Printable View
http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/politics/P...e.html?ref=523
Quote:
The survey showed Romney with 33 percent support compared with 31 percent for Gingrich. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas came in at 8 percent support, followed by former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., at 7 percent.
we are polling like shit everywhere!!@ fuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I STRESS NO ONE BUT PAUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This crap isn't gonna cut it... We have to win a state.
*Matt Collins voice** "This is just the straw poll. We won't win the straw poll. We will win many, if not most of the delegates though. We can win the nomination without winning a state through our shadow delegate strategy"Quote:
Originally Posted by pauliticalfan
They don't even pay attention to the positions anymore, just based off momentum and results from the early states.
A pro Newt robo poll paid by his billionaire backer and he still is beaten by Romney. Do not give this any credibility unless you give Newt Credibility.
Also in the article
Quote:
The poll of registered GOP voters is an indication of popularity in the state, but doesn't necessarily reflect who will show up at Nevada's Feb. 4 GOP caucuses to support the candidates.
The survey suggests the GOP race remains volatile with about 21 percent saying they're undecided or prefer "someone else."
Quote:
n Nevada, both Romney and Paul have been working for years to organize their supporters to turn out for the GOP caucuses. And Romney remains the favorite in the state, where he finished first in the caucus four years ago. Paul has a loyal following in Nevada and also expects a strong showing where he finished No. 2 in 2008.
The Gingrich campaign, meanwhile, is just starting to organize in Nevada in a late push to take advantage of the former House speaker's momentum.
Zanzibar will say we don't need to win one state and we can still win the nomination.
And the New York Giants will win the Super Bowl without scoring a touchdown...they will score four safeties and beat the New England Patriots 8 to 7.
It's really hard to poll states like Nevada and Minnesota. I won't look at the polls so much. Turnout for the caucuses is actually quite low. It's all about getting a target amount of people to their caucus. You don't have to be liked by everyone, just enough people to win. Romney won there with like, what, 22000 votes in 2008? Ron got like 6000? No reason we shouldn't have that 14% from the get go. Just need to turnout our usual 3x voters and we will be in it to win it.
Also, remember that Ron is/has been campaigning there while others have ignored Nevada for the most part.
This poll is a bunch of crap we got 13.7% in 2008, we should be polling double right now and trust me we are way above 8% I just went to Nevada 2 weeks ago and that's Ron Paul country I was seeing people hand out super brochures, alot of sign waves, and alot of random people in the casino where talking about him to.
Yeah. We cant win this by slowly getting delegates. Image is everything. All people care about is who came in 1st and 2nd from primaries/caucus.
Ron Paul is the only hope in revigorating the GOP with fresh people. Honestly, imma go back to being an independent if GOP keeps shatting on Ron Paul >.>;; Not that I will be quitting, its just that I dont want to be assocated with the majority of the party.
We cannot let this become a Newt vs Romney race. C'mon!
Hey that would be great! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by stillhere
Its possible, if you understand the delegate process then realize that some states is nothing more than a big straw poll that does not directly award delegates. Iowa is a good example of that. The proportional states with Primaries like NH and SC its good to place high or with a good percentage to get awarded delegates. Ultimately it comes down to the voters not choosing the final nominee in Tampa but the delegates if there is no one candidate with enough delegates to win outright. An example is Romney has 700, Gingrich has 600 and Ron Paul has 450. If the place is packed with Ron Paul supporters that are delegates and no one has enough to win outright (delegates) than the delegates get to choose. It is a confusing and not very democratic process when you think about it but a party process. It was an eye opener for me, and would be for people actually voting.Quote:
Originally Posted by stillhere
An example using football since that is what you understand is this. The team that plays 50 games and can break 1000 total points wins. First game is New York wins 21 to 17. New York wins that game but the points awarded are the same to each team 21 to New York and New England 17. Its not the games won but the total points that determines the winner. If all the teams that playing do not get enough points to break 1000 to win after 50 games then there is the final double overtime round where the fans that bought tickets to the game get to choose the winner among the teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by stillhere
Well...look at the bright side, we're finally ahead of Santorum and not in last place for the last 2 weeks in every poll :rolleyes:
Remember, in Nevada we expect to do well due to turnout, not high poll numbers.
In 2008 our caucus results were higher than our poll numbers. See below.
Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates still in, list by date):
caucus:
Iowa 10%
Nevada 14%
Maine 18%
Alaska 17%
Colorado 9%
Minnesota 16%
Montana 25%
North Dakota 21%
Washington 22%
Kansas 11%
primary:
New Hampshire 8%
Michagan 6%
South Carolina 4%
Florida 3%
Alabama 3%
Tennessee 6%
Connecticut 4%
Arizona 4%
Georgia 3%
Delaware 4%
California 4%
Arkansas 5%
etc.
The lowest caucus was 9%, the highest primary was 8%.
The highest caucus was 25%, the lowest primary was 3%.
Turnout can make a huge difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by da32130
In addition, in Nevada we got second place in 2008 with less than 0.25% of the vote. Our 4th place SC finish had 1.5% of the vote. Turnout can make a huge difference in these poorly attended caucuses.
http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/politics/P...e.html?ref=523Quote:
The poll of registered GOP voters is an indication of popularity in the state, but doesn't necessarily reflect who will show up at Nevada's Feb. 4 GOP caucuses to support the candidates.
The survey suggests the GOP race remains volatile with about 21 percent saying they're undecided or prefer "someone else."
The automated telephone poll of nearly 14.000 registered Republicans was taken Sunday through Tuesday. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.
What were the polls saying last time compared to how we did?Quote:
Originally Posted by Topman911
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by seapilot
I dont find a Pro- Newt Super Pac NV Poll that Credible :rolleyes:
Isn't Ron Paul HQ spending alot of time there in NV?
Can indies vote in NV (Newt's poll was only repubs)