Did anyone youtube CNN tonight saying Ron Paul might win Nevada? [Archive]

Richandler

01-16-2008, 09:50 PM

Man dude if there is some potential we need to take some sort of risky move to insure that we make an upset. The campaign could put some millions there because simply put, it would be a huge upset that would turn heads.

raeason

01-16-2008, 09:50 PM

a second plea!
Thirded!!

Jeremy

01-16-2008, 09:52 PM

AP said it too guys:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-I8TcXNEejVCpT_nWw4XkaKBKYQD8U75UC81

crackyflipside

01-16-2008, 09:53 PM

If Ron Paul won 1st place Nevada, you know how discombobulated the entire GOP race would be reported???

LOL The media's collective heads will implode. :D

ronpaultag

01-16-2008, 09:53 PM

please someone youtube this..

LandonCook

01-16-2008, 09:55 PM

It didn't show, we got blueballed again

crazyfacedjenkins

01-16-2008, 09:57 PM

It didn't show, we got blueballed again

HAHAHHAHAHAH. Blue balls suck, worse than getting hit in the balls.

CountryboyRonPaul

01-16-2008, 10:12 PM

It only works when Luntz says it will.

jereome

01-16-2008, 10:19 PM

Rofl then how would fox news spin it?

We are now reporting that no republican candidate won Nevada.

drexhex

01-16-2008, 10:27 PM

AP said it too guys:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-I8TcXNEejVCpT_nWw4XkaKBKYQD8U75UC81

WOW!

FTA:

By contrast, Republican candidates have stayed away from the diverse electorate and unfamiliar electoral landscape as Nevada voters weigh in earlier than ever before.

No major GOP candidate has set foot in the state for two months, and some Republicans are bracing for a possible surprise first-place showing by long-shot Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the only Republican to broadcast TV ads in Nevada.

jrich4rpaul

01-16-2008, 10:38 PM

Stupid question, how big would a Nevada win be in terms of delegates?

drexhex

01-16-2008, 10:41 PM

Stupid question, how big would a Nevada win be in terms of delegates?

34 delegates, 31 of which are tied directly to the Jan. 19th caucus.

However, we win one state all the people who won't vote for him because he "doesn't have a chance" will vote for him.

JustBcuz

01-16-2008, 10:41 PM

Stupid question, how big would a Nevada win be in terms of delegates?

Caucus state, no way to actually tell until June or so.

34 delegates, 31 of which are tied directly to the Jan. 19th caucus.

Not correct. 37 delegates. 3 of those are appointed by party leadership.

34 at-large delegates are up for grabs. Thats more than Michigan or South Carolina.

We are in position to do well with the delegates.

Chester Copperpot

01-16-2008, 10:43 PM

Thats impressive thatll be the 2nd largest delegate win so far next to Iowa.. I really hope we pull this off..

Dont forget Maine has their primary (or caucus I forget) before Super Tuesday as well..
I hope we win Nevada AND maine

drexhex

01-16-2008, 10:44 PM

Caucus state, no way to actually tell until June or so.

Not correct. 37 delegates. 3 of those are appointed by party leadership.

34 at-large delegates are up for grabs. Thats more than Michigan or South Carolina.

We are in position to do well with the delegates.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#NV

REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL:
Closed caucuses
34 total delegates*
31 tied to January 19 caucuses; 3 unpledged RNC member delegates

alexa doherty

01-16-2008, 11:18 PM

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#NV

Didn't we win the Nevada straw polls as well?

A big issue with Nevada will be that Ron is against taxing tips.

Btw the illegal aliens voting is incredibly illegal and wrong. Anyone involved with that should be shit-canned and thrown in jail. So much for democracy.

BLS

01-16-2008, 11:21 PM

34 delegates, 31 of which are tied directly to the Jan. 19th caucus.

However, we win one state all the people who won't vote for him because he "doesn't have a chance" will vote for him.

BINGO!

JimInNY

01-16-2008, 11:26 PM

AP said it too guys:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-I8TcXNEejVCpT_nWw4XkaKBKYQD8U75UC81

A poll for the Gazette-Journal showed John McCain at 22 percent, Rudy Giuliani at 18 percent, Mike Huckabee with 16 percent and Romney at 15 percent.

That's 71%. What are they afraid to say that RP is at 29%? lol!

jcizzle

01-16-2008, 11:39 PM

AP said it too guys:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-I8TcXNEejVCpT_nWw4XkaKBKYQD8U75UC81

The only problem is he's still polling below all the "major" candidates or it's likely they would have reported it. I know it is easy to bash the polls for a variety of valid reasons, but they haven't lied much about Paul's success so far. He's yet to crack 15%, let alone the ~30% he'll likely need to win.

I sure as hell hope he does win, but it still seems unlikely. His rise to national prominence came too close to the actual elections IMO.

Edit: I checked and they have him at 6%.

Naraku

01-16-2008, 11:40 PM

The polls have been all over the board. It's inevitable some of them would be right.

alexa doherty

01-16-2008, 11:41 PM

The only problem is he's still polling below all the "major" candidates or it's likely they would have reported it. I know it is easy to bash the polls for a variety of valid reasons, but they haven't lied much about Paul's success so far. He's yet to crack 15%, let alone the ~30% he'll likely need to win.

I sure as hell hope he does win, but it still seems unlikely. His rise to national prominence came too close to the actual elections IMO.

Edit: I checked and they have him at 6%.

6%??? That's not shown anywhere.

Well that's just pure b.s.

They lied about paul's numbers many times and even don't print him or leave him out of the papers completely. They're clearly not printing his 29%, yet say he might win, in the same aticle. I call b.s. on them for doing that.

jcizzle

01-16-2008, 11:43 PM

6%??? That's not shown anywhere.

Well that's just pure b.s.

They lied about paul's numbers many times and even don't print him or leave him out of the papers completely. They're clearly not printing his 29%, yet say he might win, in the same aticle. I call b.s. on them for doing that.

If you read the article they say the poll was run by the Gazette Journal. A simple google search will bring you the other results...

Swmorgan77

01-16-2008, 11:44 PM

The only problem is he's still polling below all the "major" candidates or it's likely they would have reported it. I know it is easy to bash the polls for a variety of valid reasons, but they haven't lied much about Paul's success so far. He's yet to crack 15%, let alone the ~30% he'll likely need to win.

I sure as hell hope he does win, but it still seems unlikely. His rise to national prominence came too close to the actual elections IMO.

Edit: I checked and they have him at 6%.

But isn't a caucus, by its very nature, less reflective of polls than just a straight primary? Are they polling caucus-goers or just Republican voters in Nevada?

alexa doherty

01-16-2008, 11:44 PM

If you read the article they say the poll was run by the Gazette Journal. A simple google search will bring you the other results...

I did a simple google search. You lied. Please post your evidence.

thanks in advance

jcizzle

01-16-2008, 11:46 PM

But isn't a caucus, by its very nature, less reflective of polls than just a straight primary?

No idea to be quite honest with you. I hope that is the case, but all I'm saying is the polls in Iowa and NH weren't as drastically off as we had hoped. The only way RP will win is to have huge turnout from his supporters. Something we all hope for.

jcizzle

01-16-2008, 11:47 PM

I did a simple google search. You lied. Please post your evidence.

thanks in advance

I lied? Huh? I'm not making this stuff up to cause you heartache here, it's just the numbers they reported.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/polls/pdfs/research2000-nevada-january-2008-reno-gazette-journal.pdf

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=nevada+primary+polls+Gazette-Journal&btnG=Search

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/nevada.html

The quote from the AP:

A poll for the Gazette-Journal showed John McCain at 22 percent, Rudy Giuliani at 18 percent, Mike Huckabee with 16 percent and Romney at 15 percent.

Rede

01-16-2008, 11:51 PM

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nv/nevada_republican_caucus-235.html

6% or 9% depending on poll

Thom1776

01-16-2008, 11:53 PM

They were talking about all the candidates each winning a state on MSNBC Tuesday night, Pat Buchanan et al, and just as they were cutting away, someone said Ron Paul could win Nevada, but you could barely hear them.

alexa doherty

01-16-2008, 11:54 PM

I lied? Huh?

You lied. That's not the specific poll they were talking about in the article. You're just throwing up old polls. Nice try.

gracebkr

01-16-2008, 11:55 PM

Rofl then how would fox news spin it?

We are now reporting that no republican candidate won Nevada.

LOL. "clearly this is voter fraud, those conspiracy theorists are conspirators"

Maybe they will blur over his name and bleep his name out when they speak.

:p

gracebkr

01-16-2008, 11:57 PM

"some republicans are bracing for a first place win by Ron Paul"

Holy toledo batman!

jcizzle

01-16-2008, 11:59 PM

You lied. That's not the specific poll they were talking about in the article. You're just throwing up old polls. Nice try.

Um, it says it was released this Monday and mirrors the AP article exactly on the listed candidates. McCain at 22% in the article, 22% in the poll. Same for Romney, Huckabee and the Ghoul. I suppose it's always possible they released a new poll with these same numbers and Paul somehow gaining 23% in two days.

I'm only pointing this out for clarification purposes to show the full poll from the AP. RP can win if he has his full base come out to vote, something the other candidates will not receive.

Karsten

01-16-2008, 11:59 PM

It only works when Luntz says it will.

F.U.F.

Carole

01-17-2008, 12:04 AM

Nevada Republican Caucus
Saturday, January 19 | Delegates at Stake: 34

The highest I have seen: PAUL AT 9% and 8%

Poll Date Romney McCain Giuliani Huckabee ThompsonPaul Spread
American Res. Group
01/09 - 01/14 28 21 11 8 13 9 Romney +7.0

CNN
11/09 - 11/13 21 12 29 4 14 8 Giuliani +8.0

pilby

01-17-2008, 12:05 AM

i started making calls to NV today in coordination with the official campaign. i was very surprised. probably 50% of the people i talked to were RP supporters.

one lady said she was voting for "the Christian guy. Huntington? Hunterbee? Huckerson? Huckla...." after a two-minute conversation, though, she was a convert to Dr Paul.

jake

01-17-2008, 12:06 AM

win Nevada = Ron Paul will be the president. I would bet every penny in my pocket on that.

Pete Kay

01-17-2008, 12:13 AM

This is just a test of the media. They are wanting to flex their muscles to determine how much sway that they have over the elections. A Paul win in Nevada and a Thompson win in South Carolina is exactly what they want. Can you imagine the story? Republicans split ina five way race and Giulliani is left in the dust. Ratings galore. If there was a true frontrunner then the race wouldn't be interesting at all. If it's a five or six man race, then that's a damn good story.

DXDoug

01-17-2008, 12:15 AM

so whats the polls showing there?

tonyr1988

01-17-2008, 12:21 AM

No idea to be quite honest with you. I hope that is the case, but all I'm saying is the polls in Iowa and NH weren't as drastically off as we had hoped. The only way RP will win is to have huge turnout from his supporters. Something we all hope for.

Don't forget - we mainly need low turnout from the other guys (although our turnout matters, too). When Paul sent the e-mail about the NH recount, he mentioned that we had turnout pegged right around what was expected. The reason we didn't do as well was because other candidates were able to GOTV, too.

That's what gives me hope (granted, it's small, but it's hope nonetheless) about Nevada. This will be the first state where the other candidates have ignored them. Even Michigan had heavy campaigning by McCain and Romney. There's a much better chance of low turnout from the other guys.

And..........if that truly is the biggest factor, we've got Super Tuesday in the bag. No doubt.

ValidusCustodiae

01-17-2008, 12:23 AM

Link to article from Associated Press saying Ron Paul could win Nevada:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-I8TcXNEejVCpT_nWw4XkaKBKYQD8U75UC81

jcizzle

01-17-2008, 12:27 AM

Don't forget - we mainly need low turnout from the other guys (although our turnout matters, too). When Paul sent the e-mail about the NH recount, he mentioned that we had turnout pegged right around what was expected. The reason we didn't do as well was because other candidates were able to GOTV, too.

That's what gives me hope (granted, it's small, but it's hope nonetheless) about Nevada. This will be the first state where the other candidates have ignored them. Even Michigan had heavy campaigning by McCain and Romney. There's a much better chance of low turnout from the other guys.

And..........if that truly is the biggest factor, we've got Super Tuesday in the bag. No doubt.

Thats a very good point. Here's hoping for an upset!

paul_v

01-17-2008, 12:29 AM

I don't get why Dr. Paul didn't spend more time in Nevada if it has more delegates then South Carolina. I'm glad he at least is running commercials but attending a few rallies and stuff would have made a big difference. Plus Dr. Paul is against banning Internet gambling which I'm sure is a huge issue in Nevada. His pro freedom stance helps the gambling industry.

gracebkr

01-17-2008, 12:33 AM

Madison

01-17-2008, 02:07 AM

Why did the OP get banned?

Lord Xar

01-17-2008, 02:11 AM

I have posted this in other place here but I'd like some thought on this.

I heard from a forum member that they are using handcounting, no diebold. Do you think the AP is saying what it is saying because handcount is much hard to 'cheat'. It seems that the POLLS in NV are as always.. Ron at some stupid low number --- YET, for this state they might concede a win to Ron Paul. That doesn't match the polls. Do you think that there is a correlation between this story and the lack of Diebold - in which items can't be manipulated?

I do admit I am moving into the conspiracy ocean, but I'd like thoughts on this line of reasoning. AND IF you think this is somewhat practical in its line of thought, then wouldn't it be wise to focus on states that use paper ballots (ie, california) and NOT diebold states.

Shink

01-17-2008, 02:13 AM

HAHAHHAHAHAH. Blue balls suck, worse than getting hit in the balls.

The proper response is to club whoever victimized you. And not with a club.

tcindie

01-17-2008, 02:17 AM

It seems to me there is still a general misunderstanding of how a caucus works here...

It would be GREAT to win the popular vote in Nevada, but even if we didn't it's most likely that we will have the most organized group of delegates. If we control the delegates, even if someone else wins the popular vote for the state, we control the state. ;)

Pharoah

01-17-2008, 02:18 AM

I have posted this in other place here but I'd like some thought on this.

I heard from a forum member that they are using handcounting, no diebold. Do you think the AP is saying what it is saying because handcount is much hard to 'cheat'. It seems that the POLLS in NV are as always.. Ron at some stupid low number --- YET, for this state they might concede a win to Ron Paul.

That's a very interesting point. If indeed there's no Diebold use in Nevada, then it makes a lot of sense for AP to worry that Ron Paul might win. If he does win it will confirm our worst fears about voted fraud.

Knightskye

01-17-2008, 02:20 AM

I couldn't find anything about Ron Paul past January 11th on CNN's video section. Just found this clip of Mitt Romney nervously making a speech in Nevada (I looked up "Nevada Republican" because "Ron Paul Nevada" wasn't finding anything):
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/10/15/romney.republican.wing.kolo?iref=videosearch

sandersondavis

01-17-2008, 02:24 AM

susano

01-17-2008, 02:25 AM

Didn't we win the Nevada straw polls as well?

A big issue with Nevada will be that Ron is against taxing tips.

Btw the illegal aliens voting is incredibly illegal and wrong. Anyone involved with that should be shit-canned and thrown in jail. So much for democracy.

Why does Alexa's name say "banned"???

Madison

01-17-2008, 03:08 AM

Because she was banned.

Marc3579

01-17-2008, 03:10 AM

Because she was banned.

+2 for stating the obvious :)

voytechs

01-17-2008, 04:25 AM

Anyone know which show they said this on CNN and roughly what time? I can you tube it if I can find it since I record everything now.

hasan

01-17-2008, 04:45 AM

Anyone know which show they said this on CNN and roughly what time? I can you tube it if I can find it since I record everything now.

why was Alexa banned?

wstrucke

01-17-2008, 06:36 AM

That's a very interesting point. If indeed there's no Diebold use in Nevada, then it makes a lot of sense for AP to worry that Ron Paul might win. If he does win it will confirm our worst fears about voted fraud.

I don't deny the possibility of voter fraud and I think we all need to be ultra-cautious, but do not confuse correlation with causation. IF RP wins, we will be in a much better position that we are now, but that doesn't mean that he didn't legitimately come in fourth or fifth in the previous votes. There has been a lot of campaigning and advertising and many people on these boards in those states admit being underwhelmed.