|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 09/01/2007 : 16:50:03
|
Ron Paul is winning over and over. Why is he still considered a "second tier" candidate?
Ron Paul's Head-to-Head Records (Win-Lose-Tie):
Rudy Giuliani 18-2-0
Mitt Romney 11-9-0
Fred Thompson 9-10-0
John McCain 18-1-0
Mike Huckabee 17-1-1
Sam Brownback 16-2-1
Tom Tancredo 17-1-0
Duncan Hunter 17-1-0
[Moved to the Media Issues folder - Dave W.]
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 09/01/2007 : 17:19:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Ron Paul is winning over and over. Why is he still considered a "second tier" candidate?
Ron Paul's Head-to-Head Records (Win-Lose-Tie):
Rudy Giuliani 18-2-0
Mitt Romney 11-9-0
Fred Thompson 9-10-0
John McCain 18-1-0
Mike Huckabee 17-1-1
Sam Brownback 16-2-1
Tom Tancredo 17-1-0
Duncan Hunter 17-1-0
|
Because he's loosing to Fred Thompson and is cash strapped. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2007 : 17:33:38 [Permalink]
|
Ron Paul has the third largest amount of cash on hand when you account for debt.
2008 campaign cash
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2007 : 17:38:45 [Permalink]
|
Ron Paul straw poll results:
First place 8
Second place 4
Third place 3
Fourth place 3
Fifth place 1
Sixth place 1
In 15 out of 20 straw polls he has finished win, place, or show.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2007 : 20:09:33 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Ron Paul straw poll results:
First place 8
Second place 4
Third place 3
Fourth place 3
Fifth place 1
Sixth place 1
In 15 out of 20 straw polls he has finished win, place, or show.
|
And he's still getting beaten by Fred Thompson. And having the third most campaign funds still means the other two are getting more money than you.
Ron Paul is getting his ass kicked. He won 8. Thompson won 9. You have not given the breakdown for the other candidates on where they did in the place and show categories.
He is a second tier candidate. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 06:30:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Ron Paul straw poll results:
First place 8
Second place 4
Third place 3
Fourth place 3
Fifth place 1
Sixth place 1
In 15 out of 20 straw polls he has finished win, place, or show.
|
And he's still getting beaten by Fred Thompson. And having the third most campaign funds still means the other two are getting more money than you.
Ron Paul is getting his ass kicked. He won 8. Thompson won 9. You have not given the breakdown for the other candidates on where they did in the place and show categories.
He is a second tier candidate.
|
Thompson did not win 9 straw polls. In straw polls that Thompson participated in he came ahead of Paul in 10 and Paul came ahead of Thompson in 9.
I am sure that the amount of votes, not amount of money is how elections are decided in America.
Paul has WON 8 of 20 straw votes.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 07:39:12 [Permalink]
|
My understanding is that straw polls aren't a particularly good measure of things, since candidates can stack the voters, and since not all candidates participate. Regarding the Texas Straw Poll (which happened yesterday), one media outlet provides the following: WHO PARTICIPATES
Any Texas Republican can attend, but only invited party activists get to vote, and they must pay $50. The party limited eligibility to 32,000 Republicans who've served as delegates or alternates at the last four state conventions or the last two national GOP conventions. Party officials say that since they've never tried this before, they'll be happy to get more than the 1,500 that Iowa's GOP got in its first straw poll 28 years ago.
HOW IT WORKS
The candidates give speeches and eligible activists vote. "Surrogate" speeches aren't allowed, so only the candidates who show up get a turn. But all the declared candidates will be on the ballot. Some state officials and members of Congress will attend, too, and candidates for party offices will use the gathering to schmooze before next spring's elections at the state GOP convention.
WHAT IT MEANS
Not much, especially since none of the top-tier candidates are coming. The stakes are slightly elevated for Rep. Ron Paul of Lake Jackson, though, as he struggles for attention and credibility; a weak showing in his home state would signal that he's not to be taken seriously. And since Texans vote in March, long after the party nominations are expected to be locked up, candidates have little incentive to court Texans yet. |
I'm guessing other polls are similar.
In the Texas poll, only Ron Paul (who is "providing buses from Houston, Austin and San Antonio"), Duncan Hunter, Hugh Cort, Raymond McKinney, and John Cox are going to be there. Given this, a win for Paul isn't all that impressive.
We aren't told in the Ron Paul link provided who else participated in, say, the New Hampshire Taxpayers Straw Poll that took place in early July. Was Giuliani there? Huckabee? He claimed a 56% win in the FreedomWorks Straw Poll in early August, but if the only other people there were Hugh Cort and Raymond McKinney (for instance), then is 56% really all that great?
This isn't to say that Ron Paul is a bad candidate. Rather, it's to suggest that there are perfectly valid reasons why the media may not consider Ron Paul to be a "top-tier" candidate, and may not report on the results of, say, the Utah GOP Convention Straw Poll (where Paul got second with a whopping 5.4% of the vote!)... |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 18:03:33 [Permalink]
|
But Cune, the point is when one of the "top tier" candidates wins a straw poll the media hoops and hollers all about it. I agree that straw polls mean little more than how much support a candidate has in that particular isolated venue. My reason for putting this in the conspiracy section was the apparent change of import that the media gives to particular straw polls based on who the winner is.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 18:34:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Ron Paul straw poll results:
First place 8
Second place 4
Third place 3
Fourth place 3
Fifth place 1
Sixth place 1
In 15 out of 20 straw polls he has finished win, place, or show.
|
And he's still getting beaten by Fred Thompson. And having the third most campaign funds still means the other two are getting more money than you.
Ron Paul is getting his ass kicked. He won 8. Thompson won 9. You have not given the breakdown for the other candidates on where they did in the place and show categories.
He is a second tier candidate.
|
Thompson did not win 9 straw polls. In straw polls that Thompson participated in he came ahead of Paul in 10 and Paul came ahead of Thompson in 9.
I am sure that the amount of votes, not amount of money is how elections are decided in America.
Paul has WON 8 of 20 straw votes.
|
So the win column you reference is useless.
Again, Thompson won 10 head to head matchups against Paul.
Thompson is kicking Paul's ass.
Now, is there anything else you'd care to reveal that you haven't? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 09/02/2007 : 18:38:13 [Permalink]
|
Val, are you kidding that winning 10 and losing 9 is kicking ass?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2007 : 21:08:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Val, are you kidding that winning 10 and losing 9 is kicking ass?
|
Winning 10 and not being included on the cash total (although sources put his campaign chest somewhere around $4 million) is kicking the ass of someone who has just slipped to the 5th position in cash on hand after debts and 6th in total cash collected (if Thompson's campaign is included). Plus Paul lists no endorsements by major groups or politicians. Thompson has those.
Paul is a second tier candidate.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 05:20:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
But Cune, the point is when one of the "top tier" candidates wins a straw poll the media hoops and hollers all about it. I agree that straw polls mean little more than how much support a candidate has in that particular isolated venue. My reason for putting this in the conspiracy section was the apparent change of import that the media gives to particular straw polls based on who the winner is. |
Is this the case? I'm not the most savvy media guy in the world, but I don't recall seeing too many references to any straw poll winners. Can you? I mean, look at some of the polls in Ron Paul's list. How many legitimately suggest that CNN or Fox News or anything beyond a local paper/TV outlet is going to cover it? Particularly when straw polls seems to differ from real elections in so many ways? I mean, if Paul brings in 3 bus-loads of people (and pays their $50 fee), and candidate X only brings in 1 bus-load, is a subsequent Paul victory all that news-worthy?
A search of CNN shows that they've only reported on two polls:
Romney wins Iowa straw poll
McCain fares poorly, Huckabee well in S.C. straw poll
Both polls are significant because Iowa and SC are (or have traditionally been) some of the first states in the actual primary cylce. Otherwise, no other straw polls appear (though a search also pulled up the headline "Exuberant Ron Paul fans use Web to stoke '08 bid," which notes the Texas Straw Poll that Paul is expected to win over the weekend.) So it doesn't quite seem like there's a huge media conspiracy to report only on other candidates' wins. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 16:56:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
But Cune, the point is when one of the "top tier" candidates wins a straw poll the media hoops and hollers all about it. I agree that straw polls mean little more than how much support a candidate has in that particular isolated venue. My reason for putting this in the conspiracy section was the apparent change of import that the media gives to particular straw polls based on who the winner is. |
Is this the case? I'm not the most savvy media guy in the world, but I don't recall seeing too many references to any straw poll winners. Can you? I mean, look at some of the polls in Ron Paul's list. How many legitimately suggest that CNN or Fox News or anything beyond a local paper/TV outlet is going to cover it? Particularly when straw polls seems to differ from real elections in so many ways? I mean, if Paul brings in 3 bus-loads of people (and pays their $50 fee), and candidate X only brings in 1 bus-load, is a subsequent Paul victory all that news-worthy?
A search of CNN shows that they've only reported on two polls:
Romney wins Iowa straw poll
McCain fares poorly, Huckabee well in S.C. straw poll
Both polls are significant because Iowa and SC are (or have traditionally been) some of the first states in the actual primary cylce. Otherwise, no other straw polls appear (though a search also pulled up the headline "Exuberant Ron Paul fans use Web to stoke '08 bid," which notes the Texas Straw Poll that Paul is expected to win over the weekend.) So it doesn't quite seem like there's a huge media conspiracy to report only on other candidates' wins.
|
This just in from Texas.
Paul finished 3rd with 16% of the vote. No word on which two candidates beat him.
Duncan Hunter placed first. Fred Thompson placed second. Chalk up another head to head win for Thompson. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 17:16:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
This just in from Texas.
Paul finished 3rd with 16% of the vote. No word on which two candidates beat him.
Duncan Hunter placed first. Fred Thompson placed second. Chalk up another head to head win for Thompson. |
Yeah, the DMN has Hunter with 41%, Thompson with 21% and Paul with 16%. The turnout for the poll was lower than expected (1300, versus an earlier hope of at least 1500), even with Paul busing people in.
Not sure how significant any of this is, but since CNN didn't report on it, may Duncan Hunter fans also claim a conspiracy? |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 18:29:01 [Permalink]
|
Looks like my conspiracy is falling apart.
 
I am sure new evidence will arise!
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 18:35:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Looks like my conspiracy is falling apart.
I am sure new evidence will arise!
|
 Thanks, Jerome! But no worries-- if there's an anti-Ron Paul conspiracy in the media, I'll count on you to find it!  |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Media Ignores Straw Poll Winner
