So how accurate has the CPAC straw poll been in the past? Analysis inside..

[Austin]

YEAR ----- CPAC ---------- Nominee ---- Accurate?
1976 ----- Reagan -------- Ford ------- NO
1980 ----- Reagan -------- Reagan ----- YES
1984 ----- Reagan -------- Reagan ----- YES
1986 ----- Kemp ---------- N/A
1987 ----- Kemp ---------- Bush -------- NO
1993 ----- Kemp ---------- N/A
1995 ----- Gramm --------- Dole ------- NO
1998 ----- Forbes -------- N/A
1999 ----- Bauer --------- Bush ------- NO
2000 ----- Bush ---------- Bush ------- YES
2005 ----- Giulianni ----- N/A
2006 ----- Allen --------- N/A
2007 ----- Romney -------- McCain ----- NO
2008 ----- Romney -------- McCain ----- NO
2009 ----- Romney -------- N/A
2010 ----- Paul ---------- N/A
2011 ----- Paul ---------- N/A -------- UNDETERMINED

Accuracy

There have been a total of 17 presidential straw polls at CPAC, 14 of which have preceded a Republican presidential nomination.

Only 5 have been during the year of a presidential election. Of those 5 years, the CPAC straw poll was accurate 3 out 5 times, or 60% of the time.

Only 4 have been the year prior to a presidential election. Of those 4 years, the CPAC straw poll was accurate 0 out of 4 times, or 0% of the time.

Combined, the poll has been accurate only 33% of the time.

Of the 9 unique winners that preceded Republican nominations, only two of the winners of the the poll ever became Republican nominees: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

Implications

So what does this mean? It means the media isn't wrong to say that the CPAC straw poll hasn't been very accurate in the past. In fact, in the past when Mitt Romney won the poll, some media was quick even then to note that the poll hasn't been accurate (ABC News). Still, the media has an entirely different tone this time around. Instead of noting the what importance of the poll does have, they are discrediting Paul's win altogether (Media Coverage).

What the poll really means

Despite the fact that poll isn't accurate at predicting future nominees, the media still hasn't recognized the significance of the poll. The straw poll is measure of a potential candidate's ability to organize activists. While activists alone don't win real elections, they can, if utilized properly, raise money, knock on doors, phonebank, and perform other volunteer tasks that can ultimately lead to more votes.

tl:dr — The straw poll hasn't been accurate at predicting actual Republican nominees. However, as Grover Norquist said, "This is a measure of how connected you are to activists, especially the young activists. Some people talk about the money primary — this is the activist primary” (National Review).

Sources
Straw Poll Results
Republican nominees
ABC News
Media Coverage
National Review

[malkusm]

Good breakdown. The takeaway should be: We need to organize NOT ONLY for these straw polls (though they do generate media buzz), but in the activism that wins elections - knocking on doors, talking to voters, fund raising, and other grassroots events and projects that will make Ron's message resonate with the electorate.