For those who think that Rand did great in the debate and really helped himself. That simply isn't the case. Rand greatly damaged himself in the debate. It was an unforced error. He should've simply been himself.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...e_IA_81015.pdf
And on the University of Iowa campus he is at what ?
That's it, I had enough! I'm dumping Rand for Carly, just like FOX said!Originally Posted by Brett85
Rand Paul for Peace
lmao . . . from libertarian conservative constitutionalist to a failed businesswoman who has never held public office . . . sheezsThat's it, I had enough! I'm dumping Rand for Carly, just like FOX said!
I would think that any dip in IOWA would be the result of the recent indictment rather than his performance at the debate.
Also:his campaign's ties to the Kent Sorenson mess are probably making things particularly bad for him in Iowa.
So the poll is pretty much meaningless regarding Rand.Public Policy Polling surveyed 619 usual Republican primary voters and 567 usual Democratic primary voters from August 7th to 9th. The margin of error for the Republicans is +/-3.9% and for the Democrats it’s +/-4.1%. 80% of participants responded via the phone, while 20% of respondents who did not have landlines conducted the survey over the internet.
Last edited by pacodever; 08-10-2015 at 11:44 AM.
Just the sort of policy I'd expect to hear suggested by someone who has admitted that he wants to see Rand lose, the establishment win, and the United States of America burn to the ground.
That's the advantage to stuffing the race full of stooges. Even Jeb Bush's number could be zero, given the margin for error. You can make the numbers say anything you want them to say.
Last edited by acptulsa; 08-10-2015 at 11:44 AM.
Predebate Rand even said that his advisers told him to play it safe, but he overruled them.
That's the jump you get when FOX and the MSM pumps you up after the debate.
Rand Paul for Peace
I know. He should've just listened to his advisors. Hopefully Rand looks at these polls and gets things figured out.
These polls are BS
You never try to win it all back at the poker table this fast. More often than not you get wiped out.
Where did you hear that?? As I recall, he said that EVERYBODY he talked to told him to speak up if he wanted to get attention.
Yes, these polls are BS.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5953201Ron was still in single digits in Iowa weeks before the caucus. When the polling companies' reputation was on the line, Ron shot up to 25% in the polls.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Me too. We should quit fighting for liberty too, because we all know if we don't have political sucess, we are nothing.That's it, I had enough! I'm dumping Rand for Carly, just like FOX said!
Those numbers are brutally bad. Even if they're polling the wrong demographics, 3% is really bad for any demographic. Anything can happen but being within the margin of error of 0% is pretty embarrassing
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
I thought he hurt himself slightly more than he helped, but at the end of the day, the debate is an irrelevancy. Rand isn't a particularly good debater and debates were never going to play a key role in his victory. With Rand, success or failure is going to boil down to image and crafting a message. You can reinforce that in a debate, but debates aren't where that kind of work is done. Rand is at 3% right now because he hasn't yet crafted a compelling message, but there is still time. And the good news is he has a very successful template of his own work that he can crib of off from 2010.
In the "I'm going to mix it up" interview. Rand said it himself.
Thank you very much! They're still putting hood winking tactics into their damn polls!! With Ron Paul it was simply not recording his vote when people would select his name. Now with Rand they know exactly where his support is coming from so they're simply excluding it. But like Ron, once the election gets near these pollsters will eventually correct the demographics and Rand will surge. Right now they're trying to ensure Rand doesn't get any of the older vote once the surge happens since the surge will be coming from all the younger crowd. I just hope everyone will hang in there with him. Until that time comes. With the election being in Feb. don't expect the rise in the polls to occur until around the beginning of December.
Exactly, all candidates have their peaks and valleys during campaigns. Let this be Rand's valley because he has plent of time to try and peak at just the right time. Lets hope this time when he does, the establishment won't have a counter. How can anyone determine when you're going to peak? If there is a political guy out there right now that could somewhat predict that, it'd be Rand. Just hang in there guys. The surge will come when these damn pollsters correct their polling models. If not and Rand can turn out all of Ron's supporters from 2012, there's going to be an awful lot of pollsters with egg on their face and hopefully in the unemployment line!
Play it safe, be aggressive, be yourself, walk the tightrope- no one's ever going to be satisfied and few here are ever going to believe polls that don't put Paul in first place or near the top because those apparently don't count..
The only Iowa Polls that count, are the ones that come out on Feb. 1, 2016.
Rand Paul for Peace
It has nothing to do with first place - it has to do with the fact that Ron Paul does better against Hillary than all other Republican candidates and is beating her in 5 purple states.
I would argue that is virtually impossible for him to be at the bottom of the heap of Republicans if he is doing that well in the national polls compared to the other candidates. Don't they still use landlines for these polls? I'm not saying Rand is in first place, I'm just saying it seems dumb to base our strategy off of polls that we know are inaccurate.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
I know you joined in 2013, but if you go back and look at all the polling tricks and BS they used against Ron, just for him to surge from about 3% to 24% in Iowa in a time frame of about a month then you'd know these polls are BS. I think the pollsters let the Ron surge happen two weeks earlier than they could have for the sole purpose of giving the media enough time to knock him back down 5 points or so which was just enough to allow the establishment to win. I suspect the same will be done to Rand. He's the guy that is going to have to figure out how to combat this. I say this time, get an RV and live in Iowa two weeks leading up to the election talking to people everyday while the MSM tears him apart. And who are people going to believe the MSM or the guy that is showing up talking to them everyday?
Rand Paul within the margin of error of zero support. That's what happens when you do not support the Iranian deal, have a horrible debate performance and have people connected to the Paul's indicted. Who would have thought Ron Paul was 100 times better candidate than his son.
As long as Rand can stay above the debate participation cut-off point, then we have time to rebound our poll %s.
Voters typically don't come back to a candidate. Typically.
Remember those words, especially if Rand Paul wins the 2016 Iowa Caucus.
Rand Paul for Peace
You're spending way too much time talking to Brian Schoeneman.
How he does against Clinton versus the other umpteenth candidates in his own party are two different things, especially when, in this poll, Clinton isn't even compared to any of the Republican candidates.
Nobody on here knows who that is lol
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us