Ron Paul Astroturfing? And CNBC vs. Paul

Is it possible that a fake grassroots campaign is happening? Just what is astroturfing?

"Unlike genuine grassroots activism which tends to be money-poor but people-rich, astroturf campaigns are typically people-poor but cash-rich. Funded heavily by corporate largesse, they use sophisticated computer databases, telephone banks and hired organizers to rope less-informed activists into sending letters to their elected officials or engaging in other actions that create the appearance of grassroots support for their client's cause."

Okay, we're not going to use the term literally. CNBC pulled their poll because their numbers didn't match the national numbers. Was it astroturfing? Probably not since it wasn't possible to vote more than once. Remember when Hannity said it was just Paulites "spamming" the text message vote? Well, it wasn't possible to vote more than once.
Maybe the polls are a bit skewed, but that's the others' fault. What's so exciting about them? "More dead people and more government control although less than the democrats"? Only the most committed neocons can get excited about that.
Who is astroturfing? Anyone who brings in low numbers at rallies, like Fred Thompson and John McCain.

Speaking of CNBC, lookie at what I found.

"He lacks the support needed to win the GOP nomination, and would even if the media covered him as heavily as we cover Rudy Giuliani. Why? Because Paul's views--respectable, well-articulated and sincerely held as they are--are plainly out of step with the mainstream sentiment of the party he is running in."

Uh, what? His views are similar to Pat Buchanan. Yes, Pat didn't win the nomination, but he did well considering he was "out of step with the party he [was] running in". Rudy's views aren't quite mainstream if we're to believe that 25% of the party is the Christian Right. What he doesn't want to admit is that the media anoints frontrunners. Name recognition didn't matter to Mitt Romney, he was still the media's darling. And why is that? To make for good TV. Forget any sort of political bias, if the majority of the people were behind the president, they would have to report on some celebrities a lot more often! I doubt they would mind too much.
And how did he raise almost half as much as Mitt and Rudy(subtracting Mitt's own "donation" to himself)? Sure, there's a number of non-Republicans donating, but who's to say they're not going to join and stay like I will if Dr. Paul wins?
There are plenty of ex-Republicans, and those people are the ones who share Ron Paul's views. Most Libertarians are ex-Republicans too. He may not be a neocon, but if the GOP wasn't taken over by the Neocons, CNBC would need a new excuse.