Ron Paul Wins Texas GOP Poll

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
1

This was a phone poll, seems like Texas is turning their attention to Ron Paul.

http://www.thestatecolumn.com/capitol/ron-paul-wins-texas-gop-poll/

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex), a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, won a poll of 882 â??highly activeâ?? Republican voters in Texas. Paul won the poll with 22 percent of the Republican vote. Texas Governor Rick Perry grabbed second with 17 percent of the Republican vote, while pizza magnate Herman Cain took third with 14 percent of the vote. Paulâ??s official campaign website and Facebook page reported on the poll first. Within a day of the poll being posted on Paulâ??s website, the article had over 6,000 shares on Facebook.

The poll was conducted by the Azimuth Research Group and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 points. Participants were polled between May 29th and June 3rd, 2011.

Paul also beat out New Gingrich, who grabbed 11 percent of the Republican vote. Other Republican candidates, including Gary Johnson, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Jon Huntsman and Rick Santorum finished with less than 10 percent of the Republican vote. Paul who beat out fellow Texan, Gov. Perry, in the Azimuth poll also leads Perry in a recent Public Policy Polling poll with 9 percent of the Republican vote. Perry grabbed 7 percent of the Republican vote in the Public Policy Polling poll.

Paulâ??s first place finish in the Azimuth poll isnâ??t the first time that the Texas Congressman has grabbed a top three finish. At the end of May, Paul took second in a CNN/WMUR poll of Republican primary voters in New Hampshire. In this poll, Paul grabbed 9 percent of the Republican vote, while former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney took first with 32 percent of the Republican vote. In June, Paul won a straw poll at the Republican Leadership Conference with 612 votes. Jon Huntsman, the former Governor of Utah, took second in the RLC straw poll with 382 votes.

Texas is a key state in the 2012 presidential race for Paul and the other Republican candidates, because Texas has 34 electoral votes, which is the 2nd most of any state.

Other indications of support for Paul include a strong 2nd quarter of campaign fundraising. Last week, Paul reported that his campaign raised more than $4 million during the 2nd quarter. While Paul hasnâ??t released an official figure, many estimates put Paulâ??s 2nd quarter haul somewhere between $4.5 and $5 million. Although Romney raised $18.25 million during the second quarter, most of Paulâ??s 2nd quarter cash came from online contributions and grassroots support. Paulâ??s unofficial 2nd quarter figure places him well ahead of his other major competitors, including Pawlenty, Cain, Huntsman and Bachmann.

The Azimuth Research Group has provided an analysis of its Texas GOP poll to explain its methodology.

2

Very interesting, so what you’re saying is if a primary were held in Texas this week Ron Paul might not end up in dead last place. Yes very good, very helpful information. Paul would be second or third from the bottom but not quite on the bottom.

3

Shut up ZEB.

4

[quote]brnforce wrote:
Shut up ZEB.[/quote]

Really good retort, for a Paul supporter that is. After all, what else can they say?

:slight_smile:

5

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
Shut up ZEB.[/quote]

Really good retort, for a Paul supporter that is. After all, what else can they say?

:)[/quote]

What is genuinely interesting is that in the first reporting of GOP candidate fund raising, only Romney out-raised Paul. Now everyone was way behind Romney, but Paul bested the rest of the field, including Pawlenty. While people may say “well, It’s Pawlenty”, remember that Pawlenty was originally considered the “other option” to Romney. If anyone was going to break out of the pack this would’ve been a good time, but it’s Romney, Paul, and Pawlenty to the first turn.

On the subject of Pawlenty, here’s a good one from the program wait, wait…don’t tell me: “Jon Huntsman’s staffers incorrectly listed his campaign phone number as 1234567890…a number so generic and meaningless that if you called it, Tim Pawlenty would answer.”

6

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
Shut up ZEB.[/quote]

Really good retort, for a Paul supporter that is. After all, what else can they say?

:)[/quote]

What is genuinely interesting is that in the first reporting of GOP candidate fund raising, only Romney out-raised Paul. Now everyone was way behind Romney, but Paul bested the rest of the field, including Pawlenty. While people may say “well, It’s Pawlenty”, remember that Pawlenty was originally considered the “other option” to Romney. If anyone was going to break out of the pack this would’ve been a good time, but it’s Romney, Paul, and Pawlenty to the first turn.[/quote]

You have to keep in mind that Paul’s supporters are always there early and strong. This is standard operating procedure. But here’s the problem…ready? Ready for this? The supporters NEVER EVER EVER grow much larger than the original base. And keep in mind the original base is:

  1. Loud

  2. Willing to donate their beer money

  3. Organized and ready to act in a flash.

Hence, what I call the “Paul mirage”. It’s there…it’s there…it’s the r e…where did it go?

He will have same 1-2 million or so “super supporters” on the final day as he does on day one. All of them swearing that Paul is the man and cannot lose. This is why whenever you can stuff a vote Ron Paul will usually come out on top because of his large base of hardcore supporters. If you lived on the Internet and were not fully in touch with reality (not you) one would think that Paul is going to be our next President. And that is exactly how he gets the 20 something males to follow him.

The Paul campaign really was interesting to a point. However, it’s very easy to figure out now and that’s why I’m laughing so hard at the Paul diehards. This Presidential election will have the same unhappy ending for the Paulites as did 2008. Paul loses by finishing in the bottom two or three.

7

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
Shut up ZEB.[/quote]

Really good retort, for a Paul supporter that is. After all, what else can they say?

:)[/quote]

What is genuinely interesting is that in the first reporting of GOP candidate fund raising, only Romney out-raised Paul. Now everyone was way behind Romney, but Paul bested the rest of the field, including Pawlenty. While people may say “well, It’s Pawlenty”, remember that Pawlenty was originally considered the “other option” to Romney. If anyone was going to break out of the pack this would’ve been a good time, but it’s Romney, Paul, and Pawlenty to the first turn.[/quote]

You have to keep in mind that Paul’s supporters are always there early and strong. This is standard operating procedure. But here’s the problem…ready? Ready for this? The supporters NEVER EVER EVER grow much larger than the original base. And keep in mind the original base is:

  1. Loud

  2. Willing to donate their beer money

  3. Organized and ready to act in a flash.

Hence, what I call the “Paul mirage”. It’s there…it’s there…it’s the r e…where did it go?

He will have same 1-2 million or so “super supporters” on the final day as he does on day one. All of them swearing that Paul is the man and cannot lose. This is why whenever you can stuff a vote Ron Paul will usually come out on top because of his large base of hardcore supporters. If you lived on the Internet and were not fully in touch with reality (not you) one would think that Paul is going to be our next President. And that is exactly how he gets the 20 something males to follow him.

The Paul campaign really was interesting to a point. However, it’s very easy to figure out now and that’s why I’m laughing so hard at the Paul diehards. This Presidential election will have the same unhappy ending for the Paulites as did 2008. Paul loses by finishing in the bottom two or three.

[/quote]

I guess my point was that the field seems much more scattered when compared to 2008, which actually gives Paul some room to step into a bigger national spotlight. I’m not saying he’s going to win, but by pratfall of his competition he will be toward the front of the pack for longer. The top 3 back in '07-'08 obliterated this year’s crop as far as fundraising. I’m fairly surprised by how large the difference is. Even Romney is well below his '07-'08 2nd quarter take and his recent predictions. Paul’s contingent wasn’t big enough previously because the groups supporting other candidates were much larger, even this early in the game. This time seems a little different thus far. If fundraising continues like this Obama will outraise the whole GOP crew.

8

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
Shut up ZEB.[/quote]

Really good retort, for a Paul supporter that is. After all, what else can they say?

:)[/quote]

What is genuinely interesting is that in the first reporting of GOP candidate fund raising, only Romney out-raised Paul. Now everyone was way behind Romney, but Paul bested the rest of the field, including Pawlenty. While people may say “well, It’s Pawlenty”, remember that Pawlenty was originally considered the “other option” to Romney. If anyone was going to break out of the pack this would’ve been a good time, but it’s Romney, Paul, and Pawlenty to the first turn.[/quote]

You have to keep in mind that Paul’s supporters are always there early and strong. This is standard operating procedure. But here’s the problem…ready? Ready for this? The supporters NEVER EVER EVER grow much larger than the original base. And keep in mind the original base is:

  1. Loud

  2. Willing to donate their beer money

  3. Organized and ready to act in a flash.

Hence, what I call the “Paul mirage”. It’s there…it’s there…it’s the r e…where did it go?

He will have same 1-2 million or so “super supporters” on the final day as he does on day one. All of them swearing that Paul is the man and cannot lose. This is why whenever you can stuff a vote Ron Paul will usually come out on top because of his large base of hardcore supporters. If you lived on the Internet and were not fully in touch with reality (not you) one would think that Paul is going to be our next President. And that is exactly how he gets the 20 something males to follow him.

The Paul campaign really was interesting to a point. However, it’s very easy to figure out now and that’s why I’m laughing so hard at the Paul diehards. This Presidential election will have the same unhappy ending for the Paulites as did 2008. Paul loses by finishing in the bottom two or three.

[/quote]

I guess my point was that the field seems much more scattered when compared to 2008, which actually gives Paul some room to step into a bigger national spotlight. I’m not saying he’s going to win, but by pratfall of his competition he will be toward the front of the pack for longer. The top 3 back in '07-'08 obliterated this year’s crop as far as fundraising. I’m fairly surprised by how large the difference is. Even Romney is well below his '07-'08 2nd quarter take and his recent predictions. Paul’s contingent wasn’t big enough previously because the groups supporting other candidates were much larger, even this early in the game. This time seems a little different thus far. If fundraising continues like this Obama will outraise the whole GOP crew.[/quote]

Oh yeah, I think Obama will be raising close to 1 billion dollars. It will be very difficult to unseat a sitting President who has that kind of money. As for Paul he will once again finish at or near the bottom after those who drop out do so. Nothing will change for Paul. But even if we stretch it and he finishes higher than anticipated that will mean nothing for him. He will not be on the ticket. And he’s not played his cards right to even get a high level cabinet post. In short, he’s going no where. One can argue that he’s brought his issues to the forefront. But what does that really mean? At this point any candidate who actually does have a chance of winning knows that the US is carrying too much debt and they’re saying so. As for his whacky foreign policy, no one is going to adopt that nonsense. Mostly because contrary to what Paul says the US was never an “island nation”. My gosh we invaded Tripoli back in 1801 because of their basic high seas terrorism. Anyway, no Paul is insignificant to the Presidential race, always was and always will be.

9

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh yeah, I think Obama will be raising close to 1 billion dollars. It will be very difficult to unseat a sitting President who has that kind of money. As for Paul he will once again finish at or near the bottom after those who drop out do so. Nothing will change for Paul.[/quote]

Sad but likely true. Most Americans are a moronic and/or naive lot, so this isn’t exactly a surprise.

10

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh yeah, I think Obama will be raising close to 1 billion dollars. It will be very difficult to unseat a sitting President who has that kind of money. As for Paul he will once again finish at or near the bottom after those who drop out do so. Nothing will change for Paul.[/quote]

Sad but likely true. Most Americans are a moronic and/or naive lot, so this isn’t exactly a surprise.[/quote]

They’re not morons, but as I’ve tried to explain to the naive 20 something’s on this site. The voters have a lot on their plate, especially during these challenging economic times. And most don’t start paying attention until after the Labor day before the election when the kids are back in school. That means that the candidates have a small window of opportunity to get their message across and look presidential while their doing it.

When Obama’s team crafted his “change” message they were well aware of its simplicity and significance. The voters heard the message, and the messenger and liked them both as there was congruency. And Obama won by a wide margin. Yes, the media helped him get elected, but he would have beaten McCain anyway, but by a smaller margin. Keep in mind it is my opinion that the liberal media is probably good for at least 2-3 million votes for the democrat.

This time around we have a sitting President with a lot of money and a very friendly media once again. If anyone thinks it will be easy to beat him, think again! And certainly someone like Ron Paul would get clobbered by the Obama machine. If for some reason everyone in the republican race dropped out and Paul were the nominee he would lose every single state in the biggest landslide in the history of Presidential politics. And I’ve been very consistent, and correct (see 08’) on this topic, but the Paulites trudge on deep in their heart knowing that Paul, when all is said and done, is a loser in Presidential politics.

11

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh yeah, I think Obama will be raising close to 1 billion dollars. It will be very difficult to unseat a sitting President who has that kind of money. As for Paul he will once again finish at or near the bottom after those who drop out do so. Nothing will change for Paul.[/quote]

Sad but likely true. Most Americans are a moronic and/or naive lot, so this isn’t exactly a surprise.[/quote]

They’re not morons, but as I’ve tried to explain to the naive 20 something’s on this site. The voters have a lot on their plate, especially during these challenging economic times. And most don’t start paying attention until after the Labor day before the election when the kids are back in school. That means that the candidates have a small window of opportunity to get their message across and look presidential while their doing it.

When Obama’s team crafted his “change” message they were well aware of its simplicity and significance. The voters heard the message, and the messenger and liked them both as there was congruency. And Obama won by a wide margin. Yes, the media helped him get elected, but he would have beaten McCain anyway, but by a smaller margin. Keep in mind it is my opinion that the liberal media is probably good for at least 2-3 million votes for the democrat.

This time around we have a sitting President with a lot of money and a very friendly media once again. If anyone thinks it will be easy to beat him, think again! And certainly someone like Ron Paul would get clobbered by the Obama machine. If for some reason everyone in the republican race dropped out and Paul were the nominee he would lose every single state in the biggest landslide in the history of Presidential politics. And I’ve been very consistent, and correct (see 08’) on this topic, but the Paulites trudge on deep in their heart knowing that Paul, when all is said and done, is a loser in Presidential politics.[/quote]

Like I said, they’re either morons or naive (most likely the latter). Although I’d say many Ron Paul supporters are also naive if they think that Ron Paul will be the next president. If he somehow did I’ve be very surprised.

12

I dunno, the same people who were laughing to me to my face about Paul in 2007 are now telling me he is right.

I mean all of them. And I don’t mean 20somethings – these are actual job-having, tax-paying, voters.

13

I think the people that want a change will have to vote for Paul, The Standard Republican and Democrat approaches are the same , try and fix the same problem with the same solution and expect different results

14

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I dunno, the same people who were laughing to me to my face about Paul in 2007 are now telling me he is right.

I mean all of them. And I don’t mean 20somethings – these are actual job-having, tax-paying, voters.[/quote]

I do think ZEB seems to think only twenty-somethings follow Paul, which is false. I’m getting close to 40 (I’m sorry to report) and agree with his views, as do my parents who are almost 60. My uncle and his wife, also over 40, also support Paul and his views. I think what some people might be forgetting is that it is young people who are more likely to be internet savvy than 70-80 somethings. Heck, most people of the latter age group can hardly even turn a computer on. Now that he has had a good deal of TV time there are more older people who have come to see the wisdom of his ideas. Twenty New Hampshire state legislatures also support his candidacy. So it’s not just “inexperienced kids” who support Paul.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think the people that want a change will have to vote for Paul, The Standard Republican and Democrat approaches are the same , try and fix the same problem with the same solution and expect different results [/quote]

This is something I don’t understand. Why do the fools in this country want to play this tired worn out Democrat vs. Republican game for dinosaurs when the state only grows, spends more, and so forth on matter who is in office? Either vote for liberty or don’t. Stop looking at labels, how old the candidate is, what they look like, labeling them as “kooks” because they know something you don’t, and so on. I would think people would have gotten tired of voting for the same old status-quo empty suits. Hasn’t gotten us to a good place has it boys and girls? Get it yet?

15

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
I do think ZEB seems to think only twenty-somethings follow Paul, which is false.[/quote]

ZEB doesn’t think that at all. What ZEB was trying to imply (and perhaps failed to do so as well as he should have) was that the majority of Paul’s followers are young males. I have no doubt that he has supporters of every age. But that does not negate the fact that most are young males --That Is A Fact!

16

I think ZEB should always refer to himself in the third person.

17

[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
I think ZEB should always refer to himself in the third person.[/quote]

ZEB is NOT amused!

18

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
I do think ZEB seems to think only twenty-somethings follow Paul, which is false.[/quote]

ZEB doesn’t think that at all. What ZEB was trying to imply (and perhaps failed to do so as well as he should have) was that the majority of Paul’s followers are young males. I have no doubt that he has supporters of every age. But that does not negate the fact that most are young males --That Is A Fact!

[/quote]

Gotcha. BTW, Your third person bit gave me a chuckle.

19

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
I do think ZEB seems to think only twenty-somethings follow Paul, which is false.[/quote]

ZEB doesn’t think that at all. What ZEB was trying to imply (and perhaps failed to do so as well as he should have) was that the majority of Paul’s followers are young males. I have no doubt that he has supporters of every age. But that does not negate the fact that most are young males --That Is A Fact!

[/quote]

Gotcha. BTW, Your third person bit gave me a chuckle.[/quote]

ZEB is pleased that you were entertained.

(Okay I have to stop that now right?)

20

[quote]ZEB wrote:
ZEB is pleased that you were entertained.

(Okay I have to stop that now right?)[/quote]

Well, only if you don’t want newcomers to think you’re on the entire pharmacy. :stuck_out_tongue:

BTW, this third person talk reminds me of Ormus in Blizzard game Diablo II. I’m now have trouble getting that bastard out of my head. :confused:

In other news it seems that Ron Paul is polling pretty well in Iowa at the moment: Iowa Republican Presidential Caucus Preference

He was polling only 3% in April. Now only 3 months later he is at 14%? I’ve got to admit that is a startling climb. So much the better though, if this poll means anything that is.

Ron Paul is also giving up his congressional seat: Ron Paul won't seek congressional term in 2012

I was expecting this to happen but not until the next election cycle.