Minnesota State University Reporter

Issue date: 1/31/08 Section: Voices

Get out your pencils, readers! It's time for a little political pop quiz.

1. Which presidential candidate raised $6 million in 24 hours Dec. 16, breaking all one-day fundraising records ever set by any candidate of any party?

2. Which Republican presidential candidate raised nearly $20 in the fourth quarter of 2007, leading the Los Angeles Times to call him "likely the most successful Republican presidential fundraiser in the fourth quarter"?

3. Which presidential candidate has been adding staff and expanding operations while other campaigns have had to scale back and eventually drop out of the race?


The correct answer to questions one, two and three is the candidate who was left off the Associated Press' "Where They Stand" graphic the Reporter used Tuesday on page 10. The correct answer is anti-war Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, a 72-year-old OB/GYN and 10-term congressman who served as a U.S. Air Force flight surgeon during the Vietnam War and has delivered more than 4,000 babies in his career.

Why the AP decided to exclude from its graphic the candidate who likely led Republicans in fourth-quarter fundraising is a question I leave up to readers to answer. Even more puzzling, however, is the AP's decision to exclude Paul while including Giuliani.

Paul has finished ahead of Giuliani in four of the six primaries and caucuses held so far, including in Iowa, where he had 10 percent to Giuliani's four percent. In a fifth contest, New Hampshire, Giuliani only finished ahead of Paul by a percentage point or two. And while Paul has a second-place finish under his belt (Nevada), Giuliani's best finish was third, in Florida - where he staked his entire campaign on a win.

Let's review. Paul almost certainly out-raised Giuliani from October through December (Giuliani's campaign has yet to release its final number). He's finished ahead of Giuliani in four of six contests thus far. He's placed second in one of those contests, which Giuliani has yet to do. Giuliani staffers were asked to forego paychecks in the final days leading up to Florida, while the Paul campaign was busy adding more staff.

Clearly, the AP's decision makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, as any Paul supporter knows, this has become the norm for major media outlets. Paul is despised by many in his own party - back in May, Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis made a short-lived effort to bar the doctor from future Republican debates - and the media still refuses to bestow legitimacy on Paul even in the face of record fundraising and respectable voting results.

It's not just Paul, however, who has faced a near media blackout since election coverage heated up early this year. Here's a list of other candidates who struggled to get any major media attention: Chris Dodd, Jim Gilmore, Joe Biden, Tommy Thompson, Mike Gravel, Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo, Dennis Kucinich, Bill Richardson and Duncan Hunter. Even Huckabee was largely ignored until after August, when he finished second in the Iowa straw poll and was later endorsed by Chuck Norris. Edwards has had to play third fiddle to Obama and Clinton all year long.

That's roughly two-thirds of the presidential candidates and a wide range of unique views going without significant media coverage. When these candidates do receive coverage, it almost always comes with a caveat, implied or openly stated: Warning! This candidate is a long shot with virtually no chance of winning!

Even in debates, the "lesser" candidates are given fewer questions and only a fraction of the speaking time as candidates deemed to be the "frontrunners." The message is clear: these candidates aren't as important as the others; what they have to say isn't as important; they're not as worthy of viewers' time. The general election is no better: established third party candidates are virtually always excluded from debates between the Republican and Democratic candidate, mostly because third party candidates fail to reach a certain level of support in polls. But how can third party candidates reach that level in polls when they're denied access to nationally televised debates?

Certainly some candidates deserve more coverage than other candidates. But one is tempted to wonder whether the same cycle exists here as well. Polls are conducted more than a year in advance of the first caucuses and primaries, when certain candidates lead the polls based on nothing more than name recognition. The media then bases most of its coverage around those select few, which creates the perception among the public that they are indeed the frontrunners.

Most candidates fall victim to this. The most egregious example this year, however, is clearly Paul. He has become a sensation on the internet, has put up respectable numbers in the primary and has set massive fundraising records.

Those record amounts of money, apparently, still aren't enough to buy a fair shake from the media.


Derek Wehrwein is the Reporter variety editor

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools