Have you been contacted to participate in a scientific poll?

[BiPolarBear]

Please keep in mind I am referring to specifically being contact by phone (landline) to respond to a poll regarding your voting preference for the 2008 presidential election or the democratic or republican primaries for said election.

Examples of such a poll: Zogby, Rasmussen, etc.

[Fyretrohl]

I fall outside of the scientific definition of likely Republican Voter. I have a strict moral stance of only voting for good candidates. I refuse to vote for 'The Likely Winner' or 'The Lessor of Evils'. Ron Paul is the first time there was a principled, intelligent, moral candidate to vote for.

[Kap]

I've been contacted twice The first was from a local college in CT in which I was able to promote Ron Paul to the lady interviewing me The second was by a computer poller which did not list Ron Paul at all.

[Fyretrohl]

One other note, I don't have a landline. IP Phone and Cell for me

[fxmercenary]

yea i was contacted. and ron paul was not an option in the poll at all, i even asked "What about Ron Paul?" "Oh im sorry his name isnt on my list of options for you to select." i was bewildered and just voted for unsure.

[BiPolarBear]

Yeah, in the interest of full disclosure I don't have a landline as well. VOIP and cell phone only.

[ckhagen]

Never. My husband has never been contacted and neither have our parents in their lifetimes. We all have landlines.

[BiPolarBear]

Bump.

[manuel]

No landline here.

[AlexMerced]

I get more in depth into this topic of the national polls and really break it down here

http://my.ronpaulspace.com/alexmerced/blog/

[tnvoter]

Frump You, Frank!

[BiPolarBear]

Frump You, Frank!

Exactly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4

It's amazing how you can make numbers say what you want isn't it?

110% of Americans think Frank Luntz is an idiot. (Know fact based on "scientific" data)

[AlexMerced]

Your right, you can make the numbers say anything you want, probably with Waterboarding, don't they know that doesn't yield honest results.

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

I don't have a landline. In fact, most Ron Paul supporters are younger folks who just have cellphones, which is partly why Ron Paul isn't higher in the big-media polls.

[BiPolarBear]

Bump for more voters! These forums move fast and furious lately! I guess that is a good thing though. :D

[ronpaulyourmom]

No offense but this poll is meaningless. Even if we met the criteria there's a good chance we wouldn't be contacted. They call very few people...that's where all the statistical analysis comes in.

[BiPolarBear]

No offense but this poll is meaningless. Even if we met the criteria there's a good chance we wouldn't be contacted. They call very few people...that's where all the statistical analysis comes in.

That was kind of my point from the outset. Polls are meaningless except to skew results towards your intended goal. Obviously this one is just for the amusement of the forum users who already understand this concept. But thanks for pointing that out. I promise I won't use this data in USA Today now. :rolleyes:

[Psyclone]

Living in Iowa, I have been called twice (once in July and once in September). The first time they said, "I know the primary is a long way off, but if the election were held today, for whom would you vote for President?" When I said, "Ron Paul", the guy said "No, for president" so I tried to say louder and more distinctly "R-o-n P-a-u-l". And the pollster just says (in a "thanks for nothing" way) "Ok, goodbye". I am convinced 1) that they didn't count my response (because Ron Paul was not one of the options they had been prepared for, based on the reaction of the pollster) and 2) that the pollster thinks I was going out of my way to be a smart aleck by giving a response for someone he had never heard of. The second time I was polled (in September) they asked me if I planned to vote in the caucus, and whether I would vote Republican or Democrat, and when I said Republican, they asked who I would support, and this time when I said "Ron Paul" they knew who he was, at least. However, they then followed up with 45 minutes worth of questions where they asked "On a scale from 1-5 how would you rate Rudy Giuliani's trustworthiness? These questions were repeated for each candidate, but the only candidates they asked about were Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Romney, McCain, and Huckabee. So, I would say that some polls are likely good (polls where they don't prompt you with the candidates names, and where the pollster has actually heard of all the candidates), and some are likely bad (where you are offered 5 choices and none of them is Ron Paul).

[LinuxUser269]

I have land line and have never been polled nor has anyone in my family.

[adpierce]

I never have been contacted to do a poll. My folks however who have a landline have been contacted to do a poll. We live in Iowa. They're poll happy here, but they're crap... they only include the so-called top tier candidates. Even worse they don't take into account whether the person actually intends on voting for president, or if they know who the candidates running for president actually are and what they stand for. It's basically a name recognition test. Usually that's a good indicator for who is going to win an election. However I think this election cycle is a whole new ballgame. Too much is at stake, and I think the younger generation is becoming seriously politically conscious.

[parke]

wow. thats alot of numbers.

[BiPolarBear]

wow. thats alot of numbers.

Exactly. I may have forgot to mention that the margin of error for this poll is +/- 99.5%. :p