Republican Presidential debate???

[Surf-n-Turf]

What friggin channel was it on? Wasn't it tonight? I couldn't find it on any channel.

[GermanStar]

CNN, it's on again late tonight -- check your local listings.

[mwood]

I watched it on CNN; nothing unexpected, nobody went too far out on a limb and Wolf Blitzer was his usual A-hole **** stirring self.

[Surf-n-Turf]

Originally Posted by GermanStar

CNN, it's on again late tonight -- check your local listings.

Thanks.

[TheDon]

I missed it.. I'll get the updates tomorrow..

Did Ron Paul partake?

[GermanStar]

A little bit ago, the CNN viewer poll had Ron Paul as the winner with a staggering 53%.

[TheDon]

wow..

I was reading the transcripts.. He Clearly stands out as a true conservative.. while as the others were mearly a bunch of neocons... Guiliani was given a sign that he should shut up and leave by a higher force


I'll try and stay up to watch the replay of the whole shebang but Ron Paul seems to be the one out of both parties that has the slightest idea on how things should be done.

[LaRondo]

Originally Posted by TheDon

I missed it.. I'll get the updates tomorrow..

Did Ron Paul partake?

Yeah, he was there ...
Besides liking what he says, I like how he says it. He always gets his stuff said on the dot. Not a sec longer or shorter of the time he's been given.
That's accuracy.

[LaRondo]

Originally Posted by TheDon

wow..

I was reading the transcripts.. He Clearly stands out as a true conservative.. while as the others were mearly a bunch of neocons... Guiliani was given a sign that he should shut up and leave by a higher force


I'll try and stay up to watch the replay of the whole shebang but Ron Paul seems to be the one out of both parties that has the slightest idea on how things should be done.

Guiliani gives me the feel of vomit ...

[LaRondo]

Ron Paul Polling 3-5% Higher but Ignored and Considered Not Statistically Important?

Published June 3, 2007, 1AM PST
Update: 6/5/07
I have asked some pollsters to help me out with regards to polling 18-29 year olds specifically to measure the support Ron Paul has in this demographic. Thus far, they have each expressed disinterest because they claim that demographic is too tough to poll.

There is a natural boost of about 3% that we feel Ron Paul will get and it is not being reported. This is a very bold statement that even I did not believe until after looking through all the data. In fact, the boost can become as high as 5% in just 2 months.
We predicted a drop to Rudy Giuliani that many of you surprised that we could make. He dropped 20% in 2 months. We predicted that the momentum in the Democratic race had shifted away from Barack Obama to Bill Richardson and we were called crazy because Obama had twice the support as Richardson. But the latest Iowa poll proved us correct again with Obama and Richardson in a statistical tie.
And we would be amazed if we were wrong with this prediction.
The Internet support Ron Paul is getting is being glossed over by many because it has not translated to a boost in the polls. But it does not tell the whole story. I think it is safe to assume that the majority of the Ron Paul supporters are young even though I do not have real statistical proof to back up that claim. I looked at the exit polls for the past 2 elections and noticed that about 15-20% of the voters are 18-29. That is about 1/5 of the voting public.
Ron Paul would undoubtedly fare much better among this small 20% of the public than the other 80%. Now the question to ask is whether this faction of our society is accurately being polled. We feel that for the most part they are fairly included in the polls. Of the pollster data that we have looked at, we have seen that group represented by an average of only about 3% less than would normally vote.
There is a couple of reasons for this small 3% difference that we feel to be because of the fact that a lot of individuals in the age group do not have landline telephones and because of the fact that the pollsters try to focus on those that are likely to vote. But for all the 18-20 year olds that have never had the choice to vote or not, how would the pollsters know who they are likely to vote for? The youth overwhelmingly support a liberal candidate and/or a third party candidate. Case in point is the 2004 election in which this age group voted for Ralph Nader 250% more frequently than the other age groups. For the Republican primaries and caucuses, that rogue candidate that appeals to the youth is Ron Paul and he is running as a Republican.
Another issue to note is the fact that many in this age group who are potential Ron Paul supporters are in college. How can they be polled if they are in college? Once they return home during the summers, we might see things shift a bit.
Pollsters get away with not correctly polling this very small faction. If the faction represents only about 3-5% of the public and their votes are distributed evenly across all the potential candidates then they have very little impact on the election. It is simple statistics and you cannot blame the pollsters for not wanting to spend the extra money and effort in profiling the youth. It is like the silent minority label that Asian Americans have had for ages. The Asian-Americans have been traditionally nullifying themselves by splitting their vote among Republicans and Democrats. Neither party takes the time nor the effort to pander to that minority group.
So in our prediction, we are going on the assumption that this time the 3-5% represents a stronger bloc of voters that will be overwhelmingly supporting Ron Paul if they are not already thanks to the good old Internet.
There is also a group of younger voters that may be profiled by the pollsters as not being likely to vote but would vote for Ron Paul. They may have been too disenfranchised by the political process and never felt that they had anyone to vote for until now.
Just imagine how many individuals rely on the Internet for information. Okay, the preference is still on television but the average voter will use the Internet at some point. If the Ron Paul supporters continue to support their candidate in a positive wholesome manner as they have, the average voter will have no choice but to see Ron Paul's message and thoughts.
This natural boost as we call it may never be seen nor reported until election day when the voters' real voices are heard. But if Ron Paul continues to languish in the polls, the youth that overwhelmingly supports him may not even bother to vote for him. And we may never see this natural boost that the polls should be reporting.
But this is just a theory because I have not seen any critical analysis done on the 18-29 age group that incorporates those without landlines, those that have never been eligible to vote before, and for those that have previously been too disenfranchised with our political process and never voted but would this time for a Ron Paul.
I am doubtful that any of the major pollsters will step up to the plate to analyze this group so I am in the process of contacting polling agencies to do a study on this for me. So keep your eyes peeled.

[Designo_E320]

Nobody really stood out. Same garbage. Same BS. Giuliani makes me vomit and so does the word "REPUBLICAN" I will vote for the crappiest democratic candidate before the best republican this time. I am sick of the lies and the "culture of corruption" that infects the republican party as a whole. Mitt Romney will get some consideration from me. Giuliani was and has always been a looser. He has done ABSOLUTELY nothing for this country and has absolutely no leadership skills. Nobody knew him before 9-11. He is an opportunist who did nothing except appear on TV with a hard hat on right after 9-11 to gain notoriety. If Michael Jackson's monkey did the same and appeared with a hard hat post 9-11, then he would have been just as popular as Giuliani.
One thing I did agree on was the BUSH BASHING.

[t walgamuth]

i read the review in the paper this morning and had to smile.

it said the repubs were bashing bush as if they were all dems.

there is one t hing i can agree with them on.

tom w

[GermanStar]

Originally Posted by Designo_E320

Nobody really stood out. Same garbage. Same BS. Giuliani makes me vomit and so does the word "REPUBLICAN" I will vote for the crappiest democratic candidate before the best republican this time. I am sick of the lies and the "culture of corruption" that infects the republican party as a whole. Mitt Romney will get some consideration from me. Giuliani was and has always been a looser. He has done ABSOLUTELY nothing for this country and has absolutely no leadership skills. Nobody knew him before 9-11. He is an opportunist who did nothing except appear on TV with a hard hat on right after 9-11 to gain notoriety. If Michael Jackson's monkey did the same and appeared with a hard hat post 9-11, then he would have been just as popular as Giuliani.
One thing I did agree on was the BUSH BASHING.

If you don't believe Ron Paul stands out, you have just not been paying attention, sir.

[Designo_E320]

Originally Posted by GermanStar

If you don't believe Ron Paul stands out, you have just not been paying attention, sir.

Actually, so far no one has impressed me on the republican side more than any of the 3 front runners on the Democratics side.
I am hoping for an OBAMA-Edwards or Vice-versa ticket.

[Surf-n-Turf]

Originally Posted by Designo_E320

Actually, so far no one has impressed me on the republican side more than any of the 3 front runners on the Democratics side.
I am hoping for an OBAMA-Edwards or Vice-versa ticket.

Yep, I'm hoping for Obama-Edwards too. But for different reasons....sure win for the Republicans.