Serious threat to Rons Campaign

[Man from La Mancha]

If pajama polls dropped Ron because of the fixed gallup poll, since they say he is under 1%. Now all the debates have a reason to drop him too. I think that Gallup's has to be fixed because how can he drop in polls as he gains more supporters?

[LibertyEagle]

Heck, even Gravel received 1 percent. I can't believe Ron Paul is polling BELOW Gravel.

We certainly have a lot of work to do to change this. Most people still don't even know who Dr. Paul is.

[nerfball]

I don't know, it may be that they are not polling Paul supporters. I remain skeptical that the youth movement on the net that seems to love Dr Paul will actually make it out to the polls to cast a vote. Maybe I'll be wrong, but I am watching, waiting, for the internet support to manifest itself as real-world numbers in the polls.

[Bradley in DC]

Relax. The next debate is August 5th in Iowa. Dr. Paul has been invited and has accepted the invitation. Let's keep our eye on the ball and not get sidetracked on each second's micro-news.

[DjLoTi]

O man, no offense m8, but I think you're wayy off on that one. Who cares about the pajama poll? Not me. I don't think they'll axe the candidate with the 3rd most cash on hand. lol. Come on, get real.

[ecliptic]

Relax. The next debate is August 5th in Iowa. Dr. Paul has been invited and has accepted the invitation. Let's keep our eye on the ball and not get sidetracked on each second's micro-news.

Yes! August 5th debate and August 11th Straw poll are huge. Let's focus on success in the Straw Poll and let's increase the focus on eliminating electronic voting machines altogether. Dr. Paul will take care of the debate rest assured!

Iowa Grassroots forum (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=61)

[foofighter20x]

Not to mention, folks, debate hosts could use whatever rationale they want to exclude candidates.

Hell, Giuliani and McCain are skipping the Iowa Straw Poll, yet they get to participate in the debate the week prior... Had I any say, I'd chuck'em from that debate since they aren't participating in the poll the next week.

If the media had any real backbone, they'd say and do the same thing.

[Man from La Mancha]

I'm glad your so optimistic. Is that Gallup for real? Seems like the work of Tavistock methods.

[kylejack]

As I stated before, Gallup moved the goal posts, polling Republicans and Republican leaners rather than likely Republican primary voters in this newest poll.

[rp4prez]

The Gallup poll is a joke. I wouldn't trust that thing as far as I could throw it. That said if the MSM drops Paul that pajamas did the alternative media will be all over it like white on rice and all of Paul's supporters will be up in arms and pissed as hell. Some how I think we can make enough noise to get him back on the list. Besides I think it would be a huge lift for Paul's campaign if he did get banned. Can you imagine the press (well at least on the web) he would get? It would be awesome!

[RonPaulGetsIt]

I think the only thing that is true an accurate representation are the betting odds. Bookies are experts at putting the odds of things exactly where there are equal buyers and sellers. Otherwise they wouldn't be in business. Ron Paul has jumped up in the betting odds. These guys make money by accurately reflecting supply/demand. No ulterior motives there.

[jonahtrainer]

I think the only thing that is true an accurate representation are the betting odds. Bookies are experts at putting the odds of things exactly where there are equal buyers and sellers. Otherwise they wouldn't be in business. Ron Paul has jumped up in the betting odds. These guys make money by accurately reflecting supply/demand. No ulterior motives there.

I would trust a bookie's opinion on his chances before a pollsters. The free market at work!

[ZackM]

If pajama polls dropped Ron because of the fixed gallup poll, since they say he is under 1%. Now all the debates have a reason to drop him too. I think that Gallup's has to be fixed because how can he drop in polls as he gains more supporters?

I'll be posting a blog about this tonight - What both Pajamas Media and us (Paul supporters) need to understand is that margin's of error are geniune statistical features. Saying someone is at 0%, 2%, 50%, or whatever without stating the MOE is giving you useless statistical drivel. Statistics never produce finite predictions, only interval estimates.

With a margin of error of +/- 5%, there is literally no statistical difference between polling at 0% or 1%.

For example, Giuliani has 30% in the latest Gallup - with an MOE of 5%, this is what that actually means: Among the population that was intended to be studied (likely republican primary voters according to historical trends), we can say with 95% confidence that his TRUE support is somewhere between 25% and 35%.

That's what it means. Nothing more, nothing less. Looking at it another way, if the TRUE support really was 30% and we performed 100 polls using an identical methodology, we would expect 95/100 to fall within the 25%-35% range forming a normal distribution about the true value (30%).

If you read the USA today article on the poll that pajamas links to, you'll see that the "frontrunners" have moved 1-2% since the last poll. Statistically, that movement means absolutely zilch - It could be a real change in sentiment, an artifact of sampling error, or a combination of both - there is absolutely no way to tell.

I'll update here with a more in depth blog post sometime tonight.

[Kuldebar]

Much ado about nothing, in my opinion.

It's like people getting upset <gasp> at the "The Epicenter Of The 2008 Presidential Election" (http://www.strawpoll08.com/) not listing Ron Paul in the web poll.

Whoopdee, feckin-doo... so some yokel gets a web domain and self titles it the Epicenter Of The 2008 Presidential Election and we are silly enough to take it seriously?


Yeah, Pajama-media has a reputation and readership, but they are petty political partisans, so I don't give a rat's ass.

If people won't debate or rely on reason because "they are too busy yelling hooray (http://www.reasontorock.com/tracks/for_what_its_worth.html) for their side" screw them, these are the idiots who just might wake up one day and wonder how they sold themselves and their country down the river.

There are certain irredeemable people in this political world; political hacks and partisan flag wavers are 2 types that come to mind.

[Man from La Mancha]

Ron Paul Holding Steady at 0%
The barking moonbats’ favorite candidate Ron Paul scores a big round goose egg in the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll: USAT/Gallup Poll: Steady leads for Giuliani & Clinton.

Giuliani has the support of 30% of “Republicans and Republican leaners,” vs. 28% a month ago; Thompson comes in with 20%, vs. 19% in June; McCain has 16%, vs. 18% a month earlier.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney remains in fourth, at 9% vs. 7% in June.

The current numbers for the rest of the Republicans included in the survey: Former House speaker Newt Gingrich, 6%; former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, 2%; Rep. Duncan Hunter, 2%; Rep. Tom Tancredo, 2%; Sen. Sam Brownback, 1%; Sen. Chuck Hagel, 1%; former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson, 1%. Neither former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore nor Rep. Ron Paul registered any support
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:pN_XyuJq8jUJ:littlegreenfootballs.c om/weblog/%3Fentry%3D26195_Ron_Paul_Holding_Steady_at_0%2525 %26only+Ron+Paul+gallup&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us

I just got this. We know it's fraud but nobody seems to care. I'm not talking about feel good we know we got more. I'm looking for the reasons they will now actively try to sensor Paul. If you know more than me, please send me the MSM links.

[AZ Libertarian]

The more they lie the more I smell fear and desperation from their general wind-direction.....

HEAR ME RNC!
NOMINATE RON OR
YOU'RE ALL GONE!

[Roxi]

not only that but all this hooplah surrounding clinton and edwards "private" conversation about excluding candidates will probably keep them from excluding anyone from the debates for a while