Apply Now!

Is this it for Ron Paul?

RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
New national Reuters/Ipsos poll that was done (January 5-9, 2012) before Dr. Paul's 2nd place finish in NH, shows Dr. Paul surging nationally by 5%:

Ipsos Poll conducted for Reuters, January 2012

Compared with previous Reuters/IPSOS polling it shows Dr. Paul's steadily increasing support:

June: 8%
October: 12%
December: 12%
January: 17%

This places Dr. Paul in a tie with Newt Gingrich for 2nd place nationally in the Republican field among all voters.

Among "Republicans only", Paul has jumped from 7% to 13% to 12% (Dec) to 16% now, just 4 points behind Gingrich who is down from 28% in Dec to 20% in this poll.
 
greg334

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Isn't paul capturing the youth in most of the polls, the same one that Obama is going after and got him elected?
 
tbubster

tbubster

Seasoned Expediter
greg334 said:
Isn't paul capturing the youth in most of the polls, the same one that Obama is going after and got him elected?
Click to expand...

Yes and no.Paul is capturing the hearts of many yung voters.However they are not the ones that voted for O.Paul and O are so far apart there is no way a voter could be for them both.

The youth that voted for O belive in bigger government,that it is the governments job to fix their problems.They belive that when they fail it is someone elses fault.They belive that the rich should pay more of "their fair share" even though they themselfs pay nothing.They belive that all their own choices and what happens as a result of those choices are our problem and not theirs.The youth that helped get O elected belive that it will take one man to change this country into a better tomorrow.They dont belive it is their job to help.

We all know this is not what Paul says he stands for.
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
tbubster said:
Yes and no. Paul is capturing the hearts of many yung voters. However they are not the ones that voted for O.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I'm afraid that you are at least partially incorrect here - some of them did indeed vote for Obama last time around. In fact, that's true not only for the youth vote, but for older voters as well.

This misunderstanding probably stems from sort of preconceived idea that doesn't comport with reality .... like people that might have voted for Obama necessarily believe in larger government .... when in fact they might have voted for Obama as a vote against Bush .... or against the wars ....

The above quoted premise is largely delusional .... and isn't capable of being supported by the actual facts on the ground .....

tbubster said:
Paul and O are so far apart there is no way a voter could be for them both.

The youth that voted for O belive in bigger government, that it is the governments job to fix their problems. They belive that when they fail it is someone elses fault. They belive that the rich should pay more of "their fair share" even though they themselfs pay nothing. They belive that all their own choices and what happens as a result of those choices are our problem and not theirs. The youth that helped get O elected belive that it will take one man to change this country into a better tomorrow. They dont belive it is their job to help.
Click to expand...
The above is a extremely simplistic view, which tends to paint as monolithic, folks which clearly aren't ......

I suppose it probably sounds like a great explanation .... if one is incapable of conceiving anything more complex and nuanced .....
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
greg334 said:
Isn't paul capturing the youth in most of the polls, the same one that Obama is going after and got him elected?
Click to expand...
Yup ..... big time .....

That's why the smarter heads in the GOP party (Palin and DeMint as but two examples on this matter) are recognizing that Paul is onto to something that the party would be ill-advised to ignore ....

Political reality necessitates that if a politician or party wishes to remain relevant to the political process they must take into account the wishes and desires of the electorate.

The only cases where that is not true are where A. the media is controlled to the point where they are capable, through propaganda, of influencing wishes and desires of the electorate, or B. you are capable of, and intend to, steal the election.

In the case of A, the MSM's ability to do so is rapidly being lost - due to the internet and the media's own actions (which create a backlash - blowback)

In the case of B, some in the GOP are certainly willing to go down that path ... just as some in the Democratic party are .....

However, there are many good folks on both sides on the aisle, which are unwilling to allow the very processes which define who we are, to be turned into a farce solely in the interests of illegitimately obtaining political power ....
 
Last edited:
witness23

witness23

Veteran Expediter
RLENT said:
Sorry, but I'm afraid that you are at least partially incorrect here - some of them did indeed vote for Obama last time around. In fact, that's true not only for the youth vote, but for older voters as well.

This misunderstanding probably stems from sort of preconceived idea that doesn't comport with reality .... like people that might have voted for Obama necessarily believe in larger government .... when in fact they might have voted for Obama as a vote against Bush .... or against the wars ....

The above quoted premise is largely delusional .... and isn't capable of being supported by the actual facts on the ground .....


The above is a extremely simplistic view, which tends to paint as monolithic, folks which clearly aren't ......

I suppose it probably sounds like a great explanation .... if one is incapable of conceiving anything more complex and nuanced .....
Click to expand...

Nailed It!!!!!
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Nate Silver over at Five Thirty Eight Polling has updated his projections for the SC primary, showing Romney in 1st place with 25.5%, Gingrich in 2nd place with 24.7%, and Dr. Ron Paul with 16.4%, moving ahead of Rick Santorum (15.1%) for 3rd place ... while noting "there is still considerable uncertainty in the forecast as is reflected in the range of possible vote totals for each candidate."

South Carolina Republican Primary Projections
 
greg334

greg334

Veteran Expediter
I expected sc to be a good state for gingrich but I dont expect him to actually last with the eastern snowbirds of fla
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
greg334 said:
I expected sc to be a good state for gingrich but I dont expect him to actually last with the eastern snowbirds of fla
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see what effect the internecine warfare between Romney and Gingrich will have on both their standings with the electorate. Could be a 3rd party that ends up being the beneficiary :D ..... and it could be the final straw that finishes Gingrich's campaign (although Adelson certainly has deep pockets)
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
BTW, does anyone know who came in 2nd in the New Hampshire Democratic Primary ... with 2273 write-in votes ... ? :rolleyes:
 
Ragman

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
RLENT said:
Nope - the most she could have taken was 759 votes (the total of un-tallied "miscellaneous" votes) since her name did not appear on either party's ballot.
Click to expand...

I know! I know!

I used google, I know!
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Ragman said:
I know! I know!

I used google, I know!
Click to expand...
Arnold Horshak .... just calm down now and quit wavin' yer arms ..... yer gonna have a heart attack .... :p

But do go ahead - give us the answer ..... :D

horshack.jpg
 
Last edited:
davekc

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
One thing for sure being down here in FL, Romney is running quite a few ads and the primary hasn't even started down here yet. In fact, he is the only one running ads.
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
davekc said:
One thing for sure being down here in FL, Romney is running quite a few ads and the primary hasn't even started down here yet. In fact, he is the only one running ads.
Click to expand...
Yup ... that's what deep pockets will get ya ;)

However, it would be a mistake to assume that simply because one isn't running paid ads that one is not getting positive media.

In fact, non-paid, "free" media can quite often be far more effective than any self-serving paid ad is .... particularly when it includes voices that are considered to "fair" ... "balanced" .... or "trusted" ....

What do you figure was the value of any of the following ?:

Napalitano: Can Ron Paul Take New Hampshire?

Or this ?:

Cavuto: Ron Paul: Rockstar

Or the value of this, where you have the pre-eminent conservative voice in the state (which happens to have an upcoming election in 8 days :rolleyes:) speaking positively of your candidacy ?:

CNN - Jim DeMint Discusses Ron Paul

Keep in mind that the above have a national reach - as opposed to paid media which are often only local or regional. And they are free ;)

On the flip side of the above is the fact that you have the media openly questioning the various "issues" regarding your opponents in terms of the past positions and record, ethical and moral issues, and the like.

One of the vital aspects of effective public relations and marketing is getting others to carry your message for you ..... when they do, they allow you to repurpose resources that might otherwise be spent, into areas where they might be more needed.

In a battle, I'll take intelligent tactics and strategy well-executed, over massive force stupidly applied, any day of the week ;)
 
davekc

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
Any candidate is going to be happy with positive reporting regardless of the source. Fox and CNN and others are only running a story that might get mentioned a couple of times on that given day to very limited markets.
Deep pockets will likely win the race.

A handful of positive stories just can't provide the traction that someone can who is running an ad on the hour on virtually every channel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top