PDA

View Full Version : Low poll numbers good?




Elwar
12-10-2007, 03:54 PM
Ok, after seeing some of the hit pieces about Huckabee coming out I'm wondering if it's not better for Ron Paul to have low poll numbers and keep him out of the Old Media spotlight while the grassroots works on sneaking the voters past the all seeing eye of the media to the polls.

I think the best scenario:

Ron Paul 3rd or 4th in Iowa...high enough for people to take notice, but low enough so the media can still ignore him. 2nd or 3rd in New Hampshire...a quirk that the media can dismiss as a state that was focussed on by the libertarian candidate.

Similar showings in SC, MI, NV...

But...February 5th it all happens...1st place in several states.

All eyes then turn to California and Texas as states that can bring huge numbers to Ron Paul.

But it's too late..the grassroots have been working in those states for a damned long time.

The media attacks. They go after his kindergarten spelling records, they drag out an ex-girlfriend from high school that says he spoke not so kindly toward her.

But...too late. He's got the delegates.


Of course...winning all states while the media sits in utter shock would be equally wonderful.

mmink15
12-10-2007, 04:00 PM
I really think we are gonna win some landslides because our people will actually get to the polls and probably drag a few people that were gonna stay home out to vote as well.

Pauliana
12-10-2007, 04:06 PM
I think Carol was his girlfriend in high school lol See? Even that won't work.

shepburn
12-10-2007, 04:07 PM
To pull off the monumental upset, we'll need to outright win in New Hamsphire!

Does anyone disagree with me?

However I do agree that it is important not to peak to soon. Huckabee is getting trashed by the media right now. Of course the obvious counter to that is ... the media has nothing to trash Paul with! Now, we supporters on the otherhand, well we're different story ;o)

RPinSEAZ
12-10-2007, 04:09 PM
I think it's imperative that we place at least second place in New Hampshire. Anything less is guaranteed failure for us.

tfelice
12-10-2007, 04:16 PM
I think it's imperative that we place at least second place in New Hampshire. Anything less is guaranteed failure for us.

Agreed.

There are eight before Super Tuesday. If Paul doesn't win a few and place high in the remainder of those eight, it's pretty much all over.

bc2208
12-10-2007, 04:16 PM
Yeah, except Ron Paul invented spell check. So that won't work.

aspiringconstitutionalist
12-10-2007, 04:16 PM
Ok, after seeing some of the hit pieces about Huckabee coming out I'm wondering if it's not better for Ron Paul to have low poll numbers and keep him out of the Old Media spotlight while the grassroots works on sneaking the voters past the all seeing eye of the media to the polls.

Like sneaking the One Ring past the Eye of Sauron?

Wingman
12-10-2007, 04:18 PM
i don't understand how we can win on super tuesday (?) Feb 5th :/

there the other candidates have a clear win especially ghoulani :/

yea :/ im hjopeful but i admit i do not understand yet

(i know the angle about how the polls are not relfective of voters hich aren't conted but i havent been able to find anywhere which says that people like pew research have so biased their polls and don't know it)

rory096
12-10-2007, 04:18 PM
Except poll numbers aren't that inaccurate, contrary to popular belief. He needs to have very strong showings in Iowa and NH to have a chance.

integrity
12-10-2007, 04:33 PM
the low poll numbers will make it easier for the dark side to cheat....

RPinSEAZ
12-10-2007, 04:38 PM
i don't understand how we can win on super tuesday (?) Feb 5th :/

there the other candidates have a clear win especially ghoulani :/


Essentially, if RP places ~3rd in Iowa, this will be a wakeup call to the MSM that Ron Paul has the votes. If that happens the talk won't be about how Huckabee or Romney wins Iowa because it's expected, it will be about how Ron Paul completely surprised everybody and he does have the actual votes to win.

A win in NH will wake people up to the idea that Ron Paul can actually win this and we'll have the momentum going into the later states. People in America would rather vote for someone they think will win rather than vote on who they want to win. People currently think RP is fringe and all of his support is half a dozen people spamming email or a bunch of kids that won't actually vote.

troyd1
12-10-2007, 05:01 PM
I agree the low poll numbers at this point are beneficial. I see the media exposure grow with the tea party and the blimp, still more of a wow thing than a serious thing from the media unless the tea party is over 20 million with about 150,000 donors. After Christmas, we will have another decent money bomb, probably New Years eve. When the fec filing come in, we do well in Iowa and NH then Ron Paul will start getting serious media coverage.

Goldwater Conservative
12-10-2007, 05:51 PM
There's some benefit, but I think the drawbacks outweigh them because many people only vote for someone who's "viable" or they write off someone as "fringe" just because of their low poll numbers.

Drew Ivers is right about exponential growth, and I hope we at least start on that curve before Iowa and NH. Surprises are always great, but I much prefer being able to secure and build on a "viable" level of support even in the polls, because we know we'll do better than those would lead you to believe.

mosquitobite
12-10-2007, 05:54 PM
I was listening to the radio the other day and they mentioned how Jimmy Carter was a complete surprise for the nomination in 1976. I'd love for that to be Ron Paul in 2008! :D

AlexMerced
12-10-2007, 05:57 PM
We're doing well by any metric, period

Nefertiti
12-10-2007, 06:01 PM
We are polling better or the same as Kerry at the same point in 2004. We need to start thinking about how we are going to make sure we get supporters to the polls because it is all about turnout at this point.

Akus
12-10-2007, 06:23 PM
They go after his kindergarten spelling records, they drag out an ex-girlfriend from high school that says he spoke not so kindly toward her.

That's what I like about Ron Paul. This is as close to a dirt on him as it will ever get and the media is ripping the hair out of its head trying to find something, anything...

The racist "black people are fleetfooted" story lost traction before the ink dried.
The "he gets money from Nazis" story lost traction before the electric signal from the enter key ever reached the motherboard.
So has the "he got the pork for his district" story, that is, if anyone ever remembers that story at all.