Latest zogby

[Real_CaGeD]

Latest New Hampshire Zogby Poll:

1. McCain - 34%
2. Romney - 30%
3. Huckabee - 10%
4. Giuliani - 9%
5. Paul - 7%
6. Thompson - 2%


Ron will pick up the +3%= for energetic base turnout, +2% indies, +3 percent Debate buzz. The other factors depends on the other candidates actions this week.

[Real_CaGeD]

Poll Date McCain Romney Giuliani Huckabee Paul Thompson Spread
RCP Average 12/27 - 01/03 31.3 29.8 10.0 9.5 7.0 2.0 McCain +1.5
Suffolk/WHDH 01/02 - 01/03 25 29 9 13 8 2 Romney +4.0
Zogby Tracking 12/31 - 01/03 34 30 9 10 7 2 McCain +4.0
Franklin Pierce 12/27 - 12/31 37 31 10 5 6 2 McCain +6.0
CNN/WMUR/UNH 12/27 - 12/30 29 29 12 10 7 2 Tie
See All New Hampshire Republican Primary Polling Data


Going to be third at 14-18% Could raise a few points if we get some coverage and the debate goes well.

[itshappening]

are these independents anti-war? they realise that McCain is a pro-war idiot along with his friend Lieberman? why do they love him so much I will never know.

[coboman]

YES! That looks like a solid 5th place.

Just as wonderful as our 5th in Iowa.

At this pace, we will maybe get even 4th on February 5.

Wohoo!

\Sarcasm

[coboman]

bump

[jd603]

This must be republican base only...

NH is 50%+ Independents

This zogby poll is completely worthless for NH, they release it for propaganda/marketing purposes. NH needs a poll tat includes indis to get an accurate view of paul's standing.




Latest New Hampshire Zogby Poll:

1. McCain - 34%
2. Romney - 30%
3. Huckabee - 10%
4. Giuliani - 9%
5. Paul - 7%
6. Thompson - 2%


Ron will pick up the +3%= for energetic base turnout, +2% indies, +3 percent Debate buzz. The other factors depends on the other candidates actions this week.

[Sevryn45]

If we get 5th in NH were done, we should be takind 1st or 2nd in NH and we will have to to gain traction with the voters in order to have momentum.

[LFOD]

Unfortunately, I think the idea that the traditional polls are inaccurate is dead until proven otherwise.

[RevolutionSD]

Paul's average poll number in NH is around 8.5%, higher than in Iowa.
He can EASILY take 4th and has a fantastic shot at 3rd. If McCain slips RP will be there to overtake him and grab 2nd. I'm happy with his chances.

[jd603]

That's nice, historically they have shown to be in-accurate.



Unfortunately, I think the idea that the traditional polls are inaccurate is dead until proven otherwise.

[RevolutionSD]

Unfortunately, I think the idea that the traditional polls are inaccurate is dead until proven otherwise.

They're not accurate.
Paul's average poll number in Iowa was 7% and he ended up with 10%. That's not really close.

[Liberty Star]

Smart ad blitz in NH with the right message, hitting hard on Iraq war/liberties/economy and McCain's Iraq war support can turn this around in days. RP should finish in top 3 in NH.

[Lord Xar]

HOW is the Ghoul AND the Huck ahead of us!!! arghh..

My cousin lives up there and she says "RON PAUL IS EVERYWHERE".

IF people are not coming around, and the grassroots is doing its job (which I think they are), then the marketing is wrong.. ie HQ commercials etc...

Does anybody KNOW what Ron is putting on the TV out there? What ads are showing?

***********

Also, I am sure Lawrence's ads have done a huge job. BTW. anybody know the response Lawrence has gotten from the ads in NH?

[skinzterpswizfan]

Unfortunately, I think the idea that the traditional polls are inaccurate is dead until proven otherwise.

That's how I feel. I really hope that the polls for New Hampshire are wrong, but we said that they were wrong for Iowa and see where that got us.

[LFOD]

They're not accurate.
Paul's average poll number in Iowa was 7% and he ended up with 10%. That's not really close.

3% is very close. It's within the margin of error. 7% would still have meant 5th place.

[coboman]

This zogby poll is completely worthless for NH, they release it for propaganda/marketing purposes..
YES! Just like the ones in Iowa.

This poll is so inaccurate that we will probably end of first, with 27% voters coming out of nowhere.

It is a conspiracy i tell you. Ineptitude of the Official Campaign has nothing to do with it.

/Sarcasm

Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"

[skinzterpswizfan]

They're not accurate.
Paul's average poll number in Iowa was 7% and he ended up with 10%. That's not really close.

The latest Des Moines Register poll had him at 9%, which was what everyone was using when making observations.

[AMack]

In Iowa, Republicans voting in the Republican caucus vastly outnumbered independents. This is evidenced by the fact that Dr. Paul pulled 29% of independents, but got only 10% of the vote. In NH that will be different. We can expect vastly more independents to come out and vote.

I expect at least 3rd in New Hampshire.

[Original_Intent]

YES! That looks like a solid 5th place.

Just as wonderful as our 5th in Iowa.

At this pace, we will maybe get even 4th on February 5.

Wohoo!

\Sarcasm

Go cry to mama, we don't need your whiny boohooing here.

[Real_CaGeD]

3rd in NH, 2nd Mi, 2nd Nevada, 1st South Caolina

[jd603]

I live here, McCain doesn't have that amount of support. I'd wager on this one. Iowa's election process is compromised and that is a fact sir, you need to start doing some research.

Zogby did NOT poll independents to produce these so called results for the republicans, yet they go on to say how important independents are on the Democrat side lower in the poll, go take a look for yourself. They are picking and choosing data...


YES! Just like the ones in Iowa.

This poll is so inaccurate that we will probably end of first, with 27% voters coming out of nowhere.

It is a conspiracy i tell you. Ineptitude of the Official Campaign has nothing to do with it.

/Sarcasm

Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"

[ronpaulfollower999]

Here is a Zogby poll that included Republicans, Independents, and Democrats nationwide: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1391

[jd603]

Zogby International was commissioned by [Reuters and C-Span] to conduct a telephone survey of [Likely Republican Primary Voters].

The target sample is [1076] interviews with approximately [31] questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd’s of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges. Up to six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR’s approved methodologies[3] and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies.[4] Weighting by [party, age, gender, religion] is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 3.0 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.

[coboman]

Here is a Zogby poll that included Republicans, Independents, and Democrats nationwide: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1391
That's a blind bio poll. It is worthless.

It does not take into account name recognition, or intention of vote.

It is only an experiment to see who would people vote for, if they knew only the candidates biographies.

[user]

In Iowa, Republicans voting in the Republican caucus vastly outnumbered independents. This is evidenced by the fact that Dr. Paul pulled 29% of independents, but got only 10% of the vote. In NH that will be different. We can expect vastly more independents to come out and vote.

I expect at least 3rd in New Hampshire.
Unless they go to Obama

[Nash]

This must be republican base only...

NH is 50%+ Independents

This zogby poll is completely worthless for NH, they release it for propaganda/marketing purposes. NH needs a poll tat includes indis to get an accurate view of paul's standing.

I don't know what to think anymore. If they polled Republicans only then I like our chances. If they polled registered voters and then asked them if they are "Republican" or "Lean Republican" or "Independent" then I'm not as excited.

I know that many polls call registered voters regardless of party and then go from there with the questioning.

I suppose we would benefit from those who aren't registered yet.

All I know is that all things considered we did ok in Iowa and not great, but if we turn in another performance like that in New Hampshire then we're in serious trouble.

[newbitech]

Go cry to mama, we don't need your whiny boohooing here.

at least wait till his state votes before you say we don't need his vote.

after Iowa, it is clear that we need all the votes we can get.

[jd603]

No it isn't.

The target sample is [503 Republican Likely Primary Voter] interviews with approximately [54] questions asked. Samples are randomly drawn from telephone cd’s of national listed sample. Zogby International surveys employ sampling strategies in which selection probabilities are proportional to population size within area codes and exchanges Up to six calls are made to reach a sampled phone number. Cooperation rates are calculated using one of AAPOR’s approved methodologies[3] and are comparable to other professional public-opinion surveys conducted using similar sampling strategies.[4] Weighting by [age, gender] is used to adjust for non-response. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.

?????????


Here is a Zogby poll that included Republicans, Independents, and Democrats nationwide: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1391

[coboman]

This zogby poll is completely worthless for NH, they release it for propaganda/marketing purposes.
This conspiracy theorist mentality has to stop. Zogby lives for its reputation for accuracy.

From their website:

“The winner of the notoriously difficult-to-poll Iowa caucuses was pollster John Zogby, who nailed the results twelve hours before voting started.”
– Jordan Lieberman, Publisher, Politics Magazine, Campaigns and Elections

These people take pride in their ability to predict accurately. That is their business.
We must start listening to them, and make changes accordingly.

If they say that we are in for 5th in NH with what we are doing now, I believe them.
Let's do something different to increase that number!

[stevedasbach]

They're not accurate.
Paul's average poll number in Iowa was 7% and he ended up with 10%. That's not really close.

Paul got 7% among Republicans, in line with the polls. What pollsters generally miss is the extent of Paul's support among independents.

[jd603]

It is completely accurate, amongst previously registered republican Voters. In NH, first-time voters can register right before they vote AND independents can vote for ANY candidate. 50% of Nh is independent and Ron WON 1st place amongst Independents even in Iowa.

Add that all up and tell me what you've got.


So I'm willing to publicly state that the Zogby poll is in-accurate.

Edit: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1412 , that is the poll for future reference so nobody gets confused in the future about what poll i'm talking about.



This conspiracy theorist mentality has to stop. Zogby lives for its reputation for accuracy.

From their website:

“The winner of the notoriously difficult-to-poll Iowa caucuses was pollster John Zogby, who nailed the results twelve hours before voting started.”
– Jordan Lieberman, Publisher, Politics Magazine, Campaigns and Elections

These people take pride in their ability to predict accurately. That is their business.
We must start listening to them, and make changes accordingly.

If they say that we are in for 5th in NH with what we are doing now, I believe them.
Let's do something different to increase that number!

[LFOD]

This conspiracy theorist mentality has to stop. Zogby lives for its reputation for accuracy.

From their website:

“The winner of the notoriously difficult-to-poll Iowa caucuses was pollster John Zogby, who nailed the results twelve hours before voting started.”
– Jordan Lieberman, Publisher, Politics Magazine, Campaigns and Elections

These people take pride in their ability to predict accurately. That is their business.
We must start listening to them, and make changes accordingly.

If they say that we are in for 5th in NH with what we are doing now, I believe them.
Let's do something different to increase that number!

I agree. I was as hopeful as anyone that they were specifically mis-polling for Ron Paul. Turned out not to be the case.

Doesn't mean they are The Word of God, however. If we do all that can be done, including an all-out effort in getting out the vote, we can surprise.

Don't forget about Wyoming... hey it counts! Might be a nice boost over the weekend... they're receptive to our message in the west.

[jd603]

Please read my previous post.


I agree. I was as hopeful as anyone that they were specifically mis-polling for Ron Paul. Turned out not to be the case.

Doesn't mean they are The Word of God, however. If we do all that can be done, including an all-out effort in getting out the vote, we can surprise.

Don't forget about Wyoming... hey it counts! Might be a nice boost over the weekend... they're receptive to our message in the west.

[Bern]

Paul got 7% among Republicans, in line with the polls. What pollsters generally miss is the extent of Paul's support among independents.

Exactly! The results for registered Republicans was right at 7%. Independents only accounted for 13% of the total vote in Iowa. It will be higher in NH, but after that, Ron Paul cannot count on independents to carry him to the nomination without making more significant inroads within the GOP.

[LFOD]

Please read my previous post.

I did. I will go out on a limb and state publicly that Zogby is completely aware of the factors you mention.

[jd603]

WRONG. They released their criteria for the poll, please READ. They only called previously REGISTERED REPUBLICAN VOTERS. I'm done arguing with you, you're too thick.


I did. I will go out on a limb and state publicly that Zogby is completely aware of the factors you mention.

[Bradley in DC]

Go cry to mama, we don't need your whiny boohooing here.

No, we need hard-headed realism that faces facts and acts smartly: ie, a new campaign official staff.

[LFOD]

WRONG. They released their criteria for the poll, please READ. They only called previously REGISTERED REPUBLICAN VOTERS. I'm done arguing with you, you're too thick.

Ok buddy, you call somebody "thick" and you're likely to get your ass handed to you on a platter. Show me the section on Zogby's methodology where it states "they only called previously registered Republican voters."