Values Voter Straw Poll Results

[kylebrotherton]

I've looked all over the forums and can't find this info, so here it is.

from: http://paul4prez.blogspot.com/2007/09/ron-paul-places-second-in-values-voter.html

At tonight's Values Voter debate, Baptist minister and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee won the post-debate straw poll with 63% of the vote. Ron Paul's debate skills earned him a second place finish at 13%. His strong showing may have surprised some observers, given his steadfast opposition to the Iraq war, and his refusal to use the power of the federal government to force conservative values on everyone. Newly announced candidate Alan Keyes placed third with 7%, with the rest of the field trailing. Not all of the 2,000 audience members were allowed to vote -- the straw poll was restricted to approximately 350 delegates pre-selected by debate organizers.

[beermotor]

HAhahaha... pre-selected 350 jerkoffs and they all voted for Huckabee? Now that is amusing. What the hell are these people thinking? FOX is going to copy that tactic from now on, I'll bet.

[literatim]

If Ron Paul can pull in 13% of the evangelical vote, that is a win. Especially if a large portion of the evangelical vote is stolen from the Frudy McRomney by Huckabee.

[LibertyEagle]

HAhahaha... pre-selected 350 jerkoffs and they all voted for Huckabee? Now that is amusing. What the hell are these people thinking? FOX is going to copy that tactic from now on, I'll bet.

Were they "pre-selected" or were they Republican delegates?

[american2]

Theres no way that many would have chosen Huckabee over Tancredo, Keyes, Hunter, Brownback. The poll was rigged by selecting those who were able to vote.

Did you hear the crazy lady talking about how she was praying God would reveal a true leader tonight. Huckabee didn't even do that well in the debate. It only makes sense that it was rigged to look like Huckabee is that clear leader.

[sunghoko]

The poll included 340 delegates hand-selected by 40 of America's social conservative activists and opinion makers.

Pre-debate numbers are located in the parenthesis and the post debate numbers immediately follow the colon

Mike Huckabee: 219 (119)
Ron Paul: 44 (53)
Alan Keyes: 24 (30)
Sam Brownback: 18 (26)
Fred Thompson: 15 (52)
Duncan Hunter: 13 (8)
Tom Tancredo: 7 (8)
Rudy Guiliani: 4 (16)
John Cox: 2 (1)

John McCain: 2 (13)
Mitt Romney: 0 (14)

from huckabee's website

[sunghoko]

one can easily argue any of the delegates could have voted for someone else in the pre straw and voted for "their guy" afterwards

[LibertyEagle]

I honestly do not see what they saw in Huckabee. He didn't stand out at all. In fact, he never really said much of anything.

[Brasil Branco]

I was surprised that Ron Paul came in second. Huckabee's win is expected- he is a true run of the mill politician. He plays the crowd with anecdotes and memories. He does not address the issue but instead portrays charm. It's the same way Bush got elected in 2000, charm over substance.

Ron Paul changed his tone for this debate, I don't think he fit in with the crowd even if he tried to play them. The reason the front runners did not appear on this debate is because the positions the moderators stressed would mean political suicide in the general election. They are advocating extreme positions on the end of the political spectrum. Seriously, the "gay agenda"? Most of the debate made my stomach churn. Though, the debate was "fair" in the time allocated to candidates- I thought the format, though rusty, was better than the MSM's sound bite debates.

I think Paul lost footing with some of his positions in the NO segment. They were loaded questions, and they painted him in a negative light with your average voter. Sure, you can try to expand and explain his positions- but your average uniformed voter will not understand. Invoking Jesus' message of Peace with the war was probably his best moment- he made his point well. I think he could of resonated his message on some other issues better- it wasn't his best debate.

The real losers were Tancredo, Brownback, Hunter, and Keynes. The former three did horribly in terms of votes- Brownback should drop, he is not even gaining support with his own crowd. Keynes was planning this for quite some time. This was to be his "great announcement". I think he packed the crowd with his supporters and wanted to win the debate, badly. He only placed third. His "pledge" system jumped by about 60 votes. Keynes entrance to this race was swift. His exit, swifter.

If you have to define a definite "second tier"- it is Paul and Huckabee at this point. All polls and indicators show Brownback, Tancredo, and Hunter with little position, little hope of gaining support. They simply waste space at this point.

[ButchHowdy]

Think Huckabee's requesting an offering TWICE says anything?!?

[Marshall]

If you have to define a definite "second tier"- it is Paul and Huckabee at this point. All polls and indicators show Brownback, Tancredo, and Hunter with little position, little hope of gaining support. They simply waste space at this point.


And whats really annoying is that we're forcibly funding their campaigns with federal matching funds. But I guess if you can't get anyone to donate you just have to take at the barrel of a gun.

[reduen]

My opinion, Ron Paul did not do his job well last night. I would have liked to see him take Huckabee to task on the war issue better. True, I missed the firstpart of the debate but it is my belief that if Mr.Paul would have just articulated the difference between this war and a just war principle more clearly he would have had better numbers at the conclusion.

I am a Christian through and through, down to the very core of me! I voted for George Bush twice. (I have prayed and asked forgiveness for this already.) I never supported the war but saw it as a necessary evil until the real reason for the war became evident to me and now I am fervently against this war and George Bush and even more so in support of Ron Paul..

Having said all this, 2nd place is pretty good in this one for our good Dr!

Chris R.

[Omnis]

Theres no way that many would have chosen Huckabee over Tancredo, Keyes, Hunter, Brownback. The poll was rigged by selecting those who were able to vote.

Did you hear the crazy lady talking about how she was praying God would reveal a true leader tonight. Huckabee didn't even do that well in the debate. It only makes sense that it was rigged to look like Huckabee is that clear leader.

What are you talking about? He did have the best debate. Huckabee clearly had the delegation on his side from the start. He made sure to keep his mouth shut about Iraq as well. Ron Paul had the most support of the crowd and, not surprisingly, Huckabee had the most of the delegation.

[m4ff3w]

And whats really annoying is that we're forcibly funding their campaigns with federal matching funds. But I guess if you can't get anyone to donate you just have to take at the barrel of a gun.


Matching funds are voluntary.

[Badger Paul]

I didn't see the debate and given the comments how it was run and what happend I can understand why people thought Ron should have skipped it. Hell, the oprganizers promised a standing room only crown and only a third of 2,700 seats in the hall were filled, what does that tell you about these ying-yangs? However, RP is not in a position to be turning down any chances to explain to voters what his views even if such voters are going to be hostile. To finish second amongst this crowd is a big victory, (and it was a disasterous showing for Keyes. He thought this debate would propell his campaign and waited until a few days before it to announce his candidacy). The fact he didn't pander to them or go off in extremes and did what Ron Paul always does makes this person and I knows others too, a proud suppoter.

We went into the lion's den and came out with our heads still attached. Good work.

[reduen]

Anyone find official results on this yet? (From the ones who hosted the debate.)

[Tin_Foil_Hat]

The poll included 340 delegates hand-selected by 40 of America's social conservative activists and opinion makers.

Pre-debate numbers are located in the parenthesis and the post debate numbers immediately follow the colon

Mike Huckabee: 219 (119)
Ron Paul: 44 (53)
Alan Keyes: 24 (30)
Sam Brownback: 18 (26)
Fred Thompson: 15 (52)
Duncan Hunter: 13 (8)
Tom Tancredo: 7 (8)
Rudy Guiliani: 4 (16)
John Cox: 2 (1)

John McCain: 2 (13)
Mitt Romney: 0 (14)

from huckabee's website


I don't understand. Are these numbers about the debate? I thought some of these clowns weren't there?!?!

[CMoore]

I did not get to watch the entire debate, but I did listen to the commentary afterwards. What really struck me was the reluctance of Schlafly and company to say anything bad about Dr. Paul. These may be crazy people, but they are not stupid. I think in their heart of hearts they know that he is their only chance to have a candidate who even remotely shares their views and is favorable to their cause even though he refuses to pander to them.

[LibertyEagle]

And whats really annoying is that we're forcibly funding their campaigns with federal matching funds. But I guess if you can't get anyone to donate you just have to take at the barrel of a gun.

That's simply not true, Marshall. The matching funds come from people who freely checked on their tax return to have an additional dollar go into this fund.

[LibertyEagle]

Schlafly has a lot of positions in common with Dr. Paul. If you guys aren't familiar with her, you should check out here website. You will see it immediately.

www.eagleforum.org

[LibertyEagle]

My opinion, Ron Paul did not do his job well last night. I would have liked to see him take Huckabee to task on the war issue better. True, I missed the firstpart of the debate but it is my belief that if Mr.Paul would have just articulated the difference between this war and a just war principle more clearly he would have had better numbers at the conclusion.

I am a Christian through and through, down to the very core of me! I voted for George Bush twice. (I have prayed and asked forgiveness for this already.) I never supported the war but saw it as a necessary evil until the real reason for the war became evident to me and now I am fervently against this war and George Bush and even more so in support of Ron Paul..

Having said all this, 2nd place is pretty good in this one for our good Dr!

Chris R.


Agreed. Those Yes/No questions hurt Dr. Paul. They were such loaded questions. I feel sure he could have explained the rationale for his positions, but unfortunately none were given the opportunity. He could have used one of his free minutes, but then he wouldn't have been able to use it for his final statement.

Hard call.

[james1906]

Agreed. Those Yes/No questions hurt Dr. Paul. They were such loaded questions. I feel sure he could have explained the rationale for his positions, but unfortunately none were given the opportunity. He could have used one of his free minutes, but then he wouldn't have been able to use it for his final statement.

Hard call.

Yeah, they should have allowed any lone dissenter a few seconds to explain his position.

I don't think George Washington felt he had the authority to tell an innkeeper how to run his business, yet when RP takes that position, it looks like Ron Paul: Pornoholic.

[stevedasbach]

That's simply not true, Marshall. The matching funds come from people who freely checked on their tax return to have an additional dollar go into this fund.

It's not an additional dollar. It is a dollar of the taxes you are already paying in taxes. Since no other spending is decreased by the dollar, it either increases the debt or ultimately causes taxes to go up.

The whole thing is a scam to make it appear voluntary. Most people see through it, which is why only around 10% check the box.

[stevedasbach]

Think Huckabee's requesting an offering TWICE says anything?!?

Yeah -- he's desperate for money. He may be getting love from the MSM (and the resulting bump in the polls) but it's not translating into serious donations. He's got to be hoping that the evangelicals open up their wallets over the next 12 days, or he'll probably be posting some unimpressive 3rd quarter numbers.

[maggiebott]

I saw the whole debate and the bullshit that followed. For Huckabee to win, had to be a setup. The R.P. supporters were screaming and again...they played tricks with his microphone.
It was purely a waste of time to see the loaded questions that required a yes or no. What really amazed me is how these god loving peeps felt that Paul's position on pulling out of the war was dissasterous. It's a scam, plain and simple.

[Original_Intent]

Yeah the guy after the debate saying that you would have to be insane to support pulling the troops out of Iraq....at least they were smart enough to not have the rabbi be the one to push the war button.

[stevedasbach]

Yeah, they should have allowed any lone dissenter a few seconds to explain his position.

I don't think George Washington felt he had the authority to tell an innkeeper how to run his business, yet when RP takes that position, it looks like Ron Paul: Pornoholic.

Last night after the debate, I thought of a way Dr. Paul could have neutralized those ridiculous Yes/No questions. (No criticism intended -- hindsight is always 20/20).

The first time they were asked one of those ridiculous, loaded, multi-part questions, Dr. Paul could have taken one of his minutes and responded something like this:

"I face situations like this question all the time in Congress. Unconstitional provisions are tacked on to bills that otherwise have merit, that members feel they have to vote in favor of. The inevitable result is the growth of government spending and power, and the loss of liberty."

"While I agree with provisions ______ in the question, the Constitution gives the federal government no authority to address the remaining issues, which are properly left to the states. Accordingly, as I so often do in Congress, I must vote no."

That would have put the rest of his no votes in context, while reinforcing his image as "Dr. No".

[hard@work]

Not all of the 2,000 audience members were allowed to vote -- the straw poll was restricted to approximately 350 delegates pre-selected by debate organizers.

:)

[undergroundrr]

The poll included 340 delegates hand-selected by 40 of America's social conservative activists and opinion makers.



I find it amazing that a candidate openly challenged federal bans on prostitution and drugs and still won over 13% of these hand-selected right-wing religious fundamentalists. I don't know how he got even 1 vote. This can only be described as political alchemy.