Ron Paul a "scattering" away from first place victory at Iowa straw poll

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   



28.55% (4823 votes) – Michele Bachmann
27.65% (4671 votes) – Ron Paul
13.58% (2293 votes) – Tim Pawlenty
9.81% (1657 votes) – Rick Santorum
8.62% (1456 votes) – Herman Cain
4.25% (718 votes) – Rick Perry (write-in)
3.36% (567 votes) – Mitt Romney
2.28% (385 votes) – Newt Gingrich
0.41% (69 votes) – Jon Huntsman
0.21% (35 votes) – Thaddeus McCotter
0.96% (162 votes) – "Scattering"


Not really sure what this whole "scattering" means but Ron Paul was 152 votes away from first place, so this "scattering" could have given him the victory. I find this whole business odd because I hear that you have to buy a ticket for 30 dollars to vote at the straw poll and you also have to show up. So 162 people paid and showed up but didn't vote? Or the votes didn't count for some reason? I'm confused, I'm sure someone can clarify what I'm not seeing here and explain what this scattering is all about.
edit on 13-8-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   
What's unfortunate is that this scattering actually beat out Jon Huntsman and Thaddeus McCotter. Ouch !



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Doesn't really matter..

If that's the best Michele Bachmann can do in her home state and after paying for more attendees, then I call it a victory for Ron Paul..



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 
filosophia -

While I'm convinced a lot of those in the media don't like Paul or reporting on his victories or himself completely, the 'scattering' votes are likely write-ins for Palin, Johnson, etc.

I disagree with him on a few major points, but even I'm pissed off that Johnson's been marginalized and dismissed by the media. I don't like to see anyone getting "Ron Paul"ed, 2007-style.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by filosophia
 


Doesn't really matter..

If that's the best Michele Bachmann can do in her home state and after paying for more attendees, then I call it a victory for Ron Paul..


I agree, and there's reason to be happy with second place because now the media made themselves look foolish by saying the straw poll had no significance, but I'm still wondering how "scattering" managed to beat out two candidates. If anything I'm just curious not that I want a recount or anything, I'm still happy with the results because the poll is just an indicator and not the real thing, but if the presidential ballot suddenly had "scattering" coming in 9th place I'd want to know what the deal is with it.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by filosophia
 
filosophia -

While I'm convinced a lot of those in the media don't like Paul or reporting on his victories or himself completely, the 'scattering' votes are likely write-ins for Palin, Johnson, etc.

I disagree with him on a few major points, but even I'm pissed off that Johnson's been marginalized and dismissed by the media. I don't like to see anyone getting "Ron Paul"ed, 2007-style.



Okay, that makes sense if it is write ins for various candidates not on the list but you said it is likely that is the case, can you say with certainty that that is definitely what it means? (I just have a personal curiosity I'm not demanding you answer me or anything).



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Yesterday, Ron was way ahead, but now I'm reading this,

Bachmann wins Ames straw poll


firstread.msnbc.msn.com...


AMES, Iowa -- Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has won the Ames Straw Poll with 29% of the vote, edging out Rep. Ron Paul by 152 votes, or 28%.


You can't be serious, Bachman? Either the USA is completely lacking in intelligence, which is very possible, or this is a shame of an outcome.
edit on 13-8-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Maybe they're just unreadable or donkey votes..
Seems odd though given that you pay to vote..



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Considering the steps taken so far by those in positions of power to do so, I don't find this poll anymore credible than FOX's debate poll last weekend or CNN's last June. For the good of the corrupt politics as we know it, Ron Paul must be stopped at all costs!
edit on 13-8-2011 by Hillbilly123069 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
I finally found some info on it

minnesota.publicradio.org...


Scattering (162, 0.96 %) Includes all those receiving votes at less than one-percent that were not on the ballot.


It still seems odd that people would show up to vote for someone not on the ballot, but I guess people were willing to show up to vote for Thad McCotter so anything is possible.

edit on 13-8-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


For once, I agree with you in the interest of world peace.

Or, well, at least a slight increase in peace.
edit on 13-8-2011 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


the scattering of .96% is the margin of error in the survey so in other words the vote count is potentially off by + or - almost 1%

i also noted that fox was reporting Bachman at 29% and Paul at 27% they rounded her figure up and Paul's down. His should have been rounded up to 28% closer than they reported.
edit on 13-8-2011 by CaDreamer because: typo



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaDreamer
reply to post by filosophia
 



i also noted that fox was reporting Bachman at 29% and Paul at 27% the rounded her figure up and Paul's down. His should have been rounded up to 28% closer than they reported.


That's funny, leave it to fox news to spin even mathematics.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 

Okay, that makes sense if it is write ins for various candidates not on the list but you said it is likely that is the case, can you say with certainty that that is definitely what it means? (I just have a personal curiosity I'm not demanding you answer me or anything).

Unfortunately, no I can't say that's definitely what I mean - but I do expect SOME of these knuckleheads would have voted for Palin, some likely for Huckabee with the support shown for him there, and likely some disaffected Johnson supporters.

Trust me, I'm definitely not trying to say there aren't shenanigans going on out there (I remember the 2008 primaries/caucuses, and there was definitely some questionable activity with procedure and chain-of-control/observation - in NH and a few other specific states, offhand... *sigh*), but this is a great place for Paul, is easily excusable via the other likely write-ins, and Bachmann's win helps avoid the downplaying of the poll as well as being explainable by way of her home-court birth advantage and neoconservative tendencies.

Score! I'm very happy with this, actually - an outright win by Paul may have actually been more problematic and easy to dismiss.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Take out the home field advantage and Ron Paul won it hands down. The MSM is going to choke and gag on being forced to admit Ron Paul is now a very serious contender.


We need a couple of terms of a Ron Paul president to take a machete to the federal bureaucracy and bring some economic sense to government.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by expat2368
Take out the home field advantage and Ron Paul won it hands down. The MSM is going to choke and gag on being forced to admit Ron Paul is now a very serious contender.


We need a couple of terms of a Ron Paul president to take a machete to the federal bureaucracy and bring some economic sense to government.
i would prefer he use a 2 meter chainsaw



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
In every single election there are "scattered" votes. Scattered votes means that they were write-ins of various names. Most of these scattered votes were probably votes for Palin. Some may have been for Trump or some other candidate that people wanted over the ones on the ballot. They don't report all of them on the list because there are probably 10-15 different names that got 2 or 3 votes. So they just clump them all together and call it "scattered" votes.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by backinblack
 


For once, I agree with you in the interest of world peace.

Or, well, at least a slight increase in peace.
edit on 13-8-2011 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)


You make it sound like agreeing with me is a bad thing, I disagree..


BTW, star for an good post..



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
I wouldn't put too much weight on the straw poll. In 2007 Mitt Romney won it and we all know who was tapped to go up against Obama right?
In 1979 George Bush Sr. won the straw poll and Ronald Reagan became president.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thunderheart
I wouldn't put too much weight on the straw poll.


Well, there is another thread here where there is an online poll (where you don't have to pay to vote) and Ron Paul is winning it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...






top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join