PPP Tweet: ARG poll "seems impossible"

[pauliticalfan]

ppppolls: Anyone notice the ARG poll says Paul's at 24% with men and 16% with women but only 16% overall? Seems impossible: http://t.co/N4x9JQQw

Seriously, how is this possible? ARG has some explaining to do.

[KramerDSP]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

[LudwigVonMisoSoup]

The transgendered community is bringing down the vote! Kidding...

[Son of Detroit]

He's behind in the Alien vote.

http://d37nnnqwv9amwr.cloudfront.net/photos/images/newsfeed/000/158/329/9189283.jpg

[Fermli]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

they are just pro-fairness and pro-integrity with respect to polling.

[blakjak]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

They are not gung-ho Paul supporters. They are gung-ho on the accuracy of their numbers.

[pauliticalfan]

According to 2008 exit polls, the GOP Iowa Caucus was 56% male and 44% female. That would put RP closer to 20% in this poll if my math is correct. The only way he'd be at 16% is with 0% male turnout.

[ItsTime]

Pure bullshit manipulation.

[nyrgoal99]

so figure 50/50, we are really at least 20%

[anewvoice]

They are not gung-ho Paul supporters. They are gung-ho on the accuracy of their numbers.

And it's awesome to see them protecting their trade from those that would manipulate it into "the polls really are not accurate anyway" that we're seeing right now.

[Rincewind]

Could that be a typo?

Because he's listed 4th but has a higher percentage than the person listed 3rd.

[kill the banks]

hmmm , good point

[Epic]

ARG said Paul won 1.5% of 6 black guys last time i think... racist! (or maybe that was InAdv...)

[samsung1]

PPP keepin them honest. PPP and DesMoines Register/ Ann Seltzer polls are the ones to look for

[ItsTime]

Could that be a typo?

Because he's listed 4th but has a higher percentage than the person listed 3rd.

It still would need to be less than 10% of the women for him to drop to 16%

[opinionatedfool]

Seriously, how is this possible? ARG has some explaining to do.

Wow, ppppolls has a very good point. I'm sure they put some thought into it before tweeting it. Oh well, I'd don't think an inaccurate poll is bad for us. Maybe someone will start attacking the warmonger Santorum.

[braane]

ARG is lulz. It's why this poll shouldn't be taken seriously.

The CNN poll and PPP polls both had similar numbers for Ron among Republicans. I would say they are pretty close, and Ron is probably up by 4-5. We shall see with the DMR poll Saturday.

[RickyJ]

24% with men and 16% with women but only 16% overall?

The only way that could be possible is if they polled over 1000 women and about 21 men. So yeah, they are right, the ARG poll is BS.

[Rincewind]

It still would need to be less than 10% of the women for him to drop to 16%

Unless there was a slight imbalance in the first place - Say 60/40 women/men.

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer PPP, and PPP has a better historical record, just pointing out something that looked odd on that link.

[Johnnybags]

Geese, we must pick up the nongender vote immediately. Everyone else got credit for nongenders apparently but us.

[BUSHLIED]

No surprise here...you think we have seen it all?? No way. All the tricks are going to come out.

I bet this ARG poll tried to match up with the new insider advantage poll that put Ron at 17.5%...that is the explaination I offer. Poll manipulation to confirm the narrative that Ron is losing ground...good for PPP to point this out.

[ItsTime]

Unless there was a slight imbalance in the first place - Say 60/40 women/men.

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer PPP, and PPP has a better historical record, just pointing out something that looked odd on that link.

True. But still makes this poll invalid.

[Rincewind]

Geese, we must pick up the nongender vote immediately. Everyone else got credit for nongenders apparently but us.

Santorum has lots of support from inanimate objects.

Which isn't surprising, since he's pretty much one himself.

[ItsTime]

He's behind in the Alien vote.

http://d37nnnqwv9amwr.cloudfront.net/photos/images/newsfeed/000/158/329/9189283.jpg

Thread winner +rep

[jer4liberty]

I love how we were citing these polls last week, when Ron had a 6 point lead in the INsider Advantage one, and a 4 point lead in the ARG. Now these polls are tools agaisnt us and inaccurate? Maybe it was a typo...all their other cross tabs on the ARG poll work out.

[G-Wohl]

they are just pro-fairness and pro-integrity with respect to polling.

This. Seriously, it only takes a few minutes of digging to see that they definitely don't have a political allegiance to our cause at all. During the 2010 senate races, the PPP twitter feed exhibited quite a bit of resentment for the Ron Paul people always voting for polls in CT and KY where we had liberty candidates running that year.

[pauliticalfan]

MSM Narrative: Mitt Romney is winning in Iowa*

*As long as we don't poll independents and those with penises

[specsaregood]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

See:

Not trying to take any credit, but I think they are friendlier to Paul than they otherwise would be in part because of me. They were a big part of why I won in 2010, actually. I commissioned a poll that had me 8 points ahead and allowed me to enlist support that would otherwise have simply ignored my race. My record in the NCGA makes NC Dems (including PPP) more friendly to our platform than any other Republican philosophy.

Seriously not trying to wrestle credit out here, but I know the two guys who run that operaton. Personally. Hardcore libdems, but otherwise sincere and well-meaning. They would not themselves support RP, but would be much much happier (and less antagonistic towards Republicans) if all Republicans were of the Pauler prototype.

[braane]

Fox just used it to push the narrative. I am ok with that though... They said "Newt is in second in a poll that came out today"... maybe that will stall the Santorum push.

[RickyJ]

I love how we were citing these polls last week, when Ron had a 6 point lead in the INsider Advantage one, and a 4 point lead in the ARG. Now these polls are tools agaisnt us and inaccurate? Maybe it was a typo...all their other cross tabs on the ARG poll work out.

Typo my butt! They make their living off of accurate stats, they check, double check, and triple check anything before they put it out then they have someone else check it! This wasn't some dumb secretary typing something out real quick that put this out, it was professional statisticians!

[RonPaulCult]

Some are saying that the women percentage is a typo, that he probably didn't get 16% there and that it was listed after Santorum who got 15% but before Perry who had 10% with women. But even if you average 24% and 11% (the lowest it could be given that order) that still comes out to 17.5% if both men and women were surveyed equally. Something STILL doesn't add up.

As somebody else mentioned, more than half of Iowa caucus participants in 2008 were men. I find it VERY hard to believe that Paul would be polling at 24% with men but only 11% with women.

Either the 24% for men is the typo, or this poll is bullshit.

If my math is off please correct me.

[justatrey]

I'm starting to think we should just move all of these BS polls straight to Hot Topics, with the exception of PPP polls.

[tremendoustie]

Wow, ppppolls has a very good point. I'm sure they put some thought into it before tweeting it. Oh well, I'd don't think an inaccurate poll is bad for us. Maybe someone will start attacking the warmonger Santorum.

The only way polls showing us lower than we are is bad for us, is if they're setting us up for voter fraud.

[RickyJ]

I'm starting to think we should just move all of these BS polls straight to Hot Topics, with the exception of PPP polls.

I'm thinking we have enough people in Iowa to take our own unbiased poll! Who needs any of them? We can know for sure what the real score is if we want to. I think we should do exactly that.

[RickyJ]

The only way polls showing us lower than we are is bad for us, is if they're setting us up for voter fraud.

The only reason they would release a BS poll is for voter fraud. We need a unbiased poll done pronto by our own people in Iowa so we can know if they are about to attempt to steal this election from us or not. I think they are going to steal it!

[specsaregood]

Typo my butt! They make their living off of accurate stats, they check, double check, and triple check anything before they put it out then they have someone else check it! This wasn't some dumb secretary typing something out real quick that put this out, it was professional statisticians!

It isn't out of the realm of possibilities for pollsters to just make crap up. dailykos old pollster (before PPP) was pretty much caught doing just that.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/06/29/880179/-Research-2000:-Problems-in-plain-sight

[Johnnybags]

Changed to 7 percent to make number work, all fixed fellas. Bwahaha, better to lie and keep # low than admit the truth.

[DRV45N05]

Hahaha.....

FOX is using a poll other than Rasmussen because it serves their purpose.

[Carole]

Seriously, how is this possible? ARG has some explaining to do.

Would it not be a function of how many women were asked and liked him (say 2 out of twelve or 1 out of six)) and how few men were asked and liked him (say 1 out of four or 3 out of twelve). It all depends on how few men and how many women were actually asked does it not? Someone can do the right formula to come up with an answer. :D:D:D

Anything is possible. :)

[ItsTime]

Changed to 7 percent to make number work, all fixed fellas. Bwahaha, better to lie and keep # low than admit the truth.

So not only did they have a typo, they had Ron in the wrong place? I call super bullshit. They are making the numbers up.

[TheState]

Paul was at 19% with women in the PPP poll, but 7% in this one...

[sailingaway]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

they aren't, but they defend their contemporaneous poll and demonstrate their own greater expertise.

[Eric39]

The only reason they would release a BS poll is for voter fraud. We need a unbiased poll done pronto by our own people in Iowa so we can know if they are about to attempt to steal this election from us or not. I think they are going to steal it!

First off, it's an unbiased. Second, you can't have an unbiased poll if it's conducted by supporters of a candidate, even if you agree with him.

[ItsTime]

Plain and simple, they are making the numbers up and got caught red handed.

[Johnnybags]

Obvious the brass were in such a rush to get a Paul falling story out they could not even proofread their own bullshit poll so had to keep the story line intact and fudge the numbers.

[cdc482]

When was this poll done?
Why is it not in the RCP average?
Did they only poll Republicans?

[joshnorris14]

First off, it's an unbiased. Second, you can't have an unbiased poll if it's conducted by supporters of a candidate, even if you agree with him.

A poll is unbiased as long as the sample is random.

[tremendoustie]

That kind of differential is impossible. Couples most often vote together, etc. -- you will never see 24% support from one gender and 7% from another in a real political poll.

[Ranger29860]

1.When was this poll done? Never Because it is fake
2.Why is it not in the RCP average? Because its fake.
3.Did they only poll Republicans? The polled only imaginary people


:P

[Eric39]

A poll is unbiased as long as the sample is random.

That's still not totally true. Polls can be easily influenced simply by your choice of words, and I have no doubt many of these big polling companies use that to their own advantage. It would be interesting to see the exact question most of these people are asked.

Example:
Who do you want to win ---?

Who do you think will win---?

Who is doing the best in ---?

[coastie]

Obvious the brass were in such a rush to get a Paul falling story out they could not even proofread their own bullshit poll so had to keep the story line intact and fudge the numbers.

Bingo.

Only some power hungry egotistical government bureaucrat could f*ck this up, this bad.;)

I'll bet there's hordes of little "yes" men, with their noses in his ass trying to knock him off the ladder saying "oh noes, the boss won't listen, Ron Paul really is winning, we can't control this anymore...if he would just do this, or that differently":toady::rolleyes:


This reeks of someone controlling the outcome via repeated narratives, and failing - big time.:D

I have a feeling the rEVOLution wave is about to reveal it's tsunaminess as it closes in on the shallow, dangerous reefs of politics as usual in America.

[specsaregood]

A poll is unbiased as long as the sample is random.

I'm quite certain that Frank Luntz could prove you wrong. :)

[WIRP]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!
It's not that they're Paul supporters, but they are competing with other pollsters. When you can point out that your competitors are delivering a faulty product, that gives you a leg up. Free Market yo!

[NoPants]

I would be curious to know how many typo's were in the results and if all of them were related to Paul's numbers. No claims of conspiracy here, just very odd if it is the case.

[unknown]

PPP FTW.

[Diurdi]

So this is why RCP doesn't add ARG polls?

Makes sense now.

[RickyJ]

First off, it's an unbiased. Second, you can't have an unbiased poll if it's conducted by supporters of a candidate, even if you agree with him.

WTH?

You don't know what you are talking about. Candidates do internal polls all the time using their own people! They aren't going to rely on the polling companies or wait for them, they need the data when they need it. And yes they can be unbiased even though they support Ron Paul. Do you think the "professional polls" done elsewhere don't have people doing them that have a preference for a certain candidate they are polling on? Dream on.

[RickyJ]

First off, it's an unbiased. Second, you can't have an unbiased poll if it's conducted by supporters of a candidate, even if you agree with him.

Another thing. A poll with numbers like this is not only NOT unbiased, it is total BS! You need to think before you post man!

[RickyJ]

I would be curious to know how many typo's were in the results and if all of them were related to Paul's numbers. No claims of conspiracy here, just very odd if it is the case.

There were no typos in the results. They don't spend so much on doing these polls only to release them with typos when they are going to be picked up and used by TV shows right away. That is not going to happen. The poll was released this way on purpose. They just don't care if people even know they are releasing BS, as long as it shows what their bosses want it to show. It is blatant, in your face fraud, just asking everybody, what the heck are you going to do about it when we steal the election Paul fans?

[parocks]

Seriously, how is this possible? ARG has some explaining to do.

woah where was this poll before

[VRG]

I think PPP attacking it's competitors on the accuracy of their polling is a very good example that shows that free markets work and are self-correcting. Competition ftw!

[parocks]

Fox just used it to push the narrative. I am ok with that though... They said "Newt is in second in a poll that came out today"... maybe that will stall the Santorum push.

You worried Santorum's gonna win it all, huh?

[libertybrewcity]

victory is near. these pollsters will pay.