[quote]pookie wrote:
If you truly believed that, wouldn’t you put a little more than 25$? I know academics get paid shit, but come on.
[/quote]
I do truly believe that. I did not bet $25 that was just an example of what an 8 - 1 payout is–for the arithmetically impaired readers.
This is better than the horses.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
I mean, where is all this alleged support? The few that are pro Paul are very loud. But there’s really only a few. [/quote]
Yes, there are only a few who are motivated to go to the rallies and straw poll events. Those are all meet-up group members that have organized. I am a member of one but I do not participate because, frankly, I am not interested in campaigning. I believe what I believe right now and that is as much as I can offer.
Plus, I can’t stand group mentalities–it’s too confining and it restricts free thought. It’s ironic because the whole idea of the libertarian philosophy is to “live and let live” and to exalt the individual mindset, but I digress.
The supposed “legitimate” national polls can only measure name recognition–it does not accurately indicate who they will vote for (history gives us plenty of examples which you are an expert on). A large percentage of the population doesn’t even know who is running for president. They pick the names they are most familiar with (Hillary, Rudy, Barack – “the first name only candidates”). Also keep in mind, a percentage of individuals not turned-on to politics are using the internet so they have some exposure to those candidates that have support there.
The next question we must ask is what motivates Paul supporters? Actually Ron Paul’s campaign really isn’t about Ron Paul–the supporters understand this–this is a bigger idea. They are motivated because they have vision of what liberty could be like. These people are very independently driven, understand how to organize, yet can still agree on a common goal.
If Rudy Giuliani had Ron Paul’s support I’d be worried. He doesn’t and none of the other candidates do or ever will have it. They have name recognition only. They all offer the same option of government with a slightly different flavor–welfare state or warfare state. No thank you.
Now, who do you think are going to go to the primary polls to vote? I think it is going to be “we cantakerous, contrarian members of the Leave Me Alone Coalition,” en masse.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
I mean, where is all this alleged support? The few that are pro Paul are very loud. But there’s really only a few. [/quote]
It is a small, noisy group that overstates the real level of support.
And, frankly, the more noise they make, the weaker they make the Paul candidacy. After all, take Nominal Prospect or Lifticus and put them in front of a non-libertarian willing to hear out the case for a mainstream libertarianism (socially liberal, fiscally conservative): can you imagine a worse “campaign”?
Again, I say it - Paul deserves a better campaign than his crop of wannabe radicals are providing for him. I feel sorry for him.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
And, frankly, the more noise they make, the weaker they make the Paul candidacy. After all, take Nominal Prospect or Lifticus and put them in front of a non-libertarian willing to hear out the case for a mainstream libertarianism (socially liberal, fiscally conservative): can you imagine a worse “campaign”?
Again, I say it - Paul deserves a better campaign than his crop of wannabe radicals are providing for him. I feel sorry for him.
[/quote]
His support is larger than that. I am among those many. I am not what one would call a radical–I don’t even agree with the concept of that idea. People believe what they believe and they are all motivated for different reasons and to different extents. Ron Paul has a huge following of people who will go to events where he will be–and this is only the people who know his name right now.
Why don’t other candidates have this kind of support? They don’t have anything but name recognition. Think about that.
It’s not just the internet.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
His support is larger than that. I am among those many. I am not what one would call a radical–I don’t even agree with the concept of that idea. People believe what they believe and they are all motivated for different reasons and to different extents. Ron Paul has a huge following of people who will go to events where he will be–and this is only the people who know his name right now.
Why don’t other candidates have this kind of support? They don’t have anything but name recognition. Think about that.
It’s not just the internet.[/quote]
Other candidates have support - just not the level of mania that Paul’s supporters have. But one vote is one vote - no matter how pathological you are about Ron Paul, you get to pull the lever one time (at the primary). Will enough levers be pulled? No.
A Fred Thompson or Rudy Giuliani supporter who has a job and a life gets the same vote as the most ardent Ron Paul internet spam warrior. Howard Dean experienced the same “internet distortion” we see for Paul, except that Dean actually had a shot at the candidacy.
You confuse “support” with “volume of noise” - over and over.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
And I am asking because I am curious. Polls have been wrong in the past, but there’s always a reason, not a “Hope” for them being off.
[/quote]
They are only accurate if the question is: which names are most recognizable now?
They are not accurate if the question is: who will be the next president of the US?
People do not vote on popularity only. It is important to have name recognition, obviously, but we are making an assumption that Ron Paul will not gain name recognition between now and the primaries. Polls can only measure what is known now–they cannot predict future information with any accuracy.
Do you think that Paul’s following is fanatical only? One thing about the polls that bother me is that they are not all inclusive. They phone 1000 random people or so and the questions weed out non-registered republicans and democrat. This ignores independent voters entirely.
If by chance they get to answer the poll the answer is going to be the most name recognized or the person polled is going to have one already picked out–these people are few and far between that already know.
I think Paul’s candidacy is different in who is being attracted. These people are not going to get a phone call anytime soon. The people who identify themselves as part of the Republican base also are not going to be the voters supporting Ron Paul.
I do believe that people are going to be motivated to go to the primary polls because of Ron Paul’s message. We are already seeing this motivation in the straw polls.
This is a great speech and interview session with Dr. Paul at John Hopkins on September 11.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
That one statement tells me that you really don’t understand the American voter. Of course your other statements point to the same thing.
Stop projecting. Just because you thinks things through doesn’t mean that the voter does.
[/quote]
I think the number of “regular” voters compared to the voters who are planning to vote for Ron Paul are going to be overwhelmed with opposition–I feel they will be going to the polls in drives. I could be wrong but his level of “legitimate” poll numbers doesn’t reflect in the least what his “on the ground” support is measuring in relation to other candidates.
Why is this and where are the people who are answering the phones in support of Romney and Giuliani? I think this is a significant piece of information that is being neglected or might not be very well understood. We will never have an accurate measure of motivation or a way to measure how many are motivated to go to the primary polls–this is key.
How many people who answer phone polls will go to the primary polls? Will those numbers be reflected by Gallup, et al?
He doesn’t need much money because he gets tons of free support. With the right kind of marketing campaign 2 or 3 months is an eternity. We’ll have to wait for 3rd quarter results for that before we can have a better understanding. I am already hearing rumors but since they weren’t accurate last time I am hesitant to even suggest what is being said. I hope this isn’t a farce like last quarter.
How large – percentage wise? How can you measure it?
That is the million dollar question. If anyone knew “how to win” political campaigns would be boring, indeed.
The only answer I can give is the obvious one: he wins with votes. How he gets those votes…by reaching the largest amount of voters possible and by continuing to do what he is already doing–converting people. He’s already made strides that said wouldn’t be made of him.
The good congressman speaks about the economics of immigration in this interview:
http://www.vdare.com/misc/070912_paul.htm
I wish he would be allowed to debate this with the other candidates. He never really get a chance to answer these types of questions.
How many rap theme-songs do the other Republicans have?
EDIT: Ha! Milton Friedman reference at minute 3:33.
Ron Paul in Congress on moral hazard, the Fed and inflation:
Official NJ Straw Poll Results
0%-John McCain, Sam Brownback, Alan Keyes, John Cox
1%-Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter
12%-Fred Thompson
73%-Ron Paul
[quote]orion wrote:
Official NJ Straw Poll Results
0%-John McCain, Sam Brownback, Alan Keyes, John Cox
1%-Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter
12%-Fred Thompson
73%-Ron Paul[/quote]
He has also won 11 out of 27 straw polls with an average of 28 +/- 23% of the vote. He has beaten every candidate more times than they have beaten him, head-to-head.
But these numbers mean nothing because they are not Gallup polls. Don’t forget all of the money he raised is only internet money and thus isn’t real either.
He is going to yank the primary out from underneath the “front runners”.
Zap is an “Osama” historian??? Zap needs his innards douched
[quote]nsane-membrain wrote:
Zap is an “Osama” historian??? Zap needs his innards douched[/quote]
You want to state that in English so I know what the hell you are talking about?
Ron Paul Odds Have Been Slashed to 6 to 1: Now Favored Over Romney
Public pushes Ron Paul odds down even further this week
Forget those political polls. Throughout time (at least the last decade), oddsmakers have had an uncanny knack for predicting political races. It’s not so much that they have a crystal ball, rather the lines adjust based on public action. When it comes to political betting, the public action is presumed to represent votes. The theory being that someone who is likely to vote on Mitt Romney probably won’t bet on Ron Paul winning…
http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-100107.html
But what do they know, they only make their money as odd-makers?