PDA

View Full Version : PPP Poll - West Virginia Republican Presidential Primary




tsai3904
05-12-2011, 06:52 PM
West Virginia (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_WV_GOP.pdf) (PDF Warning)
5/11 - 5/12
314 likely Republican primary voters
+/-5.5%

Huckabee 21% (24%)
Palin 15% (13%)
Romney 15% (11%)
Gingrich 12% (9%)
Paul 9% (3%)
Trump 9%
Bachmann 4% (3%)
Pawlenty 3%

The results in parenthesis are from PPP's poll conducted 4/21 to 4/24.

MelissaWV
05-12-2011, 06:54 PM
I think we can do better than that poll implies in WV.

"Primary voters" do not select the GOP candidate all on their lonesome. If Ron Paul were to win or do very well in the GOP Convention selection, that number would climb. He's catchin' on.

sailingaway
05-12-2011, 06:55 PM
Well, that's not as bad as I feared, when you didn't say the amount in the heading. At least it's up from 3% :rolleyes:


I think we can do better than that poll implies in WV.

"Primary voters" do not select the GOP candidate all on their lonesome. If Ron Paul were to win or do very well in the GOP Convention selection, that number would climb. He's catchin' on.

I'd go further and say that until I heard of Ron Paul I myself was NOT a 'likely primary voter' and that they should be calling UNlikely people....

tsai3904
05-12-2011, 07:04 PM
He moved from 21 points behind from first to 12 points behind in less than a month. I'm sure the debate helped him.

t0rnado
05-12-2011, 07:08 PM
1st place in the 30-45 age crowd @ 21%.

nate895
05-12-2011, 07:09 PM
He moved from 21 points behind from first to 12 points behind in less than a month. I'm sure the debate helped him.

+/- 5% isn't exactly something to go on as far as that goes.

MelissaWV
05-12-2011, 07:10 PM
Well, that's not as bad as I feared, when you didn't say the amount in the heading. At least it's up from 3% :rolleyes:



I'd go further and say that until I heard of Ron Paul I myself was NOT a 'likely primary voter' and that they should be calling UNlikely people....

No no... you misunderstand me. The kingmakers here are the likely primary voters, but only that segment which is vocal and clever enough to get elected as delegates for the GOP Convention.

Last time, we did okay. This time, there's no reason to think it can't be more successful.

sailingaway
05-12-2011, 07:14 PM
No no... you misunderstand me. The kingmakers here are the likely primary voters, but only that segment which is vocal and clever enough to get elected as delegates for the GOP Convention.

Last time, we did okay. This time, there's no reason to think it can't be more successful.

I hope it is. Nevada has passed rules keeping delegates from switching candidates even if theirs drops out which is going to limit us there.

trey4sports
05-12-2011, 07:32 PM
Wow, we can definitely say that Ron's numbers have been rising.

realtonygoodwin
05-12-2011, 07:35 PM
Do you have the numbers without Huckabee, Trump, and Palin?

Badger Paul
05-12-2011, 07:35 PM
". Nevada has passed rules keeping delegates from switching candidates even if theirs drops out which is going to limit us there"

Not necessarily. It will keep them from unifying in so-called "unity" slates to keep us from getting any delegates. We saw that way too many times in 2008.

tsai3904
05-12-2011, 07:38 PM
Do you have the numbers without Huckabee, Trump, and Palin?

No, they didn't poll those possibilities.

sailingaway
05-12-2011, 07:39 PM
". Nevada has passed rules keeping delegates from switching candidates even if theirs drops out which is going to limit us there"

Not necessarily. It will keep them from unifying in so-called "unity" slates to keep us from getting any delegates. We saw that way too many times in 2008.

But in NV last time they unified for RON.

invisible
05-12-2011, 08:13 PM
These polls are starting to piss me off. Why do they keep polling on candidates who aren't running? If they limited the polls to candidates who are actually running, who would they then have to admit is the frontrunner? How can these pollsters be properly called out for this farce?

dude58677
05-12-2011, 09:49 PM
Pointless poll. West Virginia is a caucus.

Libertytree
05-12-2011, 09:56 PM
In 08 the WV RP folks sold out to Huck because that's what the "party" wanted. It's an old boys club there and that didn't help but the majority of people there were spineless, necon twits.

dude58677
05-12-2011, 09:59 PM
In 08 the WV RP folks sold out to Huck because that's what the "party" wanted. It's an old boys club there and that didn't help but the majority of people there were spineless, necon twits.

So how do get around this obstacle?

ronpaulitician
05-12-2011, 09:59 PM
I'm counting on the polls as a whole to end up being a fairly accurate reflection of the eventual vote totals, just like it was in '08.

But he seems to be polling a LOT better than he did last time around this time of year. Did we even break double digits in ANY poll last time?

t0rnado
05-12-2011, 10:33 PM
Pointless poll. West Virginia is a caucus.

That 9% is going to translate to a lot more in the causes.

dude58677
05-12-2011, 10:42 PM
That 9% is going to translate to a lot more in the causes.

A caucus vote takes place in early February for 18 delegates and a second vote takes place for 9 delegates in a primary. The second vote not only has less delegates but also it is a time when most candidates drop out of the race. Also it doesn'tean we can't try to become chairman so we can change the rules for the second vote.

FSP-Rebel
05-12-2011, 10:45 PM
That 9% is going to translate to a lot more in the causes.

I hope!

MelissaWV
05-13-2011, 04:30 AM
In 08 the WV RP folks sold out to Huck because that's what the "party" wanted. It's an old boys club there and that didn't help but the majority of people there were spineless, necon twits.

Good to see you have zero idea what you are talking about. That decision was not made by "the party." That decision was made by Ron Paul supporters, who were there in just enough numbers to wind up 4th in the voting (which puts your candidate OUT of the running... no write-in, no chance, no nothing) but to be courted by Romney and Huckabee people, who needed the numbers to win the next round decisively. In exchange? Three national delegates.

If you still think 0 > 3, your math is questionable.

I would love to know who the "majority" that were "spineless neocon twits" supposedly were. Was it Ed Burgess, who was there giving support and an incredibly introductory speech? Maybe it was my husband and I, who didn't eat that day, but drove down from Morgantown (with a whole lot of people we helped educate on the electoral process, and who we helped register GOP way back when it was actually helpful to do so). Maybe it was the other grassroots folks who were there.

Or maybe, in your eyes, the only "true Ron Paul supporters" were those who walked out after the first round, wasted their trip, and basically told Ron Paul "screw politics; our egos are way more important than getting you any delegates today."