Discouraging new poll

[AggieforPaul]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/29/130.poll.pdf

Dont even care to post the results, but Paul comes in at 6%, behind Gingrich. At the start of the month, he was 12% in the same poll. This puts him behind Bachmann again in the RCP average.

[CaptUSA]

This poll is garbage. There's nothing to gain from this data. I mean you can't tell anything...

I think this is a BS poll put out just to be included in the RCP average.

[ProfNo]

This is not good. There have been a couple of polls out recently with 6%.

Last time we made the mistake of ignoring the polls. We can't make that mistake this time. We need to determine if we really are polling this low, and if so do something about it.

[harikaried]

National polls include all states people. We need to get the word out even outside of the early states. Join your local meetup groups. Do some tabling. Or even just sign wave.

[NJames]

Disturbing.

Why are the 18-34 and 35-50 age brackets listed as N/A ? Am I right in thinking that this poll was overwhelming of American 50 years and older?

EDIT: No that doesn't make sense. They must not have differentiated between those under 50 categories.

[RDM]

We need more nationally televised debates. I believe if RP does well or even hits it out of the park, these poll numbers go up. Also, most regular people do not even begin to seriously think about politics until after Labor Day. Don't let these early polls bring you down, but do take them seriously to prove everyone's efforts to get the word out is not done.

[Inkblots]

This is statistical noise. There will always be outliers both on the high and low side: sometimes Dr. Paul will get 14%, sometimes 6%, but in reality he's somewhere right around 10% nationally, which is exactly where he needs to be at this point. It keeps him in the mix as a major candidate in a crowded field, ensures that he'll clear any polling requirements for participating in the televised debates, and will allow him to credibly fund-raise nationally to focus on the early caucus and primary states, where he's easily outperforming his national numbers right now.

Also, I expect Paul's national support to increase when Palin fails to jump into the race and Perry has what I expect to be a poor debate performance next week.

[Dlynne]

Someone on this forum raised the idea of RP doing his own polling, or perhaps some supporters getting together to hire a professional pollster. I would love to know why Paul is only polling at 6%, that is, what issues are the great obstacles to Paul's camapign. Or, perhaps, if the respondents even know about Paul.

[Harald]

They seemed to only poll South.

North Mid- Sub-
Total east west South West Urban urban Rural
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Renominate Obama 72% N/A N/A 71% N/A 76% 72% N/A
Different candidate 27% N/A N/A 25% N/A 21% 28% N/A
No opinion 1% N/A N/A 3% N/A 3% 1% N/A

[harikaried]

They seemed to only poll South
I think they just don't have enough data to break it down, but that's how they reported the demographics for the previous poll where Ron Paul received 12%.

I don't disagree that the general average is probably closer to 10% than 6%, but we need to be doing local activism and not just sit behind our computers and hope the campaign does better at debates, etc.

[libertythor]

Young voters are more likely to participate in elections in the upper midwest than in the rest of the nation. Also, Iowa is a caucus state.

For the rest of the nation, we need to be focusing on the 35+ group but without ignoring the under 35 group.


Disturbing.

Why are the 18-34 and 35-50 age brackets listed as N/A ? Am I right in thinking that this poll was overwhelming of American 50 years and older?

EDIT: No that doesn't make sense. They must not have differentiated between those under 50 categories.

[PaulConventionWV]

There's no way this is for real. Like I said about the other poll that had him at 6%, Ron Paul doesn't just lose half his voters in a week. That makes no sense. This is suggesting that he can go from 14% to 6% just from statistical error. If that's the case, then nobody should put much stock in these polls. However, if this is suggesting that Dr. Paul lost support since the last poll, then it means that over half of Ron's base supporters simply abandoned ship for no discernible reason. We all know that is not possible. Either way, there is something fishy about these polls. Ron Paul has far surpassed this number so many times, and yet we are supposed to believe he can revert back to ~5% in a couple of weeks? No friggin way.

[kahless]

Absolutely amazing that CNN would poll for a non-candidate like Giuliani who had very little support in 2008. I can see why they would do Palin, but Giuliani, really CNN.

[harikaried]

Statistical noise doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing local activism. A bad polling day for Romney is still better than Paul's best day. We have a lot of work to do to inform people of Ron Paul. There are even supporters that don't even know Ron Paul is running again in 2012! That's easy support that just needs to be reminded to also help spread the word.

[Epic]

So, RP goes from 12% to 6% in just a couple weeks?

And Gallup had him at 13%?

Just so weird how much these things move around.

Edit: and Gary Johnson at 2%, I think I read at Politico.

[erowe1]

This poll is all adults, right?

If so, it's totally different from a poll of registered voters or likely voters. Polls of all adults mean nothing.

[NJames]

I think statistically Paul polled at 1.5% - 10.5%, given a +/- 4.5% margin of error.

[rich34]

Anyone remember some of the polling "tactics" some of the polling firms used last time? I can remember listening to about 4 or 5 different people who posted what their answering machine recorded and imo there that could have affected the polling results. Not sure if they've started this again, but it could certainly explain the sudden drop in polling. It's unfortunate, but polling numbers do affect how people vote. Everyone wants to vote for the winner..

[Esoteric]

Ok, I don't care if I'm called a conspiracy theorist, but I theorize that these polls are manipulated. If they constantly get away with manipulating Paul in the single digits, that becomes the perceived political reality. This may be the last trick in their bag.

[eleganz]

Why don't we just go outside and poll average joes from all ages, take a proportional average from each state (RPF members) and report back with details/statistics.

[minuteman76]

The important thing is that there are potential RP voters out there who need to be turned into actual RP voters.

Go out and make that happen today.

[erowe1]

Why don't we just go outside and poll average joes from all ages, take a proportional average from each state (RPF members) and report back with details/statistics.

I don't think polling average joes would be much use. But you might be onto a good idea. We could get a bunch of volunteers to do our own poll of registered Republican voters. It would have to be organized and controlled well. But it probably wouldn't be too hard to get 30 volunteers to poll 30 people each.

[NJames]

Does anyone here have the necessary polling experience to conduct a statistically sound poll? That would be pretty cool.

[harikaried]

What's with the interest to run our own polls? To see if we're really behind and need to push local activism? To see if we're still behind Perry and need to push local activism? To see if we're #1 right now and still need to push local activism?

Do people just want a nice number to pat themselves on the back for sitting at their computer?

[erowe1]

What's with the interest to run our own polls? To see if we're really behind and need to push local activism? To see if we're still behind Perry and need to push local activism? To see if we're #1 right now and still need to push local activism?

Do people just want a nice number to pat themselves on the back for sitting at their computer?

Those who don't see the benefit of it would not have to participate of course.

But there are reasons that campaigns spend big bucks to run their own polls.

[michaelkellenger]

This poll was perfectly legitimate three weeks ago, now it isn't? Amazing.....you've guys got to be kidding me.

[harikaried]

But there are reasons that campaigns spend big bucks to run their own polls.Sure, but I have yet to see a good reason for the grassroots to run its own national poll or pay for a polling company to run it. Money could be better spent elsewhere as companies like Gallup and Rasmussen are going to run polls anyway.

[erowe1]

This poll was perfectly legitimate three weeks ago, now it isn't? Amazing.....you've guys got to be kidding me.

Somebody said that a poll that was done of all adults was legitimate 3 weeks ago?

I know I didn't say that.

[erowe1]

Sure, but I have yet to see a good reason for the grassroots to run its own national poll or pay for a polling company to run it. Money could be better spent elsewhere as companies like Gallup and Rasmussen are going to run polls anyway.

I can think of ways that a specially-made poll could be very useful to us.

[realtonygoodwin]

This poll was perfectly legitimate three weeks ago, now it isn't? Amazing.....you've guys got to be kidding me.

Agreed. When this same poll showed Ron at 12% a few weeks ago, I didn't see people complaining then.

[erowe1]

Agreed. When this same poll showed Ron at 12% a few weeks ago, I didn't see people complaining then.

Can you find that thread? A poll of all adults was as worthless three weeks ago as it is today no matter what the results are.

[harikaried]

8/11: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/11/gop2012poll.pdf
8/29: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/29/130.poll.pdf

[Agorism]

New polls normally come out on Wed (although occasionally Thursday.)

So only 2 days and we'll get better polls I hope.


ps- didn't we figure out that Palin hurt us more than any other candidate...not sure why though, and she's in this plll.

[malkusm]

Guys, please be wary of trusting any poll from CNN that is such an outlier, unless it has a reputable independent polling company putting its name on it.

HERE is a CNN poll from June 3-6 -- it was just as fishy. It took Ron down from 7% (he had previously polled 12% two weeks prior). It had Giuliani at 12% (when no one was polling Giuliani). They polled only people in the "South" region, and only people in "Suburban" households, and only people 50 and older, in their Republican sample: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/06/14/rel10f.pdf

[Havax]

This poll just destroyed my chances of winning over my grandfather who repeatedly stated that "Ron Paul can't win" and saw this poll come up on TV. This was after me talking to him for 20 minutes about how he's in 3rd. He refuses to believe he's anywhere close to even 3rd now.

[malkusm]

Note -- the polling company for the most recent poll, Opinion Research Corporation, is the same company that put out the fishy poll that I link to in the post above this one.

[malkusm]

Guys, look at the crosstabs in the most recent poll. Same as the one dated June 3-6. All of their Republicans are from the "South" region and in "Suburban" households. They did poll a few individuals under the age of 50, at least. But from a sampling perspective, this poll is absolute garbage, as was the poll dated June 3-6.

[malkusm]

Sorry, I don't usually use bold font for everything, but this seemed important.

Note that it's not that ALL respondents came from suburban households, nor did they all come from the South region -- the total percentages are different. However, a vast majority of respondents did fit those criteria, to the point that results on other demographics had statistically insignificant sample sizes. Probably 70% or more of respondents were from suburban households in the South, by my estimate. Note that when a legitimate polling company does a poll with crosstabs listed (like PPP for example), you'll never see an "N/A" in a region, because the sample is properly stratified to include all regions in a relatively balanced manner, to be reflective of the actual voting population.

Additionally, note that in both of the polls (June 3-6 and the recent poll), Ron polls HIGHER in the cross-tab of the South region than he does overall by 3-4%. Combining this with the fact that all other regions are statistically insignificant in the sample, Ron would have to get literally close to 0% in all of the regions that were listed as "N/A" in the cross-tabs -- a near-impossibility, considering that he has consistently polled between 9 and 13% nationally for some time now.

[Feeding the Abscess]

There's a base of about 8 to 12% who are like us; hardcore supporters who aren't going anywhere. Some of his other support is lukewarm, and can be eaten into by Parry, etc. The focus shouldn't be on garnering those votes; it should be on growing the base. The lukewarm supporters will follow.

It's one poll, and Parry hasn't been thoroughly vetted yet. It'll happen. Not to mention, a 6% poll is within the margin of error of our hardcore base support.

EDIT: what malkusm provided is also pretty important to note.

[whoisjohngalt]

what matt said

[CaseyJones]

whoa matt you are right ... that is messed up

[yoshimaroka]

Can the name of the Title be edited to "old useless poll"? :-D

[Brett85]

It's not just this poll. The majority of polls that have come out since the debate show Ron losing a lot of ground. As I've said before, Ron has to realize that he's trying to win over conservative Republicans, and he has to phrase his message in a way that wins them over. Coming across like Dennis Kucinich in the debates isn't going to help him do that. He really needs to make Rand his debate coach.

[cero]

It's not just this poll. The majority of polls that have come out since the debate show Ron losing a lot of ground. As I've said before, Ron has to realize that he's trying to win over conservative Republicans, and he has to phrase his message in a way that wins them over. Coming across like Dennis Kucinich in the debates isn't going to help him do that. He really needs to make Rand his debate coach.

read what Malk posted

[Brett85]

read what Malk posted

I did. But he called PPP a legitimate polling organization, and they had Ron at 6% as well. It's not just this poll that has Ron losing ground. Rather than taking apart polls that show Ron losing ground, we need to work harder to get people on the ground in Iowa and elsewhere. And Ron needs to work hard at completely revamping the way he presents his message to GOP audiences.

[wstrucke]

This poll was perfectly legitimate three weeks ago, now it isn't? Amazing.....you've guys got to be kidding me.

There are a lot of people around here who always look on the bright side of the bright side. It was the same in 2008. Any good news means "we're winning!" and any bad news means "don't worry, we're winning!" You have to cut through the crap sometimes to get an idea of what's really going on.

[Jeremy Tyler]

Yeah I remember during the Rand Paul campaign he was polling a lot higher with most other polling companies but CNN always had him lower because of their funky polling..always polling just registered adults instead of likely voters.

[eleganz]

What's with the interest to run our own polls? To see if we're really behind and need to push local activism? To see if we're still behind Perry and need to push local activism? To see if we're #1 right now and still need to push local activism?

Do people just want a nice number to pat themselves on the back for sitting at their computer?

Personally? No I don't want a nice number just to pat myself on the back. Somebody suggested to pay a third party (unbiased) polling company to do the work and my suggestion was that we could do it ourselves, it would be based on an honor system of course.

This is a sort of check on the current polling companies, it wouldn't hurt or cost any money for some of us to go out and ask likely voters on their opinions. So what does this have to do with you? are you here to put down grassroots ideas to pat yourself on the back?

[wstrucke]

I like most of you, but as a whole I wouldn't trust any poll results by the members of these forums.

[malkusm]

I like most of you, but as a whole I wouldn't trust any poll results by the members of these forums.

I have a degree in Statistics, and I'll be posting something shortly that doesn't give this poll a leg to stand on.

[Brett85]

I have a degree in Statistics, and I'll be posting something shortly that doesn't give this poll a leg to stand on.

What about the PPP poll that had Ron at 6% nationally? Did that have some flaws in it as well?

[malkusm]

What about the PPP poll that had Ron at 6% nationally? Did that have some flaws in it as well?

I haven't looked at the PPP poll, so I can't comment on its validity -- although, yes, it's suspicious that PPP has shown Ron going from 12%, to 9%, to 7%, and now to 6%, in a time period when all other major pollsters have shown his take of the vote increasing. Remember that PPP is the same polling company that has a contractual obligation with Daily Kos, and the same polling company that showed Rand Paul in a dead heat with Jack Conway (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/ppp-poll-rand-paul-and-jack-conway-tied-in-ky.php) last summer.

But, my critique of this CNN/ORC poll is far more scientific and substantive.

[JoshLowry]

PPP lost their legitimacy with this poll.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-leads-in-wisconsin-iowa.html

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_IAWI_0824.pdf

They include both Palin and Cain but excluded Paul when it comes to VS Obama.

It's late August.

ಠ_ಠ

[boneyard bill]

That's the way it's been all primary season. Ron Paul has been up and down. The important thing is that he has been trending upward. That hasn't been true of Gingrich, Cain, or Pawlenty who were once being highly touted. For that matter, is isn't true of Palin, Bachmann, or Romney either. Rick Perry is the latest hare in this contest, but Ron Paul is the tortoise and we know who won that race.

[malkusm]

Here's my breakdown: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?312594-CNN-and-%93Opinion-Research-Center%94-%97-The-Numbers-Don%92t-Add-Up

[YumYum]

How come we don't do our own poll?

[Eric21ND]

How come we don't do our own poll?
If DailyKos can run their own polling we should be able to fund our own polls as well.

[PaulConventionWV]

There are a lot of people around here who always look on the bright side of the bright side. It was the same in 2008. Any good news means "we're winning!" and any bad news means "don't worry, we're winning!" You have to cut through the crap sometimes to get an idea of what's really going on.

The poll was garbage, dude. Malk just proved that. Ron has been polling consistently over 10%, and you're telling me about half of his constituents just jumped ship in the last week? It's pretty easy to see that this is a straw man. They made this garbage so that they could put it on TV and make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. We have to fight against that.

[PaulConventionWV]

Personally? No I don't want a nice number just to pat myself on the back. Somebody suggested to pay a third party (unbiased) polling company to do the work and my suggestion was that we could do it ourselves, it would be based on an honor system of course.

This is a sort of check on the current polling companies, it wouldn't hurt or cost any money for some of us to go out and ask likely voters on their opinions. So what does this have to do with you? are you here to put down grassroots ideas to pat yourself on the back?

You've obviously never taken a statistics course. The methodology has to be flawless, or else the poll is trash. That takes money and resources. You can't just walk outside in your hometown and expect to get an accurate sample for the whole nation.