Latest Rasmussen national poll

[brandon]

Edit: Paul @ 3%. mods removed that from the headline.

In 9th place and on the verge of missing debates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_is_well_ahead_as_first_debate_looms

[AuH20]

We're just PLAYING the long game. heh. The electorate wants blood and going with the guy calling for it. This isn't complex.

[jct74]

471 people sampled. Quinnipiac poll released today sampled 1644 and has Rand tied for 4th at 6%.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?479254-New-Quinnipiac-National-Poll-Rand-at-6

[Brett85]

Well, that's certainly bad news. That pretty much guarantees that Rand won't be any better than 8th place in the average of polls. Rasmussen doesn't poll cell phones which is likely why Rand's numbers are slightly lower in their poll.

[Brett85]

We're just PLAYING the long game. heh. The electorate wants blood and going with the guy calling for it. This isn't complex.

Yeah, they're going with the guy who would guarantee that Hillary becomes President. Trump loses to Hillary by about 15% and is less electable than Cruz.

[AuH20]

Yeah, they're going with the guy who would guarantee that Hillary becomes President. Trump loses to Hillary by about 15% and is less electable than Cruz.

You have to be in it to win it. Talking like dem lite goes nowhere, since the clueless will always go with the real democrat promising transsexual unicorns and a rainbow of EBT cards. Rand will be sitting home, while Trump is prepping for Hillary. Great strategy I might add.

[brandon]

lol they edited my headline to remove Paul at 3%.

[jj-]

dup

[jj-]

lol edited my headline to remove Paul at 3%. Really? Is that the kind of people we are?

It's not like it's spin. Let's just hide the truth is the policy apparently?

[CPUd]

I've got no problem putting bad poll numbers in this section, though this isn't my site and it would be nice if Rasmussen didn't put the full results behind a paywall.

[Brian4Liberty]

It's not like it's spin. Let's just hide the truth is the policy apparently?

The policy is that the "Rand Paul Forum" is for support of Rand's candidacy.

[65fastback2+2]

The policy is that the "Rand Paul Forum" is for support of Rand's candidacy.

You can barely tell based off some peoples posts here.

[brandon]

471 people sampled. Quinnipiac poll released today sampled 1644 and has Rand tied for 4th at 6%.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?479254-New-Quinnipiac-National-Poll-Rand-at-6

Quinnipiac was more accurate than Rasmussen in 2012 as well. 3% definitely seems to me on the low end of the margin of error.

[jj-]

The policy is that the "Rand Paul Forum" is for support of Rand's candidacy.

So you would support a cancer patient by telling him he doesn't have cancer? It doesn't seem supportive to me.

[brandon]

The policy is that the "Rand Paul Forum" is for support of Rand's candidacy.

Apparently knowing the truth about his campaigns performance means you don't support him.

[Brian4Liberty]

Apparently knowing the truth about his campaigns performance means you don't support him.

The left media is trying as hard as possible to demoralize Rand supporters. Is piling on helpful in supporting the cause?

[jct74]

Apparently knowing the truth about his campaigns performance means you don't support him.


It's not like it's spin. Let's just hide the truth is the policy apparently?

Everyone can see the "truth", based on 471 people sampled, once they open the thread. LOL.

[brandon]

470 people doesn't make it meaningless. Its still +-5% margin of error at 95% confidence.

[brandon]

Quinnipiac is probably like 3% margin of error

[65fastback2+2]

470 people doesn't make it meaningless. Its still +-5% margin of error at 95% confidence.

It is meaningless...470 people barely gives you like 2-3 people for every demographic...that has a HUGE margin of error when you break it down.

Further, when a poll comes out and has 3 times as many people participating and gives a significantly different picture, that even further tells you this one is hooey.

Remember, anyone can label a margin of error and confidence rating...doesnt mean their T-test was accurate.

[kahless]

We discuss the validity of these polls and our candidates performance yet every 4 years well it advance in seems obvious who the media and the establishment want as the nominee and they always get their way. No doubt Jeb in this cycle.

Do people here believe they would allow Rand or Trump to receive the Republican nomination? It think it just remains to be seen how they will end Trump's campaign. In Rand's case I think they will probably pull out the Maddow CRA interview before Iowa if needed and bring up his fathers newsletters as if it is a stunning new revelation.

[EBounding]

It's like Cruz and Rand traded places.

[AuH20]

We discuss the validity of these polls and our candidates performance yet every 4 years well it advance it seems obvious who the media and the establishment want as the nominee and they always get their way. No doubt Jeb in this cycle.

Do people here believe they would allow Rand or Trump to receive the Republican nomination? It think it just remains to be seen how they will end Trump's campaign. In Rand's case I think they will probably pull out the Maddow CRA interview before Iowa if needed and bring up his fathers newsletters as if it is a stunning new revelation.

It will definitely be coordinated. That's for sure. The problem is they screw Trump, he has a dead man's switch. For one, he will continue to air out all their dirty laundry. Secondly, he could run 3rd party.

[brandon]

It is meaningless...470 people barely gives you like 2-3 people for every demographic...that has a HUGE margin of error when you break it down.



The margin of error is 5%, like I said.

[Crashland]

It is meaningless...470 people barely gives you like 2-3 people for every demographic...that has a HUGE margin of error when you break it down.

Further, when a poll comes out and has 3 times as many people participating and gives a significantly different picture, that even further tells you this one is hooey.

Remember, anyone can label a margin of error and confidence rating...doesnt mean their T-test was accurate.

In statistics/polling, the margin of error and the confidence level aren't things that people just make up...

The numbers aren't "significantly" different either. 6% isn't that far off from 3% especially when the MoE on the polls is 3-5%. What this poll tells us is that assuming the demographics chosen are a representative crossection (which you can argue about if you want), that there is a 95% chance that Rand has 3+5= 8% or less support nationally. Which doesn't seem all that unreasonable.

[mit26chell]

There are 17 repubes running... Which makes this not too surprising to me.

[LatinsforPaul]

What's worse the Daily Paul pushing Bernie Sanders on Rand supporters or these few Kardashian type lovers we have here pushing Trump on us? :eek:

http://www.starzlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/0012.jpg

[Brett85]

This poll hasn't been added to the RCP average for some reason. I hope Fox doesn't end up using it.

[TheTexan]

Yes, but look at all the people that Rand Paul is beating I think that's the important point here right?

#1 Kentucky Senator Rand Paul
#2 New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
#3 former Texas Governor Rick Perry
#4 former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum
#5 Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
#6 Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina
#7 South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham
#8 New York Governor George Pataki
#9 Herman Cain (who isn't running but should)

[Galileo Galilei]

Edit: Paul @ 3%. mods removed that from the headline.

In 9th place and on the verge of missing debates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_is_well_ahead_as_first_debate_looms

Rand is pivoting back to red-meat tea party issues. He spent over two years talking about criminal justice reform and minority issues, that's why his primary poll numbers dropped. Rand's poll numbers will go back up, just watch.

[SilentBull]

Who cares. The Quinnipiac poll looks much better and is probably closer to reality. Rand will be in the debates. That's all that matters. Rand is doing just fine.

[eleganz]

Edit: Paul @ 3%. mods removed that from the headline.

In 9th place and on the verge of missing debates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_is_well_ahead_as_first_debate_looms


Verge of missing debates, lmao.

Dat fear monger lingo tho.

[jkob]

I'm sure Rand will be able to pump his numbers up just enough to justify staying in the race until Iowa and being forced to give up his senate seat, the pollsters will make sure of that. Rand needs to pivot to the issues that his father championed, typical Republican read meat isn't going to turn his numbers around when there are 16 other candidates doing the same. He needs to stand up to the party establishment, he needs to be a different kind of Republican.

[CPUd]

He's not giving up his Senate seat unless he gets elected to POTUS.

[David Sadler]

You have to be in it to win it.

And that is no joke.

[David Sadler]

The policy is that the "Rand Paul Forum" is for support of Rand's candidacy.

Why is the RPF policy to further family dynasties (nepotism) over the advancement of liberty and prosperity in a much more broader and long term sense? It would seem that liberty and prosperity are the true legacy of Ron Paul.

Do not read that in a negative sense. Rand is smart and talented, but he isn't pure and perfect. He may not be electable this cycle as POTUS. If that is the case, then the question becomes, "Which candidate(s) has(have) a chance of winning along with the ability to enact some of the changes the liberty movement desires?"

Another question, "If Rand can't be elected POTUS this cycle, how can the liberty movement lobby the nominee to name Rand as the VP running mate, or maybe a cabinet position such as Sec of State?"

[David Sadler]

Yes, but look at all the people that Rand Paul is beating I think that's the important point here right?

#1 Kentucky Senator Rand Paul
#2 New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
#3 former Texas Governor Rick Perry
#4 former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum
#5 Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
#6 Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina
#7 South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham
#8 New York Governor George Pataki
#9 Herman Cain (who isn't running but should)

Rand's position above many in the field is important. It makes me think that even if (bear with me) he doesn't win the nomination he could still be named the VP running mate, and if that fails he could be named to a cabinet position. Sec of State would be a good launching pad for 2020.

[69360]

Until Trump inevitably crashes out of the race, the polls will be a mess. I won't even look at the until Trump is done.

[squirl22]

Rand has already been invited to the debates and I believe he was in fourth place in the polling

[rich34]

Do none of you guys remember how the pollsters did Ron? Hell there were many people how literally caught them and posted it on youtube. They'd select Ron and then it would ask them to make a selection, they'd press his number again and do the same and/or say thank you for your vote of so and so, not Ron and then hung up. If they used those tactics against Ron, why would we expect less from Rand who is an even bigger threat? The polls didn't get real until they had to release "real" numbers leading up to the primaries/caucus.' That's when they started showing Ron where he really was in polls and were damn near identical to what he got on election night. Polling firms can only play this game so long until it comes time to when they have to report the truth because if not and they don't predict the correct results, no one is going to use them anymore thus no money. So hell with em, let them play their game. When they start showing Rand where he truly is it'll give them impression that Rand is rising and imo unlike Ron, Rand will not be so easily for them to take down, ie newsletters.. You gotta know this is the game their playing..

[Brian4Liberty]

Why is the RPF policy to further family dynasties (nepotism) over the advancement of liberty and prosperity in a much more broader and long term sense? It would seem that liberty and prosperity are the true legacy of Ron Paul.

Do not read that in a negative sense. Rand is smart and talented, but he isn't pure and perfect. He may not be electable this cycle as POTUS. If that is the case, then the question becomes, "Which candidate(s) has(have) a chance of winning along with the ability to enact some of the changes the liberty movement desires?"

Another question, "If Rand can't be elected POTUS this cycle, how can the liberty movement lobby the nominee to name Rand as the VP running mate, or maybe a cabinet position such as Sec of State?"

It applies to any candidate who gets a sub-forum with their name on it, so it's not just Rand.

Some people have been suggesting a new Trump sub-forum... :toady:

[Lord Xar]

lol.. it is SO obvious what the major players are doing..... so obvious... If Rand is out of the debates, there will be NO dissenting voices on pretty much anything..... Like that other poll, Rand at .8% in Iowa.. really? not even 1% when Ron was polling very very well... its' all fucking rigged.

[69360]

The polls are probably right as of now. Doubting them has never worked. Just wait until Trump's pretend campaign is over with and see where the numbers really fall.

[unknown]

What happened? At one point, wasnt Rand polling in first place or close to it?

Ive been really busy with work and havent been able to follow the day to day trends.

[CPUd]

What happened? At one point, wasnt Rand polling in first place or close to it?

Ive been really busy with work and havent been able to follow the day to day trends.

He was polling first nationally back in 2013 and early 2014, and often dominating in NH. This is when they were mostly polling him against Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Christie, sometimes Rick Perry and Huckabee. Walker jumped in Iowa about the same time as Mitt saying for the final time he isn't running (a couple weeks before that, they started polling him with the other candidates). Since 2014, Rand is polling consistently 4th nationally around 9% until a few weeks ago, now it's more like 5-7th. What we're seeing with the polling is a result of more candidates entering the race plus Trump drawing support from just about everyone. Rand's numbers will go up when Trump's go down, and some candidates drop their campaigns.