Ron Paul fared a little too well in a post-Republican debate poll run by CNBC, prompting the news site’s managing editor to believe astroturfing had taken place, forcing them to take down the poll.
</span>
Allen Wastler, managing editor of CNBC.com, said in an open letter to Ron Paul supporters that the candidate’s supporters “ruined the purpose of the poll” by their actions:
It was no longer an honest “show of hands” — it suddenly was a platform for beating the Ron Paul drum. That certainly wasn’t our intention and certainly doesn’t serve our readers … at least those who aren’t already in the Ron Paul camp.
Some of you Ron Paul fans take issue with my decision to take the poll down. Fine. When a well-organized and committed “few” can throw the results of a system meant to reflect the sentiments of “the many,” I get a little worried. I’d take it down again.
Wastler blamed hacking or a targeted campaign for skewing the numbers in favor of Paul: more than 7,000 votes, with 75 percent in favor of the Texas libertarian.
Suggesting a hack took place borders on a criminal accusation. Wastler may want to back off that line of thinking unless CNBC’s IT staff can prove that happened.
But as far as people organizing and taking part in a poll en masse, isn’t that kind of the point of participating in the election process? Would a 75 percent share for Republican front-runners Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani have prompted CNBC to pull down the poll, suggest a hack took place, call out supporters for voting as a dedicated block?
Wastler missed a great opportunity to ask a question of the Republican camps besides Paul’s – why aren’t your supporters working the Internet as fervently as those of Ron Paul?
