Ron Paul Winning in Spam-Proof AOL Poll Based on Over 57,000 Votes

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Dec 23, 2007.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    WOW!!!! Sorry, but this is too big of a news item to bury in my Ron Paul thread. Ron Paul is even beating Huckabee at this moment in Arkansas :) -


    On the Republican side the results mirrored media generated polls with one exception. Ron Paul is placing first in most states and second in several others.

    The results of the other candidates did mirror media generated polls. Giuliani is winning in New York and New Jersey and Connecticut but is being edged out by Paul in Florida and New Mexico. Florida and New Mexico have changed hands several times between Giuliani and Paul.

    Romney is winning Utah, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.

    Huckabee is edging out Paul in South Carolina and is being edged out by Paul in several southern states. Several southern states are virtual ties and have swung back and forth between Huckabee and Paul, including North Carolina, Alabama, and Arkansas.

    Nationwide Ron Paul is generating 26% of the vote, Giuliani is getting 18%, Huckabee 17%, and Romney is getting 15%, McCain has 14%, Thompson 9%, and Duncan Hunter has 1%.

    In Iowa Ron Paul has 38% of the vote. The rest of the candidates mirror media generated polls regarding strength in the state. Huckabee and Romney are tied at 19%. Thompson has 9%, McCain 7%, and Giuliani 7%, with Hunter at 1%.

    In New Hampshire Paul has 30% Romney 23% McCain 20%, Giuliani 15%, Huckabee 8%, Thompson 3%, and Hunter 1%. Once again, aside from Paul the candidates mirror media polls regarding strength nationally and regionally.

    Paul supporters have maintained that media generated polls have been under representing his support. Paul leads GOP candidates in 4th quarter fund raising. He has received donations from an astounding 123,000 donors this quarter.

    AOL Straw Poll: Dec. 21 - Jan. 4 can be viewed here.

    - www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=208588
     
    #1 KenH, Dec 23, 2007
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2007
  2. Petra-O IX

    Petra-O IX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Online polls are not scientific. It is well known that Paul's supporters are very active online. It seems to me that this poll means absolutely nothing.
     
  4. JamieinNH

    JamieinNH
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well there you have it!! Pastor Larry has spoken, so it MUST be true. :tongue3:

    Yes, I agree that online polls are not a "sure" thing, but they sure do show you a trend. When Ron Paul is POTUS, then we'll have a sure thing. :wavey:

    Which candidate do you support Pastor Larry?

    Jamie
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, no, not at all. It's true because it conforms to reality. It just so happens in this case that my words also reflect reality.

    Not really. They show a trend among people who get online, find a poll, and then vote in it. They don't show any trend among the people who will actually vote. In years to come, that may change somewhat, though I doubt it will ever be as accurate as real polls, which have their own flaws.

    I don't support any candidate. I don't even know who I will vote for. But as a general rule, I have stayed away from supporting politicians in order to focus on the gospel.
     
  6. JamieinNH

    JamieinNH
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you're partly right... But times are changing faster than you think. I believe that ewith every election behind us, we will see the web play a role more. The number of households getting their news and information from the web are increasing and with that, you will see that web polls are more accurate than they once were.


    I figured that much. :)

    Although you are surely within your rights to speak as you do, but I would suggest that if you're going to beat up one candidate, then you should at least pay enough attention to support someone. That is just my opinion though.

    Jamie
     
  7. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are two flaws in your argument, PL. You can only vote once(for only one party's candidate) in this poll and there are basically an even number of Democrat and Republican votes being cast. So it is not like there are 50,000 more Republican votes than Democrat votes which might indicate that Ron Paul voters were, per se, more active in this poll than the support in the "real world" would indicate. Just look at the number of individuals who are contributing to the Paul campaign. It reminds me of what was going on in the Obama campaign earlier this year and no one is questioning his level of support.
     
  8. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    When did Larry "beat up" a candidate?

    I have not made up my mind on who I am going to support either. Do we have to choose a candidate before we have an opinion on any of them?
     
  9. JamieinNH

    JamieinNH
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    I stand corrected, Larry did not "beat" up a candidate, however he sure is vocal against one.

    To your second question, no you don't have to pick a candidate at all to have an opinion, but in my opinion... someone's comments towards/against a candidate holds more weight if you have researched and picked a candidate yourself.

    Without a "horse" in the race one has to wonder why are you even worrying about the elections? Also, as I have stated before, if it was the beginning stages of this election, I could understand why one hasn't been picked, but now, every "horse" is in the race and the gates have been opened...

    What is holding you up from picking a candidate?

    Jamie
     
  10. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because I am a concerned citizen of the United States, and I believe it is my God-given right and duty to be concerned about the elections and to vote.

    I did not realize there was a timetable for me to pick a candidate to support.

    Right now, if I had to pick one it would be Fred Thompson.
     
  11. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    They may be more accurate than they once were, though they may not be. But that doesn't change the point that they are not scientific. And the amount of people getting information from the web does not change that.


    I haven't beat up on one candidate. And I am not "vocal against one." I speak up about arguments, not people per se. If people make bad arguments about something, I say something about it. It happens that most of the bad arguments are being made about Romney and Paul at the moment. So that is where I have spoken.

    It should carry less. Someone who has not picked a candidate is less likely to be biased. Consider our friend Ken for a moment. He is very biased, and as such, is unable to see certain things without that bias. Those who have not picked a candidate do not have that bias and can see arguments for what they are.
     
  12. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,927
    Likes Received:
    296
    Hardly.

    Straw polls are worse than useless, they're also misleading.
     
  13. Petra-O IX

    Petra-O IX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rush would say polls mean nothing.
    None of the other major polls --Zogby, Rasmussen, Gallup or any of the others come close to matching each others data. At least with the AOL poll those who particapate are not steered towards a candidate. The poll may not be scientific but it is just a credible as any of the others if not more so.
     
  14. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,927
    Likes Received:
    296
    I share his disdain for polls, in general.

    Many have marginal credibility. Straw polls are the worst of a bad lot. No credibility at all.
     

Share This Page

Loading...