close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Wait...I thought Paul was unelectable? New polling shows otherwise

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by G19G20, Jan 16, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. G19G20

    G19G20 Status Quo 2014

    2,004
    0
    May 8, 2011
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/

    My commentary:
    Romney holds a slight edge against Obama but Paul is within the margin of error. The "unelectable" media campaign against Paul is falling apart with every new poll released. Also, the erosion of GOP enthusiasm tells me that the Romney "inevitability" campaign is also hurting the GOP's chances since no one actually likes Romney and therefore is not excited to vote for him. You can witness plenty of that sentiment on this very forum. Paul, on the other hand, brings cross-over voters to his side that Romney can't and this is proven more with each new poll too.
     
  2. JBnTX

    JBnTX Bible Thumper

    20,501
    4,711
    Aug 28, 2008
    Fort Worth Texas
    There's just not enough Ron Paul supporters to make a difference.
    They could all fart in the same room and no one would even notice.

    Ron Paul lacks not only enough supporters and money, but he also lacks the
    backing of the "leaders" of the republican party. They won't allow the election
    of a man who'll destroy everything they've spent the last 30 years building.

    He is un-electable!
     

  3. G19G20

    G19G20 Status Quo 2014

    2,004
    0
    May 8, 2011
    Have you been paying any attention to the contests so far and the polling data? He's done better at the polls than the "electable" candidates and gets more money than they do too. You're making stuff up dude.

    Now if you're suggesting that the only basis of the unelectable mantra is simply because the GOP elite don't want him then that's a different issue entirely and isn't based on electability but rather acceptability to the elite. The polling data suggests that the People think he is electable.
     
  4. barbedwiresmile

    barbedwiresmile Unreconstructed

    10,035
    45
    Feb 3, 2008
    Dixie
    Those who don't want Paul elected: employees of IRS, ATF, EPA, DEA, NEA, NSA, FBI, CIA, DIA, NSA, DofE, DofA, DofE,,, list goes on. I wonder why?
     
  5. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    11,018
    3
    Feb 18, 2009
    You know, this might be a good reason to back Perry. The way he keeps mixing up the agencies he wants to eliminate he might keep the teat suckers off guard long enough for him to get elected then they could post the agencies on the wall and have him throw darts to determine which ones get cut.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2012
  6. geo57

    geo57

    514
    151
    Jan 9, 2010
    Nebraska
    RealClear still had Paul @ 13% nationally on Monday. Are they making that up too ?
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2012
  7. geo57

    geo57

    514
    151
    Jan 9, 2010
    Nebraska

    ... and according to RealClear 87% of all GOP voters as of Monday.
     
  8. Feanor

    Feanor

    3,545
    3
    Feb 28, 2010
    Paul is not a republican, anymore than is Romney, and the republican base knows it.
     
  9. frank4570

    frank4570

    15,508
    7
    Jun 25, 2004
    But is there anybody who is as republican as you? You seem to be kind of like the jesus of republicans.
     
  10. Stubudd

    Stubudd

    6,033
    635
    Nov 4, 2008
    Kennesaw GA
    You're talking about a different poll. Yours is GOP voters' preference among the nominees. The OP is a national 1 on 1 poll, assuming romney or paul got the nomination. The OP's poll is saying Paul does almost as well as Romney in a hypothetical 1 on 1 vs Obama, nationally- among all voters.

    And it doesn't mean 87% don't want Paul elected, it means 87% have another choice they'd rather have as the nominee right now. Paul is the first choice of 13% of GoP voters nationally, according to your poll.
     
  11. You know, you are proving that true...

    RP wants dramatically smaller government; Republicans want big government.
    RP wants constitutional governance; Republicans want crony capitalism.
    RP wants defense to mean just that; Republicans want expansionist, imperialistic militarism with unlimited funding.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
  12. Goaltender66

    Goaltender66 NRA GoldenEagle

    Those are your two major problems with the poll. They didn't poll likely voters. The sample is 91% registered voters and 9% who are not even registered. If you aren't sampling likely voters you will be skewing a poll that is supposed to forecast an election result.

    Plus the CNN poll is oversampling Democrats, unless the outfit would like to explain how in 2012 with Obama's job approval ratings, and especially in the wake of the 2010 midterms, they believe that Democrat voters will still outnumber an energized Republican base? Their own poll shows a 5 point enthusiasm gap in Extremely or Very, for crying out loud.

    Oh, but those unregistereds will register just to vote for Ron Paul? Well....

    Next thing...question 22/23, among Registereds Ron Paul is 46% to Obama's 48%. 4% wouldn't vote for either of them. Look at the trends, especially under the "neither" and "other" options. Now look at "all respondents." If you're counting on unregistereds to register just to vote Paul then you'll be disappointed. Obama wins that matchup 50% to 45% (in other words, Paul loses a full point when all adults are counted).

    Romney is marginally better in this poll, with a 1 point advantage over Obama (48 - 47) and is 2 points away from Obama with all respondents (47 - 49), which tells me Romney's base is probably more stable than Paul's, even with this shoddy sample.

    Takeaway...this poll doesn't make a persuasive case about Paul's "electability."
     
  13. barbedwiresmile

    barbedwiresmile Unreconstructed

    10,035
    45
    Feb 3, 2008
    Dixie
    Goalie - holy cow. Where've you been?
     
  14. geo57

    geo57

    514
    151
    Jan 9, 2010
    Nebraska
    That post in which you quote me was in response to barbedwiresmile's post that suggested those fed depts. listed were the only people that don't want Paul. I was not responding to the OP there.

    As far as the 87 % who do not want him / not right now you are splitting hairs. From what candidate do you honestly see him taking votes away from ? And the poll , RealClear , is not mine.
     
  15. You know, when President Obama was shoving the stimulus package down our throats, all the conservatives were b**ching and whining. Now that the GOP is shoving Rommey down our throat, I don't see an uproar. Why? and why is the Tea Party so silence right now? WAKE UP PEOPLE! Now, I'm not a Paul supporter, but I just did not like the way the media (FOX) set him up to look bad in a deliverate way, and also tried to warn the other candidates from the begining not to touch their "golden boy" Rommney on the Bain issue. I felt sick to my stomach to realize that NO media is looking up for US anymore. Not even O'Reilly. The media is suppose to be the "Fourth" Branch of power that should keep the other "Three" in-check, making sure they are doing their job. Now all that is gone, and we are left without a voice. without true journalism, this country is up for grabs for the highest bitter.:steamed:
     
  16. frank4570

    frank4570

    15,508
    7
    Jun 25, 2004
    My memory isn't real good on this. But I read a while back about a program that was started in the 70s by either the FBI or the CIA or both. They started looking for newspaper reporters and editors who could be put on the payroll, just in case. And bear in mind that those people who were corrupted back then have been climbing the ranks since then.
    And I am positive the program has been expanded. And I'm sure corporations with REAL money have come to understand the value of being able to shape the news as well. Often corporations work closely with govt and military, with employees moving back and forth from one job to the next higher job.
    Just like when Obama assigned to the FDA a former Monsanto lobbyist. That person can now use the .gov to help benefit Monsanto, including the media assets. With money from both sides. For the greater good of course.:upeyes:


     
  17. JBnTX

    JBnTX Bible Thumper

    20,501
    4,711
    Aug 28, 2008
    Fort Worth Texas
    Ron Paul destroyed any advances he's made in the polls with his moronic responses in the South Carolina debate.

    He sounded like a cranky old kook with an axe to grind against Washington DC.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
  18. Goaltender66

    Goaltender66 NRA GoldenEagle

    I'm on a sabbatical from my sabbatical. How've you been?
     
  19. cowboy1964

    cowboy1964

    20,498
    2,543
    Sep 4, 2009
    U.S.A.
    Ron Paul equated Bin Laden with a theoretical Chinese dissident. That's not only stupid, it's offensive.
     
  20. 22rtf2

    22rtf2 Peaceful

    2,020
    0
    Feb 24, 2009
    20 mins from Smyrna
    You forgot the 100 pound overweight guys with "Official Terrorist Hunting Permit" sticker on their car. Or more likely crappy pickup truck.

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.