PPP and Reuters Polls are outside Margin of Error for Ron Paul

[Esoteric]

PPP - 5% (4.5% margin of error)

Thus, according to PPP, the HIGHEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 9.5%

Reuters - 13% (3% margin of error)

According the Reuters, the LOWEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 10%


If the lowest that Paul could possibly be polling is 10%, according to the margin of error allowed for in he Reutuers poll, then the PPP poll cannot be correct, as the poll asserts that his highest possible level of support is 9.5%.

The only answer is manipulation, or an error in calculating margin of error. I have a slight propensity to believe the former.

side note - notice that the low range of PPP's margin of error has Paul at 0.5% nationally. seems about right! :rolleyes:

[sailingaway]

That is because the PPP poll is full of it. They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose I am convinced. They are a Dem polling firm and Ron cuts into Obama's hope at getting activists involved in his campaign.

[KingNothing]

That is because the PPP poll is full of it. They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose I am convinced. They are a Dem polling firm and Ron cuts into Obama's hope at getting activists involved in his campaign.


They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose, no doubt about it. But you're completely insane if you think they do it to hold Paul back. That doesn't even make sense. Romney polls better against Obama than Paul, so by your logic he is the man they should be conspiring to defeat.

The fact is they're doing what they think gives the most accurate representation of the political landscape. Stop inventing dragons to slay. It's silly.

[rp08orbust]

PPP - 5% (4.5% margin of error)

Thus, according to PPP, the HIGHEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 9.5%

Reuters - 13% (3% margin of error)

According the Reuters, the LOWEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 10%


If the lowest that Paul could possibly be polling is 10%, according to the margin of error allowed for in he Reutuers poll, then the PPP poll cannot be correct, as the poll asserts that his highest possible level of support is 9.5%.

That's not what margin of error means. They don't specify absolutely certain boundaries, just boundaries that mark certain levels of confidence.

[trey4sports]

They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose, no doubt about it. But you're completely insane if you think they do it to hold Paul back. That doesn't even make sense. Romney polls better against Obama than Paul, so by your logic he is the man they should be conspiring to defeat.

The fact is they're doing what they think gives the most accurate representation of the political landscape. Stop inventing dragons to slay. It's silly.


Reluctantly, I agree.

[Keith and stuff]

PPP is known for not having accurate polls. Don't take PPP polls too serious.

[Esoteric]

That's not what margin of error means. They don't specify absolutely certain boundaries, just boundaries that mark certain levels of confidence.

It's specific enough to tell me that one of these polls is bullshit.. and I think it might be the one that suggests that it's within the realm of possibility that Ron is polling at 0.5% nationally.

[sailingaway]

They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose, no doubt about it. But you're completely insane if you think they do it to hold Paul back. That doesn't even make sense. Romney polls better against Obama than Paul, so by your logic he is the man they should be conspiring to defeat.

The fact is they're doing what they think gives the most accurate representation of the political landscape. Stop inventing dragons to slay. It's silly.

I disagree. I think Romney has no excitement and they are hoping for another McCain type situation if he wins, or a loon on the other side who won't appeal to independents as the alternative. I used to think what you are saying but I have been looking at their choices of who to poll head to head for too long.

[Epic]

Margin of error stats are at 95% confidence intervals, I believe. It doesn't necessarily mean that the polls are screwed up. Could just be an anomaly. And they could be calling different lists, different methodologies.

[sailingaway]

That's not what margin of error means. They don't specify absolutely certain boundaries, just boundaries that mark certain levels of confidence.

It's still indicative and rare to have established polling companies wholly outside of the margin of error from each other. I'm not saying they made up their methodology, I'm saying that while staying within the 'acceptable realm' polling companies have a lot of leeway in designing polling bases and that outside the last 2 weeks where their polls are actually rated and held against them, they have a lot of ability to 'lead the conversation' with their polling. And I remember some PPP Polling in Rand's race before that window of time, which was absolutely screwy from what Rand was getting on internal polls.

[Galileo Galilei]

There is no democrat primary. All of the poll are underestimating the independent and crossover vote. Most assume 15%, but it will be 30% to 35% or maybe even higher. By the time the election rolls around, Paul will be running tons of TV ads and the voters will realize Obama is unopposed.

[trey4sports]

PPP is known for not having accurate polls. Don't take PPP polls too serious.


What? They were the second most accurate firm last cycle. (Granted, the measurement was from within 3 days from the election)

[hazek]

"Those Who Forget the Lessons of History Are Doomed To Repeat It" - John A. N. Lee

In 2007 we also thought the polls couldn't possibly be the picture of reality, and yet they turned out to be remarkably accurate come election day.

Of course the polls changed throughout the process but in the end just a week before the election they were very accurate. To get a good picture of this please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party _presidential_primaries,_2008

2007/2008 IOWA POLLS::
--------------------------

Caucus Results
Sampling Size: 118,696
January 3, 2008 Mike Huckabee 34.4%, Mitt Romney 25.2%, Fred Thompson 13.4%, John McCain 13.1%, Ron Paul 10%, Rudy Giuliani 3.5%, Duncan Hunter .4%

Poll Source Date Highlights

Insider Advantage January 1, 2008 Mike Huckabee 30%, Mitt Romney 24.1%, Fred Thompson 11.3%, John McCain 10.9%, Ron Paul 7.1%, Rudy Giuliani 4.8%, Duncan Hunter 1.3%, Undecided 10.5%
American Research Group
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4%
December 31, 2007 - January 2, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 24%, Fred Thompson 13%, John McCain 11%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 6%, Duncan Hunter 4%, Alan Keyes 1%, Undecided 4%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 914
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 30, 2007 - January 2, 2008 Mike Huckabee 31%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 10%, Ron Paul 10%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 882
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 29, 2007 - January 1, 2008 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 26%, John McCain 12%, Fred Thompson 12%, Ron Paul 9%, Rudy Giuliani 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 903
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 28–31, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 25%, John McCain 12%, Fred Thompson 10%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
December 28–30, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Mike Huckabee 28%, John McCain 16%, Fred Thompson 13%, Ron Paul 4%, Rudy Giuliani 4%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
Des Moines Register
Sample Size: 800
Margin of Error: ±3.5%
December 27–30, 2007 Mike Huckabee 32%, Mitt Romney 26%, John McCain 13%, Ron Paul 9%, Fred Thompson 9%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Alan Keyes 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 876
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 27–30, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 27%, John McCain 13%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 7%, Ron Paul 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
CNN/Opinion Research Corp.
Sample Size: 373
Margin of Error: ±5%
December 26–30, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Mike Huckabee 28%, Fred Thompson 13%, John McCain 10%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter <0.5%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 867
Margin of Error: ±3.4%
December 26–29, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 28%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
MSNBC/Mason-Dixon
Sample Size: 400
Margin of Error: ±5%
December 26–28, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 23%, Fred Thompson 14%, John McCain 13%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Ron Paul 5%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 12%
American Research Group
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4%
December 26–28, 2007 Mitt Romney 32%, Mike Huckabee 23%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 7%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 11%
Research 2000/Sioux City Journal
Sample Size: 500
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
December 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 34%, Mitt Romney 27%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 3%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 27%, Fred Thompson 15%, John McCain 14%, Rudy Giuliani 4%, Ron Paul 4%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
LA Times/Bloomberg December 20–23, 26, 2007 Mike Huckabee 37%, Mitt Romney 23%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 11%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 9%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 20–23, 2007 Mike Huckabee 23%, Mitt Romney 21%, John McCain 17%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Ron Paul 10%, Fred Thompson 3%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Alan Keyes 2%, Undecided 8%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 16–19, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, John McCain 20%, Mitt Romney 17%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Alan Keyes 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Undecided 11%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 16–18, 2007 Mike Huckabee 31%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 16%, John McCain 8%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 496
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 17, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 27%, John McCain 14%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Fred Thompson 8%, Ron Paul 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 8–10, 2007 Mike Huckabee 30%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 13%, Rudy Giuliani 10%, John McCain 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 9%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 789
December 10, 2007 Mike Huckabee 39%, Mitt Romney 23%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%
Newsweek
Sampling Size: 540
Margin of Error: ± 3%
December 5–6, 2007 Mike Huckabee 39%, Mitt Romney 17%, Fred Thompson 10%, Rudy Giuliani 9%, Ron Paul 8%, John McCain 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 0%, Other 1%, Undecided 8%
Mason-Dixon
Sampling Size: 400
Margin of Error: ± 5%
December 3–6, 2007 Mike Huckabee 32%, Mitt Romney 20%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 7%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Alan Keyes 1%, Undecided 19%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
November 30 - December 2, 2007 Mike Huckabee 27%, Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 11%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 27%, Fred Thompson 14%, Rudy Giuliani 9%, John McCain 9%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 9%
Des Moines Register November 25–28, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 9%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 7%, Tom Tancredo 6%, Duncan Hunter 1%, John Cox -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 4%
Rasmussen November 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 25%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, Ron Paul 5%, John McCain 4%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
November 23–25, 2007 Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 10%
Pew Research Center
Sampling Size: 264
Margin of Error: ±7%
November 7–25, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 12%, John McCain 5%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Other 10%
ABC News/Wash Post November 14–18, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Fred Thompson 15%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
KCCI Des Moines
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 12–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 18%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 10–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 10%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Keyes -, Undecided 13%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 825
Margin of Error: ± 3.5%
November 9–12, 2007 Mitt Romney 29%, Mike Huckabee 16%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, Fred Thompson 14%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 4%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 9%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 9–12, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Mike Huckabee 19%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
CBS News/New York Times
Sampling Size: 1273
Margin of Error: +/- 5%
November 2–11, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 21%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, Fred Thompson 9%, Ron Paul 4%, John McCain 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 14%
Zogby
Sampling Size: 410
Margin of Error: +/- 5.0%
November 6–7, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Mike Huckabee 15%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 8%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Other 1%, Not Sure 16%
American Research Group October 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 19%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, John McCain 14%, Fred Thompson 8%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Ron Paul 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 13%
University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll
Margin of Error: +/- 5.8%
Sampling Size: 285
October 17–24, 2007 Mitt Romney 36.2%, Rudy Giuliani 13.1%, Mike Huckabee 12.8%, Fred Thompson 11.4%, John McCain 6.0%, Tom Tancredo 2.2%, Others 3.5%, Undecided 14.9%
Strategic Vision (note) October 12–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 5%, Sam Brownback 4%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 22%
Rasmussen Reports October 10 & 14, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 19%, Mike Huckabee 18%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 6%, Sam Brownback 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 11%
InsiderAdvantage October 2–3, 2007 Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 13%, Mike Huckabee 13%, John McCain 10%, Sam Brownback 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 13%
Des Moines Register October 1–3, 2007 Mitt Romney 29%, Fred Thompson 18%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, John McCain 7%, Tom Tancredo 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Sam Brownback 2%, Alan Keyes 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, John Cox -, Undecided 9%
American Research Group September 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 22%, Rudy Giuliani 21%, Fred Thompson 16%, John McCain 11%, Newt Gingrich 5%, Mike Huckabee 4%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Sam Brownback 2%, Alan Keyes 1%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Undecided 13%
Newsweek (All Republican voters) September 26–27, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 16%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, John McCain 7%, Mike Huckabee 6%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 21%
Newsweek (Likely caucus-goers) September 26–27, 2007 Mitt Romney 24%, Fred Thompson 16%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Mike Huckabee 12%, John McCain 9%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
Strategic Vision (note) September 21–23, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Rudy Giuliani 17%, Fred Thompson 13%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 6%, Newt Gingrich 5%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll September 6–10, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 16%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 7%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
American Research Group August 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Rudy Giuliani 17%, Mike Huckabee 14%, Fred Thompson 13%, Newt Gingrich 7%, John McCain 5%, Hunter 1%, Paul 1%, Brownback -, Tancredo -, Undecided 15%
McLaughlin & Associates August 20–21, 2007 Mitt Romney 35%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, Mike Huckabee 11%, Tom Tancredo 9%, John McCain 7%, Sam Brownback 2%, Ron Paul 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Firm Undecided 10%
Strategic Vision (note)
(Likely Caucus Goers)
Margin of Error: +/- 4%
Sampling Size: 600
August 17–19, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Fred Thompson 15%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 8%, Mike Huckabee 8%, Newt Gingrich 3%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
Newsmax/Zogby
(Likely Caucus Goers)
Margin of Error: +/- 4.5%
Sampling Size: 487
August 17–18, 2007 Mitt Romney 33%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 12%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 6%, Sam Brownback 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Ron Paul 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Someone else 2%, Not sure 14%

[brandon]

The only answer is manipulation, or an error in calculating margin of error. I have a slight propensity to believe the former.


The answer lies in the confidence level being less than 100%.

For example, if the confidence level for the PPP poll is 95%, it it saying that if the same poll were repeated an infinite amount of times, 95% of those polls would find paul's support to be in the range of 5% +- 4.5%


For example, here mark the top point on the curve to be 5%. The borders of the red region would be 0.5% and 9.5%. It is still possible to get a value outside of the red region, but only with 5% probability.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xjvxvV_sels/Szkopoy9xpI/AAAAAAAAABU/2ou3djrFHDY/s400/bellCurve95.gif

[hazek]

In NH McCain at this stage grew to consistent 16-17% and only built upon it until the election day, so if we want to win NH, we're already behind.

[1836]

PPP - 5% (4.5% margin of error)

Thus, according to PPP, the HIGHEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 9.5%

Reuters - 13% (3% margin of error)

According the Reuters, the LOWEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 10%


If the lowest that Paul could possibly be polling is 10%, according to the margin of error allowed for in he Reutuers poll, then the PPP poll cannot be correct, as the poll asserts that his highest possible level of support is 9.5%.

The only answer is manipulation, or an error in calculating margin of error. I have a slight propensity to believe the former.

side note - notice that the low range of PPP's margin of error has Paul at 0.5% nationally. seems about right! :rolleyes:

LOL. You are taking this "rigged poll" stuff too far. It harms our movement's credibility.

Statistical polls have a 95% confidence level on the margin of error. Meaning, there is a 95% chance that the number accurately falls within the MOE. Polls like this have a bell curve and use, if I remember correctly, two standard deviations on the curve.

[TheTyke]

PPP said Conway tied Rand at one point. At no time in KY did it feel even close to tie... all the energy was behind Rand. I think they're liars.

At the same time, we need to run as if we're waaay behind, which isn't so far off. Desperately!

[rpwasright]

"Those Who Forget the Lessons of History Are Doomed To Repeat It" - John A. N. Lee

In 2007 we also thought the polls couldn't possibly be the picture of reality, and yet they turned out to be remarkably accurate come election day.

Of course the polls changed throughout the process but in the end just a week before the election they were very accurate. To get a good picture of this please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party _presidential_primaries,_2008

2007/2008 IOWA POLLS::
--------------------------

Caucus Results
Sampling Size: 118,696
January 3, 2008 Mike Huckabee 34.4%, Mitt Romney 25.2%, Fred Thompson 13.4%, John McCain 13.1%, Ron Paul 10%, Rudy Giuliani 3.5%, Duncan Hunter .4%

Poll Source Date Highlights

Insider Advantage January 1, 2008 Mike Huckabee 30%, Mitt Romney 24.1%, Fred Thompson 11.3%, John McCain 10.9%, Ron Paul 7.1%, Rudy Giuliani 4.8%, Duncan Hunter 1.3%, Undecided 10.5%
American Research Group
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4%
December 31, 2007 - January 2, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 24%, Fred Thompson 13%, John McCain 11%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 6%, Duncan Hunter 4%, Alan Keyes 1%, Undecided 4%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 914
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 30, 2007 - January 2, 2008 Mike Huckabee 31%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 10%, Ron Paul 10%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 882
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 29, 2007 - January 1, 2008 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 26%, John McCain 12%, Fred Thompson 12%, Ron Paul 9%, Rudy Giuliani 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 903
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 28–31, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 25%, John McCain 12%, Fred Thompson 10%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
December 28–30, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Mike Huckabee 28%, John McCain 16%, Fred Thompson 13%, Ron Paul 4%, Rudy Giuliani 4%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
Des Moines Register
Sample Size: 800
Margin of Error: ±3.5%
December 27–30, 2007 Mike Huckabee 32%, Mitt Romney 26%, John McCain 13%, Ron Paul 9%, Fred Thompson 9%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Alan Keyes 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 876
Margin of Error: ±3.3%
December 27–30, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 27%, John McCain 13%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 7%, Ron Paul 7%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
CNN/Opinion Research Corp.
Sample Size: 373
Margin of Error: ±5%
December 26–30, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Mike Huckabee 28%, Fred Thompson 13%, John McCain 10%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter <0.5%
Zogby International
Sample Size: 867
Margin of Error: ±3.4%
December 26–29, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 28%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
MSNBC/Mason-Dixon
Sample Size: 400
Margin of Error: ±5%
December 26–28, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 23%, Fred Thompson 14%, John McCain 13%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Ron Paul 5%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 12%
American Research Group
Sample Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4%
December 26–28, 2007 Mitt Romney 32%, Mike Huckabee 23%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 7%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 11%
Research 2000/Sioux City Journal
Sample Size: 500
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
December 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 34%, Mitt Romney 27%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Ron Paul 8%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 3%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 27%, Fred Thompson 15%, John McCain 14%, Rudy Giuliani 4%, Ron Paul 4%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
LA Times/Bloomberg December 20–23, 26, 2007 Mike Huckabee 37%, Mitt Romney 23%, John McCain 11%, Fred Thompson 11%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 9%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 20–23, 2007 Mike Huckabee 23%, Mitt Romney 21%, John McCain 17%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Ron Paul 10%, Fred Thompson 3%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Alan Keyes 2%, Undecided 8%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 16–19, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, John McCain 20%, Mitt Romney 17%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Alan Keyes 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Undecided 11%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 16–18, 2007 Mike Huckabee 31%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 16%, John McCain 8%, Rudy Giuliani 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 6%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 496
Margin of Error: ± 4%
December 17, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 27%, John McCain 14%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, Fred Thompson 8%, Ron Paul 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%
Strategic Vision (R)
Sampling Size: 600LV
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
December 8–10, 2007 Mike Huckabee 30%, Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 13%, Rudy Giuliani 10%, John McCain 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 9%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 789
December 10, 2007 Mike Huckabee 39%, Mitt Romney 23%, Fred Thompson 8%, Rudy Giuliani 8%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%
Newsweek
Sampling Size: 540
Margin of Error: ± 3%
December 5–6, 2007 Mike Huckabee 39%, Mitt Romney 17%, Fred Thompson 10%, Rudy Giuliani 9%, Ron Paul 8%, John McCain 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 0%, Other 1%, Undecided 8%
Mason-Dixon
Sampling Size: 400
Margin of Error: ± 5%
December 3–6, 2007 Mike Huckabee 32%, Mitt Romney 20%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 7%, Rudy Giuliani 5%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Alan Keyes 1%, Undecided 19%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4.5%
November 30 - December 2, 2007 Mike Huckabee 27%, Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 11%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 27%, Fred Thompson 14%, Rudy Giuliani 9%, John McCain 9%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 9%
Des Moines Register November 25–28, 2007 Mike Huckabee 29%, Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Fred Thompson 9%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 7%, Tom Tancredo 6%, Duncan Hunter 1%, John Cox -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 4%
Rasmussen November 26–27, 2007 Mike Huckabee 28%, Mitt Romney 25%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, Ron Paul 5%, John McCain 4%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ±4.5%
November 23–25, 2007 Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 10%
Pew Research Center
Sampling Size: 264
Margin of Error: ±7%
November 7–25, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 12%, John McCain 5%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Other 10%
ABC News/Wash Post November 14–18, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Fred Thompson 15%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 6%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 4%
KCCI Des Moines
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 12–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 18%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
American Research Group
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 10–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 10%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Keyes -, Undecided 13%
Rasmussen Reports
Sampling Size: 825
Margin of Error: ± 3.5%
November 9–12, 2007 Mitt Romney 29%, Mike Huckabee 16%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, Fred Thompson 14%, John McCain 6%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 4%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 9%
Strategic Vision (note)
Sampling Size: 600
Margin of Error: ± 4%
November 9–12, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Mike Huckabee 19%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, John McCain 7%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
CBS News/New York Times
Sampling Size: 1273
Margin of Error: +/- 5%
November 2–11, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 21%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, Fred Thompson 9%, Ron Paul 4%, John McCain 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 14%
Zogby
Sampling Size: 410
Margin of Error: +/- 5.0%
November 6–7, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Mike Huckabee 15%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 8%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Other 1%, Not Sure 16%
American Research Group October 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Mike Huckabee 19%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, John McCain 14%, Fred Thompson 8%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Ron Paul 1%, Duncan Hunter -%, Alan Keyes -%, Undecided 13%
University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll
Margin of Error: +/- 5.8%
Sampling Size: 285
October 17–24, 2007 Mitt Romney 36.2%, Rudy Giuliani 13.1%, Mike Huckabee 12.8%, Fred Thompson 11.4%, John McCain 6.0%, Tom Tancredo 2.2%, Others 3.5%, Undecided 14.9%
Strategic Vision (note) October 12–14, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 5%, Sam Brownback 4%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 22%
Rasmussen Reports October 10 & 14, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 19%, Mike Huckabee 18%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 6%, Sam Brownback 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 11%
InsiderAdvantage October 2–3, 2007 Mitt Romney 24%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 13%, Mike Huckabee 13%, John McCain 10%, Sam Brownback 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Undecided 13%
Des Moines Register October 1–3, 2007 Mitt Romney 29%, Fred Thompson 18%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Rudy Giuliani 11%, John McCain 7%, Tom Tancredo 5%, Ron Paul 4%, Sam Brownback 2%, Alan Keyes 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, John Cox -, Undecided 9%
American Research Group September 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 22%, Rudy Giuliani 21%, Fred Thompson 16%, John McCain 11%, Newt Gingrich 5%, Mike Huckabee 4%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 2%, Sam Brownback 2%, Alan Keyes 1%, Tom Tancredo 1%, Undecided 13%
Newsweek (All Republican voters) September 26–27, 2007 Mitt Romney 25%, Fred Thompson 16%, Rudy Giuliani 15%, John McCain 7%, Mike Huckabee 6%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 21%
Newsweek (Likely caucus-goers) September 26–27, 2007 Mitt Romney 24%, Fred Thompson 16%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Mike Huckabee 12%, John McCain 9%, Ron Paul 5%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
Strategic Vision (note) September 21–23, 2007 Mitt Romney 30%, Rudy Giuliani 17%, Fred Thompson 13%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 6%, Newt Gingrich 5%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll September 6–10, 2007 Mitt Romney 28%, Rudy Giuliani 16%, Fred Thompson 16%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 7%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Ron Paul 2%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 15%
American Research Group August 26–29, 2007 Mitt Romney 27%, Rudy Giuliani 17%, Mike Huckabee 14%, Fred Thompson 13%, Newt Gingrich 7%, John McCain 5%, Hunter 1%, Paul 1%, Brownback -, Tancredo -, Undecided 15%
McLaughlin & Associates August 20–21, 2007 Mitt Romney 35%, Rudy Giuliani 12%, Fred Thompson 11%, Mike Huckabee 11%, Tom Tancredo 9%, John McCain 7%, Sam Brownback 2%, Ron Paul 1%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Firm Undecided 10%
Strategic Vision (note)
(Likely Caucus Goers)
Margin of Error: +/- 4%
Sampling Size: 600
August 17–19, 2007 Mitt Romney 31%, Fred Thompson 15%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, John McCain 8%, Mike Huckabee 8%, Newt Gingrich 3%, Ron Paul 3%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Sam Brownback 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 13%
Newsmax/Zogby
(Likely Caucus Goers)
Margin of Error: +/- 4.5%
Sampling Size: 487
August 17–18, 2007 Mitt Romney 33%, Rudy Giuliani 14%, Fred Thompson 12%, Mike Huckabee 8%, John McCain 6%, Sam Brownback 4%, Tom Tancredo 3%, Ron Paul 3%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Someone else 2%, Not sure 14%

Thats accurate? McCain wasn't in the lead in one of those polls. I don't even see him in 2nd in any.

[hazek]

Thats accurate? McCain wasn't in the lead in one of those polls. I don't even see him in 2nd in any.

McCain didn't win Iowa, learn to read please. Oh and good job on quoting the whole thing.. :rolleyes:

[D.A.S.]

I think that Ron's support is highly nonuniform across the nation, and in some regions it is missing entirely. So, their margin of error on Paul might at well be 7%! I just think Ron's support is much more difficult to poll uniformly, regardless of where other candidates' support is. Ron has a passionate base, and they can be found in unlikely places. Some election pollsters may hit those pockets of support, and others may miss them entirely. So I doubt it's manipulation per se, but the method of regional polling could drive up the error margin for Paul substantially higher than they report with the poll.

[69360]

I do not believe the PPP poll at all. Forget Ron for a second. PPP says 1 in 3 GOP voters supports Cain. Bullshit they do.

[InTradePro]

PPP - 5% (4.5% margin of error)

Thus, according to PPP, the HIGHEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 9.5%

Reuters - 13% (3% margin of error)

According the Reuters, the LOWEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 10%


If the lowest that Paul could possibly be polling is 10%, according to the margin of error allowed for in he Reutuers poll, then the PPP poll cannot be correct, as the poll asserts that his highest possible level of support is 9.5%.

The only answer is manipulation, or an error in calculating margin of error. I have a slight propensity to believe the former.

side note - notice that the low range of PPP's margin of error has Paul at 0.5% nationally. seems about right! :rolleyes:

Same thing with Gingrich in previous two polls. PPP(10/10) gave him 15% while Bloomberg(10/9) gave him 3%. If happens often if you take notice. The margin of error is bigger then implied because the distribution graph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marginoferror95.PNG) does not have a boundary which is why on occasions polls have been 40% out (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/). I tend to read any polls with less then 2000 sample size to have a error rate of ±10%.

[PaulConventionWV]

PPP - 5% (4.5% margin of error)

Thus, according to PPP, the HIGHEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 9.5%

Reuters - 13% (3% margin of error)

According the Reuters, the LOWEST that Paul could possibly be polling nationally is 10%


If the lowest that Paul could possibly be polling is 10%, according to the margin of error allowed for in he Reutuers poll, then the PPP poll cannot be correct, as the poll asserts that his highest possible level of support is 9.5%.

The only answer is manipulation, or an error in calculating margin of error. I have a slight propensity to believe the former.

side note - notice that the low range of PPP's margin of error has Paul at 0.5% nationally. seems about right! :rolleyes:

No, the upper range of the statistical margin of error does not mean that's the highest possible that candidate could be polling. It means that the true value is within that range within a certain level of confidence. They don't include the confidence level anymore in the analysis, but they should. Basically, if their confidence level is .90, it means they are 90% sure that the true value is within that range of numbers, and a .95 confidence level means they are 95% confident.

Other than that, you are right. It is ridiculous the different numbers these polls are coming up with. In theory, they should be very close together, considering you have a high confidence level and a small margin of error.

[specsaregood]

What? They were the second most accurate firm last cycle. (Granted, the measurement was from within 3 days from the election)

Right and in Rand's election they were saying it was all tied up until the 30day range was reached, then all of a sudden Rand was up by 15+pts, just like most of the other polling firms were saying for months before.

[PaulConventionWV]

They pick a more classic GOP establishment base on purpose, no doubt about it. But you're completely insane if you think they do it to hold Paul back. That doesn't even make sense. Romney polls better against Obama than Paul, so by your logic he is the man they should be conspiring to defeat.

The fact is they're doing what they think gives the most accurate representation of the political landscape. Stop inventing dragons to slay. It's silly.

Neither of you is correct. They're not doing it because they like Obama. They're doing it because they don't want Ron Paul to win. It's as simple as that.