Ron Paul Moves Into the Top Tier, Suggesting All His Support is Real

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Ron Paul is now being shown at 7-1 and only second to Hillary who is 2-1 in Vegas. Interesting again how the guys who make their living off of making odds see Ron Paul as a threat, and a serious contender.

Although I would personally love to see President Dr. Ron Paul, they would never let it happen. I thinnk Vegas is looking at the support, coverage, polls and other such info that would leaad them to believe that Ron Paul is growing daily and could in a real world be President. There is one thing that can make those odds go pastAl Sharpton who is coming in at 80,000-1, that is DIEBOLD.

Remember it is not those that casst the votes that decide anything, but those that count them... I will say ina REAL paper counted fair, no dead people voting kind of election, Ron Paul wins hands down. But alas we don't have real fair counted elections in this nation.


If that were true, why was the 2006 election such a major defeat for the Repuglicans?




posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by yuefo
I have to point out that in all three MSNBC polls, the before poll showed Paul at the bottom, and the after poll showed him waaay ahead.

Waaay ahead of who? Is he ahead of Giuliani or Romney?


Yes, in the post debate polls he trounced Giuliani, Romney and the rest of them. 3 debates, 3 wins.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
If that were true, why was the 2006 election such a major defeat for the Repuglicans?


Well maybe you should check out on Paul and he is a republican who won re election with over 68% of the vote, and he is in a predominantly Democratic District in Texas. Ron Paul is doing so well because he sticks to the ROOTS of Americanism not one party or another. Ron Paul is an American Patriot and his words inspire Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike. The reason that the republicans lost so terribly in 06 is because they didnt follow Ron Paul's example.

Now the time is coming for the 08 elections and I would bet, if I were a betting man, that Democrats that were elected to stop BUSH, who haven't but have in fact helped him alog will be out of a job come Nov. 08.

So real conservative, real American values and real American Constitutional Values are what the people want and they left/right GAME is about over for those two partes I fear. Americans are fed up with both so called Parties today and I think this may be the best thing for Americans and the World.

They have done polls for years about where people stand, what party they call themselves and whatnot. These polls are done by the parties as well as news and polling groups. Never in the history of these polls have thosepolled represented themselves as Independents by more than 3-4%. In the most recent polls of this nature the numbers did something they have never seen. Here are the numbers as they stand today;

25% - Republican / 32% - Democrat / 43% - INDEPENDENT

These numbers are bound to decrease for both Dems and Reps when you consider the people aremore and more angrier at both sides. Besides the Reps had to fire 65 phone solicitors because the everyday people were telling them to piss off and no money.

Ron Paul can win because Ron Paul wants to make America the Land of the Free again. Ron Paul wants to limit Government intrusion and Taxes. Ron Paul wants to make the people the Masters of Washington again.

The sooner the people realize that the dems and reps are like the corleones and gambinos. They may fight amongst themselves from time to time but when "THEIR GAME" is threatened they close ranks and defend "THEIR GAME". We the people must realize that it is OUR GAME and throw these criminals out.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by tom goose

Originally posted by Togetic
I am a mathematician, and a pollster. Scientifically speaking, such online polls are useless as measurements because there is no control of the universe of people sampled.


no control over the people sampled? like if they were american or not? what else would matter? sounds like cherry picking to me.

A valid experiment ensures that the people chosen are chosen at random. It is more likely that among the people who voted online, they were biased towards Paul.



Second, a national poll with N=100 or N=500 isn't worth the paper it's printed on. However, at least in the polls that I have cited above, N=1000, which is standard for polls of national scope and results in a 95% confidence interval with about a 3% margin of error.


1000 people out of what? 300,000,000 and a 3% margin for error? come on, what does that even mean? 95% success rate of keeping you in the dark of what MOST people are acctually thinking.
These concepts empirically mean that if you were to take an infinite number of polls of the same universe of people asking whether they supported Paul, 95% of the resulting numbers would be within 3% of the actual percentage of people in the universe supporting Paul.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
You have to understand how hard it is to get Ron Paul as an answer here, controlling the sample means CONTROLLING the POLL as well as the answers they will accept.
In the polling I cited, his name is included as an option.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Just because McCain overspent his "allowance" doesn't mean Ron Paul moves into "top tier," it merely means that McCain moved himself to "bottom tier."



Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I will say ina REAL paper counted fair, no dead people voting kind of election, Ron Paul wins hands down. But alas we don't have real fair counted elections in this nation.

If you can't rely on the Diebold machines to count your votes, you always have the option of Absentee Ballot...That's still a paper-vote & you don't even have to give a reason for requesting one.


I'd have to say something in Ron Paul's favor though...If he makes it through the Primaries (& I'm not a fortune teller, so I'll decline any predictions), 2008 would be the first time in my (almost) 30 years of voting that I wouldn't be voting "No Confidence."

[edit on 14-7-2007 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I love how people try to spin the internet polls, like only ron paul supporters know how to use a computer.



Augut 11th - Mark it down in your calandar!

This is the day of the Iowa Caucaus Straw Poll. Where Iowans have to PAY money out of their own pocket to attend and vote for their favorite republican in person.

When Ron Paul finishes this live in person Straw Poll in the top 2, then his support will be undeniable by the mainstream media.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
I love how people try to spin the internet polls, like only ron paul supporters know how to use a computer.


Wow, that is a complete mischaracterization of everything that I have said.

Can you show that careful steps are being taken to not skew the data in those polls? I can show that with mine.



Augut 11th - Mark it down in your calandar!

This is the day of the Iowa Caucaus Straw Poll. Where Iowans have to PAY money out of their own pocket to attend and vote for their favorite republican in person.

When Ron Paul finishes this live in person Straw Poll in the top 2, then his support will be undeniable by the mainstream media.
It will show nothing other than that his supporters are more willing to make their voices heard than the other attendees. It will most likely have no impact on the 2% number of supporters.

The unfortunate fact is that no one is accepting his policies.

For example, he is pro-life. He is also anti-Iraq war. Where exactly is the broad base of pro-life, anti-war voters?

At least for me, he supports juries answering questions of law, as well as questions of fact. That's a frightening prospect to me as someone who will soon be an attorney.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by TogeticAt least for me, he supports juries answering questions of law, as well as questions of fact. That's a frightening prospect to me as someone who will soon be an attorney.


Interesting, a Lawyer to be who dislikes the Justice system, I imagine this lawyer to be would be for professional juries too then, which should give most readers a clue as to where he stands befre he tells you where he sits.

Let me give a few examples of more learned Constitutionalists views on what Ron Paul has said, I guess some are Constitutionlists and like the Rule of Law and others arent, funny how its always the attorneys against the law.


[Originally spoken or written by Cheif Justice John Jay U.S. Supreme Court Court 1789The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the facts in controversy.



[Originally spoken or written by Oliver Wendell Holmes U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1902The jury ahs the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact.



[Originally spoken or written by Harlan F. Stone U.S. Supreme Court Court 1941The law itself is on trial quite as much s the cause which is to be decided.



[Originally spoken or written by U.S. Supreme Court Court 1972 in U.S. vs. Dougherty, 473 F 2nd 1113, 1139The pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogitive to disregard instructions of the judge...



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
Ron Paul spammers are Democrats, who want support for an Anti-War(American) Republican.

Democrats almost fell for the internet hype in 2004. Republicans won't fall for it because we know whats going on with Ron Paul and his faithful Democrat internet spammers.


I'd love for you to substantiate that, because I've been involved with the campaign from before it started and have meet........ a total of zero dems. Why is it hard to imagine that there might just be a larger portion of fiscal conservatives out here that agree with his message that are not talked about or represented by the current Socialists running the GOP?

I also find it funny that you continue to say the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

You think he's a non-entity. Roger. We heard you the first 70 times.

Peace



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Togetic,

As a "future" lawyer I would expect you to understand that Ron Paul's Pro-Life stand has nothing to do with politics. Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court Decision and the President can't change a supreme court decision. If you didn't know this then you are going to have a very difficult time making it out of law school and passing the B.A.R.

Ron Paul is Pro-Life because he has delivered over 4,000 babies into this world and he has personally experienced the miracle of birth.

I don't agree with Ron Paul's Pro-Life stand, but I am smart enough to realize that it doesn't matter, because we wouldn't be able to do jack to change it.

Ron Paul's Base of Influence comes from Republicans. I have always voted republican including GWB Twice, Three times if you count primaries.
However, The Republican Party has changed from what I once believed in. They Used to be the fiscally conservative party, who believed in small govt. Now they are Globalists just like the Dems. Infact I see very little difference between the 2 parties.

I support Ron Paul because

- He Has Never Voted To Raise Taxes
- He Has Never Voted To Give Himself a Raise
- He Doesn't Believe in Being the World Police
- He Promotes the Ideals of the Constitution
- He Believes in Small Govt
- He Believes in States Rights
- He is Serious About Stopping Illegal Immigration
- He Wants Our Economy to Return to a Gold Standard and fire the IRS & FED
- He Isn't Bought and Paid For By Special Interests



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
I support Ron Paul because...

I didn't want to excessively repeat your quote, but you seem to have forgotten a few other things...

Source: Ron Paul Campaign site
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

I only edited out (from the Source) points you already mentioned in your post...



Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
When Ron Paul finishes this live in person Straw Poll in the top 2, then his support will be undeniable by the mainstream media.

Even if the mainstream media won't be able to deny it, they're still more than capable of suppressing it...That's the sad part & one of the major reasons why Dr. Paul is still under the "top tier" & has to rely so heavily on Grass Roots support.


[edit on 15-7-2007 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal

Originally posted by TogeticAt least for me, he supports juries answering questions of law, as well as questions of fact. That's a frightening prospect to me as someone who will soon be an attorney.


Interesting, a Lawyer to be who dislikes the Justice system, I imagine this lawyer to be would be for professional juries too then, which should give most readers a clue as to where he stands befre he tells you where he sits.

Let me give a few examples of more learned Constitutionalists views on what Ron Paul has said, I guess some are Constitutionlists and like the Rule of Law and others arent, funny how its always the attorneys against the law.
Do you think that they should, and if so, why? Further, I am not advocating for anything different than the system we have today, at least in my state. And perhaps you would be so kind as to elucidate my opinion for me, as I do not see "where I sit"?

[edit on 7/15/2007 by Togetic]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
Togetic,

As a "future" lawyer I would expect you to understand that Ron Paul's Pro-Life stand has nothing to do with politics. Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court Decision and the President can't change a supreme court decision. If you didn't know this then you are going to have a very difficult time making it out of law school and passing the B.A.R.

My point, missed again, was that he is unelectable because he will be unable to build a broad-based coalition of voters sufficient to win. If it were Paul versus a nameless Democrat, the pro-life crowd would tend towards the Democrat. And all the anti-war people would probably tend towards the Democrats. Those two groups probably will not support Paul's other policies because Paul is to the right on other issues that such voters care about. So, as a political matter, and it was never a legal one, he cannot as a practical matter build the coalition necessary to win the election.

The above notwithstanding, you had made claims, and I had proferred rebuttals. I don't want to make this a discussion about me, although this parry-riposte is actually quite fun; can you address those points?

[edit on 7/15/2007 by Togetic]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TogeticDo you think that they should, and if so, why? Further, I am not advocating for anything different than the system we have today, at least in my state. And perhaps you would be so kind as to elucidate my opinion for me, as I do not see "where I sit"?


The Law and the Constitution of the U.S. say that the Jury ahs the Duty and Right to take the Laws into account and to throw it out, this was set up this way as a final stop to bad laws. Juries were tha last chance for the people to overthrow BAD LAWS, and interestingly enough attorneys who pass bad laws are aganst Jurys throeing their bad laws out. I can tell you the mentality it takes to be against the people and the constitution, EGOMANISM, ELITISM, and ARROGANCE, nothing more nothing less. This is why Shakesper said "KILL ALL THE LAWYERS FIRST", a prophecy I assume as they will be the first ones to die in a second American Revolution...

Good luck to you in your future.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro

Originally posted by RRconservative
Ron Paul spammers are Democrats, who want support for an Anti-War(American) Republican.

Democrats almost fell for the internet hype in 2004. Republicans won't fall for it because we know whats going on with Ron Paul and his faithful Democrat internet spammers.


I also find it funny that you continue to say the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

You think he's a non-entity. Roger. We heard you the first 70 times.

Peace


This is about the 10-15th post about Ron Paul, and you are calling me redundant?


Sure he may have 1-2% of true Republicans, but he is being built up by anti-war(American) Democrats. (There I said it again
)

This is so obvious, but there are alot of uninformed people out there, so I can see how they can be fooled.



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 10:48 AM
link   
I see someone with no evidence except some bull*&^% MANTRA adding to this post. provide your evidence of your point of view. See I used the odds makers in this example, the oddsmakers make their living by doing this and they are very good at it, or they would lose their jobs. Remember the rest of you what Ghandi said,

First they laugh at you, call you crazy or demean you in some other way.

Then they get mad at you and fight you, keep Ron Paul out of the debates.

Then they join you, as 43% of Americans now call themslves Independents and less call themselves either Republcian or Democrat.

The best part of the rants like that of RR is that I love watching these death throes of these sheeple. They think that if they say it enough times and loud enough it will become truth. I am sorry that just is not the case, saying it over and over don't make it true...



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I see someone with no evidence except some bull*&^% MANTRA adding to this post. provide your evidence of your point of view. See I used the odds makers in this example, the oddsmakers make their living by doing this and they are very good at it, or they would lose their jobs. Remember the rest of you what Ghandi said,



And your evidence of Ron Paul moving into the top tier consists of Ron Paul raising a little more money than dead end candidate John McCain, and some Vegas odds?

You want evidence? Go to Prisonplanet.com Ron Paul is all over this leftist site.

www.prisonplanet.com...

Ron Paul's name appears 10 times, just on the Front Page. Prisonplanet is not exactly the place where you are going to find alot of Republicans. Unless they are like me, looking for a good laugh.

[edit on 15-7-2007 by RRconservative]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Prisonplanet.com is a leftist website, is that your opinion or some empirical fact??? George W. Bush's name is on it 18 times, does that make him a more leftist than Paul?

Interesting that no one wants to talk about Ron Paul or his message on the Neo-Conned side. Deflect to anything including name calling because he is on a websiste, anything but actually talk about the CONSERVATIVE CORE PRINCIPLES he speaks.

I do however find it amazing that politically orientated websites are covering Presidential nominee seekers, WOW thanks for bringing that to our attention...

EDIT - I just saw Dr. Ron Paul on FOX News, does that mean FOX News is leftist or does it mean Ron Paul is a Fascist?

[edit on 7/15/2007 by theindependentjournal]



posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Prisonplanet.com is a leftist website, is that your opinion or some empirical fact??? George W. Bush's name is on it 18 times, does that make him a more leftist than Paul?

Interesting that no one wants to talk about Ron Paul or his message on the Neo-Conned side. Deflect to anything including name calling because he is on a websiste, anything but actually talk about the CONSERVATIVE CORE PRINCIPLES he speaks.

I do however find it amazing that politically orientated websites are covering Presidential nominee seekers, WOW thanks for bringing that to our attention...

EDIT - I just saw Dr. Ron Paul on FOX News, does that mean FOX News is leftist or does it mean Ron Paul is a Fascist?

[edit on 7/15/2007 by theindependentjournal]


Every leftist website will "mention" George Bush. There is a certain amount of bashing that has to be done, and it's hard to do without mentioning his name. But when you have a link promoting Ron Paul for President, that's a different story.

I just saw a post on DemocraticUnderground regarding Ron Paul. I think it is the first time I ever saw a post there talking about a Republican without vile cursing and downright hatred spewing in the entire post.

Democrats love this guy, but when Ron Paul drops out of the race to run as an Independent, will the Democrats continue to support him and reject their party?

Who wins in a race between Mrs. Bill Clinton (D), Fred Thompson (R), Ron Paul (I) and Ralph Nadar (I)? That is how I see the 2008 election setting up!

In this situation Fred Thompson easily wins!





top topics
 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join