What's wrong with this picture?

[XXL TideFan]

Share
 

[Ldlane]

	Quote:	XXL TideFan

It's a conspiracy against Huckabee and the Christian Right!

Maybe, they didn't have a picture of Ron Paul!

[BAMAFAN IN NY]

Less than 1% reporting and they are calling a winner??????

[UA All the Way]

	Quote:	BAMAFAN IN NY
	Less than 1% reporting and they are calling a winner??????

Isn't that more than 1%?

[XXL TideFan]

Paul has almost a big of a percentage as McCain but they show the "top 3" candidates pictures. A subtle way to influence perception.

[BAMAFAN IN NY]

	Quote:	UA All the Way
	Isn't that more than 1%?

no its less than

[NYBamaFan]

	Quote:	XXL TideFan
	Paul has almost a big of a percentage as McCain but they show the "top 3" candidates pictures. A subtle way to influence perception.

Those are the top 3 candidates nationally...

[NYBamaFan]

	Quote:	BAMAFAN IN NY
	Less than 1% reporting and they are calling a winner??????

[TiderB]

Shouldn't matter about national perception. Paul had more votes than Huckabee and should have been pictured at the top. If the national media gave him the attention he deserved maybe he'd have a realistic shot.

[Ark-Tider]

	Quote:	XXL TideFan

Is this what the new cherry master machines look like in Vegas?

[NYBamaFan]

	Quote:	TiderB
	Shouldn't matter about national perception. Paul had more votes than Huckabee and should have been pictured at the top. If the national media gave him the attention he deserved maybe he'd have a realistic shot.

The age old question - what came first, the chicken or the egg. I don't think that RP could win a single state. Of course, the sheep might just follow the direction of the media, but most people that vote in primaries are pretty motivated, politically. They are voting for "their" candidate...

[Tidewater]

	Quote:	XXL TideFan
	Paul has almost a big of a percentage as McCain but they show the "top 3" candidates pictures. A subtle way to influence perception.

Another thing that I have learned, (from a US Army Psychological Operations officer, no less). People have a natural aversion to the color red, and a natural affinity for the color blue. This is a result of testing showing people pictures with red borders and blue borders, and comparing the favorable and unfavorable impressions of thousands of survey takers. Now PSYOP doesn't print leaflets in red unless that are trying to associate the item displayed with something bad.
Notice which colors the networks assigned to which parties in the 2000 elections? Which are the red states and which the blue states? And now the names have stuck.
For the record, I am not saying that there was any governmental involvement with this application of one color with one party. It probably came from PR or Madison Avenue types advising the networks, but all three major networks have mysteriously adopted the same methodology. Now the media has successfully associated the color red, with all the associated psychological liabilities, with one party, and blue, with all the psychological benefits, with another party.
Obviously, it would have been more appropriate to associate the Democrats with red, but that was too close to the truth.
Anyway, the Republicans allowing themselves to be painted this way is as short-sighted as the majority party Mensheviks (Russian for "minority party") allowing the minority Bolsheviks (the "majority party") to name both parties in 1917.

As for the picture above, Rupert Murdock decided way back that he didn't want Ron Paul to win, so Fox suppresses images of Ron Paul whenever he can get away with it (as your screen capture demonstrates). Not that RP had a great chance under the best of circumstances, but Rupert wanted to make sure he never sees the light of day.