PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul up, Rudy Down in new Rassmussen poll...




gagnonstudio
12-03-2007, 10:05 AM
Rudy is down to 20%, and the other "frontrunners" are starting to equal out to around the same level of support. This is perfect. Plus RP is up to 7%, his highest ranking yet in this poll. This is based on likely republican primary goers, so this is a good sign.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

lew
12-03-2007, 10:07 AM
7% w00t

lew
12-03-2007, 10:08 AM
He's been at 6% and 5% on the Daily Poll last week, nice to see him up to 7%.

winston_blade
12-03-2007, 10:09 AM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

WilliamC
12-03-2007, 10:09 AM
Greetings All,

Will Ron Paul hit double digits before or after December 16th? I say before.

William C Colley

Bradley in DC
12-03-2007, 10:10 AM
Just to put this in perspective, they are 95% confident that Dr. Paul is with a statistical margin of error of being third in the race. (oh, wait, I forgot, the polls are "rigged.")

Mark Rushmore
12-03-2007, 10:10 AM
12/03/07
Rudy 20% Thompson 14% Romney 11% McCain 13% Huckabee 17%

That is so close to the perfect storm I'm giddy. It's probably leveled out too early though and will redistribute to a clear two way front before the early primaries. But if it were to hold, this pattern of polling leaves us competitive in every single state.

gagnonstudio
12-03-2007, 10:12 AM
whoops I spelled rasmussen wrong in the title... I hate when I do that. :)

Yes good signs. This is nation wide, and among "likely" republicans. I would like to see all the "frontrunners" hover around 15 - 17% while we reach 10 - 12%. Once we are that high among the "likely" the "unlikely" voters will win the election. That's what I'm hoping for anyway.

dante
12-03-2007, 10:18 AM
Slow and steady wins the race. 7% nationally is the highest yet for RP among republicans. The reports of a massive phone bank for RP going out today ought to help increase his national name recognition and by extension support among republicans too.

Bradley in DC
12-03-2007, 10:20 AM
Angus Reid not so good:

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/republicans_2008_giuliani_26_thompson_18/

Question_Authority
12-03-2007, 10:23 AM
POlls are kinda fun and all, but they do not apply to our candidate. They are only polling likely Republican voters (read: those that voted in the last election for Bush). They are not polling independents, 3rd party voters, and young people who are voting for the first time.

The only way the polls hurt us is the perception it gives that people will be wasting their vote because they do not understand the shortcomings of these polls.

That's why I take every opportunity to educate people on that point.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 10:27 AM
This is pretty significant. Giuliani looks weak at 20%.

Thompson has taken a beating in the media since day one, and he might actually pick up a few more points at Giuliani's expense -- but not many.

Huck looks very strong in second place, but the media hasn't hit him hard yet. I think he'll continue to rise a bit before the media starts uncovering the dirt on him, and then he'll come back down to earth.

Romney looks finished. I never would have guessed that just a few weeks ago.

McCain seems to have had a mild resurgence lately, but I think he's not really going to go much higher.

The "perfect storm" theory just might work out for us. The field is in complete disarray with no clear leader. The "big 5" are going to step up their attacks on one another, and continue to cannibalize their votes. Meanwhile, 0% of Paul's support is going to go the way of any of those candidates. Our numbers will either stay steady, or keep slowly rising. And our numbers still have an asterisk next to them, representing the unknown quantity of those unrepresented by these polls...the younger voters, the non-land-line voters, etc.

Biggest risk for us right now is that Huckabee continues his surprising rise, and convincingly wins Iowa. At that point, it might be too late for the media to effectively bring him down by informing people that he's actually a fiscally liberal theocrat.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 10:30 AM
POlls are kinda fun and all, but they do not apply to our candidate. They are only polling likely Republican voters (read: those that voted in the last election for Bush). They are not polling independents, 3rd party voters, and young people who are voting for the first time.

Please don't repeat this fallacy unless you're prepared to demonstrate that it is not, in fact, a fallacy. :)

lew
12-03-2007, 10:31 AM
Just to put the pollster-bashing by Paul supporters in perspective though, remember this:



Let me say this once. For the most part, pollsters are professional and competent and stake their name on the accuracy of their polls. They've spent a lot of time and money on getting the formula for administering a political poll just right. They continuously tweak and modify their methodology to account for changes in the demographic. And they double and triple check their work before they put it out there under their banner. Everything you can think up that may invalidate poll numbers, they've already thought about it... 10 times over. Bottom line here is that when a good, independent poll results are released, chances are, it's closer to the truth than to fiction.

So, if you see Ron Paul polling in single digits within a month of the first primary, then you need to realize that, Yes... less than 10% of voters in that area support Ron Paul. Don't wait for a rush of new voters that the pollsters are missing because of cell phones or what have you. They're not there. They didn't come out for Dean, they didn't come out for Kerry (over Bush of all people)... they are not going to come out for Ron Paul at the last second. As Hunter S. Thompson best put it after the 2004 elections... "The young bastards have let us down again." And they will do it again, I promise you.

gagnonstudio
12-03-2007, 10:31 AM
POlls are kinda fun and all, but they do not apply to our candidate. They are only polling likely Republican voters (read: those that voted in the last election for Bush). They are not polling independents, 3rd party voters, and young people who are voting for the first time.

The only way the polls hurt us is the perception it gives that people will be wasting their vote because they do not understand the shortcomings of these polls.

That's why I take every opportunity to educate people on that point.

I think you're right about how this poll doesn't include a large number of "unlikely" voters. Like democrats who switched parties, first time registered voters, apathetic voters, independents, young people, people with cell phones only etc....
These groups of people make up a large portion of our base.

BUT, I think this is a great sign that we are registering higher and higher with the "likely" voters. The people polled are more likely to be Bush supporters, which is a shrinking portion of voters. If we can reach a good 10% of them, I think we are in really really good shape. We just have to hope the young crowd, and the apathetic voters get out there and vote.

This election may very well come down to who is best organized to get the vote out. Let's hope we are all on the same page when Jan 3rd comes around.

DRV45N05
12-03-2007, 10:41 AM
This poll just goes to show how tight the Republican race is. RP is in 6th place and just 13 points back.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 10:44 AM
The people polled are more likely to be Bush supporters

Just curious -- what makes you think this? Is it because everyone keeps saying it? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but it's largely not true. Reputable polling organizations frequently use random-digit dialing, and ask people if they're likely to vote in the Republican primary. If they say "yes", they proceed to read a list of candidates (in randomized order), and ask the respondent to choose the one they're most likely to vote fore. Voilą -- there's your sample.

Does this sample not include cell-phone voters? Yes. So we lose some support there. Does this sample include liars or exaggerators -- people who say they're going to vote in the primary, but will not? Yes. We likely gain some support there, because, on average, I'm willing to accept that a Ron Paul supporter will be more likely to get out there and vote on primary day.

That's pretty much the extent of it though. The people who are randomly called cannot be considered "more likely to be Bush supporters", unless you can prove that people who own land lines are more likely to be Bush supporters. Period.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 10:45 AM
This poll just goes to show how tight the Republican race is. RP is in 6th place and just 13 points back.

THAT's what I took from the poll results.

Mark
12-03-2007, 10:46 AM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

Because the first choice political operatives have become too dirty to win,

Huck is the next "chosen one", he's just not dirty... yet.

manny
12-03-2007, 10:54 AM
It's good news. Slowly but surely climbing up. Depending on how they choose "likely republican voters" it is likely to under-estimate RP's support. Regardless that 7% looks very solid. We keep going up, 1% at a time, not bouncing around like others do, at the whim of the media. Once RP hits 10% I think he'll continue rising faster. Just goes to show that all the work people are doing door-to-door, on streets, signs, donating to the campaign, campaign ads, money bombs is working. Just keep pushing.

Pete Kay
12-03-2007, 10:55 AM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

This is actually great news. If there's one thing the media loves to do more than building a candidate up is tearing him down. Do you think that those in the news media aren't aware of Huckabee's dirt? Of course they are. But how will they get scandalous headlines attacking an unkown. First they have to make Huckabee a well liked person before they start the mudslinging.

RevolutionSD
12-03-2007, 10:56 AM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

Huck is an MSM/CFR creation who has hardly any money and no popularity outside of his home state of Arkansas. His "poll numbers" are fabricated and real votes will be much lower.

amonasro
12-03-2007, 10:59 AM
Just curious -- what makes you think this? Is it because everyone keeps saying it? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but it's largely not true. Reputable polling organizations frequently use random-digit dialing, and ask people if they're likely to vote in the Republican primary. If they say "yes", they proceed to read a list of candidates (in randomized order), and ask the respondent to choose the one they're most likely to vote fore. Voilą -- there's your sample.


Can someone dig up that old thread (there were a few) where they got polled on their landline a month or so ago? It was a national polling organization, can't remember who. Anyway the Republican list was NOT randomized, in fact, the "frontrunners" were first, followed by Huckabee, and to get Paul you had to hit "6" for more candidates.

It was when the media just began to prop up Huckabee.

gagnonstudio
12-03-2007, 10:59 AM
Just curious -- what makes you think this? Is it because everyone keeps saying it? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but it's largely not true. Reputable polling organizations frequently use random-digit dialing, and ask people if they're likely to vote in the Republican primary. If they say "yes", they proceed to read a list of candidates (in randomized order), and ask the respondent to choose the one they're most likely to vote fore. Voilą -- there's your sample.

Does this sample not include cell-phone voters? Yes. So we lose some support there. Does this sample include liars or exaggerators -- people who say they're going to vote in the primary, but will not? Yes. We likely gain some support there, because, on average, I'm willing to accept that a Ron Paul supporter will be more likely to get out there and vote on primary day.

That's pretty much the extent of it though. The people who are randomly called cannot be considered "more likely to be Bush supporters", unless you can prove that people who own land lines are more likely to be Bush supporters. Period.

Just look at poll numbers in most of these polls. A majority say Bush is doing a good job, or is doing well in Iraq. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that a majority of these people are Bush supporters. I didn't say they picked up a list of people who voted for Bush and called them. I said that they are Bush supporters. You guys freak out too much about what people say on here. Relax, the pollsters won't go out of business. You'll be able to defend poll results for years to come.

voytechs
12-03-2007, 11:00 AM
Rudy is down to 20%, and the other "frontrunners" are starting to equal out to around the same level of support. This is perfect. Plus RP is up to 7%, his highest ranking yet in this poll. This is based on likely republican primary goers, so this is a good sign.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

We should do alright if all the other candidates have a weak turn out 25%, its only a primary after all in most peoples minds and with the help of the independents in open primary states we should win. We all know that there are also a lot of people that switched parties that are completely under the radar. I cite as evidence, myself, my wife and my entire meetup.

CelestialRender
12-03-2007, 11:14 AM
Just to put this in perspective, they are 95% confident that Dr. Paul is with a statistical margin of error of being third in the race. (oh, wait, I forgot, the polls are "rigged.")

They're not rigged, they're just biased against us by method. This means we should pass all expectations.

stevedasbach
12-03-2007, 11:22 AM
Can someone dig up that old thread (there were a few) where they got polled on their landline a month or so ago? It was a national polling organization, can't remember who. Anyway the Republican list was NOT randomized, in fact, the "frontrunners" were first, followed by Huckabee, and to get Paul you had to hit "6" for more candidates.

It was when the media just began to prop up Huckabee.

That was Rasmussen. Since Brownback dropped out, they are able to fit all the candidates without using "other" and a second tier. Not surprisingly, Paul's support went up when they changed methodology. I still don't think they randomize the order.

Most other companies randomize the order and list all the candidates. Ones like Gallup also use random-digit dialing. The most reputable firms list the questions and their methodology.

The screening questions used by some companies (but not all) to determine likely primary voters will tend to screen out party-switchers and some independents. They also weight results by age based on past voting patterns. Finally, they assume that turnout is similar among candidates.

Whether or not the youth vote turns out for Paul is a big question mark. Based on past results, I wouldn't count on it, but there is always a first time.

I think the biggest factor that will cause our actual votes to be higher than the polls is turnout. We know from the straw polls that Paul supporters will show up to vote.

Naraku
12-03-2007, 11:26 AM
Yeah things that should be remembered about these polls:

1. They don't include people who only use cell phones.

2. It doesn't consider people who won't take a poll, whether they're voting or not.

3. They're traditionally biased against younger voters.

4. Their determination of likely voters usually operates on a points system the pollster comes up with.

5. THEY CANNOT DETERMINE TURNOUT! They can only guess at the turnout, nothing more.

6. Some will not even consider the possibility of Democrats voting in the Republican primary or caucus.

amonasro
12-03-2007, 11:31 AM
Here's one thread I dug up, a guy who got polled by Rasmussen back in Sept...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=19899&highlight=phone

There was another guy who posted the exact same experience around the same time but I wasn't able to find it. Goes to show you that these polls are anything but scientific. How can they be if they list the frontrunners first?

Do a search for "zogby" and you'll come up with lots of instances where RP is left off completely. Is it coincidence that Zogby and Rasmussen are the guys Hannity interviews all the time on FOX?

hawkeyenick
12-03-2007, 11:59 AM
7% is only the tip of the iceberg, our people are the most likely to caucus, that should easily double our number to around 14%+

Iowa might not happen, but we really have a shot at taking the whole thing in NH and come super tuesday if we keep momentum and have a good showing on the tea party date.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 12:11 PM
Here's one thread I dug up, a guy who got polled by Rasmussen back in Sept...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=19899&highlight=phone

There was another guy who posted the exact same experience around the same time but I wasn't able to find it. Goes to show you that these polls are anything but scientific. How can they be if they list the frontrunners first?

Do a search for "zogby" and you'll come up with lots of instances where RP is left off completely. Is it coincidence that Zogby and Rasmussen are the guys Hannity interviews all the time on FOX?

Zogby is widely considered not a very reputable polling company. Rasmussen is certainly considered more reliable. I would be very surprised if its weekly (or is it daily?) poll doesn't rotate the candidates names. The only evidence you provided is that post, in which one individual claimed that Ron's name was only accessible by "pressing 6 for other candidates." Even if true, why does this suggest to you that the names were not rotated? Wouldn't you need several people to verify that they received phone calls with the names in the exact same order?

JS4Pat
12-03-2007, 12:17 PM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?
Because when compared to the other "Mainstream Media Candidates" he looks pretty damn good.

Cindy
12-03-2007, 12:26 PM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

He's rising faster based on a mass hysteria being created by the MSM, then those people have had a chance yet to learn the dirt on him.

He will tank to a lessor degree like Rudy, Miitt and Fred have been when they learn more about him and his record.

However, many of those turning on to him are the far Christian right, and many will sweep his dirt under their rugs for him, if he will preach and enforce "the word of their God" from the Oval office.

Some will finally turn to clean Ron Paul as they will want Huckabees dirt sweeped out of their home, as they keep it clean.

The ones who choose to keep the dirt swept under their rugs, are looking the other way, as hard working Americans and families are being robbed through taxes and inflation by a man like Huck. They'll live with that dirt and crime in exchange for having their moral values forced unto others.

OReich
12-03-2007, 12:58 PM
Hey guys, be grateful Huckabee is rising now, with lots of time to be criticized and fall back down. Remember how everyone has different ideas for how to criticize the Huckster? Well Giuliani/Romney/Thompson/McCain will bash him for us. It's a weird feeling, knowing a huge message we wanna get out won't have to be conveyed through Ron Paul grassroots support, it's just gonna happen naturally. Wow its a weird feeling.

wgadget
12-03-2007, 01:00 PM
Huck is trouble. I really wish he wasn't rising in the polls that fast. There is tons of dirt on him, why is he that high in the polls?

TODAY, December 3, ALL the talk shows are outing Mike. They're telling about all his catering to ILLEGALS and his proclivity to RAISE TAXES.

Sorry, Mike...Cat's outta the bag.

margomaps
12-03-2007, 01:15 PM
TODAY, December 3, ALL the talk shows are outing Mike. They're telling about all his catering to ILLEGALS and his proclivity to RAISE TAXES.

Sorry, Mike...Cat's outta the bag.

Coincidentally, does anyone wonder whether Pat Robertson is beginning to feel like a complete idiot for endorsing Giuliani? I think if he had known Huckabee would have started gaining in the polls like he has, he would have been more likely to endorse Huck. I know if I were a Huckabee supporter, I'd be very resentful of Robertson right now.