Polls: Paul at in 3% OH & WI, 1% AL, CO, FL

[Bradley in DC]

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/

Republican Candidate AL CA CO FL NY OH WI
Fred Thompson 31% 16% 25% 23% 9% 21% 24%
Rudy Giuliani 21% 22% 20% 24% 47% 34% 28%
John McCain 14% 15% 12% 9% 16% 9% 8%
Mitt Romney 7% 16% 8% 13% 6% 8% 7%
Newt Gingrich 7% - 5% - 5% 5% 6%
Mike Huckabee 2% 2% 8% 6% - 4% 3%
Tom Tancredo 1% 2% 4% 1% - 2% 2%
Duncan Hunter 1% 3% 1% 1% - 1% 1%
Ron Paul 1% 1% 1% 1% - 3% 3%
Sam Brownback - - 1% - - 2% 1%
Unsure/Other 16% 23% 15% 22% 17% 11% 17%

[Shatterhand]

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/

Republican Candidate AL CA CO FL NY OH WI
Fred Thompson 31% 16% 25% 23% 9% 21% 24%
Rudy Giuliani 21% 22% 20% 24% 47% 34% 28%
John McCain 14% 15% 12% 9% 16% 9% 8%
Mitt Romney 7% 16% 8% 13% 6% 8% 7%
Newt Gingrich 7% - 5% - 5% 5% 6%
Mike Huckabee 2% 2% 8% 6% - 4% 3%
Tom Tancredo 1% 2% 4% 1% - 2% 2%
Duncan Hunter 1% 3% 1% 1% - 1% 1%
Ron Paul 1% 1% 1% 1% - 3% 3%
Sam Brownback - - 1% - - 2% 1%
Unsure/Other 16% 23% 15% 22% 17% 11% 17%

Bradley, what do you personally make of all these polls? Please share your opinion.

[Richard in Austin]

I just voted in the poll titled, 'You Vote', and RP is in the lead, taking 52% of the vote with 9417 votes.

This is all they say about those poll numbers: "These are the polls from the following states: Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida, New York, Ohio, Wisconsin."

That's not very informative.

[G-khan]

Pure BS............................

[MsDoodahs]

Today's polls are intended to SWAY public opinion, not find existing opinion.

:)

[Shatterhand]

Today's polls are intended to SWAY public opinion, not find existing opinion.

:)

Indeed.

Still, I find it hard to gauge support. Sometimes I do signwaving and lots of people honk and wave. Other times I do signwaving and nobody honks and waves. :(

[honkywill]

There's no doubt in my mind that if the primaries were tomorrow that Rudy or Thompson would take AL.

[Bradley in DC]

Bradley, what do you personally make of all these polls? Please share your opinion.

This early in the game, the polls mostly reflect name identification. They show how much work we have to do to get Dr. Paul's message out.

[BUSHLIED]

Today's polls are intended to SWAY public opinion, not find existing opinion.

:)

yes, this is my observation too. Many poll results are used to influence others how to vote. This is evident when you read about PAUL and they ALWAYS mention how he is low in the polls or at 1% in national polls!

This is what really pisses me off. I really don't think that he is that low in the nation. However, I would agree that he is low among the republican neo conservative base.

But that is no surprise, that is the group Ron is attacking.

[Corydoras]

I'd like to see polls without Newt Gingrich in them. He's not going to run, as nobody's going to pledge $30M for him.

[EvilEngineer]

I'm not worried about these poll numbers as they really do not address the base of support for Ron Paul. These antiquated polls use only land lines and only target past registered voters.

The big thing about Ron Paul in my mind is that he is pulling his support from all across the political spectrum and walks of life. Most of which, don't fit the poll group specifications. The major difference though between those that were "polled" is that Ron Paul supporters are going to have an EXTREMELY high voter turn out when it matters. That 5% of the population that shows up for the primaries is going to be 90% of our supporters. We are motivated, organized, and working toward change. We will win not because of our popularity, but because of our zealotry for the cause of freedom.

[EvilEngineer]

I'd like to see polls without Newt Gingrich in them. He's not going to run, as nobody's going to pledge $30M for him.

Kind of wish he would, it would be one more pro-war neocon in the mix to dilute the pro-war vote.

[DataSage]

These polls do absolutely nothing but tell us about name recognition. What matters is the people who are voting on primary day.

[dsentell]

These polls do absolutely nothing but tell us about name recognition. What matters is the people who are voting on primary day.

Welcome DataSage!

You are absolutely right!

[jacmicwag]

I think Gallop showed Ron Paul at 4% recently. Hey, Clinton was at 3% this time in 1991 and look what happened.

[Mordechai Vanunu]

Only 3%? Looks like he doesn't have a chance. I'll vote for the guy who is polling the highest since he could actually win.

(what they want me to think)

[SwordOfShannarah]

This early in the game, the polls mostly reflect name identification. They show how much work we have to do to get Dr. Paul's message out.

No they don't- they are fixed- cheated polls. They are lies. His rating haven't changed in these polls AT ALL, yet his meetings around the nation went from tens, to hundreds and now thousands of supporters. Please stop posting lie/propaganda here.

[micahnelson]

No they don't- they are fixed- cheated polls. They are lies. His rating haven't changed in these polls AT ALL, yet his meetings around the nation went from tens, to hundreds and now thousands of supporters. Please stop posting lie/propaganda here.

No need for hyperbole... lets just call it as it is.

Among 500 or so people who were called randomly from a list of registered republicans who have voted in primaries before and have a land line, Ron Paul is polling at 1-5%.

Among people who watched the primary debates and were willing to go through the effort to text message a vote to a phone number to support a candidate, Ron Paul won with 33%

The question we should be debating isn't the validity of the polls, but the meaningfulness of the results.