Paul at 3%

[Bradley in DC]

http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_1207MBS.pdf

(only 1% of women for RP)

PPIC California GOP Primary
Rudy Giuliani 24% (22%)
Mitt Romney 15% (16%)
Mike Huckabee 12% (2%)
John McCain 11% (15%)
Fred Thompson 10% (16%)
Duncan Hunter 3% (3%)
Ron Paul 3% (NA)
Tom Tancredo 3% (2%)
Don’t Know 17% (20%)
Survey of 346 likely Republican primary voters was conducted November 27 - December 4. The margin of error is +/- 5 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted September 4 - 11 are in parentheses.

[noztnac]

The polls are meaningless.

[Bradley in DC]

The polls are meaningless.

Would you care to elaborate and share your wisdom? :rolleyes:

Start by explaining why Dr. Paul is wrong to spend our contributions for internal polling (as he's always done).

[Hope]

Would you care to elaborate and share your wisdom? :rolleyes:

Start by explaining why Dr. Paul is wrong to spend our contributions for internal polling (as he's always done).

I don't think polls are meaningless. I think polls that target "likely Republican voters" are meaningless.

[tfelice]

Meaningless or not, Paul continually shows up in single digits. The MSM validates their ignoring of him, and the electorate ignores him as well. It's not just Paul either as they are doing the same with Hunter, Tancredo & Keyes.

In the mind of many, the Paul phenomenom is limited to an overly enthusiastic grassroots base. It confirms their assumption that while the grassroots are willing to donate lots of cash, vote in every internet poll around, write letters to the editor, etc in reality their numbers do not add up to much at all.

[Oliver]

Do we have actual numbers about how many supporters
Ron has - how many registered republican or how much
delegates?

[Primbs]

The polls might be close to the truth, however we are not at the election yet and the blimp is not in the air. Everything is going to change in the next month.

I thought Huckabee with his Mormon comment and Romney battling back would both destroy each other. Rudy has his fair share of problems, but not enough people know about those problems or they don't care.

[Mike Mitrosky]

Would you care to elaborate and share your wisdom? :rolleyes:

Start by explaining why Dr. Paul is wrong to spend our contributions for internal polling (as he's always done).

what is 'internal' polling?

[hard@work]

Would you care to elaborate and share your wisdom? :rolleyes:

Start by explaining why Dr. Paul is wrong to spend our contributions for internal polling (as he's always done).

It comes down to what the definition of "likely" voters is. And in order to win we have to redefine this.

[Richandler]

I know more than a couple of people who are registering Republican just to vote for Paul, myself included. This poll was of 346 people. That isn't very much at all. After the next month or so of unfolding events Ron's support is going to be through the roof here.

[xao]

This poll is fucking retarded as is bradley in dc.

Ron had more people show up in frisco than anyone else. Ignore the stupid polls bradley shows.

He should focus on his worthless area of DC.

[Ozwest]

Bradley,

Being continuously bombarded with these piddly and insignificant polls with ridiculously unrealistic low polling numbers for Ron Paul, only serves to confuse and discourage people.

Please limit your postings to only the large and reputable polls.

[0zzy]

Would you care to elaborate and share your wisdom? :rolleyes:

Start by explaining why Dr. Paul is wrong to spend our contributions for internal polling (as he's always done).

Because it was an online poll conducted with a selected group who particularly like the Economist?