Ron Paul is probably in first place!

[briansd1]

I think that young people will tear the Republican party apart because they don’t give a crap about “family values”.

Young people want 420, booze and hookers. They’ll need contraception also.

If young voters, who are generally unreliable to begin with, vote en masse, the Republican party is done. The Democrats can adapt, but the GOP is finished.

[SK in CV]

[quote=markmax33]
He’s right about at the tipping point right now. It’s hard to say if he’s past it with 16% overall, but he’s close.[/quote]

At least two more national polls with Paul at 12% in one and 8% in the other. The 8% appears to be an outlier (Gallup). But the “tipping point” surge appears to have fizzled. Now below 13% on average.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elections/state/US/?chart=12USPresRepPR&chart_mode=new

[markmax33]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]
He’s right about at the tipping point right now. It’s hard to say if he’s past it with 16% overall, but he’s close.[/quote]

At least two more national polls with Paul at 12% in one and 8% in the other. The 8% appears to be an outlier (Gallup). But the “tipping point” surge appears to have fizzled. Now below 13% on average.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elections/state/US/?chart=12USPresRepPR&chart_mode=new%5B/quote%5D

Again the tipping point is at 15-18%. You claim based on the national polls he hasn’t gotten there quite yet, and I guess I have to agree. He hasn’t campaigned in many states and you call 15% a failure with no help from the media?

[SK in CV]

[quote=markmax33]Again the tipping point is at 15-18%. You claim based on the national polls he hasn’t gotten there quite yet, and I guess I have to agree. He hasn’t campaigned in many states and you call 15% a failure with no help from the media?[/quote]

I don’t know that 15% is a failure. I just haven’t seen any indication that he’s going to go any higher than that. I agree that he may have upside, since his campaigning has been limited. On the other hand, none of the other candidates have ever paid much attention to him, so they haven’t campaigned against him either. I’m sure you’ll see it differently, but I think he has at least as much negative as positive going for him that will keep him in the same range he’s been at for the last 6 months.

[sdrealtor]

The greatest irony is that once this is all said and done the RP followers would have a bright future as recruiters for the LDS.

Kinda reminds me of that LMFAO song

They’re Romney and they’ll soon know it!

[Anonymous]

The initials “RP” remind me of another independent candidate that was popular with the younger libertarian demographic, made the national debt his key issue, did well in the debates, and got almost 20% of the popular vote, but ultimately was nothing more than a footnote in presidential history.

[markmax33]

[quote=pri_dk]The initials “RP” remind me of another independent candidate that was popular with the younger libertarian demographic, made the national debt his key issue, did well in the debates, and got almost 20% of the popular vote, but ultimately was nothing more than a footnote in presidential history.[/quote]

He didn’t have a son in Congress or Gary Johnson either. He also didn’t have debt and wars nearly as bad as we have now either.

[markmax33]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]Again the tipping point is at 15-18%. You claim based on the national polls he hasn’t gotten there quite yet, and I guess I have to agree. He hasn’t campaigned in many states and you call 15% a failure with no help from the media?[/quote]

I don’t know that 15% is a failure. I just haven’t seen any indication that he’s going to go any higher than that. I agree that he may have upside, since his campaigning has been limited. On the other hand, none of the other candidates have ever paid much attention to him, so they haven’t campaigned against him either. I’m sure you’ll see it differently, but I think he has at least as much negative as positive going for him that will keep him in the same range he’s been at for the last 6 months.[/quote]

The other Candidates don’t need to focus on his negatives because the media did it for them. There isn’t much there at all. All you see in the debates is the other retards arguing how they shifted their positions and trying to back pedal. Paul can’t participate because he won’t attack them and they have nothing to attack him about. He’s said the same thing for 30 years.

I don’t understand how going from 10% to 15% in 6 months, literally a 50% increase in your support nationally is range bound. He did it with negative media support. Just because the other supporters will jump behind whoever for the moment, doesn’t mean they are successful getting those temporary votes. The Paul supporters will not leave. They will not vote for the other Obama in sheepskin clothing.

[SK in CV]

[quote=markmax33]

The other Candidates don’t need to focus on his negatives because the media did it for them. There isn’t much there at all. All you see in the debates is the other retards arguing how they shifted their positions and trying to back pedal. Paul can’t participate because he won’t attack them and they have nothing to attack him about. He’s said the same thing for 30 years.

I don’t understand how going from 10% to 15% in 6 months, literally a 50% increase in your support nationally is range bound. He did it with negative media support. Just because the other supporters will jump behind whoever for the moment, doesn’t mean they are successful getting those temporary votes. The Paul supporters will not leave. They will not vote for the other Obama in sheepskin clothing.[/quote]

Paul has plenty of potential negatives. That you see them as positives differentiates you from non-Ron Paul supporters.

Going to 10% to 15% is no big deal. Look what the other candidates have done in a matter of a few weeks. Gingrich went from below 5% to 30% before he fell. Romney went from below 20% to over 30%. And Santorum just went from an internet punch line to almost 30% practically over night.

Since my earlier post, 3 more national polls came out, with Paul at 7%, 12% and 16%. He has a very strong base of support. And a very low ceiling. But with the way the others are slugging it out, you could be right. 15% won’t be a factor in a national election. It could be a factor at the convention. But so far it looks like the only winner coming out of the Republican primaries is Obama.

[markmax33]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]

The other Candidates don’t need to focus on his negatives because the media did it for them. There isn’t much there at all. All you see in the debates is the other retards arguing how they shifted their positions and trying to back pedal. Paul can’t participate because he won’t attack them and they have nothing to attack him about. He’s said the same thing for 30 years.

I don’t understand how going from 10% to 15% in 6 months, literally a 50% increase in your support nationally is range bound. He did it with negative media support. Just because the other supporters will jump behind whoever for the moment, doesn’t mean they are successful getting those temporary votes. The Paul supporters will not leave. They will not vote for the other Obama in sheepskin clothing.[/quote]

Paul has plenty of potential negatives. That you see them as positives differentiates you from non-Ron Paul supporters.

Going to 10% to 15% is no big deal. Look what the other candidates have done in a matter of a few weeks. Gingrich went from below 5% to 30% before he fell. Romney went from below 20% to over 30%. And Santorum just went from an internet punch line to almost 30% practically over night.

Since my earlier post, 3 more national polls came out, with Paul at 7%, 12% and 16%. He has a very strong base of support. And a very low ceiling. But with the way the others are slugging it out, you could be right. 15% won’t be a factor in a national election. It could be a factor at the convention. But so far it looks like the only winner coming out of the Republican primaries is Obama.[/quote]

How do you get the authority to randomly put in the word ceiling? I find it hilarious and it basically negates all points you make. It is the same wording as electability. You have never addressed why you use it or your authority. You and the media said he had a ceiling at many different points and you were wrong every time before. What mathmatically makes a ceiling and that wording correct? It is that sort of incompetent word play that really pisses the Ron Paul crowd off the most. You know every time you do it, we go convert another 10 people over to Ron Paul voters.

Ceiling is when you base doesn’t care enough about you to participate in the election process. Ceiling is when you can’t motivate your followers to become state delegates. I can’t wait to see the actually delegate totals coming out of the states.

[Author]

Posts