This poll from Public Policy Polling shows Rand with highest unfavorability of all other candidates.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...e_NH_82515.pdf
is this the Anti-Trump?
You will find your answer in the age demographic splits.
PPP is a democratic polling outlet, so I'm starting to suspect that they are selectively screening demographics that are pro-Trump, and also probably not likely voters. I think part of the reason why Ron Paul got favorable numbers with them is because PPP thought he was useful for creating disunity in the GOP (which was the prevailing narrative in the MSM), which probably fed into GOP misgivings about Paul.
When we're 2 weeks from the NH primary, if it still looks this bad, then I'll get worried.
Some interesting charts:
I've been seeing a LOT of people on the various lobotomy websites ie.. Breitbart, who are associating Rand with being RINO supreme.. and that is only supported by two args that I have heard.
1. He doesn't want to bomb brown people at the whims of Israel
2. He backed Mitch, who they see as a RINO traitor (he is, curious why Rand backed him).
That is the argument the pro-war, hawk candidates are using to derail Rand as a conservative.. HE BACKED MITCH!!! HE DOESN"T WANT TO KILL FOR ISRAEL....
This is really fascinating.Originally Posted by CPUd
Some interesting charts:
Democratic polling? Where does that come from? He was third here and I didn't hear that PPP was Democratic-based.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p...e_NH_41515.pdf
Even so, Rand at 8% at age 18-45, 2% for 45-65, and 1% over 65? If you only average 1.5% over age 45 you can't make up that kind of deficit even with a massive showing under 45.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
Talk show hosts like Levin and Beck DESPISE Mitch. They frequently give Rand a hard time for supporting Mitch. These labotomized posters frequently do as their told.
if you want to understand the Rand/Mitch relationship look no further than this past weekend in Frankfort. That would never have happened without Mitch.
"he backed Mitch" is coming from the freepers
*milquetoast* and *uninspiring* comes from the big 'L' brain trust
"he blew it" comes from the little 'l' and **********s.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/na...rticle/2535603
There are more examples of this that I could seek out, but it's pretty well established that PPP leans left-of-center, ergo pro-democratic.
Again, these numbers might be correct, but I'm not taking their word for it, for obvious reasons.
I'm just guessing, but I would think that was the tradeoff for Mitch getting him on the best senatorial committees.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
As memory serves, didn't one of the dirtbag War PACs run another add against Rand? So that combined with the unholy attraction for Trump seems to have done a number on Rand.
I find the above chart interesting about the perception of Rand as a Liberal.
Rand's favorability numbers took a huge hit after the first debate. Rand made a huge unforced error acting the way that he did in the first debate. He went against the advice of his advisers who told him to take a more conservative approach. I still haven't heard Rand acknowledge that he did poorly in the debate and that he needs to act differently next time. If the next debate is a repeat of the first debate, then Rand stands no chance. He needs to just be himself, be cool, confident, and collected, and he has a chance to impress people and change their perception of him.
It's the usually BS that comes out of some in here. It's a polling company that does very well in getting things right at that snap point in time.
Interesting...Walker has gone from 24% to just 7% since April. Ted Cruz has gone from 14% to 4%.
It's ALL about the old voters. Rand needs to get them somehow...
If Rand does not win the Republican nomination, he should buck the controlled two party system and run as an Independent for President in 2016 and give Americans a real option to vote for.
We are all born libertarians then something goes really wrong. Despite this truth, most people are still libertarians yet not know it.
I don't believe that PPP has any intentional bias towards Rand, but they do tend to poll him about 2-3% lower than the other polls do. That's likely because they only poll landlines and not cell phones, which hurts Rand since Rand's supporters are mostly young people who don't have landlines. But even 2-3% better would only put Rand at 5 or 6%, which still isn't good at all. So it's not really a meaningful difference.
I've got no problem with him being 8% right now, puts him pretty much in the same field as everyone else not named Trump.
For whatever reason New Hampshire really loves Trump. I know there are those here who feel that Rand was too aggressive in the debate but I'm not sure that's a problem. What would the narrative have been had Rand been still and only responded when called upon? I dare say the punditry would have proclaimed him completely dead. With the interruptions he only got 5 mins of talk time. How many minutes would he have gotten without it? Walker played it safe and it hurt him.
So how does he get the old voters?
Trump has a semi-permanent campaign infrastructure in NH since 2008. Their job every cycle is to poll and let him know if the numbers look good for him to run for president.
8% of 18-45 year-olds is a big problem when you have almost zero support above age 45.
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 meant 8% across the board. Agree that he should always be trying to get his numbers up with older folks.
I'm an old voter, and I support Rand. BUT: He is coming across as a meely mouthed weakling. I am not convinced he wants the job !! He needs to open his mouth, loudly. A good strategy would be to sue the news networks for not giving him equal time. When he does get the equal time, he better talk about illegal immigration and his solution; ISIS and his solution. His mouth should be as loud as Trumps right now. Rand who? Let's hear it.
That's the thing though, if they're only polling land lines it most likely don't represent an accurate picture of the electorate. Also, Ron at this time was polling no better than what Rand is polling it wasn't until a little over a month out from Iowa that Ron started surging. Of course, I'm of the opinion that Ron didn't surge, but was most likely there the whole time. If they did it to Ron they'll do it to Rand. But everything comes down to the dollar, and you can bet everyone you got that once their bottom dollar is going to be affected they'll start getting the demographics/polling correct.
being in the 45+ group myself, I can see what you mean. But being bombastic isn't Rand's style. Trump/Christie are bombastic. He needs less words--more clarity. I think his best moment was "Get a warrant!" The Obama hug comment was a bridge too far.
How did Ron do with the over 45 crowd?
Same poll 4 years ago:
I'm an older voter and I support Rand. He needs to lay-off social security; he will never convince the older voters that social security needs to be cut, reduced, reformed or anything. I personally like his noninterventionist foreign policy as I am anti-war, but he sounds like he is afraid to believe that anymore. I also like his privacy and 4th amendment positions and support for the constitution. He needs to stay strong on his beliefs, he needs to promote his conservative credentials and he needs to focus on core supporters and stop catering to minorities and youth because they do not vote in GOP primaries...they are Democrats. He does sound kind of mealy mouthed these days...I liked it when he took control of the abortion issue and he needs to do more of that.
I agree that social security is the third rail of politics, but as a younger voter, I resent older voters for having that position. Social security needs to be reformed or phased out, and the retirement age needs to be raised as soon as possible.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
There won't be any Social Security if it's not reformed. It will go bankrupt. Is that what older voters want?
"As a younger voter...," "I'm an older voter..."I'm an older voter and I support Rand. He needs to lay-off social security; he will never convince the older voters
You see how these two diverging views really aren't that compatible?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us