Ron Paul Polls Knowledge Base
Why does CNN never include Ron Paul in polls against Obama? I noticed today the paired Newt Gingrich against him and before that Donald Trump. I always see media stations hyping Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and others but they always leave our Ron Paul. I think its disgusting that Main Stream media always trys to shape everyones opinion on the elections. Also, who would you vote for in the upcoming election if it actually came down to Ron Paul vs Barrack Obama?
Hey Ron Paul fans, can you lay off the straw polls? On the AIM straw poll Ron Paul is winning all 50 states, but has not even come close to winning any real actual states, so can you guys lay off and play fair? I do like Ron Paul, but it seems like these old farts do not like him.
Is the Ron Paul campaign moving into position for a big upset after winning big in the latest straw polls? After finishing 5th in Iowa and 3rd in Illinois, Ron Paul dominated the New Hampshire straw poll, capturing 73% and the Alabama straw poll with over 80%. Ron Paul keeps gaining support and is quickly becoming the cinderella story for the upcoming primaries. These straw polls are run by the state republician parties and are open to residents of the state which is hosting. If they are meaningless as the detractors claim, why did Romney spead a ton of money to win in Iowa?
Ron Paul leading the polls FoxNews? How do those who are Ron Paul naysayers feel about him leading the FoxNews polls as the "winner" of tonights debate? And what does that say about the "conservative" viewers that FoxNews appeals to? I am not a Republican but I stand by my stance that he's the only "Republican" that I would ever consider voting for. Personally he comes across more as an Independent or Libertarian to me, but we'll go with this "republican" thing since that's what he calls himself. :D I didn't vote myself. Just curious to see what the response would be to this. The expected, "only his fan boi's are voting!" response.
RON PAUL leads in Polls of people who have heard him ? take a look :? Ron Paul Leads in Polls of People Who Have Heard Him Speak by Jennifer Haman by Jennifer Haman DIGG THIS After the first three debates on National television, three mainstream news channels featured polls asking the American people who won. After the first debate on May 3rd, MSNBC ran a poll obtaining over 72,000 responses showing Ron Paul was the most convincing candidate receiving 45% of the vote. His nearest competitor was Mitt Romney who received 18%. Fox news ran its own poll after the second debates on May 15, and with over 40,000 votes Ron Paul came in second with 25% of the vote. Watching Sean Hannity's face was priceless as while he was saying that Ron Paul's chances were over in this election, Fox's polling numbers flashed across the screen and had Ron Paul in the lead. He immediately did his best spin to claim the polls had been rigged. MSNBC also ran a poll about that debate and discovered Ron Paul was, again, the most convincing candidate with 64% of the over 25,000 responses. After the third debate on June 5, CNN's poll of over 25,000 respondents showed Ron Paul won with 60% of the vote. One would think with such a strong showing on the online polls for a "second tier" candidate that the mainstream media (MSM) would have discussed this phenomenon at length and on the front page. However, no such stories appeared. In fact, MSM pundits did their best to ignore these figures and instead focused mainly on who they deemed to be the top three choices; effectively, taking control of the election and deciding quite undemocratically who was a "real" candidate. Even though the MSM is largely ignoring him, Ron Paul is taking the Internet by storm. His name leads in searched terms ahead of even Paris Hilton, his YouTube videos have been viewed over one million times and he has more Meetup groups than all other GOP candidates combined. Poll after poll conducted on the Internet shows Ron Paul winning or at least in the top three. Yet, these polls are completely discounted and Ron Paul's tremendous Internet support is sloughed off by the MSM. Occasionally, the MSM will grant some notice of the huge grassroots support online but then discount it by saying "he may be doing well online but he is only polling at 1 or 2 percent." Doesn't anyone see a disconnect between those two clauses? Who do they think is on the Internet? Pet mice running around in tubes? The Internet, for those who seem confused, is a link of people who write things and have ideas and OPINIONS. The 300-plus Meetup groups he has across the country are also attended by people. The MSM is trying to get us to believe that Ron Paul is only polling at 1% because that is what was said on a few polls and the fact that he is polling much higher on the Internet does not count. It is as if they believe that the people on the Internet are not real, their opinions do not count, and the Internet polls could not possibly be correct. The argument is absurd, insulting and designed to keep Ron Paul out of the mainstream public's eye. The MSM ignores his success because of the misguided concept that people do not want to "waste" a vote. It is never a waste to vote for what you want: indeed, nothing could be more wasteful than voting for what you do not want because you think it the lesser of two evils. Voting for evil is always a bad idea. Not only is the MSM staying mum to keep you from seeing Ron Paul as a legitimate candidate but there have been active attempts to hide information about his successes. After the third debate CNN not only ran a poll, but also asked viewers to voice their opinions about the debates. Comments started pouring in supporting Ron Paul, along with all the votes. The next day CNN removed the comments from their webpage. Clever supporters found these lost comments through Google's cache (a technology that takes a virtual picture of a webpage on a certain date, so you can see if it has changed). When silence does not work, biased pundits accuse Ron Paul supporters of "spamming" the votes (that is voting over and over for their candidate) and claim that this huge show of support is really being done by a few campaigners. This claim is specious for several reasons. First, if it was so easy to spam the polls, all the candidates would do it and online polling numbers would look more like an American Idol session with tens of millions of votes cast. Second, anyone, who understands that the Internet is not a series of tubes, knows that it is easy for a web designer to develop a poll that prohibits more than one vote per person. In fact, most of the online polls do restrict you to voting only once and if you attempt to vote again, even weeks later, you get a polite message that your vote will not count. Finally, along with the polls themselves, people leave comments, thousands of individual comments. So let's look at these polls and their methodologies. Many online polls have tens of thousands of responses, especially the ones done by the MSM immediately after the debates, while old-fashioned telephone pollsters only get responses from hundreds. Yet, only the old telephone polls are reported on by the MSM. We are asked to accept that a poll with 600 persons responding is more accurate than a poll with 70,000 respondents. For example, a much-cited Zogby poll admits that they only targeted 500 interviews and drew their samples randomly from telephone CD's of a national listed sample. (In that poll Ron Paul has a 3% lead). A recent Washington Post article cited its own telephone poll that only reached 1205 adults, and that was used to say Ron Paul is only receiving 1% support. Instead of citing polls that have 70 to 100 times more respondents, the MSM still sticks to old-fashioned telephone-polling methods. The world has changed. We no longer need to depend on poor polls that only call a few hundred people, nor should we be relying on them to tell the whole story. Some say random telephone sampling is more effective just because of its randomness and therefore there is no self-selection bias as in the online polls in which one chooses to partake. However, elections are also based on self-selection and are only won and lost by those who choose to go to the polls: so shouldn't the self-selected polling methods be more accurate? The good news is that of those who have heard Ron Paul speak (if only for the 5 minutes or so he gets in the debates) he is leading by a landslide; unfortunately, not enough people are getting to hear about him. This race would look much different if the leading headlines the days following the GOP debates were (in order of the debates): 1. Ron Paul takes GOP by surprise and WINS the debate. 2. Ron Paul once again a leading contender in second debate, comes in second. 3. Ron Paul wins third debate hands down: other candidates struggling to keep up. If the people were told Ron Paul won the debates, more would learn about him and his support would grow exponentially. In all fairness, the polls that show that Ron Paul is ahead with 98% of the vote are just as inaccurate as the polls that show he is only polling at 1% and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. But the largest online polls, the ones taken after the debates, have him receiving somewhere between 45% and 60% of the votes. So, why the big disparity in polling numbers? Some have suggested that Ron Paul has a lot of young supporters who do not own landlines and thus are not being polled. Other explanations come to mind as well: 1. Typical polls will only call a certain type of voter e.g. people who voted Republican in the last election and this will leave out a lot of Ron Paul supporters. Ron Paul's message of liberty and freedom reaches across the aisle and a lot of previously registered Democrats are switching parties to vote for him in this election. For the same reason, many Libertarians and Independents are also going to be voting as Republicans this election. Much of his support also comes from young people who are voting in their first Presidential election and thus would have no previous voting record. 2. Ron Paul's message of freedom and liberty is so exciting that people who have decided not to vote in past elections have decided that finally they have someone for whom to vote. 3. Some polls are so biased they do not even list Ron Paul as a choice (coincidentally, in a few of those "other" is leading the pack): Hard to win a poll when your name is not on the list. 4. Ron Paul fights for the individual, not the government, and his message appeals to those who like to be left alone. During this election many individuals have caller ID and often choose to avoid telemarketers and callers they do not know. 5. Some of these polls begin with intrusive questions about a person's gender, religious affiliation, annual income, and other information some see as none of anyone's business. If you refuse to answer the initial questions they will not continue with the questions. The type of person that likes Ron Paul, also tends to like privacy. 6. Sadly, not enough people are getting to hear about his policies. Once they hear him, Ron Paul's supporters are very passionate about his message. A search of Internet "blogs" shows people writing zealously about him. Nothing could be more thrilling than to see an 18-year-old excited about the election process, shouting out support for Ron Paul, begging to hear more information about the Federal Reserve and its implications for the country. Through his campaign, Ron Paul is teaching many the benefits of limited government. There should be no surprise that his message is so well received; it is the one taught to us by Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and other founding fathers. It is the message of liberty, freedom, with the basis of a republic, not a democracy. We have been lied to so often, and our Constitution ripped apart at the seams, that when a person comes along speaking basic truths and principles, it awakens a part of us buried for so long. When ignoring Ron Paul does not work, and removing messages about him receives backlash, the next stage is to call his supporters rabid, nuts, crazy, unstable. If you cannot attack the man, attack his supporters. Yet who can blame people who get upset when a life-saving message comes along and the MSM tries to keep it from the public. Ron Paul's message is life-saving. He wants to end the war, he wants to help ease poverty by eliminating the Federal Reserve and its ability to steal through monetary inflation. He wants to end the Income Tax and give those who need it most their entire salaries. The anger you hear is frustration by his supporters at being marginalized, just as they are by so many government actions these days, and fury when all this support is discounted. Of course people are getting upset. They do not like being manipulated and they especially do not like it when a Presidential campaign is being hijacked. The worst part about the MSM treatment of Ron Paul, is that finally the people have a candidate they really love, and a man who would get this country back on the proper course. They have a man who will follow the Constitutional course that served this country so well for so long. Instead of rejoicing and helping the country and the people find their way, corporate media giants are trying to silence his message by ignoring him completely or reporting on only the most obscure, misleading and slanderous articles (could this be because Ron Paul is also against corporate welfare?). Most recently, even the Associated Press got into the "let's lead with misleading statements" game. In reporting on how Dr. Paul decided to hold his own rally after being the only candidate in the debates to not be invited to a Presidential Forum in Iowa, the AP's first line in the article was that Ron Paul has added "party crashing" to his debate tactics. As any ten-year-old knows, to crash a party you have to attend the party. Ron Paul had not announced he would attend the Presidential forum. Instead, he decided to hold a completely separate event immediately following the forum in the same venue. That is not party crashing, that is called campaigning. The article went on to tell the truth about the situation, but that catch phrase was repeated as a headline across the country impugning Dr. Paul's character. See for example this ABC News headline: Republican Ron Paul to Crash Iowa Forum. Just as Ron Paul spoke of blowback in the context of military interference in foreign affairs, unless the mainstream media ends the Ron Paul blackout and misinformation drive, they will lose the next generation who is seeing it as a biased, manipulating, election-fixing force not to be trusted. When Ron Paul gets heard or seen, he is liked. As soon as people who do not own computers are able to see him or read his message his numbers in the national polls will rise just as they have done on the Internet. In general, the American people are saying they want liberty and freedom: Now, if only the MSM would listen. "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." ~ John Quincy Adams July 16, 2007 Jennifer Haman
Is Ron Paul the only candidate trying to be a true American? TRying to return the government to its rightful self and freedom back to the people by abolishing the 16th amendment that has allowed abuses to run crazy throughout the government. He is the only candidate trying to do this, funny people would rather get Bush out, or a women president that back essential freedoms. IT is crazy people are okay with government giving itself new powers day to day. Why aren't the polls showing Ron Paul in the lead?
Why is Ron Paul winning the online polls, but not the mainstream polls? CNN said that Ron Paul supporters are spamming to win the polls. I don't believe that is why he is winning. I think Ron Paul truely does have that many supporters that he is winning the online and text message polls without cheating. However, the people that are actively watching the debates and voting in polls right now only make up a small fraction of those that will actually vote. When the AP, Gallop, Newsweek, or whomever does a scientific poll (where they randomly ask among people who are likely voters), you get a lot of people that haven't paid much attention to the election yet (if at all) and have only heard about the front-runners in the media. These people don't even know who Ron Paul is or that he's running for President. Agree or disagree?
Do you think this is fair or professional? Strawpoll08.com keeps removing Ron Paul from their polls.? Here was their response when I sent them an email asking why I couldn't find Ron Paul on their poll: contact@strawpoll08.com wrote: Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:22:03 -0700 From: contact@strawpoll08.com Subject: RE: Where is Ron Paul in your list to vote for? "I have found that most of the polls like yours are very biased toward a certain candidate and therefore give the results based upon insufficient information because a choice was not offered." You must be on crack. Hope you have a good dealer. What you said above could only be said by a Ron Paul supporter! The rest of civilization sees a poll with over 140 candidates and 30 parties and they think, wow this site is trying to be fair to all. The rest of civilization sees a poll results page with different candidates winning and concludes that hey maybe this site isn't biased towards one candidate. I do have Paul on the poll. He's on the expanded poll. Have fun shootin your crack paultard.
How did Ron Paul do in the Iowa Straw Poll? While detractors claim Ron Paul supporters are just a few internet spammers who won't climb over 2% or 3% in the polls, Ron Paul finnished with a very respectable 9.1% in the the Iowa Straw Poll. This along with a great turnout of Paul supporters shows that the Paul campaign is gaining momentum! Ken, only Iowa residents were allowed to vote but people from out of state also attended which probably accounts for the difference between tickets sold and votes counted.
Did you see that Ron Paul is leading in the national polls? Real Polls from Real People: Released on Dec 12, 2007 National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus http://www.nationalcaucus.com/120707_results_announcement Among votes in Open Caucuses, Ron Paul wins with 62.5% of Open Caucus votes, followed by Barack Obama (18.75%), Fred Thompson (12.5%), and Hilary Clinton (6.25%). These are the real results after the GOP debates: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results Ron Paul's Straw Poll Results Updated on December 10, 2007 Ron Paul's Head-to-Head Records (Win-Lose-Tie): Ron Paul v. Rudy Giuliani 41-7-0 Ron Paul v. Mitt Romney 32-16-0 Ron Paul v. Fred Thompson 32-15-0 Ron Paul v. John McCain 42-5-0 Ron Paul v. Mike Huckabee 40-6-1 Ron Paul v. Tom Tancredo 45-1-0 Ron Paul v. Duncan Hunter 44-2-0 What I have listed are true *unbiased* results. There are many *biased* polls that are paid for by candidates' campaigns. The National Caucus results prove it. Do you think the media will begin to recognize Ron Paul as the national Presidential choice or are they being forced to conseal the truth? National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE National Presidential Caucus Announces Results From First-Ever National Caucus -- Barack Obama Wins Democrat Caucuses; Ron Paul Dominates Both GOP And "Open" Caucuses -- Washington, DC (December 12, 2007) - - On December 7, 2007 in cities and small towns across the country, Democrat, Republican and "Open" Caucus groups formed independently online and Caucused face-to-face on National Caucus Day. The first-ever National Presidential Caucus is now history and the results are in. Among votes in Open Caucuses, Ron Paul wins with 62.5% of Open Caucus votes On the Republican side, Ron Paul obliterated the field for the GOP generating the preference of 50% of GOP Caucuses. Barack Obama wins over Democrat voters generating 40% of Democrat Caucus voter preferences. http://www.nationalcaucus.com/120707_results_announcement As to strawpoll results after debates, other candidates cannot list them on their sites because they would show Ron Paul as number One nomination for President 2008! Ron Paul has listed his placement after every debate - sometimes he came in last and the results are listed at the link I provided above. Congressman Ron Paul is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. He has never voted to raise taxes. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget. He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership. He has never voted to raise congressional pay. He has never taken a government-paid junket. He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch. He voted against the Patriot Act. He voted against regulating the Internet. He voted against the Iraq war. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ Ron Paul is currently #1 for President of the U.S. 2008.
Why is Ron Paul always last in the polls? He has the best ideas for the country and then comes last in all the polls? You want to get out of Iraq and he is the only person saying we shouldn't be there in the first place, yet he comes last. Is he a closet Satanist or something that I don't know about?
Ron Paul low in Iowa what other states can he win? With Ron Paul polling low in Iowa is their any other states he can win? I think he may be able to win New Hampshire. I am a huge supporter of Paul and think he's the country's last chance. Is their any chance he can win the republican nnomination or any other states? Does he have a chance anywhere else?
Mini poll: Ron Paul a solid balanced candidate for America? He clearly shows he is a TRUE conservative, unlike the rest of the GOP candidates by opposing unnecessary "policing" of other parts of the world. This idea is very attractive to most liberals. But, as the constitution would like it to be, he is also for a very limited federal government. (Very much unlike today's federal government.) I predict there will be chaos for the lack of media attention given to poor Dr. Paul and his solid base.
Are the Fox Debate polls spammed for Ron Paul as much as Sean Hannity claims they are? Okay, I am a Ron Paul supporter (beacuse I love America and Freedom) I remember hearing that they said they spam proofed the call ins. is this true? He wins every debate and Hannity says that the polls are rigged. Now I have 3 theories about this. 1. Paul is winning beacuse... well hes winning. 2. The smart liberals (I hate those socialist wannabes as much as the next Christian white guy) that know the war NEEDS to end NOW and that Hillary and Obama (despite the fact that they are a woman and a "Minority" are not qualified to do it) and know that Paul is the greatest hope for finishing this (Hes doing better on the Rep side then Gravel and Kucinich on the Dem side.) 3. It is being spammed, simple as that.
Ron Paul: Leads all straw polls with 33%? http://www.nolanchart.com/article615.html What do you think of this? In straw polls, people actually show up to vote, and dont just answer questions on the phone. It seems that Ron Paul is going to win this election!
If Ron Paul is not a serious contender, then why has he won numerous straw polls? Either the media is lying and trying to push Ron Paul out of the Race, or the straw polls don't tell the truth. Independ...Ron Paul is NOT pro-abortion...He is a OB-GYN for GOD'S SAKE! And most Americans are against the Patriot act and also the war...including the GOP. They realize that LOYAL Patriots stand by the Constitution and not tear it down like the "patriot" act does.
Ron Paul & the polls, seriously, are these fiqures true??? I just checked infowars.com for the poll standings after the third Gop presidential debate. I support Ron Paul & figured he was in a close race with Romney, BUT, according to this poll it's a runaway for representative Paul. Honest to Christ, & I could'nt beleive it myself, it has Ron Paul at 43.61% compared to a distant second place Tom Tancredo at 21.93%. Mitt Romney was 10.17% & the others ar'nt even worth mentioning! Boy, if this is any indication of reality Ron Paul is gonna pull a Jehovah on the competition!!! Any body else seeing a different poll or heard different? I mean I'm super happy to see this polls percentages in Ron Paul's favor but it just seems way too high in favor of representative Paul. All presidential races, even primaries are ALWAYS resonably close. Is this just a fluke or is Ron Paul really this popular??? Input please...
Will Iowa Caucus be as rigged as Foxnews Polls against Ron Paul ? Everyone knows at the Iowa caucus, they seperate each candidates supporters into groups, and if each group does not make up at least 15% overall, they will be disinfranchised, or be given the opportunity to cross the line for a new candidate, and then a new head count will determine the winner of the group at that time.......you can bet there will be a head count AT THE DOOR keeping Paul supporter's too a minimum to disinfranchise him.
Why do Ron Paul supporters think that online polls mean anything? Do they not understand that one man can set up a macro on even just one or several computers and flood the poll with votes for Ron Paul? I did a little test, I used this program below: http://www.download.com/Easy-Macro-Recorder/3000-2094_4-10695515.html?tag=lst-0-1 I recorded the actions needed to vote for John Cox on the poll at iowagop.net, and I then set it to replay over and over again. Surely enough I was able to move up his numbers (by hundreths of a percent, but progress regardless as other names stood still), indicating that in fact you can vote on this poll multiple times (either that or support for John Cox suddenly took off at the same time I did this test). Regardless of how fast I set the replay, in no way could I keep up with the rate at which Ron Paul's percentage was increasing. In regards to jayztttight's post. Maybe I am an idiot, and maybe macro isn't the term, but I see it plastered all over the programs like the one I used, so I assumed that was the term.
ron paul is leading the polls at 33%, what do you think about that? http://www.nolanchart.com/article615.html Ron Paul is leading in the national polls! 33% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The result of months of polling actual voters certainly destroys the phone polls the media pundits want you to believe. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- by Robert Werden (Libertarian) The pollsters insist that polls conducted over the phone are the most scientific way of accurately assessing a candidate’s viability. This statement couldn’t be further from the truth. What it all boils down to in the end is votes. On Caucus and Primary day you cannot phone in your vote and for all the Ron Paul supporters you cannot click your vote either. You must show up in person and cast your ballot live. The Ron Paul brigade has proven they can vote. Ron Paul wins every single internet poll as well as almost all cell phone text message polls after network debates. The question media pundits are constantly asking regarding the huge internet voting and fund raising success of Ron Paul is can he translate his tremendous support into Caucus and Primary votes? Well let’s take a look at what that means. To the media, polls are success. Polls determine who gets the most media coverage. Polls determine who gets endorsed by big names in both politics and from Hollywood. The Ron Paul supporters have proven online votes and text message votes, but have they proven votes in person, where you actually have to leave your computer or couch and travel somewhere, listen to a bunch of stump speeches then wait in long lines to vote? The only test of that are straw polls. Straw polls are actually a rehearsal for Caucus and Primary day. They are held in almost every state and require a person to travel (sometimes hours away), sit through speeches and stand in lines to vote. Furthermore straw polls are also GOP fund raisers, so in order to vote you often have to pay about $35 to $55. So now you’re getting to the question the media pundits are asking. The translation to actual votes! There have already been close to 50 official straw polls throughout the country. There is a website that keeps track of these events and tallies the scores just like the Media and pollsters do. Now remember straw polls are the closest you can get to actual voting. There is no spammers clicking on 50 internet polls per day, there is no phone polling to the miniscule reminant of the decimated Republican Party. These are real people taking the day off to go and support their candidate. So without further ado here are the results. Source www.usastrawpolls.com As you can see the candidate with the most number of Straw poll wins is Ron Paul. Also notice that the current break through front runner in the phone polls Mike Huckabee has won only 2 straw polls. Candidate# Wins Ron Paul 25 Fred Thompson 24 Mitt Romney 22 Rudy Giuliani 7 John McCain 5 Mike Huckabee 2 Duncan Hunter 2 Alan Keyes 0 Now here is the really shocking statistic of these real life votes. If you look at the total straw polls and average Ron Paul’s polling percentage the same way phone polls are averaged, the percentages of votes for Ron Paul is 33.02%. Source http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ 33.02% is the media pundits answer to their question of translation to actual votes. So if you were hesitant to throw your endorsement towards Ron Paul because of the Medias assessment of viability, your likely in a genuine position to justify Ron Paul as your candidate. I say, welcome to the Ron Paul Revolution. DASHLOC4: by the looks of your answer you didnt take the 2 minutes to even read the article or look at the facts , but that happens allot here so dont sweat the truth or facts sailorti... : actually its talking about people going to straw polls compaired with phone polls , straw polls are not jut held near colleges , they are put on by republican partys or republican voters groups, none are really backing ron paul but his supporters come out and vote , just like they will in the primaries Golden : 2 things just because its not your poll doesnt make it a wrong poll. 2 just becuase people dont vote for your canidate ,doesnt mean they stole anything, they just believe in a different canidate than you and the only wasted vote is the vote not cast. (or the status quo)
Why do the Ron Paul Denialists keep bringing up the polls? Are they historically ignorant? In early 1975, Carter was polling at 1% (he went on to win the Presidency). In early 1987, Dukakis was polling at 1% (he went on to win the Democratic nomination). In early 1991, Clinton was at 2% (he went on to win the Presidency). In the spring of 1999, John McCain was polling at 3% (he went on to win the NH primary). In early 2003, Joe Lieberman was leading the field for the Democratic presidential nomination (he failed to win any primary). With history like that, why do Ron Paul Denialists like to refer to irrelevant polls? Is it because the polls are the only thing that gives them the illusion of being even half right? Why do these Denialists even bother with easy to break arguments and absurd claims that Ron Paul isn't a frontrunner? Paid by Ron Paul? I don't think so. He's only spent about $600,000 thus far and that definitely isn't enough to afford staffers to promote him on the Internet. If anybody is paid, its the people who are against Ron Paul or for other candidates. John McCain, for example, is spending like a drunken sailor. Some of the Denialists really make me laugh. How exactly would be a bad thing to dump the Federal Reserve. You have to be ignorant of Economics (real economics, not government accounting psuedoeconomics) to even believe that BS. Its also crazy to suggest that Clinton, Carter, Dukakis and the like had any name recognition. They were obscure before they were nominated. Its also crazy to suggest Ron Paul can't get nominated because of his views. The GOP does claim to be for limited government and personal responsibility, something only Ron Paul believes in among presidential candidates.
How is Ron Paul doing in the polls? I hear many of you talk about him, and I would consider voting for him, but I need to know will he have a chance? Night flyer, you are a smart cookie, and I understand your frustration, its just we all get conditioned not to "throw" votes away....
Why does Ron Paul win online polls but do so miserably in regular polls? I have heard he has an army of people who sit around all day dialing phone polls and voting on internet polls, but could there be a group of people who are that bored? I have never met anyone who supports him. What is the actual reason for the difference between the two types of polls when it comes to his support? In fairness, I have seen "Ron Paul" spray painted on a few block walls and white bedsheets and taped to a few walls, which I doubt does much to gain support from normal people. Uh, the internet people being more informed thing doesn't really work, since most everyone is "on the internet" now. So the people voting in big name phone polls are also probably on the internet as much as any other average person. Sorry, but many of the polls he did poorly in were random samples of registered Republicans, not caucus goers.
Scientific polls proven Incorrect ? Ron Paul is first place? are the "scientific" polls incorrect ? here is my argument 1 -Ron Paul's donations will probably be equal to or greater than both guiliani and Romney this quarter (if romney doesnt inject another 17 million of his own money into the campaign)- 2-Avg donation for for Ron paul are $60.00 avg donation for giuliani its $490 and average donation for romney is $650.00 3-so for every average donation guiliani gets Ron Paul gets 8 and for every avg donation Romney gets Ron paul gets 10! 4 - Straw poll results are showing results to support the above also -Ron Paul is coming out on top most of the time on very big margins 3 Questions what are the scientific polls missing when these polls are made so that there is such an obvious discrepency ? And do you think these polls will be corrected any time soon ? also do you agree that the scientific polls have been proven wrong by this example ? in this article it states romneys and guilianis donation avgs http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=rudy+giuliani+average+donation&fr=slv8-adbe&SpellState=n-507578775_q-Bix%2FPCRxzPqOJFfZyU5LGgAAAA%40%40&u=www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/14/america/web-0414donate.php&w=rudy+giuliani+average+donation+donations&d=NxYC_fL9P13o&icp=1&.intl=us http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ if you have a different site please give it a link in your answer so people can verify you are telling the truth
Have You Seen The Latest Ron Paul Rasmussen Poll? http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news17.htm Public opinion service Rasmussen Reports recently released data from its October 12-14 polling that indicates that Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul leads his GOP opponents against Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton among likely voters ages 30-49. He is the leading White House contender for the key demographic, polling higher than Clinton among baby boomers. Congressman Paul polls in at 47%, compared with Clinton's 44%, among likely voters aged 40-49. I regret to inform the Ron Paul supporters that the author of this article, a Mr. Jim Kouri {real name???} may have written numbers that are not actual. I spent several hours @ Rasmussen yesterday, without finding those numbers. Thank you Elway, for pointing that out. However here is a recent article you can believe: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071115/ap_po/ron_paul;_ylt=AsW6zUr9FPuyycGm... [excerpt] Poole said she found herself agreeing with him on monetary policy, the war and other issues. "He would turn this country around in the way that it needs to go," said Poole, a semiretired mortgage broker. She and her husband now travel to several states, she said, "promoting him everywhere we go."
Ron Paul is leading in the polls...why the media blackout? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356 none of the news networks are mentioning his name but the american people must have heard his message because he leads all of the other candidates in the latest poll. 70% of americans are now against the war. Ron Paul was against the war and the patriot act from the very beginning. or maybe it was his comments on abolishing the illegal IRS that got everyone's attention? it seems that he is the only candidate that is not under the contorl of the new world order. please spread the word because the media will continue the blackout as long as they continue trying to sell us the war
Why is Yahoo Censoring Ron Paul even though he won multiple debate polls? Why is Dr. Ron Paul not on Yahoo's "complete coverage" page for the election??? http://news.yahoo.com/page/presidential_election_2008;_ylt=Ak1s8jjCRsM1WXtXEAygkotpu6cv Even though since the debate on May 3, Ron Paul: Handily won two post-debate polls posted by event sponsor MSNBC Placed a close third (18%) in a post-debate poll on the conservative Drudge Report Won an ABCNews.com online debate poll with 84% Won a C-SPAN online GOP candidate poll with 69% Became the third most-mentioned person in the blogosphere, beating out Paris Hilton, according to the reputable Technorati.com Produced a YouTube.com video that was ranked the 8th most popular overall video, and the most-viewed political video Generated so many bulletin posts on MySpace.com that the site owner News Corp. blocked all additional posts about Dr. Paul Became a "most searched" term on Google and Yahoo!
Ron Paul poll? Have you heard of Ron Paul? Do you support Ron Paul? Are you going to vote for Dr.Ron Paul?
Will Ron Paul supporters go away now that he got pounded again? Well despite all the spamming of internet polls and phone polls by the Ron Paul poll trolls, reality has shown itself. Ron Paul can't even muster double digits IN AN ACTUAL VOTE. He once again got a real beat down, managing only fifth place. Will his annoying supporters now take down the spray painted bedsheets and go home? I know supporting him is like a cult, but isn't the fantasy getting pretty hard to continue? Oh yeah, and the release of his newsletters yesterday which include lots of racist junk, like him talking trash about blacks and that MLK was a gay pedophile, can't help, can it?
Springfield,MO straw poll Nov.1st.Ron Paul 85% is more believible to me than the Media polls. how say U? We The People can bring an end to the political corruption on the hill. We want the truth nothing but the truth so help us God. We need a national email vote one vote per email provided by google or someone who will show the truth of what America is really thinking about when it comes to our votes and the candidates. I believe there is a big difference in the main stream polls and how " We The People" are really voting in the states and national polls. This is how I see it, what say you?
did you know of the 22 straw polls across the country so far, ron paul has won 9 of them.? here are the list of the straw polls so far with the date, ron paul's final place, and his percentage of the poll. Maryland Straw Poll 9/3/2007 1 27.30% Allegheny County, 8/26/2007 1 45.20% DeKalb County, Geo 8/25/2007 1 24% Ronald Reagan Club 8/21/2007 1 28.00% West Alabama 8/18/2007 1 81.20% Strafford County, NH 8/18/2007 1 72.20% Gaston County, NC 8/14/2007 1 36.60% FreedomWorks Stra 8/3/2007 1 56% New Hampshire 7/7/2007 1 65.30% Georgetown County 7/28/2007 2 17.90% Cobb County, GA 7/4/2007 2 17.00% National Taxpayers 6/16/2007 2 16.70% Utah GOP convention 6/8/2007 2 5.40% Texas Straw Poll 9/1/2007 3 16.70% HRCC (Minnesota) 8/22/2007 3 16.00% Illinois State Fair 8/17/2007 3 18.90% (NFRA), St. Louis, 8/6/2007 3 14.00% West Lafayette, In 8/18/2007 4 11.70% Students for Life of 8/16/2007 4 9.00% California Republican 7/1/2007 4 12.00% Ames, Iowa 8/11/2007 5 9.10% Western Montana 8/15/2007 6 4.00%
Opinion Polling and Lies?? Go ahead Mr.P. Ron Paul? Ron Paul and Opinion Polling by Lasse Pitkaniemi by Lasse Pitkaniemi DIGG THIS Many supporters have been wondering or even worrying about the weak 1–3% opinion polling support Ron Paul has had. There are several reasons why opinion polling produces these results that most people do not know about. 1) Opinion polls are mostly conducted by using telephone landlines. The reason is that landline numbers are easy to obtain, and they produce a fairly accurate and random result for most questionnaires. As known from marketing, each product has a life cycle, and those who hang on to landline numbers tend to be late adopters of new technology. These late adopters do not use the internet, so they have (most likely) not even heard of Ron Paul. For them the choice is still between Rudy McRomney which is thus reflected on the polling result. Due to this sampling error the real support for Ron Paul is most likely stronger than the opinion polls show. 2) Many opinion polls count answers selectively. They reason that by counting only certain given opinions, uncertainty and randomness will be reduced in the opinion polling results. For example, the opinion polls ask questions such as: are you a registered supporter of the Republican party, have you voted in primaries before, what is your yearly income, when where you born etc. These questions are then used to eliminate groups such as non-registered republicans or young people. Even if this elimination is mostly statistically justified, it reduces the showing support for surprise candidates such as Ron Paul, especially when an important part of Ron Paul's campaign is to mobilize voters who do not usually vote in primaries. 3) In order to reduce the inaccuracy between two polls conducted by the same pollster, vote multipliers are added, which can be based on earlier polls, prior elections, "scientific" analyzes or just simply guesses. Here is how they work. Let's say that a vote multiplier for Rudy Giuliani is 1.2, for John McCain 1.5 and for Ron Paul –3.0. If the pure poll gives Giuliani 25%, McCain 10% and Ron Paul 10% of the vote, the opinion polls are counted to show 30% for Giuliani, 15% for McCain and only 3% for Ron Paul. The chances are that opinion polls for Ron Paul have negative multipliers, since no-one conducting the polls believes that he can win. The same phenomenon has happened in various European countries during the last five years when so-called far right parties (with anti-immigration, anti-EU and fiscal conservative views) have taken many land-slide victories, even if their results in opinion polls have been often either poor or mediocre. 4) Opinion polls are not value free or interest neutral. Even if the opinion polling company would want to conduct a poll on honest scientific standards, they still know that their poll has been ordered by USA Today, NBC, FOX News, the Washington Post or the New York Times. So a polling company's self-interest is to produce a result that the mainstream media likes. These news agencies are not interested in polls that predict a great result for Ron Paul, if they would get one, they would not publish it. This can be seen by just looking back at the polling results from as late as late April. During late April most polls did not even include Ron Paul as a potential running candidate! He only starts to show up regularly after mid-May, where as undeclared 'candidate' Fred Thompson has been included since the very beginning. Opinion polls often lie, just like statistics do. The opinion polling for the Republican primary clearly underestimates Ron Paul's real popularity, which may already be around 10%. For example, sportsbook.com (a betting site – not a pro–Ron Paul site) currently places his odds 5th in the Republican candidate nomination race and 9th in the 2008 Presidential Elections. But let's suppose that I am wrong and the opinion polls do show the real support for Ron Paul. Still, his chances for winning are very good, for the following reasons. 1) As Justin Ptak correctly pointed out, "the national polls are entirely a reflection of name identification, not voters' views of the candidates." For example Carter was only polling 1% in 1975 and he won the presidency. Back in 1991 Clinton's support was at 2% and he became the president. Joe Lieberman was leading the Democratic presidential nomination in 2003, yet he failed to win a single primary. 2) The opinion polls also fail to grasp that the Ron Paul revolution is not only a revolution of ideas; it is also revolutionizing campaign methods. Campaign methods seldom change, but in the US presidential elections they have done so twice in the past. Back in 1825 when John Quincy Adams won the presidency he revolutionized campaigning by distributing buttons and other campaign gimmicks. A second campaigning revolution took place in the 1961 elections when the televised mass media made JFK the president. The Ron Paul revolution of 2008 could be the third campaigning revolution. Earlier it was easier for politicians to lie and get away with it. Today prior speeches and voting records are easily obtainable and thus politicians become increasingly accountable of what they have ever said or done. Furthermore the mass media can no longer determine the election winners. In such an environment the few sincere honest politicians like Ron Paul will win. 3) All conducted opinion polls measure the general opinion on candidates. In elections where half the nation votes, such as the presidential election, the opinion poll results are crucial. In elections where only a minority of activists vote the opinion polling results are unimportant. The primaries are activist elections and despite all attempts to reduce uncertainty and randomness by the opinion polling companies (e.g. by methods mentioned above), the randomness and uncertainty still remain. This is due to the fact, that it is almost impossible to separate the activists from the rest in an opinion poll. For example, in the presidential primaries of 2004 only 7.2% of the Americans voted! The Democratic turnout was 11.4%, the Republican turnout only 6.6%! In these cases straw polling matters more than general opinion polls, since straw polls are conducted in places where only the best-informed and most active voters gather. In straw polls Ron Paul has done extremely well, always placing first or second, once he even made a land sliding victory gaining 65% of the popular support! 4) The opinion polls give out the impression that a candidate needs to gather millions of votes in most states in order to get the party's presidential nomination. As noted above, with only 7.2% of the Americans voting in the 2004 primaries, this is not the case. For example, in New Hampshire with a population of 1,200,000 the size of the voting age population is around 1,000,000. If 20% of the shire folk would vote (an extremely high number for a presidential primary) 200,000 votes would be cast. Half would be democratic votes. Thus even if Ron Paul would race himself against all the other republican candidates, he would win with just 51,000 votes. And this is the pessimist scenario. Most likely the voting turnout will be around 10% and no other GOP candidate will gather more than 30% of the state's votes. In this case Ron Paul will win the New Hampshire primary with only 15,000 votes! As the CNHT straw poll shows, Ron Paul already has 200 votes and judging by some videos, there are at least a thousand dedicated Ron Paulians in New Hampshire. How hard can it be for them to gather 14,000 more votes for Dr. Paul? Using the same analogy, in California, the most populous state of the Union with 36,500,000 people, the GOP primary can be won with only 450,000 votes. Ron Paul will be aided further by the fact that five small states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Wyoming and Maine hold their primaries before Super-Tuesday and every single primary victory will give him an election boost. The smaller the state is, the easier it is to gather a grassroots movement that can influence the election result. In the primary phase of the presidential elections the ingenuity of the Ron Paul campaign will be clearest. All other GOP candidates adhere to some stripe of neoconservatism, which will only attract the support of the old voters (i.e. of those 6.6% of the Republicans that voted in the 2004 presidential primary). The neoconservative message is old and widely hated. Ron Paul provides a culturally conservative, libertarian option with fresh ideas that appeal not only to many old voters, but to thousands of new voters who have never voted in primaries before. He has already succeeded in turning the whole Constitution party, half of the Libertarian party and many, many anti-war Democrats into registered Ron Paul Republicans. Ron Paul is also about to succeed in waking up the elderly Republican voters with the traditional conservative Republican message of life, liberty and property. The neoconservatives cannot beat him. Their individual candidates are all too power hungry to give up the race and join forces under one name in order to defeat Dr. Paul. With the primaries moved closer to each other they have no longer the option to drop out in the middle of the race, meaning that the neoconservative vote will be shattered between a dozen candidates in every, single, state. The Ron Paul revolution has already succeeded. It has brought a lot of attention to the libertarian ideas of peace and a limited government. It has also put a strain on the mass media, who can no longer deliver any information they want in any manner they please. Just like a real revolution the Ron Paul revolution has become a movement everyone wants to join. The real test for the Ron Paul revolution is not the victory over the GOP nomination, the question is how to win the presidency from a Hillary-Obama ticket, which will undoubtedly be seen as a dream team by the academia, the mass media, the special interest groups, the bureaucrats and the politicians. July 14, 2007 Lasse Pitkaniemi
Ron Paul polling at 8% now??? http://www.rasmussenreports.com/ Isn't this great... It shows that a reliable poll... not a biased MEDIA poll is showing Ron's REAL Numbers What does this say??? TG - you just wait until December 16th!! I'm not saying it means impending victory, but when the last I heard was, RON PAUL 4%, 8% is something to party about... especially because that puts him close to double digits. Once his ball gets rolling, the Media can't ignore him any longer, and they will be forced to support politicians for THE PEOPLE... and not just for big business. (which control them!)
Powered by Yahoo! Answers