Ron Paul Supporters Prove CNBC's Ratings Stink

There were just over 7,000 votes cast in their poll.  Ron Paul garnered 75% of the vote.  This means approximately 5,250 votes were cast for Ron Paul, leaving the other 8 candidates with a combined total of approximately 1,750 votes.

If we are compelled to abide by the mainstream media's "scientific" curve, then we are allowed to give Ron Paul no more than, say, 2% of the total.  This means we can add approximately 36 votes for Ron Paul onto the 1,750, throwing out 5,214 Ron Paul votes.  This leaves us with a grand total of 1,786 votes cast on CNBC's post-debate poll.

What do I see in this?  Either a)There was no spamming, in which case Ron Paul supporters outnumber CNBC viewers by far, or b)As CNBC claims, Ron Paul's total has to match the "scientific" polls, making everything else "spam," meaning CNBC had only 1,786 viewers who voted in the poll.

From what I can tell, CNBC should be very concerned about its own ratings.  The old media is dead.  If polls showed that more than .05% of the population watches CNBC, I couldn't believe it.  I would have to discard those poll results.  Maybe CNBC is trying to conceal its piss poor ratings.

How else do you explain the supporters of a man garnering "2%" in the "scientific" polls organizing so effectively that they are able to skew poll results of a network television station 3-to-1 in their favor, against 8 other candidates?

See also: Media Elites Struggle to Keep Ron Paul Under Wraps and Press Ignores Paul GOP-Debate Win

 1  |  2