Rasmussen Poll... What to make of this?

[AMack]

A Rasmussen Poll shows Ron Paul at 8% as a Libertarian candidate for president.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016895.html

I can't decide what to make of this. If we assume that RP would take 8% of the national vote, and also assume that the Republican party represents roughly 50% of the vote, we could also assume that RP's real numbers are more like 16%.

However, this ignores several factors.

- Everyone who would vote for RP as a libertarian is necessarily registered to vote for him as a republican. This might reduce RP's poll numbers.

- Republicans actually represent LESS than 50% of the vote, meaning that perhaps RP's support within the GOP is even more heavily underrepresented. This might raise RP's poll numbers.

- Could people in this poll simply have picked RP as a way of saying "None of the above" to Clinton and Giuliani?

Anyone who can provide a better analysis?

[Goldwater Conservative]

Could people in this poll simply have picked RP as a way of saying "None of the above" to Clinton and Giuliani?

I think that's what reasonable people like us would conclude is at least partially responsible, but the mainstream media would draw the simple conclusion that "8% of the country supports Ron Paul in a general election with both Hillary and Rudy".

Anyway, Rasmussen suggests that support for independents and third parties goes down as Election Day draws near, but I don't think that'd be the case here. I really think Paul could build up more support as recognition of his name and ideas increased. He'd do better than Ross Perot, in my opinion.

[ronpaulyourmom]

Unfortunately you cannot conclude much, as both of you pointed out, we become the protest vote in such a matchup. It is not a signal of real strength in the primary.

You also cannot double his support because there's no proof that those democrats are voting for Ron Paul unless Hillary wins, i.e. they wont vote the primaries.

[paulitics]

I seriously think he would win in a year. There is so much crap going down, with the plummeting dollar, and skyrocketing oil, that in 6 months it will begin to effect Joe sixpack in a major way.

I think we could win through our efforts, and will be less dependent on media conglomerates.
ANy 3rd party candidate will have a better chance than anyone since Ross Perot.

[ronpaulyourmom]

I seriously think he would win in a year. There is so much crap going down, with the plummeting dollar, and skyrocketing oil, that in 6 months it will begin to effect Joe sixpack in a major way.

I think we could win through our efforts, and will be less dependent on media conglomerates.
ANy 3rd party candidate will have a better chance than anyone since Ross Perot.

I'm inclined to agree that there would atleast be a fighting chance. I think the main point right now is that the poll is not all that meaningful.

[Duckman]

I think the main thing the poll shows is that RP's supporters will follow him out of the Republican party (if necessary) to an independent/libertarian ticket, which we all knew anyway.

However, I agree with Ron and his campaign that we do NOT want to make it seem like this is in the cards, since Ron really NEEDS the Republican nomination for ballot access and "braindead block voting" reasons. Plus, nobody has been elected president who was not the nominee of a "major political party" (one of the two big ones, whether that's Democrat/Republican or Democrat/Whig) since the 1820's.

[goRPaul]

If you read the rest of the results, Michael Bloomberg would get 11% as a third party candidate in a three way race. Stephen Colbert would get 13%. All I think it means is that people are not happy with a Hillary vs. Rudy election, and there will be plenty of third party support. I've gone through this in Hot Topics a couple times, I think this election is set up perfectly for a third party win.

Keep the movement growing, no matter what.

[PaleoForPaul]

I can't decide what to make of this. If we assume that RP would take 8% of the national vote, and also assume that the Republican party represents roughly 50% of the vote, we could also assume that RP's real numbers are more like 16%.

Anyone who can provide a better analysis?


IIRC, Republicans make up about 35% of the 'voting public' Democrats the other 35% with the leftover 30% as independant. Those numbers might be a bit off but....

It's hard to tell much from a poll, but I found it interesting that more democrats than Republicans in the poll voted for Paul...over Hillary. That is a very interesting dynamic that the Republican party should pay attention to.

At this point in the race, it's still about name recognition, and I still think the majority of the voters don't know who RP is. Hopefully they will find out when he wins NH.