600,000 registered Republicans in Iowa

[Uriah]

There are roughly 600,000 registered Republicans in Iowa.

In 2008 about 120,000 Republicans caucused in Iowa.

Huckabee won Iowa with more than 40,000 votes.

Ron Paul is consistently polling about 11%.

11% of 600,000 is 66,000.

The last time I checked, 66,000 is greater than 40,000.

We have the numbers in Iowa to WIN!

Many people say that we need to target Independents and Democrats. While we may bring many to caucus for Ron Paul there are some that will never put an (R) next to their name. Some people, no matter how much they like Ron, will never register as a Republican. I'm not saying that we shouldn't persuade Dems and Indies when we can but that it should not be our main focus. Republicans mostly identify with Ron's message of small gov't, less taxes, liberty, etc. Republicans are easier to convert.

Think about it this way. For every Democrat or Independent that we get to vote for Ron in Iowa, we gain one(1) vote. For every likely Republican caucus-goer that we get to vote for Ron, we effectively get two(2) votes. One for Ron and one less for another candidate. Likely caucus goers are well, likely to vote. And many of them are undecided or their preference is weak. We have seen week in and week out, poll after poll, that Iowans are searching for someone to rally behind.

The single best thing that anyone can do for the campaign is the Phone from Home Program. Finding supporters off our radar. This is important because we already have the numbers in Iowa to win. We need to identify them so we can get them out to vote on caucus night.

If we do this, we win.

[trey4sports]

we have 11% of those who are likely to vote. Not 11% of all registered GOP voters.

[dbill27]

we have 11% of those who are likely to vote. Not 11% of all registered GOP voters.

Still good numbers though, we can get more votes than huckabee got.

[VictorB]

We can and we will win Iowa. Our 11% will actually go out and vote. Cain and Newt's 20% are all talk. It's easy to give your opinion over the phone, but when it comes down to going out and casting the vote, few do.

This is where our grassroots will come in to play. We have to bang on doors and get those people out to vote.

[trey4sports]

We can and we will win Iowa. Our 11% will actually go out and vote. Cain and Newt's 20% are all talk. It's easy to give your opinion over the phone, but when it comes down to going out and casting the vote, few do.

This is where our grassroots will come in to play. We have to bang on doors and get those people out to vote.

I disagree.

We have to work to improve our poll numbers, but the overriding theme in '08 was that the polls were right.

[Steve-in-NY]

This is why you all need to be doing the call from home (see my sig for links) in order to ID supporters to get the vote out.
We need to have THE ABSOLUTE BEST PERCENTAGES POSSIBLE to win this.
We need our GOTV percentages to look like our online polls.
Thus, we need to be able to ID those supporters and remind them to get to the polls.
Thus, we need to get on the phones now.
So go!

[dusman]

This is why you all need to be doing the call from home (see my sig for links) in order to ID supporters to get the vote out.
We need to have THE ABSOLUTE BEST PERCENTAGES POSSIBLE to win this.
We need our GOTV percentages to look like our online polls.
Thus, we need to be able to ID those supporters and remind them to get to the polls.
Thus, we need to get on the phones now.
So go!

It really is too easy. Just register your number and the system does everything for you.

[Eric21ND]

Turn out might be bigger this year. We need to win over those Huckabee voters.

[da32130]

I disagree.

We have to work to improve our poll numbers, but the overriding theme in '08 was that the polls were right.

4) Why results don't have to be tied to current polling

On the accuracy of polls this far out:

"Would the average of the very last polls have yielded the right winner? Yes. Would any single poll have provided real confidence? No. Would polls in September, October or November have offered useful guidance? None."

"Most polls that purport to provide Iowa caucus results survey the 2.3 million adult residents of Iowa, asking whether each respondent is registered to vote and then either whether he has participated in, or is likely to attend, a caucus. The tendency to say yes results in responses so highly inflated as to be worthless. If everyone who said he had attended, or would attend, a caucus actually showed up, turnout would be four or five times higher than it was at its highest."


Which means turnout of voters can play a large role.

The current evaluation of the ground games (and overall current standing):
"1.Ron Paul — The Texas congressman remains at the top of our rankings for the second week because our panelists generally see him as the GOP candidate who currently has both an energized base and grassroots organization."

Last time Iowa was also much more competitive. Romney was putting in a huge effort. A lot of voters (that are dispersed now) went to Huckabee. In early caucus states where the effort wasn't as great by other candidates Ron Paul did much better than polling showed(shortly after these results we only got 4% in the Virginia primary, difference was turnout):

22% in Washington
21% in North Dakota
25% in Montana
16% in Minnesota
17% in Alaska
18% in Maine
14% in Nevada (2nd place finish)
10% in Iowa (highest poll was 10%, but average at time of caucus was only around 7% - he is polling consistently in the 12% area now, which could mean high teens support, if not more - that is why phone from home, etc. matter, increasing turnout ensures victory)

No reason Iowa couldn't see the same thing happen this time now that it is generally agreed that the ground games are weak. The fact is if all of Ron Pauls supporters turn out in Iowa even at current polling levels we win. We can ensure that by focusing on getting turn out higher by phoning from home (http://rp2012.org).

From:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?328197-How-Ron-Paul-Wins

Another analysis of phone from home and iowa (everyone can vote republican in Iowa)
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?328921-Just-One-Hour-For-Ron-Paul-To-Win-Iowa-New-Hampshire-and-then-the-nomination

[parocks]

I disagree.

We have to work to improve our poll numbers, but the overriding theme in '08 was that the polls were right.

If the polls were right, that only means that our GOTV wasn't better than everyone elses, or some other things, but a superior GOTV should mean outperforming the polls, everything else being equal.

[sailingaway]

A LOT more will caucus this time than did in 2008 when all the independents went Dem after Obama and away from the Bush legacy. There is no major election on the Dem side. The GOP caucus will be much bigger. Heck, even the straw poll was bigger. Ron got more votes than Romney won with in 2008, but Randy Travis got even more.

And because this time we are the party out of power, we need to look at swing voters, as Obama got them. Obama was way behind in the Oct Des Moines Register poll, but won in a landslide in the caucuses, due to first time caucusers. THAT is what we are trying to replicate with Ron. Don't look at whether RON'S polls were accurate in caucus states, or not only at that, but also at whether Obama's were, in 2008.

[trey4sports]

If the polls were right, that only means that our GOTV wasn't better than everyone elses, or some other things, but a superior GOTV should mean outperforming the polls, everything else being equal.


I would agree with this, but I'm not sure that a good GOTV operation will take us from 10 to 15% or even better yet 10 to 20%. yes, I would agree that we have a great base, but even then I think people overestimate the amount of Ron's support that is "walk over coals for him" strong. I can tell you that my personal experience making calls to supporters in Iowa leads me to believe that a good portion of his support is just normal GOP voters who believe that Ron is the best candidate in a pool flawed candidates. Hence his variation from 8 -12% in polls. Not "all" his support is strong. Some is soft, but it is much less than other candidates by comparison. That's not a bad thing. We're going to have to win over a LOT of soft voters if we intend to win the caucus.

[dusman]

A LOT more will caucus this time than did in 2008 when all the independents went Dem after Obama and away from the Bush legacy. There is no major election on the Dem side. The GOP caucus will be much bigger. Heck, even the straw poll was bigger. Ron got more votes than Romney won with in 2008, but Randy Travis got even more.

And because this time we are the party out of power, we need to look at swing voters, as Obama got them. Obama was way behind in the Oct Des Moines Register poll, but won in a landslide in the caucuses, due to first time caucusers. THAT is what we are trying to replicate with Ron. Don't look at whether RON'S polls were accurate in caucus states, or not only at that, but also at whether Obama's were, in 2008.

You could make the case that 57% of the votes in Ames went to Constitutionally-Conservative candidates and that might be indicative of the Caucus. I honestly don't see what other candidates are going to appeal to Iowa voters as Ron Paul would. Nonetheless, it's going to be a really interesting day. I'm nervous and excited all at the same time. :)

Ultimately, I don't think you can compare 2008 with 2012. It's a bit arbitrary to do so as the conditions are significantly different.

All that matters is GOTV. We should note that we proved ourselves during Ames, that our GOTV effort is far better than the rest of the field.

August 4th Rasmussen Poll in Iowa:

Bachmann - 22%
Romney - 21%
Paul - 16%
Perry - 12%
Gingrich - 5%
Cain - 4%
Huntsman - 2%
Santorum - 0%

Ames Voting Percentage (Variance from poll +/-):
Bachmann - 28.55% (+6.5%)
Romney - 3.36% (-17.63%)
Paul - 27.65% (+11.65%)
Perry - 3.62% (-8.38%)
Gingrich - 2.28% (-2.72%)
Cain - 8.62% (+4.62%)
Huntsman - .41% (-1.59%)
Santorum - 9.81% (+9.81%)

Keep in mind all the other polls leading up to Iowa had Paul in single digits, aside one from PPP at 15% in April. The poll numbers from Rasmussen were the best Ron ever received in Iowa. So, looking at these numbers Ron Paul has the best GOTV numbers in comparison to his poll numbers.

I highly doubt Bachmann has as much solid support as she did. Romney, while polling well, did horrendous at Ames. The only one I'm really worried about is Cain. I think it's going to come down to Cain and Paul taking 1st and 2nd, despite the sexual harassment allegations.

However, those RP supporters that decided not to go vote at Ames I would imagine feel pretty bad that he lost by only 152 votes. That is a motivational factor that might be missing in this equation that isn't seen with the other candidates.

[trey4sports]

4) Why results don't have to be tied to current polling

On the accuracy of polls this far out:

"Would the average of the very last polls have yielded the right winner? Yes. Would any single poll have provided real confidence? No. Would polls in September, October or November have offered useful guidance? None."

"Most polls that purport to provide Iowa caucus results survey the 2.3 million adult residents of Iowa, asking whether each respondent is registered to vote and then either whether he has participated in, or is likely to attend, a caucus. The tendency to say yes results in responses so highly inflated as to be worthless. If everyone who said he had attended, or would attend, a caucus actually showed up, turnout would be four or five times higher than it was at its highest."


Which means turnout of voters can play a large role.

The current evaluation of the ground games (and overall current standing):
"1.Ron Paul — The Texas congressman remains at the top of our rankings for the second week because our panelists generally see him as the GOP candidate who currently has both an energized base and grassroots organization."

Last time Iowa was also much more competitive. Romney was putting in a huge effort. A lot of voters (that are dispersed now) went to Huckabee. In early caucus states where the effort wasn't as great by other candidates Ron Paul did much better than polling showed(shortly after these results we only got 4% in the Virginia primary, difference was turnout):

22% in Washington
21% in North Dakota
25% in Montana
16% in Minnesota
17% in Alaska
18% in Maine
14% in Nevada (2nd place finish)
10% in Iowa (highest poll was 10%, but average at time of caucus was only around 7% - he is polling consistently in the 12% area now, which could mean high teens support, if not more - that is why phone from home, etc. matter, increasing turnout ensures victory)

No reason Iowa couldn't see the same thing happen this time now that it is generally agreed that the ground games are weak. The fact is if all of Ron Pauls supporters turn out in Iowa even at current polling levels we win. We can ensure that by focusing on getting turn out higher by phoning from home (http://rp2012.org).

From:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?328197-How-Ron-Paul-Wins

Another analysis of phone from home and iowa (everyone can vote republican in Iowa)
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?328921-Just-One-Hour-For-Ron-Paul-To-Win-Iowa-New-Hampshire-and-then-the-nomination



I agree that a poll this far out doesn't accurately predict what will happen in January but at the same time, today's polling is just that. A snapshot of how the GOP is leaning right now.

[da32130]

I agree that a poll this far out doesn't accurately predict what will happen in January but at the same time, today's polling is just that. A snapshot of how the GOP is leaning right now.

But don't miss the second paragraph:
"Most polls that purport to provide Iowa caucus results survey the 2.3 million adult residents of Iowa, asking whether each respondent is registered to vote and then either whether he has participated in, or is likely to attend, a caucus. The tendency to say yes results in responses so highly inflated as to be worthless. If everyone who said he had attended, or would attend, a caucus actually showed up, turnout would be four or five times higher than it was at its highest."

If we make sure our voters show up(ground game) we could in theory pull 4-5x our current polling.

My point is only for everyone to stay motivated and keep at. I think we can both agree on that.

[JoshS]

this should energize people more than anything.

for ron!

[Uriah]

we have 11% of those who are likely to vote. Not 11% of all registered GOP voters.

I hear what you are saying. I think it is fair to say that the 120,000 that voted in 2008 are the "likely voters". If Ron only had support among likely voters then his total support in Iowa among Republicans would be 13,200. He received 11,841 votes in 2008. This is not the case.This would mean he has had virtually no significant new support over the last 4 years. I know I'm not considering Inds. & Dems. but I don't buy this.

I think the 120,000 likely voters are a good sample of all Republicans. So, I believe my numbers stand. They are rough but I think we have 66,000 Republicans in Iowa that support Ron Paul for president.

Turnout is around 20%. So, if we had an average turnout then 13k would vote for Paul. And this isn't including crossovers and higher turnout that is typical of Paul supporters.

Turnout is key. Phoning and canvassing are crucial between now and the caucus.

[Perry]

There are roughly 600,000 registered Republicans in Iowa.

In 2008 about 120,000 Republicans caucused in Iowa.

Huckabee won Iowa with more than 40,000 votes.

Ron Paul is consistently polling about 11%.

11% of 600,000 is 66,000.

The last time I checked, 66,000 is greater than 40,000.

We have the numbers in Iowa to WIN!

Many people say that we need to target Independents and Democrats. While we may bring many to caucus for Ron Paul there are some that will never put an (R) next to their name. Some people, no matter how much they like Ron, will never register as a Republican. I'm not saying that we shouldn't persuade Dems and Indies when we can but that it should not be our main focus. Republicans mostly identify with Ron's message of small gov't, less taxes, liberty, etc. Republicans are easier to convert.

Think about it this way. For every Democrat or Independent that we get to vote for Ron in Iowa, we gain one(1) vote. For every likely Republican caucus-goer that we get to vote for Ron, we effectively get two(2) votes. One for Ron and one less for another candidate. Likely caucus goers are well, likely to vote. And many of them are undecided or their preference is weak. We have seen week in and week out, poll after poll, that Iowans are searching for someone to rally behind.

The single best thing that anyone can do for the campaign is the Phone from Home Program. Finding supporters off our radar. This is important because we already have the numbers in Iowa to win. We need to identify them so we can get them out to vote on caucus night.

If we do this, we win.

There were 115,000 votes in Iowa 2008. Therefor 11% of that number which is between 12-13,000... according to your logic. I do believe that number is higher as we have a much higher per capita turnout but we must do more.

[parocks]

I would agree with this, but I'm not sure that a good GOTV operation will take us from 10 to 15% or even better yet 10 to 20%. yes, I would agree that we have a great base, but even then I think people overestimate the amount of Ron's support that is "walk over coals for him" strong. I can tell you that my personal experience making calls to supporters in Iowa leads me to believe that a good portion of his support is just normal GOP voters who believe that Ron is the best candidate in a pool flawed candidates. Hence his variation from 8 -12% in polls. Not "all" his support is strong. Some is soft, but it is much less than other candidates by comparison. That's not a bad thing. We're going to have to win over a LOT of soft voters if we intend to win the caucus.

If his support is "strong", we don't need GOTV. They'll vote anyway.

GOTV as you probably know, means Get Out The Vote. It means we find lazy people and we bug them until they vote. If they're "strong" our Get Out The Vote activities do not matter. They're there already.

I don't believe that our support comes from Likely voters. We are strongest with age groups who traditionally don't vote. The people who like us are not on lists. We're looking at voter lists, right? Our people don't typically caucus. Well, they did last time, right, so it should be easier this time.

I have driven voters to the polls before. That's the end of the GOTV. The last few hours where you have a list of the voters you've ID'd, and you've checked off the names of the people that have voted, and you call in the info to the HQ, and they make phone calls. And then, later, you call in the updated list. And they're still making calls. And you on your own, can make calls, can offer people rides. Really, it's the dragging the people to the polls on election day which is the core of GOTV, and really, the core of volunteering.

Ron Paul doesn't really need helpers that much to get people to like him. That's what Ron Paul does. And money, which buys tv ads, and jets to move Ron Paul around, and that comes from helpers. But Ron Paul can't drive everyone to the polls himself. That's what he needs helpers for. Ron Paul is not a psychic and does not know who likes him. He needs helpers to call.

I just don't think win over soft voters matters.

Getting unlikely voters to vote. And it's really how "we" should look at it. Because that's "our" job, as boots on the ground. The persuading is done by others.

If you went into a convienence store on caucus day, I guarantee you will find a kid / young adult who is buying a pack of smokes. You could ask him what he thinks of Ron Paul. He will say that he likes Ron Paul. You will ask him if he is going to be going to the caucus. And he will say "when is that?" Or, "that's in November, right?"

Would they be "soft" voters? Do we have to win them over? No, I think we really need to go all schoolhouse rock on the 18-29 year old males. Do not assume that our voters have a great understanding of the rules of caucusing. There's a reason 120K out of 600K voted in a pretty important caucus last time. It was hard or confusing or boring.

[parocks]

But don't miss the second paragraph:
"Most polls that purport to provide Iowa caucus results survey the 2.3 million adult residents of Iowa, asking whether each respondent is registered to vote and then either whether he has participated in, or is likely to attend, a caucus. The tendency to say yes results in responses so highly inflated as to be worthless. If everyone who said he had attended, or would attend, a caucus actually showed up, turnout would be four or five times higher than it was at its highest."
This i
If we make sure our voters show up(ground game) we could in theory pull 4-5x our current polling.

My point is only for everyone to stay motivated and keep at. I think we can both agree on that.

If we make sure our voters show up(ground game) we could in theory pull 4-5x our current polling.

Right. This right here.

I've been making a point on other threads. What is happening in Iowa, and all around the country, but most noticeably in Iowa, is that we are getting huge numbers with 18-29 males. (PPP has just started lying about this). Talk to rp08orbust about the results of his robocalling. He was calling cellphones with a robopoll, for the Iowa straw poll in August. He was finding that we were crushing so hard with men 18-29. All we needed to do was get any 18-29 year old male, and that person was so likely to vote for us that we didn't have to spend any time, or any money, to persuade them. We could save that money, and use that money to get these people, who already preferred us, to the polls. There's a reason why pollsters think that the 65+ are 10 times more likely to vote than 18-29. Because that's what happens, year in and year out.

So, we really should have a Des Moines Grassroots Final Push. Where we round all the kids who go to college not in Iowa, and just everyone who hangs out in bars (you'll find 18-29 year olds there), and figure out what it takes to get them to the caucus 1, 2 or 3 days later. You want a Rock the Vote type situation. The message does not need to be "vote for ron paul" the message needs to be "young males need to vote" I would think that cheap flyers with maps of precincts. And instructions on how to vote. Our people might be "strong" in the sense that they wouldn't vote for anyone else, but they need persuading to get them to vote.

Rock concerts. Think of any incentive to vote you can possibly think of. Apply those incentives. Right now, I would think this would be an open-ended, vague project, but the idea of "Des Moines Grassroots Final Push" is pretty close to what we do. There are a lot of us on the ground. And we all have money in our pockets, and a vehicle. Whatever we need to move bodies.

This is in addition to the finding of the needles of Ron Paul supporters in the haystack of 65+ LRPV which is what the campaign is doing. And they're doing a great job at it.

We need very high turnout of 18-29 year old males, and we (grassroots) have to come up with novel strategies due to the novel situation we're in.

Huckabee got 40K. There are a total of around 200K in Des Moines. I don't have 18-29 males offhand. But 10s of thousands.

It would've been so much easier to nail it with the Cyclones and the Hawkeyes.

[IDefendThePlatform]

If we make sure our voters show up(ground game) we could in theory pull 4-5x our current polling.

Right. This right here.

I've been making a point on other threads. What is happening in Iowa, and all around the country, but most noticeably in Iowa, is that we are getting huge numbers with 18-29 males. (PPP has just started lying about this). Talk to rp08orbust about the results of his robocalling. He was calling cellphones with a robopoll, for the Iowa straw poll in August. He was finding that we were crushing so hard with men 18-29. All we needed to do was get any 18-29 year old male, and that person was so likely to vote for us that we didn't have to spend any time, or any money, to persuade them. We could save that money, and use that money to get these people, who already preferred us, to the polls. There's a reason why pollsters think that the 65+ are 10 times more likely to vote than 18-29. Because that's what happens, year in and year out.

So, we really should have a Des Moines Grassroots Final Push. Where we round all the kids who go to college not in Iowa, and just everyone who hangs out in bars (you'll find 18-29 year olds there), and figure out what it takes to get them to the caucus 1, 2 or 3 days later. You want a Rock the Vote type situation. The message does not need to be "vote for ron paul" the message needs to be "young males need to vote" I would think that cheap flyers with maps of precincts. And instructions on how to vote. Our people might be "strong" in the sense that they wouldn't vote for anyone else, but they need persuading to get them to vote.

Rock concerts. Think of any incentive to vote you can possibly think of. Apply those incentives. Right now, I would think this would be an open-ended, vague project, but the idea of "Des Moines Grassroots Final Push" is pretty close to what we do. There are a lot of us on the ground. And we all have money in our pockets, and a vehicle. Whatever we need to move bodies.

This is in addition to the finding of the needles of Ron Paul supporters in the haystack of 65+ LRPV which is what the campaign is doing. And they're doing a great job at it.

We need very high turnout of 18-29 year old males, and we (grassroots) have to come up with novel strategies due to the novel situation we're in.

Huckabee got 40K. There are a total of around 200K in Des Moines. I don't have 18-29 males offhand. But 10s of thousands.

It would've been so much easier to nail it with the Cyclones and the Hawkeyes.

Sounds good to me. Maybe all those young people coming for Christmas with Ron Paul can canvass the bar scene at night after canvassing houses during the day.

[parocks]

Sounds good to me. Maybe all those young people coming for Christmas with Ron Paul can canvass the bar scene at night after canvassing houses during the day.

right on

[InTradePro]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj6UX6OyXww
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj6UX6OyXww


http://phone.ronpaul2012.com - Start today and start making a difference! It is very easy to do. Register and verify your phone and email address, and start making calls in minutes.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/phonefromhome/

[kylejack]

I disagree.

We have to work to improve our poll numbers, but the overriding theme in '08 was that the polls were right.
Yep. The claims of Ron Paul's voters being more likely to come out and vote may have had a little truth to them, but the poll-busting numbers never materialized. The polling was basically correct.

[rich34]

I just can't wait for Rand to hit Iowa in mid December. I wanna see how the GOP will spin him supporting his father when he's been the best senator I've seen in my life time. Not sure how the indy's and democrats will react to Rand, but hopefully Ron will be enough to pull them all in.