Scientific Polls

[paulaholic]

A couple things I wanted to say on this matter:

Firstly, I doubt the Gallup Poll was tampered with. Let's assume that the Gallup poll hates Ron, or that they are influenced by people who do. Let's also assume that Ron is polling higher than his previous high, 3%. Gallup wouldn't decrease his numbers, because TPTB would therefore be blindsided by his better-than-expected showings in the primaries, and would miss out on their Dean-esque opportunity to try and smear him.

Secondly, don't let it get you down. The poll is a very small sample. We just happened to get a bad draw this time. I'm sure some other scientific polls will show gains for the Dr.

:)

[ronpaulitician]

Paul gets anywhere from 0 to 3% in these national polls.

That's it.

We have to face that, because as long as Paul polls those numbers, he's not (/we're not) going to get the voters that are still on the fence to support his campaign.

I'm concerned, because there's not much time left.

[Karsten]

1)Internet Polls
2)Internet Statistics (meetup members, youtube subscribers, website hits and search hits, etc)
3)Text Message Polls (where you can only vote ONCE)
4)Straw Polls
5)Crowd Sized (Ron Paul can easily have over 1000 people attend his rallies with short notice. Although he didn't win the Iowa Straw Poll, he clearly had the biggest presence as people from across the country came.
6)Cheering Level (Peggy Noonan commented that "someone is going on when you gather 1000 Republicans in a room, and half of them cheer for Ron Paul).

All of these other sources show Ron Paul in the top-tier or the FRONT RUNNER. It's time we stop whining about the 1% cited in the national telephone polls. They CLEARLY do not reflect reality. The only way we're going to win this is to be optimistic. THE MEDIA CANNOT RECOGNIZE THE SIZE AND STRENGTH OF OUR SUPPORT IF WE DON'T REGONIZE IT OURSELVES!

[Brasil Branco]

You also forget that these are likely "Republican" voters and it completely misses the 500k to 600k Libertarians potentially supporting Paul as a candidate.

Moreover, Ron Paul has the lowest name recongniton still, only about 40% of Republican voters know who he is according to another poll.

[Sean]

You also forget that these are likely "Republican" voters and it completely misses the 500k to 600k Libertarians potentially supporting Paul as a candidate.

Moreover, Ron Paul has the lowest name recongniton still, only about 40% of Republican voters know who he is according to another poll.

We have to get the likely "Republican" voter. Ron Paul needs TV advertising for name recognition. He will not get the same amount of media coverage as others. That means he will have to pay for it. If he can get to about 15% in a crowded field he just might get equal coverage. October and November he has to increase his poll numbers significantly .

[Elwar]

We handed out push cards to people over the weekend. We'd ask "Have you heard of Ron Paul?" as we handed them a card. I'd say the low percentage is accurate.

Many who took the card and walked on did a 180 and came back to us to learn more.

We talked to one elderly gentleman for a while who knew all about Ron Paul, praised his honesty and his principled stand. We asked if he'd be voting for Ron Paul, he said unfortunately for us, he is a Communist. So he could not support Ron Paul.
He was carrying a few "Workers World Party" newspapers and he offered one to us. I took one. I told him my cat box might need some liner. (jokingly of course)

I looked through the paper a bit...lots of support for Hillary...heh.

[Matt Collins]

You should read the following articles on the subject:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/ostrowski/ostrowski84.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/fisk1.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/pitkaniemi1.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman1.html

[NoxTwilight]

You also forget that these are likely "Republican" voters and it completely misses the 500k to 600k Libertarians potentially supporting Paul as a candidate.

Moreover, Ron Paul has the lowest name recongniton still, only about 40% of Republican voters know who he is according to another poll.


And all us former Dems!

Just got my registration card back today - I am officially a Republican!!

Feels ... weird :eek:

[empirenine]

And all us former Dems!

Just got my registration card back today - I am officially a Republican!!

Feels ... weird :eek:

I concur.

[Paulitician]

I contend they're not at all scientific. I find any and all polls done via phone or on the Internet dubious. Straw polls are a little better but since you have to pay to vote and most Ron Paul supporters are very dedicated to get Ron Paul's name out there they'll do their best to attend and give a good showing. The fact remains therefore, Ron Paul is still very, very unknown. I just hope with the debate and the being on Bill O' gives him a bump on these so called "scientific polls" but I'm not counting to much on it. Two things I know for sure is that Ron Paul needs way more mass media coverage, and way more money if we're going to look "viable" to the braindead masses.

[Larofeticus]

The cell phone/land line concern is something I don't think makes a big difference in polls.

What I do think makes a difference is the bias towards "likely republican primary voters." They call people who have voted in previous republican primaries.

That removes from consideration:

First election voters,
long time non-voters,
independents,
and democrats switching parties.

All of these categories are hotbeds of RP support. I would say real world voting support for RP is close to 6%.

And don't forget primary voters have a self selection bias that "scientific polls" can't account for. I have a friend who thinks the best thing to happen to ron paul is a nationwide typhoon on primary election days. I'd brave a natural disaster to vote for RP, how many other people would do the same for their marginal candidate?

But constantly whining about polls doesn't accomplish much except sound really whiney. Not like anyone has never said this before to the point of it being cliche, but skrew the polls and go out and do supporter stuff anyway. Thats the best choice, given the circumstances.

[nist7]

The cell phone/land line concern is something I don't think makes a big difference in polls.

What I do think makes a difference is the bias towards "likely republican primary voters." They call people who have voted in previous republican primaries.

That removes from consideration:

First election voters,
long time non-voters,
independents,
and democrats switching parties.

All of these categories are hotbeds of RP support. I would say real world voting support for RP is close to 6%.

And don't forget primary voters have a self selection bias that "scientific polls" can't account for. I have a friend who thinks the best thing to happen to ron paul is a nationwide typhoon on primary election days. I'd brave a natural disaster to vote for RP, how many other people would do the same for their marginal candidate?

But constantly whining about polls doesn't accomplish much except sound really whiney. Not like anyone has never said this before to the point of it being cliche, but skrew the polls and go out and do supporter stuff anyway. Thats the best choice, given the circumstances.

That is exactly what the polls can't tell you.

Turnout rate for potential RP voters will be MUCH higher than other candidates. And this is where it WILL make a difference in the primaries.