Supporter Cries Foul Over Ron Paul's Exclusion from Yahoo! Games Candidate Recap

January 31, 2008 -

As GamePolitics has noted, Yahoo! Games issued a summary this week detailing its view of where the top three candidates from both parties stand on video game issues.

Left out of the Republican mix was Ron Paul. Yahoo! instead rated John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, who are, in fairness, the leading vote-getters at this point in the primary cycle.

The exclusion of Internet favorite Paul left a bad taste in the mouth of at least one Libertarian blogger. In a piece for Nolan Chart, "Big Louie" writes:

In a strange move to... Yahoo Feature article writer Ben Silverman doesn't mention the one candidate who believes in freedom, especially for the digital world (Internet, video games, TV, etc).


What could have they have been thinking? Congressman Paul is the ONLY candidate we can depend on to NOT regulate the Internet and guarantee our First Amendment Rights.


He wasn't included because he has absolutely, positively, NO CHANCE IN HELL of winning the nomination, let alone the presidency.

DCOW (above) confesses:

"I judge a politician by the kind of supporters he has, and Ron Paul’s supporters definately fail. "

There it is folks: ignorance on stilts and bragging about it. Certainly NOT a Ron Paul supporter. They judge candidates by the quality of the candidates ideas and the integrity of his voting record. That's why they are Ron Paul supporters.

[...] Look at this recent story as reported over at As GamePolitics has noted, Yahoo! Games issued a summary this week detailing its view of where the top three candidates from both parties stand on video game issues. Left out of the Republican mix was Ron Paul. Yahoo! instead rated John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, who are, in fairness, the leading vote-getters at this point in the primary cycle. [...]

All these people on here supporting the democrats. How ignorant.

Do you have ANY idea what the democrats want to do with your games? Do you think it is the Republicans that have been attacking the gaming industry?

It's like how the blacks support overwhelmingly democrats. WTF!? The democrats were the pro-slavery party! The democrats were the ones fighting AGAINST civil rights in the 60s. Check your history books, folks.

There is simply no excuse for being so ignorant. You attribute things to the democratic party that THEY do not support themselves. Like getting us out of Iraq and not starting a war with Iran. DO YOU SERIOUSLY believe any of the democrats, besides Gravel are going to get us out of Iraq? They have never even said they would. YOU just keep thinking they will and they are simply letting you believe it. Not one of them besides Gravel has said they would.

Pure ignorance.

But Ron Paul also has a snow ball's chance in Hell of getting the Republican nomination. (but with the recent freeze there shortly after John Bruce supported Mass Effect, it could be possible)

But why are people upset when Ron Paul is excluded from articles discussing the top candidates. They are discussing the ones who have garnered enough Primary votes to matter in the end. Now that the Republicans are down to 4 candidates, he is still in fourth place.

Now if Huckabee dropped out, then Ron Paul would be discussed in top three articles. But until then, he is still not in the top three and most likely will never make it there.

@ EZK: Because in many cases, it was simply for no reason. Faux News' debate in New Hampsire had Fred Thompson, who was nationally doing worse than Paul.

Plus, Huckabee has not been doing well since Iowa. So I don't think it'd be fair call him a top candidate, either.

I still think ALL candidates should receive equal attention in the media and let the VOTERS decide who they do or don't want for president. Let's face it, there are a great many candidates running, but the only ones the media give attention to at all (even beyond paid advertisements) are the democrats and republicans, with just barely a little attention to a couple of super rich independants and no unaffiliateds.

This isn't really a democracy. Quite frankly, I'm not sure WHAT to call it.

NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as

They also didn't include Gravel for the Democrats, who probably has the same stance on video games as Paul, and frankly would be a much better president.

For Ron Paul supporters, "grass roots" has just become a euphemistic term for "thin skinned".

Other then Obama, Ron Paul is the only other candidate i like. Just pray to God that both Mitt Romney and Clinton don't get nominations for their party. Otherwise vote for a Third party candidate or kiss your First Amendment rights goodbye and say hello to the nanny-state.

I'm sure all 20 of the Ron Paul supporters are upset.

Ron Paul is also the only candidate you can depend on to completely misunderstand the purpose of the Supreme Court or even the Constitution and attempt to wrangle even more power into the executive branch than Bush and Cheney did. (But what do I know? I'm Canadian, so all of your candidates seem like crazy right-wingers to me.)

@ BmK

That would be plausible if the state you're in would let thrid party candidates on the ballot.

In Oklahoma, we have some of the strictest laws governing thrid party ballot access in the US. In the last 10 elections, we have not had a third party o nthe ballot.

From an objective standpoint, Ron Paul isn't considered a viable candidate for president by most people.

The level of uninformed blather is abundant here.

Ron Paul is also the only candidate you can depend on to completely misunderstand the purpose of the Supreme Court or even the Constitution

Really, why has he voted to defend it at every turn for 20 years, why has he stood up for American liberties when congress have surrendered total control to the Executive branch.

The MSM is scarred that they will have to pay more attention to him now that the fairweather candidates have fallen off. Ron Paul has raised more money from more supporters than any other candidate in history.

But hey what do facts matter in a fantasy world

Actually I saw my first Ron Paul supporter yesterday. Actually, it was a Ron Paul sign stuck in the front yard of someone in my neiborhood. Next to the for sale sign for the house. I'm not sure they are actually living in that house right now. But that means that at least one person in my state supports him!

While soliciting opinions on the different candidates from others in my office, everyone had the same thing to say about Ron Paul; "Who?"

There is a difference between being vocal and being a majority.

“Big Louie” lost every bit of credit he could have had when he linked to Loose Change. I can't believe there are people out there that still but that B.S.

The candidates only drop out when they want to.

If they want to they can continue running as an independent. Quite Frankly we can't force the media to cover a candidate.

Now if there was enough outrage and enough people were angry that they were being force fed a specific candidate, then we wouldn't need to force the media to cover all of them.

To bad we can't get enough people outraged enough.


Well no, the US is NOT a democracy and never was. It is a representational republic where you have two parties that have their own internal quasi-democratic systems for determining who will run for them.

Unfortunatly a two party system (with minimal votes going to independents) is a natural consequence of the way voting is set up. Even if you rebooted the entire system today with no parties it would quickly resolve into a two party system again within a few decades. The media knows that unless an independent canidate has some gimick or resources behind them then they have basicly no chance and thus are not worth covering.

The 2 party is the result of incredible apathy and a large number of people who don't pay attention to politics except during the lead up to the presidential election. Even when they are paying attention, its only so they can make some extra noise, even then they still do the same thing, he is a republican/democrat hes th only one for me.

You know, between Bush calling the Constitution a "damn piece of paper" and Hillary Clinton (no example needed), I'd say Ron Paul is the best candidate for gamer's issues, or for anyone who wants this country to stay true to the Constituton. Honestly, I haven't done enough research on Obama to form an informed opinion, but I have done enough on Ron Paul to say he has my support. Considering this is a blog about games and politics, I'm surprised how many negative comments I'm seeing here towards these kind of issues. Did we get an infestation from Kotaku and Joystiq while I've been gone?

The entire sidebar of that site, Nolan Chart, is for the most visited stories. It should be pointed out that nearly every single one of them has Paul in the title, and the rest just have to do with him. His internet popularity is crazy for what he is.

Ron Paul has my support, because he wants true American values. He wants to protect the first amendment, the 2nd, all of them. He's never voted to increase Congressional salary, voted AGAINST the Patriot act, supports gamers and the internetz, and wants to distance ourselves from the rest of the world (because frankly, whenever we try to stick our noses in other countries' problems, it turns out bad for everyone). I'm truly surprised at how few conservatives support him, especially when the "main" guy (according to the media) is Romney.

Ron Paul is the Dennis Kucininch of the Republican Party.

Papa Midnight

Negative responses? Many of us are not single issue voters.

Ron Paul has some good ideas, I don't believe he is the end all be all some people believe he is.

My main issue with him. All the things he wants to do can't be done right in only 8 years, but that won't stop him from trying.

Paul is interesting to a discussion of Gaming positions because he is so unabashadley different from the other candidates. He clearly would not mess with gamers or games, as his position on things like the First Ammendment are pretty much as commited as you get. It is of interest to gamers that there is a candidate who is exactly what we are looking for (in terms of positions on video games, at least).

It's because Yahoo HATES FREEDOM.

First off Gravel is better than Paul (just wanted to clear up that issue). Secondly it is a shame that yahoo did not include all the canidates, but what do you expect from an arm of a conglamerate. (The arms sole porpous it to make money for the parent comapny.)

Recognize that Ron Paul had beaten the crap out of Guliani in all states but Florida and Guliani was a "front runner". He has made serious headway and while his chance to win is very unlikely he is a serious candidate. More media exposure could put him in the race. Not to mention the online grassroots base and millions of dollars raised on his behalf by third parties. He even beat all but Romney in Nevada. A second place win is nothing to scoff at.

People don't vote Ron Paul even if they like him or his ideas. Because our electoral system is flawed, we only get one choice and voting for Paul is like throwing your vote. If we had a system that used something like instant runoff voting, we would not have this "throwing your vote" problem.

Ron Paul is to the Republicans as Lyndon LaRouche is to the Democrats.

While Ron Paul might have the right idea on games his economic policy will ensure that nobody will be able to afford them or even afford to make them.

"This isn’t really a democracy."

Yahoo is not a democracy either.

TO all Ron Paul supporters.



Um...what are we saying that is so whiny? I for one am a Ron Paul supporter (or rather, highly dislike Romney, Hillary and Edwards) and would like to hear your reasons for why/how we are being so annoying that you feel the need to tell us to grow up.

The marketplace of ideas have rejected those of Ron Paul and yet the exclusion in debates on forums not owned by Ron Paul results in wild conspiricy statements and a fundamental attack against free speech. Fox is well within their free speech rights to hold a debate and exclude Ron Paul and something that Ron Paul supporters should defend.

"The MSM is scarred that they will have to pay more attention to him now that the fairweather candidates have fallen off. Ron Paul has raised more money from more supporters than any other candidate in history.

But hey what do facts matter in a fantasy world"

And you'd expect him to be in first place because of this, but he isn't. In fact, he's last amongs the republicans (not 100% sure but I HAVE to be close).

It's really too bad there is no candidate with a social/civil libertarian view and a moderate economic/fiscal view. Laze Fair Capitalism is extreme and i disagree with libertarians on that point but i do agree with the libertarians on the social/civil views.
There has to be some form of taxes and social programs and limits put on big greedy corporations. On the other hand i do believe in private property and debt reduction, and i am against wasteful spending.

I can't believe American citizens have become so ignorant not to notice what is happening during these debates.

There is no doubt that if "Ron Paul" is NOT a threat to monied interests in this country (in receiving their tax sponsored corporate welfare.....why would they decide to exclude him?

Obviously he is a threat to their free money & ability to then spend it with lobbyists to pass even more legistlation that benefits them directly.

If Ron Paul has such a low amount of support, why did the mainstream media have no problem pushing someone with no support (Guiliani was supposedly a wrapup for the Republican nomination !)

Democrats are exactly the same as most republicans these days. Bought & paid for.

I love the people that are obviously first time posters that are trying to make ron paul seem better than he is.

I judge a politician by the kind of supporters he has. and ron paul's supporters definately fail.


You should judge a candidate on what he believes not what his supporters act like (since the more extreme supporters are usually more vocal).

Here's my view on Ron Paul.

I would not want him as president but I think he'd be perfect as a supreme court judge.

Perhaps right, Paul might not have a snowball's chance in Hell to be either nominated or elected -- but we can assured that if such as McCain and his good old Zionist pal Lieberman are elected Iran will be invaded, that there will be more body bags, and the last of our money will vanish into that damned stinkng religious cesspool in and about Israel

Ron Paul certainly looks attractive as a candidate that will protect the first amendment, but in the past, Paul has stated some things that are horribly racist in his newsletter. Additionally, it has been shown that he has accepted funds from, a white supremacy organization. Despite his appearance of championing first amendment rights, he is likely to ruin civil rights in our nation.


Can you verify what you are saying? Answer, No. Before you spew any more garbage,provide the evidence.


DCOW... (hmmm)... anyway, every candidate has odd acting supporters. Some people are more passionate then others. You should be worried more about the ambivalent then those that are ardent. You'll always have a few that go too far. Look at the Hillary supporter who wanted to get health care so held up her office. Maybe growing up and looking at the issues and the true condition of our country then comparing those to the candidates stances might prove a better way to pick a candidate then by what you think of an ardent or even several ardent supporters.

@John Reading

Continuing with what you're saying, many Americans today only vote for what the media portrays as the front runner, which for Republicans is Romney. DCOW clearly isn't your average GP poster, and probably wouldn't mind if his rights were taken away if the media portrayed it as "ok." We gotta watch out for his type, and try to educate him a bit...

From -

He has "no idea" who wrote, in his newsletter "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."

He has "no idea"? If he can't find out who said what in such a small office that was his newsletter then either he is incompetent or he is lying. Everyone else knows who wrote it. Ron Paul is responsible for everything that came from his newsletter with his name on it. He now is trying to deny responsibility for it.

Reason Magazine shares the general Libertarian ideals as Ron Paul and they can't stand him. This isn't a hit piece by the "MSM" because nobody could call Reason Magazine main stream media. I'm sure there will be some vast conspiracy that will be raised to explain why this is an issue but he doesn't deny that such things were said in his newsletter just that he isn't responsible for it.

Ron Paul puts riders in bills that send pork barrel projects to his state and then votes against it to say that he votes against bills that spend (they pass over his no vote) despite the fact that his pen wrote the spending. So yes, lets judge him by his hypocritical voting.

Can we just agree not to run any more stories about Ron Paul so that we don't get such rough debates in the comments? This story shouldn't even be a story. Ron Paul supporters get mad every time he gets left out of something, so it's not news that they did so this time as well.


hah. your such a joke.

same goes for john reading.

I actually am your average GP poster, and I have been for quite a while. I've been here since before this site was in wordpress form.

@nathaniel Edwards

amen man. a-f--king-men.

@ chada and John reading

I'm canadian. Deal with it. You can't take my rights even if you wanted to.

Anyone who claims to know the outcome or a good prediction of the outcome of any election has lost any credibility to me. Sorry, you have a guess but you DO NOT KNOW. No matter what reasons you state, what polls you cite you do not have a clue. Its hard to give people respect that have this mindset. Its just stupid, there is no other way around it.

Honestly, it is people in this mindset, along with people that claim not voting for republican/democrat is a wasted vote, that are a HUGE part of the problem in terms of America's unreliable election process. It has gotten out of hand. Who is left that actually votes for who they think will be the best person for the job rather than the person who is better than the worst choice. Why pick whats better than wrong over what you believe is right? American voters have lost all of their common sense, all of their values and all of their credibility because of this foolish and shameful mindset. It is frightening how much America would rather vote to make sure someone else doesn't win rather than just voting for who they believe in.

Disgusting. He is left out but really why shouldn't GP cover this?

I'd much rather read articles on RP rather than JT. Honestly, I just don't read the JT articles anymore. JT sues A for because of X. A = Person/Company X = Bullshit reason. Its really boring and predictable. Its like playing Pac Man after you've memorized all the patterns.
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
PHX Corp although it's a little late, a comic strip on neogaf about the "release it now, patch it later" culture08/30/2015 - 7:37am
Papa MidnightBack to when, RedMade? A week ago? (seriously, though...)08/30/2015 - 1:55am
RedMageOh hey, a news station is trying to scapegoat gaming. That takes me back. - 1:40pm
Big PermA link to TB twitter with Matt Lees in the replies - - 12:16pm
Brad GlasgowWhy would he say the company lies about getting abuse? Oh, because people don't abuse GG?08/29/2015 - 10:38am
Big PermBrad - Matt Lees was also quick to say the company "Gamers Gate" lies about getting abusive messages thinking they were an official GG channel08/29/2015 - 9:11am
Goth_SkunkMGSV: The Phantom Integrity - A Rant by RazörFist. (NSFW on account of language). RazörFist discusses the latest batch of unethical journalist conduct, with a caveat. - - 7:10am
Goth_Skunk@Brad: I can.08/29/2015 - 6:13am
Goth_SkunkI assume "Stacy" is a pseudonym. After reading what she went through, I would not be one bit surprised if it is.08/29/2015 - 6:13am
Goth_SkunkA Year of #GamerGate: From Neutral To Anti To Neutral To Pro by "Stacy" - - 6:12am
Brad GlasgowI can't believe Matt Lees deleted his positive review of Ethan Carter because Chmielarz is sympathetic to GG.08/29/2015 - 5:30am
Goth_SkunkA GameDev's Year With #GG: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly by Adrian Chmielarz - - 5:18am
Goth_SkunkDespite not being a fan of fighting games I had to check out that R Mika trailer. Loved it. Still won't buy the game though, on account of Isuckatstreetfighteritis.08/29/2015 - 2:42am
MechaCrashI use a Dynex DX-840 headset, but it's discontinued. :( I wanted a mono headset so I could keep the other ear free for my speakers, but it has the bonus of being very light and comfortable, so you don't notice it.08/29/2015 - 12:41am
Big PermSora - I was just having a slow day at work earlier. Now I'm home with vidya!08/28/2015 - 7:54pm
ZippyDSMleeSora-Chan: Blender is easy compared to 3Dmax :P08/28/2015 - 6:51pm
Sora-Chantime to take up a hobby? maybe messing around in GIMP to make wallpapers? use qCAD to design somethin? open Blender and stare at it for a couple hours trying to figure what does what?08/28/2015 - 6:41pm
Big PermAlso, yes. I've been spamming the shoutbox. I don't have much going on today, don't judge me08/28/2015 - 3:25pm
Big PermThanks, but yeah. Not sure I wanna drop that kind of cash :P I don't even mind the sound quality of my krakens, it just hurts to wear em after a couple hours.08/28/2015 - 3:25pm
Sora-Chan@Big Perm: I'm a bit of a fan of the Omega Recon3D headset from SoundBlaster. Though it is a bit expensive.08/28/2015 - 2:36pm

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician