. Blatant misrepresentation. Showing Mac with a commanding lead. Just because delegates aren't bound doesn't mean that they haven't selected a candidate already. Really Mitt has over 70 delegates and almost double what Mac has right now. We know who the NYT wants to win. they've been propping him up for a month now.
Now Rudy is back and Fred is gone, too funny! http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/index.html