| John from Carlsbad, CA | December 17th, 2007 2:00 pm ET He is proving it takes more than money to be a presidential candidate. In order to get the nomination from either party, you need to pander to the base. He is not doing that. He is also not a good communicator. In the debates and in his campaign he comes across as the “crazy old uncle” nobody listens to. If he gets a new campaign staff that can teach him tone of voice, body language and presentation skills he might have a chance as an independent. Both parties are too entrenched to nominate anyone from the middle. Sad but true. | |
| Bobby Dennis | December 17th, 2007 2:05 pm ET He may be low in the polls due to every time reluctant news stations report on Dr. Paul’s success they preface the good news with “He Can’t Win”. Is it just me or does it seem like the rest of the news anchors read that every time they mention him. Cafferty you are the exception. You must have kept your freedom when you signed your contract with CNN. Did I mention they also like to ask if he will run as a 3rd party; I don’t know if Wolf can ask that question any more than he does? Seems like another way to discredit him. | |
| Nick W. | December 17th, 2007 2:07 pm ET Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls because pollsters call likely primary voters. Many of the Ron Paul supporters I know have been apathetic to politics and have never voted in a primary before. In addition, Paul has more support from younger voters than the other Republican candidates and many of these people only use mobile phones; the pollsters only call land lines. Come election time, people will be in for a shock… | |
| Lissa Nix | December 17th, 2007 2:08 pm ET Because many times, Dr. Paul’s name is not included on the polls. | |
| Jeff K. | December 17th, 2007 2:09 pm ET Because most people polled are registered Dems and Republicans. The place where a Ron Paul’s strength lies is with Independents and the “American Underground Voters” (the ones that don’t tell anyone what they are truly thinking but always end up creating the questions at the end of an election among the media-icons like “Why do you think it turned out the way it did? None of the polls showed this happening”) . Americans as a whole are just genuinely tired of all the garbage that has become the political process in this country and all the trash that is given us after the election that we have to wade through just to get to the next election. Ron Paul seems like someone who will tell it like it is whether you like it or not and that’s what we need. We have had enough of the “hide and seek” style administrations, the present one being the epitomy of hide and seek. | |
| James | December 17th, 2007 2:09 pm ET Because the polls are the last buffer between perception and reality. Paul has a lot of money and ranks low in the polls, he gets no media attention. Huckabee has no money, ranks high in the polls, and turns the news into the Huckabee show. The polls are a way to control reality by controlling perception. I thought everybody knew this. | |
| Alec Yeager | December 17th, 2007 2:10 pm ET Ron Paul attracts many younger voters who have either switched party affiliation to vote for him in this election (like myself) or who have never voted before. Pollsters typically call only registered Republicans who have voted in previous primary races, and they typically do not call cell phones which leaves out a lot of people under 30 who use cell phones exclusively. Ron Paul’s support is being drastically underrated. | |
| Kyle | December 17th, 2007 2:13 pm ET The “polls” aren’t as indicative as people like to believe. A donation, or “putting of money where the mouth is” is far more likely to indicate voting support. Look at the numbers of donors (100,000+) and the average donation amount: $50.00. The people across the nation are supporting this guy, not the corporations. The media needs to stop all the hype on the “polls”. They weren’t too accurate during the 2004 election cycle’s primaries, and they probably aren’t now. | |
| Brian Jones | December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET If the polls were updated to reflect the fact that a LOT of voters use cell phones and not landlines they would come out different. I dare you to put a poll up on your website and see who comees out the winner. | |
| nick piccard | December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET Answer: Who says he won’t be? In fact, I am absolutely positive he will have significantly higher poll numbers. The more they try to suppress the voice of liberty and patriotism, the louder we will shout. And we will be heard across the world. | |
| Jeff | December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET Why? He is getting no real media coverage equivalent to his base. Scientific polls often don’t reach students and others who may be first time voters - or those who have never voted Republican. He also doesn’t get much “love” in the media, who continue to add backhanded comments in every report, ex. “He has no chance”. If Romney, Obama, etc. had raised this amount of money, it would be front page news. | |
| Oliver Reis | December 17th, 2007 2:15 pm ET Hello Mr. Cafferty, being a German citizen, I have the strong impression that So let me thank you for your fair coverage about Ron Paul, it’s Sincerely, | |
| John | December 17th, 2007 2:16 pm ET The mainstream media continually tries to discredit and marginalize the only candidate that truely represents THE PEOPLE. It is not in the interest of the current administration’s agenda to support a candidate that would truely change the status quo. Ron Paul is one of the only candidates that would REALLY end the War in Iraq. Instead, the media continues to promote candidates like Giuliani and Clinton, who will continue the war and corruption, in the name of Corporate America. The reason Ron Paul is such a powerful force on the internet, is because the internet isn’t controlled and censored, like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and other mainstream media outlets are. | |
| falseflagop | December 17th, 2007 2:16 pm ET Fact of the matter, Jack, he is polling way higher than the so-called (independent polls). Someone recently got a call to vote in a GOP poll, and guess what RON PAUL’S name was not even included (He was excluded from the poll question). I think I see a problem arising, don’t you Jack? | |
| Brian | December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET He set the single day record for primary campaign fundraising, besting the mark set by John Kerry AFTER he won the Democratic nomination and you are asking us why your polling methods don’t register the support he has? You are the journalist, do some work and figure it out. You know like reporting. | |
| Michael | December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET You must not mean straw polls or text polls, Ron Paul always places well in those polls. Nobody has called me to be part of a poll. Just who are they calling in these polls? The Answer: | |
| Chris Rhoades | December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET In many polls the requirements for selection is being a likely Republican voter with a landline. It is defined as someone who voted Republican (Bush) in the 2004 election. I am a Republican but voted 3rd party on principle last election and I only have a cell phone so I wouldn’t get polled. Donors are also people who have been disaffected from politics, young first-time voters, Constitution Party, Libertarian, Independent, and yes disgruntled Democrats who realize that he would end the war. The big story on the fundraising is that is averages out to around $100 per donor. In other words, the numbers are corporate, lobbyist, bundlers but average American patriots. Time will tell if the polls are right. Looking forward to January! | |
| Rick | December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET If Dr. Paul had one half of the free media coverage of the “usual suspects”, he’d already be running away with this thing. By every other objective measure Ron Paul is king. Most Straw Poll wins - check I have never been one of those conspiracy minded folks, but I may have to reevaluate that after this election cycle. The Republican machine should be trumpeting this huge news of beating Kerry (D)’s fundraising record - especially considering how broke the GOP is. | |
| karpodiem | December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET Answer: Who says he won’t have higher numbers? The media’s prejudice against Ron Paul today is outrageous. The more you try to silence the liberty and patriotism we promote, the louder we will shout. All of America will hear us very soon, and we are beginning to outnumber you. | |
| Matt Myers | December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET The answer to your question….. Why isn’t Ron Paul higher in the polls? Because there is a concerted conspiracy by the special interests and powerful, wealthy people who think they alone can decide who will be the next president of the USA. 60% of Americans don’t trust the polls apparently………….and I’m certainly among that 60% who do not trust the mainstream media or the people conducting the polling to run a fair and honest election. They will do everything in their power to prevent Ron Paul getting the attention he so justly deserves. | |
| Jeremy | December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET Ron Paul is not showing well in the polls because the polls are conducted by land-line telephone, and only with people who have voted republican in the past. The vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are younger independents who have never shown an interest in politics until now. Also most of the younger people who support him do not have land-line phone, as most people these days just have a cellular phone line. How can the mainstream media keep ignoring a candidate that can pull in $6 Million dollars in a single day without even organizing it with his own campaign? I hope you aren’t the only journalist who digs deeper into this story, because sadly that is likely what will happen. | |
| Thomas M. | December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET Because the polls don’t include him in the polling. Show us one that does and he will win it guarantee. And we will all only vote once. | |
| Jake Beischlag | December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET Hello Jack: You can almost feel the winds of change stirring for this upcoming election. I have never seen or heard of such a strong grassroots support for any Presidential candidate in history. Ron Paul will turn the political system in America upside down with his message of Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity. The reason Dr. Paul is not higher in the polls is simple: the media itself is damaging the democratic process, the mainstream media’s bias is overwhelming and is becoming so blatant to many. America is waking up, the sleeping giant, the voting public, has been stirred - the final result will be the election of Ron Paul for President in 2008. | |
| Jason Del Wraa | December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET These polls only take into account republicans who were registered in 2004, while completely overlooking disenfranchised republicans and democrats, independents, libertarians and those who’ve never voted before. Voter turnout in the primaries is typically around 10-15% of registered voters. | |
| Troy | December 17th, 2007 2:19 pm ET Because the polls are no good. The polls are biased against. There is evidence of this. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself why Huckabee has surged in the polls and hasn’t raised anywhere remotely close to the money that Ron Paul has.Then ask yourself which is a better measure of support, random people answering a phone poll or cold hard cash. Cafferty for VP. | |
| Michael | December 17th, 2007 2:19 pm ET It’s quite simple Jack, | |
| falseflagop | December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET If he is polling so low why are local pundits in New Hampshire asking is RON PAUL is a a bigtime realtor ? I guess all those signs acroos the whole state would make even me wonder. | |
| Rafik Mikhael | December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET Polls are a scientific tool to reach an unscientific result. The deception begins when you assume (mistakenly) that the expectation of people to actually take the trouble and go on a winter day to vote for their favorite candidate is equal among all campaigns. With this assumption it make sense that surveying people’s opionions would give an indicator as to the expected result of the actual vote. But the fact is, supporters are not equally enthusiast about their candidates. Many supporters poll for a candidate cause he is the one they see everyday on TV, not because they are truly enthusiast about his message. Come voting day, you probably wouldn’t take the trouble to wake up and head for the booth unless you really really believe in someone’s message, no matter how many times you see him on TV. You want a more scientific way to count the votes apriori? find a way to measure not only the size of the support, but the depth of it!! | |
| Eric Gerhardt | December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET Jack I have 4 calls in the last 2 months from the telephone pollers, not one has included Ron Paul in their Poll. The polls just arent accurate! Not only that, one of the automated polls that called me told me to “press 6 for other.” When i pressed 6 it told me “You will no longer recieve calls from this polling agency.” The polls just arent Accurate! | |
| Brett | December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET Jack, Why? How about the fact that our Mainstream Media trys its best to dictate the “best” choice of candidates for America by neglecting the others. Call me naive but I thought the media was supposed to protect their countrymen from this klnd of manipulation……. and if that doesnt do it for you then it at least shows how far we have strayed from the intentions of our founding fathers. *hint* Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist… | |
| nick piccard | December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET One thing is for sure, it isn’t lack of support. Perhaps the better question is: Why don’t polls properly reflect real-life support. | |
| Mike Kaniut | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Simply a matter of polling techniques. Polls ask “likely” voters who they will vote for. Ron Paul has a very strong following is the normally no-show voters. This includes college aged voters, and the 40-50 percent that historically haven’t been voting as a result of becoming apathetic to politics. Ron Paul has energized these lost pieces of the democratic process, and will be reaping the benefits come the primaries. I believe he has a very legitimate chance at unseating several of the candidates and getting a respectable 2nd place or winning the nomination. But all is speculation until January. | |
| ALLEN | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Because the polls are rigged! | |
| Terry O'Flaherty | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Jack | |
| Dan Teesdale | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Jack, polls should mean very little to us. The key to the primaries is to vote for who you feel matches your beliefs the most. I believe it is very, very dangerous when we begin to rely and vote based on poll results. These poll results have been proven to be easily manipulated, and when we rely on them we are giving up our democracy. Despite this manipulation, I feel Ron Paul will have great turnouts in Iowa and New Hampshire. Then, Jack, we will see the rEVOLution! | |
| mariahussain | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Ron Paul is relying on a viral marketing campaign which takes time to become effective. Not everyone is tuned into google. Many people haven’t heard of Ron Paul or have been influenced by the media smear campaign. The combination of media smears and media blackouts, and the way he was treated in the debates, give the impression that he is the unwanted guest and does not help him come across well to the audience. On the other hand, the passive participation of the poll-takers may not result in votes. Ron Paul advocates will definitely vote. It will be interesting to see how far Ron Paul can get without any help from America’s thought police, the Israel Lobby and its media arms. | |
| Robert Nash | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET Come on Jack… Do you really have to ask? Ron Paul is not polling higher for the same reason the NAU is “non-existent”. BTW, Ron Paul Supporters really like you! Please keep up the good work! | |
| Kent | December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET That’s easy. He’s been censored. To this day, he’s often simply not even listed as an option in polls. Which is understandable considering he’s a true threat to the established political order in Washington. Think about it… he had over 58,000 people contribute hard earned money to him on just ONE day. Nobody’s ever gotten that kind of numbers before. Does anyone really believe he gets all those people to send him money, and none of them is going to vote him? Be prepared to see stunning numbers in the Iowa and New Hampshire votes. Finally, Dr. Paul’s true support will be witnessed in a way that no one can supress. | |
| Eric Gerhardt | December 17th, 2007 2:22 pm ET Mr. Cafferty, I got engaged on December 16th to coincide with Dr. Pauls Tea Party Bomb and im wondering if it was a good idea now. The Boston Tea Party stood for freedom, and I just gave that right up! | |
| Jesse | December 17th, 2007 2:22 pm ET He has done extremely well in many of the straw polls taken around the country. Where he has struggled so far is in the “traditional” polls, many times made up of registered Republicans who voted in a previous primary. I would not expect him to do well in that forum, because that is not his base. Up until this past weekend, the Paul campaign has not had the money to go on the offensive and attempt to reach the mainstream voter. They do now, however, so I anticipate a full out media blitz in IA and NH leading up to the primaries. Double digit results in those primaries is a great goal. | |
| Mr. Walker | December 17th, 2007 2:24 pm ET Maybe if the polls showed more people who would actually vote in the primaries instead of 500 “random” people, he would actually be leading. Most supporters have never voted before or they switched parties to Republican. | |
| Craig Royce | December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET What do you mean jack? he’s won almost all the straw polls. If you’re asking why he doesnt win telephone polls of likely republican voters the answer is quite simple. His message has created NEW likely republican voters and nobody is calling us. when they do call a paul supporter he’s in the “other” category. Add that to the virtual media blackout and rise of cell only phone users and you have highly inaccurate telephone polls. | |
| Bob Rooks | December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET No one’s asked me. The polls I’ve read about either leave him out, lump him with “other,” or produce the results that the pollster was paid to achieve. The “polls” seem designed not to ASK what we believe, but to TELL us what we should believe. | |
| Marc Lysne | December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET Most of the mainstream media is attempting to ignore Ron Paul. We have these ‘celebrity’ candidates that people seem to identify with, until that is, they hear what Dr. Paul has to say, and what he believes in. Give it time and Mr. Paul will be very high in the polls. All the other candidates have too much baggage to even compete with the man. | |
| Diana Nickel | December 17th, 2007 2:26 pm ET I believe part of it is because he will not carry forward the agenda of the North American Union and will actually work to return ownership of the country to the people. Since we aren’t allowed to acknowledge the end of American sovereignty in the MSM, how on earth could we expect the MSM to give fair air time to a man that would not only talk about it but fight to reverse it? He is left out of polls and marginalized to an unbelieveably obvious degree by the MSM. It’s almost as if each organization has received a script and marching orders. If Ron Paul got the attention that he has earned, (like the attention Huckabee gets that hasn’t been earned)I’d bet you 6.2 million dollars he’d be sitting on top of the polls. | |
| Jonathan | December 17th, 2007 2:26 pm ET The national polls target likely primary goers. However, likely primary goers are considered to be those who went to the primaries in the last election cycle. This excludes at least two-thirds of all Ron Paul supporters. If you want to see who is going to be at the primaries and how they will vote, look at the straw polls. Ron Paul supporters will drive from one side of their state to the other side of their state to vote for Ron Paul in a straw poll, and the results are obvious. Ron Paul has won, that’s first place, over 50% of all straw polls nation wide. This fact alone dismisses the idea that Ron Paul supporters are only on the internet, and really it makes supporters of other candidates look lazy in comparison. | |
| Johnathan Stromboli | December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET Dr. Paul has a very active support base, with many of his followers believing in the campaign ‘An American Hope” to such an extent that they donate the maximum amount allowed for an individual. The least amount of supporters he can have is roughly 18 million divided by the max (being 2300) donation. We get roughly 7826.5, which makes sense, because his average follower is 1.5 the weight of an average American. | |
| Erin Moore | December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET The people who are polled are “likely” republican primary voters. Many of his Quarter 4 donors have never voted in a primary election, and therefore will not be contacted for polling purposes. Also, many of us have only cell phones as 24% of Americans do now. These lines are not called for polling purposes. Hundrens of thousands have donated. We are passionate and we will vote. Call us. | |
| Terry | December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET Depends on which poll you are talking about. Do you mean the so-called scientific polls where the GOP party refuses to even name Ron Paul as a choice of candidates on the poll? Do you mean the poll that doesn’t name Ron Paul as a choice but his numbers and his supporter’s are forced to either choose “other” or “undecided” for lack of other options? Or do you mean a poll that only polls Republicans that voted Republican in 2004 which is a very poor reflection of his support? As a person who is very familiar with who is supporting Ron Paul, the real numbers are reflected in a cross section of Americans who are changing parties just for him. Independants, Democrats, Libertarians, Republicans, people who have never even voted before, and everything else you can imagine. A poll of card carrying Republicans, rarely even given the choice of Ron Paul as an option, is a pathetic reflection of his support. The polls are not a reflection of someone’s popularity, it’s just another tool of the neocons to manipulate people to tell them who to vote for. Don’t believe me? Feel free to request the recording one Ron Paul supporter made while being polled a few weeks back. No Ron Paul option and when the person choose “other”, the recording said thanks and told them they would be removed from the calling list. In other words they aren’t interested in polling people who choose Ron Paul. And there are many reports from Ron Paul supporter’s of similar shenangians. | |
| Joshua Workman | December 17th, 2007 2:29 pm ET These “polls” that show Dr. Paul as barely registering are among likely caucus go’ers, who voted in the Republican Primary last time and have land line telephones. Most pollsters neglect to even mention Dr. Paul as an option. They do not take into account cell phone users or first time Republican voters. Mr. Cafferty, I believe a better, more honest, question would be: How is a man who raised $6 million in one day, has his own blimp(payed for by grassroots), and thousands of UNPAID supports and volunteers that have “rain, sleet, or snow” dedication, still considered a long-shot, fringe candidate by the media? The bias that many of the media outlets have gone through to suppress Dr. Paul’s success can be seen just by a simple YouTube search. Are we to believe that when the 4th Quarter Campaign Finance Reports come out the headlines will read “Romney finishes 2nd in fundraising” as opposed to “Ron Paul blows all other GOP Candidates out of the water with a $20 million 4th Quarter!” | |
| Scott | December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET ron paul is common folk, the one person that washington didn’t change. that just isn’t news worthy, no profit in giveing equal time the canadates. besides he looks too much like jack cafferty, and one sex symbol is all cnn can handle at a time. | |
| Greg Dunbar | December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET The answer is a simple one. The polls are polling only individuals that voted republican in the last election. That makes up a very small minority of real voters in this upcoming election, since after Bush, many jumped ship. Ron Paul draws a lot of his support not only from Republicans but also from Independants and Democrats who switched over from their parties and have never voted Republican before. Those voters are not included in the polls. Does Ron Paul have a chance though? Well, history often repeats itself. At this time in 2003, John Kerry was actually polling slightly LESS than what Ron Paul is polling now - but he still went on to win the nomination. That right there, is pretty much proof that the polls cannot be taken seriously this early into the game. | |
| Justin Stout | December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET Hi Jack, | |
| Jonathon Cohen | December 17th, 2007 2:31 pm ET http://thecaseforronpaul.com/default.aspx #1 in majority of straw polls, The polls conducted by main stream media are of usually less than a 1000 people and are of voters who already voted in the last primary and Ron Paul’s audience is mainly of new Republican voters. The polls conducted online have a majority win for Ron Paul. He has the most meet-up groups. Now that he has more money, and is willing to spend that money on advertising on major networks, it is surprising that the main stream media still does not recognize Ron Paul as a leading candidate. The main stream polls were not relative to the winnings of the Democratic primary in Iowa for John Kerry and John Edwards. I would think that the main stream media would have learned by now that these polls are not absolute. You need other data to really see that Ron Paul is going to win this primary. | |
| Luis Gomez | December 17th, 2007 2:31 pm ET Simple. Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because he has never received a fair shake from the media. The vermin that call themselves “journalists” and “reporters” have been attempting to marginalize him from day one, always going out of their way to label him a fringe candidate, a nut, an extremist, a long-shot, etc… It has become blatantly obvious that the mainstream media has no interest in informing the public. Rather, their interest lies in skewing public opinion to favor those candidates they annoint as being ‘viable.’ A more interesting poll would be: How many Americans actually agree with any of the garbage spewing from the vile fountain of the media??? Thanks Jack, and keep up the good work! | |
| paulforronpaul | December 17th, 2007 2:32 pm ET Some of the reasons why Ron Paul doesn’t do better in the polls is because they are doing landline polls of “likely primary voters.” These numbers are taken from those who voted in the last republican primary. In the last Republican primary George Bush ran unopposed, resulting in a voter turnout of about 6%. Among that 6% voter turnout, every single one of them voted for George Bush, and these are the people being polled. Since Paul’s views on virtually everything are diametrically opposed to Bush’s, it’s no surprise he doesn’t do well in this demographic. But in 48 Republican straw polls where people must actually physically appear and pay money for the privilege of casting their vote, Ron Paul has placed first, second, or third in 41 across the nation. Excluded from land line polls are people who do not have land lines, disgruntled Democrats who have crossed over to Paul, college students who make up a large percentage of his support base but have never voted before, and folks who did not vote in the last primary because there was no choice, what with Bush running unopposed. Additionally, he was virtually every single poll following a debate be it online or via cell phone text message. Note that those who text message would not be included in the landline polls. | |
| Ed | December 17th, 2007 2:32 pm ET The same reason why Ron Paul has won 50% of national straw polls and the National Presidential Caucus (http://www.nationalcaucus.com/results) for both Republican and Open voters. Or outside of each debate how Ron Paul supporters dwarf everyone else’s. The Polling system is flawed when you have people like Frank Luntz asking questions and skewing the votes towards their pre-chosen candidate. The main stream media has already chosen it’s candidates, they’ve already decided who you should vote for. | |
| James | December 17th, 2007 2:33 pm ET There are many reasons. For one, to be able to vote on someone in a poll their name has to actually show up in the poll as an option. In many phone polls his name just isn’t present. Another reason is the fact that the polling system is flawed in that it doesn’t consider first time voters, voters that have changed parties, and voters that didn’t participate in the Bush elections (and how can anyone blame them for that). This is where Ron Paul’s votes will come from and they aren’t even being asked. Finally, the polling system is showing its age by relying on land line based phones in a time where people have internet-based and cell phones. | |
| Jon Searles | December 17th, 2007 2:33 pm ET It’s simple Jack. Millions of supporters can go online whenever they want and make their voices heard by donating. On the other hand, I don’t know a single fellow Ron Paul supporter who has ever had the opportunity to participate in these so called scientific polls. I think Pollster Frank Luntz explains why Ron Paul is not polling higher very clearly in these excerpts from an interview made famous by Penn and Teller. “The key in survey research is to ask questions that people care about the answers and to ask the question in a way that you get the right answer…” “…What you will find is that virtually the same question just a single change of wording you’ll get a very different reaction in terms of how they think and how they feel.” In short Jack, the polls tell us what the sponsor wants us to hear. It has always been that way and will always be that way. I can only hope that one day the news outlets who report these polls will grow a conscience and restore some credibility to the word “news”. | |
| Tim | December 17th, 2007 2:34 pm ET Jack, | |
| Timothy Helms | December 17th, 2007 2:34 pm ET Three reasons: 1. Voters aren’t concerned with educating themselves on the issues. They’re content with gut reactions and scared off by big, misconstrued statements like “Ron Paul wants to abolish the Department of Education.” I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard this translated back to me as “Ron Paul wants to remove public education.” 2. Big media caters to American laze. The point of these ‘money-bombs’ is to garner support, to get people interested. While you do report the total earnings, you further say “He can’t win.” It’s time CNN, FOX, and the big three realized how much control their opinions have over the mindless masses. Please, stick to the facts. 3. Polls only account for registered republicans. Ron Paul’s appeal is much, much broader than this. He will outvote McCain, Thompson and Giuliani will place top 3 in Iowa. Hell, he may even win if the weather is bad. | |
| Dave A. | December 17th, 2007 2:35 pm ET Perhaps the question should be: If Dr. Paul is so low in the “polls”, how can he raise more than $6 million in one day? | |
| Joseph Swenson | December 17th, 2007 2:36 pm ET Telephone polling is an antiquated technology that died with era of the cellphone. I think 2008 will prove this at the ballot box. | |
| Christopher F. Dillard | December 17th, 2007 2:36 pm ET Whether its biased polling techniques that exclude his name, registers of republican voters from the last presidential primary where George Bush ran unopposed, or the marginalization of Ron Paul’s campaign by the mainstream media, the real reasons for the low polling numbers become evident with some research. Check out the straw poll results at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ to see for yourself how widespread the support really is. The message of Freedom and Liberty is an inclusive one, and it’s time to send the message, that “We, the People” want our Republic back. Quite frankly, there is no other candidate that I would trust at the helm to steer us back onto a Constitutional path. | |
| Anthony | December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET Its very hard to move up in the polls if your name is not on the list. When I was polled Ron Paul was not even on the list to chose from. Here in Tennessee all I’ve seen is Ron Paul signs! “EVERYWHERE” The people are getting their news from the internet now! You are losing your control!!! Oh just thought you should know I’m 48 not 17! | |
| Monika Holbein | December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET The reason why Ron Paul’s support is not displayed accurately in the Polls is that he has a lot of young supporters and also supporters that have not voted in recent years due to frustration with the current system. | |
| Jeff Scott | December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET I know this will never make the air but it’s because I speak the truth and I can’t say anything other than the truth. There have been straw polls cancelled because of the amount of people who show up to support Ron Paul in cities (shame on the GOP). There are many polls that don’t even list Ron Paul. There are many polls that are taken as gospel, but were taken of around 500 people who are ‘likely voters’. We’re told that straw polls don’t matter anymore. We’re told that money raised doesn’t matter anymore. We’re told that momentum doesn’t matter anymore. We’re even told that the size of a campaign doesn’t matter anymore. What are we left with? We’re left to depend on polls hich are generated by bias media and pollsters with an agenda. The fact is Ron Paul stands against the power structure which both parties thrive and neither the media or the political system are giving him a fair shake. | |
| Jason | December 17th, 2007 2:38 pm ET It’s kind of hard to get higher in the polls when you are not included in the poll! The mainstream media is backfiring, they keep ignoring Ron Paul and more Americans are realizing it. It’s just firing up more people to push for change. Who gets more money from the military? Who wins most of the straw polls? Who has more public support? Who has a blimp? I’ll let you take a guess… RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008! | |
| Mark Weatherley | December 17th, 2007 2:38 pm ET 1.) The “mainstream” media practically ignores him. The reasons for this are plenty but pretty much boil down to the fact Ron Paul will upset the Status Quo. 2.) The lack of name recognition due to the media blackout And to top it all off.. 3.) Most of the polls don’t even mention him as a choice. A true travesty for freedom loving America. The media has alot to answer for! M. Weatherley | |
| Derek | December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET I believe it could be because the media has already chosen the frontrunners. Although they have some legitimate support I feel we sometimes don’t fully support democracy in this country. Ron Paul has had some coverage but he clearly deserves more. Also if you check you will see that Ron Paul gained a significant amount of the money from NH residents which shows he might have some new numbers during the New Hampshire Primary. | |
| Henry | December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET Jack, He needs to be in all the polls to show up higher in the polls, far too often his name is not even mentioned as a choice, but rather as “other”. That coupled with the fact that in these day’s the media chooses our leaders. Thank you, | |
| Jess Fields | December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET Ron Paul is the wildcard in this race for a good reason. He is the only Republican candidate bringing new voters into the party. His appeal among America’s youth and the third-party voters simply cannot be tested in conventional polls. The only sure test of his support will come on January 3rd. Then, we’ll see if Dr. Paul’s Revolution is for real or not. I’m certainly along for the ride. | |
| Steve Duff | December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET Several reasons. Some polls don’t mention Ron Paul’s name, and if the respondent (such as happened to a local Paul supporter I know) chooses “Other”, they are told they are being removed from the call list. Also, pollsters are calling voting participants of prior Republican primaries. Much of Paul’s support comes from first time voters, disenfranchised voters who haven’t cast a vote in years, and people changing their voter registration from Democrat. So the Paul supporters are not being called. There are many other reasons which demonstrate the un-scientific nature of polls. You can rig a poll to show a Ham Sandwich in the lead if you ask the right questions. Thanks Jack for your unbiased reporting of Dr. Paul’s campaign. Keep up the good work! | |
| john | December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET Two reasons he’s not higher in the polls; first many Ron Paul supporters do not get called. They don’t have traditional telephones, when they communicate it’s on cell phones or through internet social networks. Second, when supporters do get called Ron Paul’s non-traditional message may cause false negative responses very much like the false positive responses motivated by a political correctness decorum when voters are queried about the gender, race or religion of a candidate. | |
| Daniel Frazier | December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET It’s simple, Jack. Most Ron Paul supporters are getting involved politically for the first time and and weren’t previously registered with any party. Notice how the polls usually say something along the lines of “In a poll of likely Republican voters…”? The answer to your question is that Ron Paul’s supporters aren’t being asked to participate in the offline polls. Online is a different story, as I’m sure you’ve noticed. | |
| Cyrus Etemadi | December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET Because a huge majority of the American citizens get their information from a Media that ignores Ron Paul’s rEVOLution to this day, thus they are unaware of the movement. So I hope you, Mr. Jack Cafferty, have an answer to this question: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million via an “uncontrolled” news resource such as the Internet, how come your corporation never treats him and his supporters with the respect that they deserve? We funded a Ron Paul Blimp so that he gets recognition because we have lost faith in the Media. | |
| Suhayb | December 17th, 2007 2:41 pm ET Jack, | |
| Kevin | December 17th, 2007 2:42 pm ET Jack, Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because respondents to voter polls are more mainstreamed and consistent Republican voters. Paul, with his message of freedom and liberty, has attracted a wide array of Americans who in the past have been disenfranchised by politics. This honest and humble man haa given people something to chear about: a better future. Now, it has turned into a movement, a Revolution. And Just because it hasn’t reached these “scientific polls” doesn’t mean it won’t reach the voting booths. | |
| Sophie Laurence | December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET It depends on what poll you’re referring to, Jack. If you’re referring to polls which involve random calls to past primary voters who have landline phones and time to answer a structured phone survey which only until recently included Ron Paul among the options, then yes, Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls. If you’re referring to straw polls and post-debate polls, then you’re mistaken. He’s won more straw polls around the country than any other candidate and has finished in the top three in the vast majority of them. He’s won text polls, radio polls, web polls — you name it. Only when the polls have been conducted in an open and fair manner has Ron Paul garnered higher percentages. | |
| Christopher Deal | December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET Well Jack it can be sumed up in one phrase “Human Error” Now let me elaborate, Polling companies have stated that when polling they are calling republicans that voted in the last primary. That was four years ago and alot of people have since turned 18 who they are not polling. Second they only call landlines which being in the automotive sales industry I know not alot of people have/answer landlines especially with the invention of caller id. These polls also do not include independats or 3rd parties or democrats like myself that registered republican just for the good Dr Money Bags. The worst reason which really pains me to know is the fact that Ron Paul isn’t even a choice. If you go on youtube and do a search for republican phone polling you will find a video with audio of a poller calling and the only choices you have are the Media elected(ie Mitt Romney, “Tax Hike” Mike Huckaby, Rudy “9/11″ Ghouliani, and John McCain/Thompson) And then you get the option of OTHER I didn’t know John Other was running?!? Sadly our process for choosing a president has been reduced to a popularuty contest similar to that at a Home Coming Prom to choose the Homecoming King/Queen. Aside from the fact that the Mainstream media promises that Dr Paul is a kook, fringe, longshot, no chance, waste of vote, 3rd party and any other disparraging titles that they want to give him. I’m deeply discouraged in the American Way. We now disregard policy and position and in place judge a candidate based on some of the “characters” that may support his policies and positions. What has America Become?? That should be the question of the hour. Thank you for considering my comments PS- Jack I have to thank you personally as I feel you have been one of the most fair and unbiased journalists to discuss Dr. Paul on your program | |
| Nicholas W. | December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET “The polls don’t mean anything at this point. In November and December of 2003, Kerry was polling around the same percentage as Al Sharpton. Check if you don’t believe me…” | |
| Brian | December 17th, 2007 2:45 pm ET Congressman Paul clearly has serious support from those who know of him. The problem is he doesnt get the same coverage other candidates do. Perhaps the media is to blame for Dr. Pauls relatively low numbers. The supporters of Pauls campaign are doing 90% of the legwork without much help from the mainstream media. One can only wonder if that will now change… | |
| Jason Beasley | December 17th, 2007 2:46 pm ET It is a shame when the opinions of less than one thousand neo-conservatives are allowed to deceive the freedom loving people of this once great nation. It is even more shameful that we accept these polls without question. It is this small minority, and only this minority that will be shocked come primaries. Watch his words spread hope like fire. | |
| Wesley | December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET Dear Mr. Cafferty, The only polls that show Ron Paul unfavorably are those flawed and outdated ones. The internet has risen to become the new standard by which political support are defined in this generation and Ron Paul leads on all online polls. It is just another plain and simple case that politics has not yet caught up with technology. Wesley | |
| Eric | December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET Many of Ron Paul’s supporters are under the age of 40 and only have cell phones, while polls are based on landline phones. Also, about 40% of his supporters are Independents or Democrats, so they aren’t included in the “likely Republican voter” category. Also, the turnout rate for his passionate supporters is sure to be much higher than other “typical” Republicans, meaning Ron Paul may have a real shot at winning some primaries. | |
| Mark Olsen | December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET Which polls are you talking about Jack? The ones bought and paid for by the military industial complex and reported by the very media outlets they own??Or the ones on the internet that are owned by no-one,Ron Paul continually wins hands down over and over again. | |
| Mark Hipshire | December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET Respectfully sir, I cannot explain it, and I don’t need to have to try to either. Having been a lifelong advocate of liberty, the best I can say is that _finally_, more people are awakening to the fundamental understandings that Ron Paul is so eloquently illustrating to us. We may not win this particular “battle” Sir; but the battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. More of us than ever before are now vigilant, active, and brave, and that is something that no amount of money will ever be able to stop. Beware would-be oppressors, the revolution is at hand; the revolution will not be televised. | |
| Sandra | December 17th, 2007 2:49 pm ET Jack, If Ron Paul won the presidency, it would pose a threat to every pork barrel project the federal government has created in the form of know nothing government agencies and their do nothing services. Pollsters are hand in hand with the pork, hired to promote the need for thier existence to masses. Do you think for a minute that they are going to promote Ron Paul at the expense of their masters? Yep, Jack, YEE HAA!! It’s time for a pork barrel BBQ compliments of Ron Paul - Texas style! P.S. Pollsters will need extra garlic salt. | |
| Scott Johnsson | December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET A peculiar disconnect indeed. Perhaps 10 second soundbytes promoted by quick and easy political coverage fail to cover the depth and breadth of Ron Paul’s deeply rooted principles. Perhaps those on the internet, indulged in healthy discourse and near unlimited information have unearthed the long forgotten cornerstone of this great republic. Perhaps, Jack, the truth may just really set you free. | |
| Andrew Krzynowek | December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET The polls being considered do not account for the vast amount of Paul’s supporters. Many of them have never voted for a candidate, many of them have switched parties to vote for Ron Paul. Take a look at his straw poll wins at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ These are the polls that people actually have to get out of their house for, this is a somewhat better representation of where his support lies. | |
| Dan | December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET Jack, Besides Lou Dobbs and you, I don’t have a lot of faith in the mainstream media these days; I was at the Ron Paul Boston Tea Party yesterday in the winter storm. Oh I drove up from Pennsylvanian, anyway, the energy and passion I saw yesterday for a Constitutional candidate was absolutely amazing. | |
| Cleaner44 | December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET Let’s examine the anomaly of the national polls. The only area that Ron Paul scores low in are the national polls. This begs the question, how are these polls being conducted? Telephone calls are placed to Republican voters, at home, on landlines. The voters being called are previous Republican voters from the last election cycle. These calls do not engage the voters who have registered as Republican in 2007 because of Ron Paul. These calls are to traditional Republican voters, which are only one part of the party that will be voting in the primaries. Let’s look closer at the group of traditional Republican voters that receive polling calls. Only those that are home regularly and answer such calls will be able to give their opinions. The views of regular Republican voters who are active outside the home, whether at work, at volunteer activities or children’s events when called by pollsters, will not be included. The poll will also not include disaffected registered republicans who have not voted in recent elections. Ron Paul has been creating many new Republican voters that were previously Independents, Libertarians and Democrats. These new Republicans are an undefined factor as of yet, but there are many indications that they are in fact quite a large group. Many of these undefined voters are also young and do not have home landlines. The bottom line is that the national polls are very limited in the sample of opinion that they gather. They simply are not a valid indication of the wide variety of voters that will be making their voices heard loud and clear at the Republican Presidential primaries. | |
| Pedro | December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET Those polls are nothing more than a tool to control the voters. Ron Paul’s name is left out of a lot of those polls. Why doesn’t the media talk about the straw polls that Ron Paul has dominated? National polls mean nothing. No other candidate has the support that Ron Paul has and no other Republican candidate has raised the money that Ron Paul has this quarter. If you ask me, Ron Paul is the only front runner. | |
| pat | December 17th, 2007 2:51 pm ET the people are smarter then they are portrayed. call it last minute or call it an upset the party will reel over for decades. the people nominate the candidate not cohorts. | |
| Ron | December 17th, 2007 2:52 pm ET Clearly Ron Paul is among the frontrunners in this Republican race. He leads in money, on the internet, in straw polls, and in debate victories. His showing in the polls clearly does not reflect his support, and it seems the better question to ask is ‘why don’t the polls accurately portray Ron Paul’s support?’ | |
| Daniel | December 17th, 2007 2:52 pm ET Jack, It’s pretty obvious to most of us who support Ron Paul that the traditional polls have lost a lot of credibility. Perhaps part of the reason he doesn’t make a better showing in the polls is because half of the time he’s not even included in the poll itself, only an option to choose “other”. Also, a large percentage of Ron Paul’s support comes from people who have not voted in recent years due to frustration with traditional politics. These people aren’t considered “likely Republican primary voters” by the pollsters, and therefore, aren’t polled. The political system is in for a big shock. Ron Paul is waking TONS of people up. Will you be a part of it? Daniel | |
| Erik John, Varvir | December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET Ron Paul has repeatedly stated that his name is not being included in the scientific phone polls and that he is winning almost every State GOP straw poll so you do the math? | |
| Paul | December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET Simple. People have gotten so used to being spoon feed news through sound bites via the main stream media filters. We simply except what we’re feed without asking the deeper questions but not all of us! That is why you see such high Ron Paul funding and low poll numbers. A few see the real picture and are passionate. Soon many will see it! | |
| Taylor Buchanan | December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET Jack it seems blatantly obvious that the methodology of “modern” polling needs a re-vamp. From every indication all people see are Ron Paul signs, Ron Paul supporters at rallies and Ron Paul moneybombs. How on earth could he possibly be so low in the polls you ask? Maybe a better question is how are these polls being conducted. Try to get 1200 people at a rally on a Sunday for Hillary or Rudy. Good luck. And Huckabee seems to be a media creation. Kudos for asking the question! | |
| Greg Gillette | December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET The powers to be do not like Ron Pauls message of freedom and liberty and his message that our foreign policy and the military industrial complex are completely had of control and ruining our country. The truth is a hard thing to swallow for a lot of folks, especially those making money from untruths. | |
| Doug Carkuff | December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET No comments? Somehow I don’t believe that. Well, the reason why Dr. Paul’s real support (as indicated by his amazing ability to raise money - beating all records for a single day’s fund raising) and his polling is very obvious. The polls are biased - often times leaving Dr. Paul out as a choice altogether and designed specifically to reflect the agenda of the people who commissioned the polls and the pollsters themselves - and that agenda, by and large, is to marginalize and sabotage Dr. Paul’s campaign. Look, we all know this and we all know the media itself has made it its mission to marginalize Ron Paul, so what is the point of pretending about it. The big political news on MSNBC this morning was Lieberman’s endorsement of McCain - nevermind that Ron Paul just raised more money in 24 hours than any political candidate has ever raised in the history of the world. You might think that might be interesting and important news, but apparently not and apparently, no matter how much real support Ron Paul has, the media has decided he is “marginal” and treat him that way no matter what - thereby marginalizing not merely Dr. Paul, but his views on liberty and the Constitution and all the many millions all over the world who see in Dr. Paul the first real hope for a better future for us all. The shamelessness and deceit of the media apparently knows no bounds. | |
| Ralph | December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET The polls are obviously biased, skewed or incorrect. The sheer number of donates should mean something and to suggest that anyone who donated or contributes to the campaign won’t vote in the primaries is just fullish. Also, let us not forget John Kerry who before the Iowa caucus was polling at 3%, but went on to win the Democrat nomination. | |
| sig | December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET How can Ron Paul raise 6 million dollars and receive so little coverage compared to the rest of the candidates the media is obviously pushing. Dr.Paul has the most youtube subscribers, More meetup groups then all the other candidates combined, has won the most strawpolls, most myspace fans,won all the after debate polls but one where he came in second, the most blimps,the most chat rooms,the most internet radio stations,the most UNder-reported candidate. Investigate how the “Polls” are conducted and who they are polling and you will have your answer….you’re supposed to be investigative journalists…do your jobs. | |
| Albert | December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET The Internet is a gold mine which magnifies the impact of small, widely dispersed minorities. If you can sell little razors to trim nose hairs for ten times what they’re really worth on the Internet, surely you can sell Ron Paul. | |
| Christopher | December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET Ron Paul in not higher in the polls because people do not fully understand his message. I know I did not understand how he could make all of the things he talks about work until I heard him speak fully about them. Ron Paul has a plan and though you might not agree with all of what he says, it is in the country and the media’s best interest to at least listen to what he says because he speaks more truth than any candidate I have ever heard in my lifetime. Truth is medicine and while medicine never tastes good, sometimes you have to take it to get better, right now Dr. Paul has the medicine this country needs. | |
| Matthew Niemerg | December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET This is a simple matter of understanding how the polls work. First off, these polls are only going after ‘likely’ primary voters, or those who have voted in past primaries for the GOP. If you look at the voter turnout in ‘04, for the primaries, it was around 6%. These are the people that are being called. In addition, the polls are all done via landlines. The pollsters, through no fault of their own, are ignoring the demographic that Paul’s message has hit with: the youth, the 70% of Americans who want to end the war, independents, and many people who have previously been apathetic to politics. They aren’t being asked the questions, so they aren’t being included in the polls. Hence the low poll numbers. It’s not a conspiracy or anything, just bad data acquisition. There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics. | |
| Steven | December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET Your network uses flawed polling methodology. They only contact previous Republican voters, most of which Ron Paul supporters are not. Also, only landline phones are used, and because Ron Paul has a larger youth following, and statistically the 18-30 age group mostly only uses a cell phone and not a landline, they are never contacted. It’s alright though, we know your polls are meaningless, and they don’t discourage us one bit. | |
| theproducer1776 | December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET Jack, How many times do we have to scream at the main stream media the answers to this question?! There are a few very simple answers to why he is not polling higher. Let me list them off so you can read them on air and finally get the truth out. Austin Petersen | |
| Frank Dupone | December 17th, 2007 2:57 pm ET Most of the polls are simply about name recognition. Being in the business world myself, I’ve always paid attention to the “Money” at the end of the day - as that is the biggest indication of real support, not media hype. Ron Paul’s biggest hurdle is name recognition, but with this new Fundraising Record & the Blimp - the people are about to hear. What is most suprising is that this $18+ Million hasn’t come from corporations, but from individuals wanting to change the course of politics. | |
| Ann | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET Jack, | |
| Mark Neumann | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET 85% of Ron Paul supporters are outside the mainstream polling demographic of Republicans who voted in the last primary. Romney and Giuliani will get very few primary votes from outside this demographic. Source: | |
| Lawrence | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET 1. The polls are inaccurate. 2. The media feeds us a steady stream of mistruths and propaganda. 3. Americans who have heard the message do select him. He has won a majority of all GOP straw polls. 4. The media has convinced many people that he cannot win and therefore apathy prevents many people from voting for him. 5. The media has been grossly unfair to this man and the bias shows quite clearly. 6. Many Americans are stupid and have been fooled by the leading candidates, recall that 74 million Americans voted for George Bush’s second term. 7. People who are educated by TV and many of our public schools are not going to develop the ability to think critically. For more information on Why I Support Ron Paul., see the link below. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lepard2.html Best, Larry Lepard | |
| Sandor Bors | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET Easy answer Jack. It is time to change the mainstream polls! They obviously do not coincide with what informed Americans think and they think enough of Ron Paul to donate money, donate their time, and donate their energy to support an idea whose time has come. | |
| Scott Swingle | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET I believe the better question here is “Why are the polls not more accurately reflecting Ron Paul’s support?” | |
| Travis Steward | December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET It’s simple Jack: the polls are wrong. | |
| Rain Anderson | December 17th, 2007 2:59 pm ET Because the polls you’re referring to attempt to query folks who have voted Republican, and Ron Paul’s base draws heavily from those who have shied away from the party or were not previously politically active. I think you should take a look at straw polls and post-debate polls. But of course it doesn’t help that big media largely ignores him. I’m a man from a country most Americans probably never heard of and I’m rooting for Ron Paul. And when he wins, hell, I might just move to the US. But for now, it’s painful to watch how the American big media attempts to control your presidential elections. What Ron Paul’s supporters did yesterday was history, pure and simple. They broke all records and most of the media barely even mentions it. If Rudy or Hillary were to raise even half of what Ron Paul’s supporters raised yesterday, it would be big news across your country for days. But not in the case of Ron Paul. No, we can’t have that now can we.. | |
| NickB | December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET 1) Who voted in the last primary? Think about the voters who voted for Bush in the last primary. These are the only people considered “likely voters” in most polls. Even if you supported Bush, like I did in 2000, the war kept many of us home. We had no enthusiasm for Bush. Today we have anger and distrust for the man, and we have found in Paul an honest sincere champion of the Constitution. He gives us a third choice… we don’t have to leave because of a false fear of Islamo-fascism or because we are losing, the third choice is that we didn’t follow the founding father’s advice–and we’re strong enough as a people to admit our mistake and come home! | |
| Jeff-Rhode Island | December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET There are many reasons. The polls don’t reach most of the people who support Ron Paul. I am registered as “Unaffiliated”, my wife has never voted before, and many in my MeetUp group were registered Democrats before becoming Ron Paul supporters. As always, Ron Paul speaks the truth when he says “Freedom IS Popular!” | |
| Chad Byrd | December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET Ron Paul’s poll numbers are low because the polls don’t accurately measure his support. If the media use flawed poll numbers as the only metric for potential success on election day and ignore donation statistics of individuals, they’re forming their own foregone conclusion through reporting of those polls numbers. Just examine the disparity between Paul & McCain’s levels of media coverage to see that there are double- & triple-standards at play in the media when considering polls and donations. We haven’t heard a peep about Paul winning nearly half of the straw polls he’s been in, which account for people motivated to vote. That’s all fine, though — Paul’s low poll numbers give the competition false security. We’ll be out at 90% strength. | |
| Ross Johnson | December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET I think it’s fairly clear that our current polling system is simply out of date. Current pollsters seem to ignore the inevitable; Americans have become indoctrinated into an internet society. Internet savvy Americans are not only young college students, or 30 year old spammers living out of their Parent’s basement. But rather individuals of all ages and political affiliations have begun to rely on the internet for their daily news. However, a majority of the “reliable polling” is still performed over landlines. In an era of expanding technology a majority the American public have abandoned their landlines in favor of more practical means of technology, such as cell phones. Conversely, internet polling is labeled as unsubstantial and unreliable. Money talks in politics and Dr. Paul’s fundraising capabilities show that he is not only a viable candidate, but a top contender for the Republican nomination. Yet, sadly the main-stream media would rather focus on the meaningless endorsements of Sen. John McCain, than even acknowledge the clear will of the American people. | |
| George | December 17th, 2007 3:01 pm ET Jack, Well he should be higher in polls if the polls are legitimate. 50 OR 60 percent of republicans are not sure who they are voting for. Also the media has a lot to do with why he’s not higher in polls. He raised that money from hard working american people not big corupt corperations that will do anything to get there pupits elected so they can pass any laws they want to make the slaves that we are right now. Also because the media wants to talk about other candidates and will not mention how our country is adding $1.8 billion dollars a day on top of the $9.2 TRILLION dollars ( AND THAT’S TRILLON WITH A T ) that we owe. They are more concerened about what dirt they can find on the canidates then to figure out how this country can get out of the mess we are in. | |
| Richard Shank | December 17th, 2007 3:02 pm ET Perhaps the better question is, with all the excitement about Ron Paul and the record-breaking fund raising, why are the other candidate so high in the polls? | |
| Ashley Jordan | December 17th, 2007 3:02 pm ET Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because of the fact that the people that are polled are Republicans who voted for Bush in the last election. If Democrats, Independants, and Republicans were polled then he would be a lot higher. I am in a Ron Paul meetup group that has 600+ members and atleast half didn’t vote in the last election or are Democrat/Independant. Think about this though-all 600+ members of the group will vote for Ron Paul and will also campaign for him for FREE. His meetup groups equal 80,000+ people and that’s 80,000+ people working to tell others about Ron Paul and the message of freedom. Thanks! | |
| Sam Johnson | December 17th, 2007 3:03 pm ET Jack, The reason why Ron Paul is not higher in the national polls is because they poll people who have land line telephones; these are the same people who are more likely to subscribe to the old media for their news: television networks, printed papers, etc. Ron Paul’s message of a principled conservatism: that of personal, financial, and national freedom and security has drawn support from unmeasurable segments of the population, including Democrats and previously apathetic citizens. | |
| Brandon Yates | December 17th, 2007 3:04 pm ET Ron Paul is not higher in polls because he is not a media appointed candidate. He is hardly mentioned in the media, and when he is, he is often painted as a fringe candidate who has no chance. Of course, your program, Jack, is one of the few exceptions. Brandon | |
| Harvey Russell | December 17th, 2007 3:04 pm ET Two reasons. The MSM has basically determined Ron Paul can not win, and the Big Government Nanny Staters are deathly afraid of him. A Ron Paul comes along possibly once in a lifetime. I’ve been blessed to have seen two; Barry Goldwater in ‘64 and Ron Paul this year. | |
| Ogiar | December 17th, 2007 3:05 pm ET Because the media has ignored him, laughed at him, and said “He can’t win!”. The good news is that frustration with media coverage for Paul directly transfers into money for his campaign and an intense viral grassroots effort. So it doesn’t really matter what the media does one way or another. Paul’s message is the same one this country was founded on and people are hungry for it. As the economy falters they will grow hungrier. The British couldn’t stop it and corporate media is not going to stop it either. Thanks Jack., you da man! | |
| Matt Black | December 17th, 2007 3:06 pm ET Jack, | |
| Hank Beasley | December 17th, 2007 3:06 pm ET QUESTION ASKED: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million in one day, how come he’s not higher in the polls? ANSWER: Sincerely, Hank | |
| Eric Yingling | December 17th, 2007 3:06 pm ET Mr. Cafferty, As an active duty member of the United States Marine Corps, and a veteran of the war in Iraq, I can only say that Ron Paul has a lot of support from those of us in uniform. Out of everyone I have talked to, none of us have ever been contacted by any polling agencies for our opinions. Most of us are previously unregistered voters, and I think Dr. Paul has tapped into a large source of similarly-positioned individuals, which will not reflect on a traditional poll. I would like to point out how Dr. Paul has more actual “boots on the ground” truly motivated supporters at almost every event, when compared to the supporters of other campaigns. Dr. Paul’s supporters don’t have to be coaxed, bribed, or bussed in by the official campaign, either. Thank you for the opportunity to voice a response, Eric | |
| Curtis Ehler | December 17th, 2007 3:09 pm ET A better question would be, “If the pre-primary polls are so bad at predicting candidates in competitive primary races (such as in 2004 when John Kerry emerged from the second-tier to become the choice among Democrats), why are we paying attention to them at all?” –Curtis Ehler | |
| Matt Black - Elgin, Illinois | December 17th, 2007 3:09 pm ET Jack, | |
| Angie | December 17th, 2007 3:10 pm ET Jack, The polls? Im waiting on the voting booths!!. Ron Paul has more support than any other presidential candidate of my near 40 years! The media has far underestimated the power this man has or they are too afraid to admit it. Which is it ? The people have controll of this one Jack! The cats out of the bag! Goodbye neoCon world. Hello Freedom! | |
| Phil (Austin Texas) | December 17th, 2007 3:10 pm ET Besides the steroid using Romney, who bulked up his campaign to the tune of $17 million of his own money, the others will be cash anemic come mid January and drop out. Ron Paul will be the next to take over that front position, just in time for the primaries. The others treat this race like a sprint, the Ron Paul campaign is running it like a marathon. Watch those front runners become too winded to finish the race. | |
| Jay | December 17th, 2007 3:11 pm ET Most of the main stream media tries to ignore or downplay him. When he does get questions in a debate, they are always designed to make him seem like a less serious candidate. If the media would give him fair coverage and allow Americans everywhere to hear his message, he would be doing MUCH better in the polls. | |
| Dennis | December 17th, 2007 3:12 pm ET Ron Paul raises so much money from so many individual Americans — beating competitors who raise primarily from corporations and unions — because the excitement of human freedom beats the cynicism of self-interested lobbyists. | |
| John Stevens | December 17th, 2007 3:12 pm ET Because of the lack of media exposure. The “Old Media” still controls much of the information that Americans receive and for some reason information about Dr. Paul is not disseminated in the same manner or in the same volume as it is in the case of the other candidates. I thank you Jack for at least asking the question and I hope that perhaps someone on your end might answer this question: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million via an “uncontrolled” news resource such as the Internet, how come most of the corporate “controlled” news resources don’t treat him and his supporters with the respect that they deserve? | |
| Richard | December 17th, 2007 3:12 pm ET The reason Ron Paul is not higher in the polls, even after being able to raise more than $6 million in one day (for over $18 million this quarter alone), is actually several fold: 1. When moderating debates, the media does not typically give equal time to all participants in the debate (the exception to this was PBS’s Republican Debate many months ago), or will interject loaded questions or bias (in the form of laughter or ridiculing demeanor) into the process. When this unfair practice happens, the audience and general public does not get an equal or fair representation of the lesser-known candidates. The result is that Ron Paul gets less subsequent media exposure. 2. The polls themselves are rarely fair. It is my understanding that when asking participants for their choice, Ron Paul’s name is often left out of the list of possible choices (unless he is listed under the “Other” category). How is he supposed to do well if his name isn’t specifically listed? I think a fair poll would list each of the major candidates (and by major I mean all of the candidates that have participated in the majority of the televised debates so far). And in doing so, should randomize the order in which the candidates are listed so that any bias from order would be removed. 3. Also, the polls generally only ask a small set of previously registered republicans who have participated in the previous primary for their opinions. Ron Paul’s message of freedom, prosperity and peace is a very popular and far reaching message, even prompting many Democrats and Independents to pledge to vote for him (I have personally talked to several). Also, the polls generally exclude younger adults who have never voted or other adults who have been apathetic to the whole process, until now. Dr. Ron Paul has done an excellent job of reconnecting with these people through an understanding of what the real concerns are for the common person and has found substantial support among a varied group of people, not all of them registered Republicans who are likely to be asked for their preferred candidate via phone polls. The shear fact that Dr. Ron Paul can raise over $6 million dollars in one day (and beat his $12 million goal for the quarter, for which he is now over $18 million) is a truly remarkable feat and should show just how much support these traditional polls are missing by their current polling practices. Additionally, of the many straw polls taken all over the country, Dr. Paul has placed very well is most of them (see http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ ) and has taken first place in many of them. sometimes in landslide victories. I feel that Dr. Paul, by continuing to increase his fund raising each quarter (actually doubling it each time until this quarter where he may quadruple the previous), is now a top tier candidate (and actually has been for some time). What other candidate has raised so much money in one day? If the amount of money raised and grassroots support (both of which Dr. Ron Paul has much) are not valid indicators or a top tier candidacy, what is? It’s time for the media to give Ron Paul the exposure and coverage that he deserves as a front runner. | |
| Ben Schmidt | December 17th, 2007 3:12 pm ET The better question is, if he is ranking so low, why is he able to pull $6 million in one day? Now compare the media coverage of this record-setting day to any of the other candidates, and how nearly every news story has to include ‘longshot’ or ‘has no chance’ and you’ll get your answer. The American people see a good man being shut out, and they’re fighting for him. | |
| Harris Durrani | December 17th, 2007 3:13 pm ET Jack, I think you should be in a better position to answer that question than us. Think about it if Hillary Clinton says something about Obama’s drug usage that news spreads like wildfire on the Mainstream media and has been on air for almost a week everyday. Ron Paul literally has to break World Records to get a 30 second news coverage in any of the major corporate news stations. Ron Paul and Barrack Obama are the only two candidates who when talk to a nation don’t talk as if they are talking to a specific group of people like the other Republicans do. I feel Ron Paul is talking to me, talking to you , talking to everyone thats why there are far more Democrats who are now turning Republicans to vote for Ron Paul. Thats why there are far more Independents now voting for Ron Paul, far more Libertarians, Liberals, Conservatives. All these Candidates talk about finding a common ground to communicate yet Ron Paul is The only candidate who has found common ground where alot of people from every party come together and agree with whats happening. Jack you want to know what proper conservatism is? Ron Paul has raised almost 19 million dollars this Quarter and he is not in DEBT. Thats Fiscal Conservatism, thats how you make money and raise funds. Not borrow money from lobbyists and other big corporations for your Campaign like Rudy, Clinton, Romney, McCain etc. They are all hypocrites and i am sure you know that. Thank You | |
| Neil A. In New Hampshire | December 17th, 2007 3:13 pm ET I live in New Hampshire, and have a land line. I’ve been called now for four separate polls. Including the Time poll back a week or two ago. THREE of FOUR polls did not include Ron Paul! The fourth poll that had Ron Paul buried him beneath several extra button presses (it was an automated poll). His exclusion doesn’t make sense when you consider that Hunter and Trancredo make it onto more polls than Paul. That’s how it is here in NH. | |
| jeff | December 17th, 2007 3:14 pm ET Jack, Many polls only poll voters that voted in the last primary election, or likely primary voters. In the case of the last republican primary, Bush ran unopposed, so only the hardcore Bush supporters turned out, mostly the religious right. This may also explain Huckabee’s overnight surge in these same polls, even though he has raised very little money. Many of Ron Paul’s supporter are new to politics, never voted before, or were too young to vote during the last election cycle. In addition, many of these supporters are more high tech, using cellular phones only vs. landlines, and VOIP for long distance. This typically excludes them from traditional telephone polling. Conversely, Ron Paul wins every internet polls and text message poll. Originally, these wins were dismissed as spam or high tech spam bots. Well Jack, spam bots do not raise $ 26 million YTD with an average donation of $75.00. Those numbers represent real people. Mark Twain said, ” I hate to make predictions, especially on the future”. However, I predict that with the level of support of hundreds of thousands of very motivated supporters, there will be some very surprised faces once the votes are counted. | |
| Brett Floren | December 17th, 2007 3:14 pm ET Ron Paul is ahead in the polls - at least the important ones where people use their credit cards to cast their ballots. | |
| Chris | December 17th, 2007 3:14 pm ET There are many reasons, but one that stands out are the methods that are used to survey the population. How do they poll individuals? Is it random, if so, based on what sample population? Do they use past republican voters? Do they use past election cycle voters? Do they use registered republicans, democrats or independents? Just who are these people that are being polled? Well, one thing is for certain, they are not reaching Ron Paul supporters. A large percentage of Ron Paul supporters have never voted, have recently changed parties, or have become so disgusted with the same old same old, that they simply do not vote. So basically the reason that Ron Paul’s numbers are so low in the Polls is because his supporters are not being polled. I think everyone is in for a very big suprise starting in January. I’m sure it is going to have alot of people scratching their heads, wondering why they have not heard more about this fine Dr. named Ron Paul. | |
| Jeff in Virginia | December 17th, 2007 3:14 pm ET Ron Paul is not showing strongly in the polls as much of the coverage on him comes with a very negative bias. More often then not, a sound blurb on Ron Paul goes something like this. “Ron Paul raised more money then anyone else in history, too bad he has no chance as a fringe candidate” The so called “front runner” candidates are propped up by national polls that do not include Ron Paul, and a constant stream of media attention. | |
| Josh Fair | December 17th, 2007 3:16 pm ET Recent figures continue to show that about 70% of America is against the Iraq War, and about 40% of Republicans are against the Iraq War……..Dr. Paul is the ONLY candidate in the GOP that matches up with this issue. Either the nation has changed it’s view on the Iraq/Iran War(s) or the poll numbers are off. | |
| Casey W | December 17th, 2007 3:16 pm ET ITS TRUE JACK! Us Paulites really like the way you approach news. | |
| Johnathan | December 17th, 2007 3:16 pm ET He is high in many polls,in example, straw polls and online polls. Just not traditional land line phone surveys. No one I know (even my grandparents) has a land line. The question is, why is he ignored by the media when he has the most outstanding, principled and unwavering voting records of anyone else running? It’s like the American people are supposed to like a candidate just because they we’re a governor somewhere, happened to be the mayor of a city that was attacked, or because I’ve seen him before on Law and Order. It’s a petty popularity contest without substance. | |
| Will | December 17th, 2007 3:17 pm ET Simple. Those polls are wrong. Look at state straw polls, Ron Paul has one most of them (25). Ron Paul’s support comes from all walks of life and polling companies call registered republicans from the 2004 election. The numbers only capture a fraction of his real support. | |
| Debra Amorino - Long Branch, NJ | December 17th, 2007 3:17 pm ET What is impressive is the fact that Ron Paul and his official campaign actually did NOT raise over 6 million dollars yesterday….the grassroots movement did! We donated yesterday to a ’cause’, not an individual. Ron Paul is merely a ‘face’ to this revolution and his loyal followers are living proof this country is in serious need of a powerful 3rd party to offset the ’same old, same old’ politics we’ve been force-fed through the main stream media. | |
| Kirk | December 17th, 2007 3:18 pm ET Jack, What polls are you talking about? With the corporate media circus pushing there own agenda, how in the world would you think that a candidate like Ron Paul is going to get the recognition that he deserves? | |
| Jim FreedomWon | December 17th, 2007 3:18 pm ET Great question. I’ve been following the primary debates more closely than any of the past 9 presidential elections that I’ve participated in. Usually voted for the Candidate and not the Party. This year it is clear to me that the entire News Media Industry is exerting enormous control over the election process and has for the past 4 elections. Given that any reasonably intelligent voter has complete access to every Candidates political/personal history, and we are faced with the fact that Ron Paul has accomplished as much if not more that any other Candidate, there are only two answers to why he is not higher in the polls. 1) The polling proccess and procedures are faulty because they only are connecting with Republican voters that voted in 2004 and have landlines. My experience with Ron Paul supporters is that every time that the press states that: “Ron Paul cannot win the election” they go out and get ten more voters. For this may God have mercy on Dr. Ron Paul. Oh by the way, I recently registered as a Republican for the Primaries. | |
| Frank McSorley | December 17th, 2007 3:18 pm ET If any other candidate had raised over 6 Million in a single day it would have been the top story on all networks. Mainstream media has been downplaying all of Paul’s accomplishments since day one. He scares the big corporations that own the news channels. | |
| Jena | December 17th, 2007 3:18 pm ET Hi Jack, Thanks for offering fair reporting on Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not doing better in the polls because the mainstream media ignores him, laughs at him or labels him as “long shot”, “dark horse” or “fringe candidate”. Many Americans are simply too stupid to do their own research on the candidates and they go to the polls like sheep and vote for who the media tells them they should. Also - Ron Paul is not even listed in many of the polls or he is listed as “other”. How fair is that? How can one be expected to get any poll percentages if they are not even listed as a choice. Thanks! | |
| Greg from PA | December 17th, 2007 3:19 pm ET Ron Paul could be the best qualified person to get the U.S. out of the mess that the past thirty some years of inept and corporate bought leadership has gotten us into. Unfortuantely, too many obstacles block his nomination. Firstly, he’s a Republican who’s ideas fall outside the neo-conservative mindset of the born-again Christian, right-wing base. Secondly, while he has strong support from the well-educated internet set, he lacks corporate and special interest backing the provide big buck and vocal supporters. Thirdly, while he may appeal to independant voters, only New Hampshire includes Independants in their primary so many who would vote for him are disenfranchised. Lastly, he has the charisma of sandpaper, lacking the folksy rejoinders of Hackabee and the smooth glibness of Romney and his speach writers and debate coaches should be fired. | |
| Dennis Nielsen | December 17th, 2007 3:19 pm ET Are you referring to the polls that target “likely Republican voters”? And , yes, I gave my nickel’s worth to Paul’s campaign on December 16th – | |
| Tara B | December 17th, 2007 3:20 pm ET Landline phones are becoming obsolete. They are no longer representative of the population as a whole. It is more accurate to gauge support by looking at fundraising, straw polls, and the like. I am confident that his will be shown to be true during the elections. The world is changing, and its about time that the media caught up! | |
| Jeff Cran | December 17th, 2007 3:21 pm ET Simple answer to a simple question… Ron Paul isn’t higher in the main stream media polls because the powers that be, the powerful and rich people that own these organizations, don’t want him to be. We have nearly lost total control of this whole process. | |
| Dan | December 17th, 2007 3:21 pm ET Because often times Paul is not listed on the Pollsters questionnaire. Doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that is going to affect the results. | |
| Dave | December 17th, 2007 3:21 pm ET Take a look at who is being polled, and the questions being asked. You’ll find your answer. Many polls call “likely Republican voters”. Who is likely to vote? People who voted in the last Republican primary in which Bush ran largely unopposed. With no real choices, the people who did vote in those primaries were Bush supporters. Given that polling population, it’s a wonder Ron Paul gets any numbers at all. Ironically, it is the effort to get the most accurate polling data that is actually distorting the polling itself. | |
| Simon Jester | December 17th, 2007 3:21 pm ET Jack — please play this audio file on the air, which shows that Ron Paul is not even on many of the “official” polls. It’s a recorded automated telephone primary poll: http://bhday.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/anti-paul-polling2.wav | |
| john | December 17th, 2007 3:22 pm ET Why isn’t Ron Paul higher in the polls ? I would say because the polls are certainly in favor of other candidates and in other polls he is left out altogether . It would seem that the people may believe in the idea of freedom that this country was built upon, but the power structure that runs it do not . And as Carl Rove said we decide what reality is . This is another good example of them trying. But with the polling numbers voted with $ we seen at Ron Paul’s website this weekend , they can say what they will but the Ron Paul message and his movement is reality. | |
| Charlie | December 17th, 2007 3:23 pm ET Plain and simple, the changes that Ron Paul and his supporters want to see in this country do not serve the best interests of the media, and because of that, we often see him being portrayed as a longshot candidate with little support and crazy ideas. Of course he’s going to suffer in polls when he is being treated unfairly and has his stances on the issues left unexplained or manipulated to make him come off like a kook. Breaking fundraising records isn’t something that someone with little support and crazy ideas can accomplish. | |
| Dr. Daniel Keane | December 17th, 2007 3:24 pm ET There are polls, damned polls and then there are scientific polls. | |
| JohnW | December 17th, 2007 3:24 pm ET Mr. Cafferty, I would like to see that question directed at those who pay for and conduct the polls. The people have spoken for Dr. Paul with their pocketbooks. The number of donators should be as impressive, if not more so, as the $6 million dollar figure. We don’t all have a lot of money, so a lot of Ron Paul supporters had to donate to in order to reach that figure. | |
| Tammy :) | December 17th, 2007 3:26 pm ET Because too many people in office or places of control are afraid of his message. If more media would just report on the facts and not involve their personal opinions or the personal opinions of the owners of the media, he would have just as much name recognition as the rest of the people running. Thank you for having a forum for this question. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!! Go Ron Paul! | |
| Virginia - Boca Raton, FL | December 17th, 2007 3:26 pm ET Jack, Your question about Ron Paul raises another question. At this time, there have been 139 comments to your Ron Paul question, yet only 7 comments on the McCain question and only 13 on the CIA Tapes question. Why do you think it is that 87% of the total comments to these three questions are being made by people who are interested in and taking the time to respond to the Ron Paul question. | |
| Welid | December 17th, 2007 3:27 pm ET That’s because he tends to follow the ideals of the Founding Fathers. It seems the media just don’t like a modern day Thomas Jefferson and, as a result, ignore him. | |
| Patricia | December 17th, 2007 3:27 pm ET 1. Liberman gave John McCain an endorsement & the media thinks that’s more important. | |
| Susan in Michigan | December 17th, 2007 3:28 pm ET I am a registered voter, not a first time voter by any stretch of the imagination, and while my Republican Congressman seems to have no trouble locating my land line phone number, I haven’t been called to participate in any poll which included Dr. Ron Paul as a choice. I think perhaps the pollsters need to actually consistently present Ron Paul as a choice before we can expect to see any statistical improvement. | |
| Rick | December 17th, 2007 3:28 pm ET What has happened is that there is some form of at least semi-organized popular movement that “liberty minded” people are involved in - the Ron Paul rEVOLution! Organization has its effects. It means that you discover that you’re not alone. Others have the same thoughts that you do. You can reinforce your thoughts and learn more about what you think and believe. The Ron Paul rEVOLution is a very informal movement, not like a membership organization, just a mood that involves internet interaction among people. It has a very noticeable effect. That’s the danger of spreading the “message of liberty”: If an organization can develop, if people are no longer just glued to the tube, you may have all these funny thoughts arising in their heads, like sickly inhibitions against the use of military force. That has to be overcome, we are seeing that process unfold in the “old media”, but the “old media” is dying, dying hard but dying. The Ron Paul rEVOLution is effectively bypassing the media who is “at death’s door” and with it the will of the “military industrial complex”. It’s a fight – servant against master. Do you think the master is worried about hand feeding the rabble fictitious “poll numbers”? | |
| Ted Minnard | December 17th, 2007 3:28 pm ET He’s behind because MSM likes to concentrate on the leaders. Further, he receives very little opportunity to speak in the debates. There is no doubt in my mind of media bias throughout any given broadcast day. Mr Paul also has a little difficulty in speaking, as a result, he sometimes comes across as a crackpot, which he surely is NOT. When you listen to Ron Paul, you have to read between the lines, because his use of words has a tendency to cover a lot of territroy. It appears however that Ron Paul has pretty much the same approach to government as our founding fathers did. The two main political machines are projecting that old time principals, practices, integrity and foundations of America are passe’. Ron Paul depicts an America we should have that we have strayed from. No one seems to understand that . | |
| Bryan Andersen - South Bend, IN | December 17th, 2007 3:29 pm ET The polls do not reflect reality, that is the only logical and obvious answer. You cannot raise that much money from ordinary Americans in such a short span of time if you only have the support that the polls show you having. It is impossible. | |
| James Schroeder | December 17th, 2007 3:29 pm ET I’ve noticed over the years, Jack, that presidential primary polls taken in the couple of months before the first primary have very little to do with the actual vote. So, a better question might be: Why do news organizations relentlessly report on these polls as if they actually mean something? It would serve the voting public better to do more in-depth coverage of the candidates’ views on the role of federal government, understanding of economics, foreign policy approaches, etc. Polls are easy. Serious reporting on Dr. Paul’s Austrian economics approach vs. Giuliani’s Keynesian approach is more difficult, but maybe if the American people were treated to intelligent political coverage, we wouldn’t elect so many stupid politicians. | |
| Ferris | December 17th, 2007 3:30 pm ET The powers that be would rather have any democrat elected as opposed to Paul! | |
| Cary Abrell | December 17th, 2007 3:30 pm ET It’s important to remember that Ron Paul did not raise any of that 6 million dollars. It was done at a grassroots level by a diverse collection of people. And Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls because the people polled are those who have voted Republican in prior elections and the number of people polled doesn’t even represent a tenth of a percent of the nation’s voting age population. And to think that everyone watching TV is suckered into believing these polls have any worth! Pathetic. | |
| Robert Cranford | December 17th, 2007 3:32 pm ET I left my office for lunch today and what did I see hovering above my building? A giant blimp with Ron Paul’s name plastered to the side of it, easily read from hundreds of yards below. The joy that this brought me was indescribable. Its that feeling that gets me excited about Ron Paul. | |
| Brewskie | December 17th, 2007 3:33 pm ET I have a family member who received a telephone poll where Paul was NOT included. It seems fair to say that not all polls are being held fairly and without bias. I would not be surprised to learn that most polls put out several variations for one reason or other and inadvertently skew results from accurately exposing his support. When Paul has shown he is in first place, or the top three, in virtually every metric of support, from straw polls (which he is in first place with the most wins of all Republican candidates) to fundraising and rally size, yet only the polls produced by the media show him with little support, something tells me that the polls are not accurate and are not reflecting the true scale his support. | |
| Robert Benson | December 17th, 2007 3:33 pm ET Ron Paul is polling low for a number of factors such as lack of inclusion and unscientific polling methods. Polls are the equivalent of the “spin-room” after a debate. Full of useless, unprovable information to appease the wind bags that need something to talk about in order to remain employed due to their lack of any discernible skill. | |
| Gary | December 17th, 2007 3:34 pm ET Hillary promises to give everybody everything they will ever need. Rudy tells everybody who is scared that he will kill the evil Islamofascists and protect us all. This is what the governing classes have tricked people into believing. Ron Paul just tells the truth. It will take time before people will be able to hear it again. It has been so long, most people wouldn’t recognize the truth if it came down their chimney. | |
| Bill | December 17th, 2007 3:34 pm ET Jack I think it is because he doesn’t fit the mold of either party. I think if the was to run as a third party candidate you would see just what a threat he would be to both parties. He is a candidate that doesn’t leave you guessing on where he stands on the issues. He doesn’t flip flop on the issues and he has a record in Congress to prove that. To have those qualities in a candidate today is unheard of. There are some things I disagree with him about, but I clearly know what he is all about and you got to respect that. - Bill, Quarryville, Pennsylvania | |
| Shelley | December 17th, 2007 3:35 pm ET Dear Jack, One of the reasons that Dr. Ron Paul isn’t polling higher in the polls is because our senior republicans haven’t done their homework. I am a baby boomer and researched Dr. Paul’s views on the Internet. I feel that most senior citizens are not computer savvy enough to get this information from the web and have to rely on the MSM to educated them on Dr. Paul’s positions. Let’s face it our senior citizens may not own a computer but they have a land line! | |
| David | December 17th, 2007 3:36 pm ET Why do we have 700 bases in 130 countries but we can’t pacify a bunch of ragtag radical Muslims? It’s the same reason Ron Paul’s poll numbers don’t match his support. The method is wrong and a new approach is needed. | |
| Jared Austin | December 17th, 2007 3:36 pm ET The “scientific” polls that the media tend to rely on so much are simply not accurate, and that fact is unfortunately ignored or suppressed by most. There are many flaws in the way the polls are conducted that are obvioius to anyone who is willing to do a little research. The result is that the voter “sample” is extremely narrow, and does not represent accurately the intentions of those who will be voting next year. The $18 million that Ron Paul has raised in the last 2 1/2 months is real, and it came from real people like me who will vote for him when the time comes. Maybe a better question to ask is why the so-called front runners who are “leading in the polls” are unable to raise more money? | |
| gilliganscorner | December 17th, 2007 3:36 pm ET Jack, The reason for that is Old Media (CNBC, Fox News, CNN and the other massive conglomerates) are actively suppressing his campaign and message. Additionally, pollsters are jerry-rigging their questions to exclude asking people about Ron Paul: Here is an example of the typical phone polls conducted Ron Paul online polls have been consistently being pulled from Old Media sites, because they didn’t like the results. Your own Allan Wastler admitted it here. In addition, John Howard wrote a supporting letter for his colleague here Or when Ron Paul won the Nevada Straw Poll, MSNBC headlined their report: “Romney loses NV Straw Poll” - that is like announcing “Kerry loses Presidential Election”. ABC’s John Stossel (on 20/20) does an interview with Ron Paul, but instead of airing it to television, it is confined to the Web. Yet we get to see Barbara Walters do a stomach turning interview with Rudy Guiliani. Why? As a result of mainstream media ensuring that the populace remains ignorant , Ron Paul supporters must turn to the Internet to communicate, share ideas, and rally support for their candidate. The Internet is not controlled - yet. Yesterday, Ron Paul Raises 6 million dollars (and mainstream is so quick to point out “online”) and what do we see on the Front Page of CNN’s politic site (as of right now)? “McCain picks up key endorsement from Lieberman”. Even by CNN’s standards, a candidate raising 6 million dollars is a heck of alot more interesting than that. Yes, you do mention Ron Paul’s success as a side story, but isn’t it funny how Ron Paul is always delegated as a side story by the mainstream media? Ugh. | |
| jack dacosta | December 17th, 2007 3:36 pm ET Its pretty simple Jack 4.2 million one day, 6.2million plus next fund raiser 18mil.plus so far in 4th quarter, put one of the C.F.R canidates (basically everyone else running for president) would equal high poll #s that simple………….. | |
| Tony | December 17th, 2007 3:37 pm ET How will he rise in the poll, when no one knows who he is, and no major news network spending more than 5 minutes covering him? | |
| Shelley | December 17th, 2007 3:37 pm ET Dear Jack, One of the reasons that Dr. Ron Paul isn’t polling higher in the polls is because our senior republicans haven’t done their homework. I am a baby boomer and researched Dr. Paul’s views on the Internet. I feel that most senior citizens are not computer savvy enough to get this information from the web and have to rely on the MSM to educated them on Dr. Paul’s positions. Let’s face it our senior citizens may not own a computer but they have a land line! Shelley | |
| Tom Gregory | December 17th, 2007 3:37 pm ET The polling numbers may appear to be low. These are based on active republicans from the past elections. Yet his gatherings have crowds sometimes in excess of 5,000 people, from all walks of life. He wins the majority of straw polls taken. I believe Ron Paul will suprise a few GOPs with his showings in some of these upcoming primaries. | |
| Nathan Key | December 17th, 2007 3:39 pm ET I think there’s three primary reasons that Paul’s numbers haven’t gone up: The first is that these polls target “likely republican voters.” Since a big chunk of Paul’s support is from independent and disenfranchised voters, they won’t be called, even though there’s a large number who are switching parties and about to vote for the first time. The second is that Ron Paul’s name isn’t widely discussed by the media and he isn’t invited on major networks as often as other candidates. And when he is mentioned, it’s always with the tag-line that he’ll never win. It’s really hard to overcome that sort of negative airtime and I think he’s polling pretty well considering. The third is that there are a number of telephone polls that require you to pick an “other candidate” in order to choose Ron Paul. The average respondent won’t work that hard in order to answer a telephone call that’s already intruding into their dinner time. | |
| John | December 17th, 2007 3:40 pm ET A valid question. Given poll’s historical inaccuracies, It seems to me that poll “results” should be questioned more. Perhaps the question should be: ” How much integrity is their in polling?” It’s no secret that good polsters can formulate questions to swing trends towards a desired end. Isn’t it then fair to expect the results to be similarly skewed? Most Polsters aren’t philanthropists. They do it to earn thier clients continued business and for MONEY. Their clients MAY BE unbiased philanthropists, but many are not . I would suggest those that aren’t , expect a return on their investment. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one.. | |
| Dan H | December 17th, 2007 3:40 pm ET Just look at the e mails Jack do you think Hillary or any of the other candidates would get this response? America wake up and vote for a candidate you like ,not one that you dislike the least. Ron Paul is the first candidate I ever gave money to and I am 64. All of the other candidates took my money after they got in. | |
| Erin Moore, Elizabethtown KY | December 17th, 2007 3:41 pm ET The people who are polled are “likely” republican primary voters. Many of his Quarter 4 donors have never voted in a primary election, and therefore will not be contacted for polling purposes. Also, many of us have only cell phones as 24% of Americans do now. These lines are not called for polling purposes. Hundrens of thousands have donated. We are passionate and we will vote. Call us. Erin Moore | |
| Donna | December 17th, 2007 3:41 pm ET The same reason your not high in the polls Jack…. Your names’ not in them. | |
| B Reyes | December 17th, 2007 3:41 pm ET The polls are completely flawed. First, they only include registered Republican voters that voted in the last primary– Which is only 6% of the entire party. Second, they don’t poll democratic, libertarian and independent voters that Dr Paul’s bringing in for the primary– many are switching parties just for him. Third, he has sizable support from younger voters, who don’t have land line phones but cell phones, which are not called for polling. Lastly, the pollers usually don’t even include Dr Paul as a choice. He has much bigger numbers than what are being reported. | |
| Grant | December 17th, 2007 3:41 pm ET Because the days of the few controlling what 300 million people think are over. The traditional media and the pollsters are the dinosaurs of the Information Age, and the irony is they don’t even know it. The are becoming irrelevant as quickly as the land line telephones they use to divine what the country is thinking. | |
| Garcia | December 17th, 2007 3:42 pm ET What do you mean? Ron Paul is higher in the polls. He has won most post-debate web and text polls, and has dominated the straw polls. Which polls are you referring to? Are you talking about those “national” polls that sometimes don’t even include Ron Paul’s name? The ones who don’t take into account young people and people who never voted before, thus eliminating most of the Ron Paul votes? I think it’s safe to say that we can multiple Ron Paul’s numbers by at least, 2, based on the things that I mentioned. | |
| Alan Ngai | December 17th, 2007 3:43 pm ET Jack, it simple, . The sampling size is just too small, 1000 people and we are suppose to expect that to represent the views of all american, that is just worst kind of statistics. | |
| Joel in Houston | December 17th, 2007 3:43 pm ET Instead of waiting at home for pollsters to call us we make our voices heard with cash! Can a poll measure passion? If you think your favorite candidate is likely to win, will you necessarily bother going out to vote? What about if you know your favorite candidate NEEDS your vote for him to have any chance of winning? Ron Paul supporters will show up at election booths, whether they are polled or not. | |
| Ra | December 17th, 2007 3:44 pm ET I don’t know Jack? | |
| Jim | December 17th, 2007 3:45 pm ET Ron Paul isn’t in the polls because the people doing the polling are only asking people who have been registered republican and who had voted in previous primaries. Most Ron Paul supporters are young and hadn’t voted in a republican primary before. All online polls and text messaging polls show you that he has a huge following. Maybe you should ask why the telephone polls differ so much from the online polls. | |
| Pat | December 17th, 2007 3:46 pm ET That’s easy, Jack - the polls are wrong, because the usual polling method is to call only former Republican primary votes, who have land line phones, and then leave Ron Paul’s name off the list, or just ask about “other” candidates in addition to the so-called “top tier”. | |
| Tony Phan | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET What’s the fascination with land-line polls anyway? Do we need the opinions of a select group of people to drive our our decision-making process for someone who’s going to lead the country for 4-8 years? Are “polls” simply scapegoats to justify the amount of coverage each person gets — or it is the amount and quality of coverage creating the poll results (chicken/egg dilemma)? | |
| Alan Waller | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET Ron Paul wins the polls in which the people must actively cast votes. That is, the polls which require an informed and motivated public. However, he ranks low in polls which rely on cold calls. Many of these cold-call polls require that the participant be 1. home between 9am & 5pm, and 2. have a land-line telephone. Unfortunately, these requirements leave many young, employed, tech-savvy voters out of the process. Also, much the same as it’s become standard to imply that Ron Paul’s support is trivial by saying that he has a “strong internet following,” a more accurate way to describe Rudy Guilliani’s support is to say that he has a “strong, unemployed/retired, land-line telephone following.” For some reason, though, the media aren’t as belittling to Guilliani as they are to Paul. But come on, media! Rudy “Did-I-Mention-I-Was-Mayor-During-9/11″ Guilliani can take it. You know why? He was mayor during 9/11. I heard that somewhere. | |
| Michael | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET Ron Paul is not high in the polls because the polls only ask from a selected group of people. It’s like asking people at a dog show, “What is your favorite breed?” Do you really think anybody will answer “Tabby cat”? To best tell the actual support for a candidate, look at what the real world results are telling you. Here is what Ron Paul has accomplished: The people are saying that Ron Paul will be our next president. The real question should be, “Why isn’t the media telling the unbiased truth?” | |
| Brian Sanford | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET The bottom line is this, the major networks and their Presidents don’t like Dr. Paul. This is not a conspiracy, it is the sad truth. It is up to the major networks what we Americans see. Our only hope is if Americans get off the TV and onto the internet and do the research themselves. | |
| John-Ross Cromer | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET Ron Paul can raise 6 MM precisely because he is not higher in the polls. Ron Paul’s organized support base, upset with poor mainstream media coverage and general exclusion from traditional polling methods, realize cash is the only way to get his message heard before the primaries. They support these creative, action-demanding promotion methods because they genuinely care about what he has to say. | |
| Anthony | December 17th, 2007 3:47 pm ET What you don’t think the polls are manipulated? Just look at the amount of people who left comments her. Looks like that that tell the real story. Media controlls the polls, some Paul supporters that were phone polled say that either Paul was not an option, or once they chose Paul, the questions became so ridiculous the you would hang up for being insulted. I know that you know this. | |
| Jeff | December 17th, 2007 3:48 pm ET Setting aside the idea of deception, there are two possibilities: 1) Congressman Paul has a small, but very passionate, following; 2) The polls are not accurately reflecting the true support for Paul. Arguing about which one is correct is largely unimportant as the primaries in the coming weeks will ultimately provide the answer. However, the question IS important if news media is deciding on the best way to allocate time and resources to covering candidates. The difference between fundraising and polling is one of the most interesting political science questions arising from this campaign season, in that there are two candidates with sharp discrepancies within their own statistics (Paul and Huckabee). I would argue that fundraising numbers are straight forward and open, as required by law. On the other hand, while polling is scientifically sound in theory, in practice it becomes subjective as subtleties in polling methods can largely influence the outcome, and results can easily be distorted to conclusions beyond the scope of the poll. If polling methods and results are not made as transparent and open as fundraising statistics, it is difficult to defend polling as the most honest approach to determining the airtime a candidate deserves. | |
| Ruby Justice | December 17th, 2007 3:50 pm ET Who said Dr. Pau’s numbers are low?? Ha! Dr. Paul is only low in the “Old Media” polls because the Old Media (OM) take most of their own polls and report on the results in their own pre-fabricated way. Dr. Paul has won EVERY online poll, and EVERY post-debate online poll, and every international poll and every military poll; but the OM is still in denial and out-of-touch with the free people of America. Ruby Justice | |
| William Lucas Jones | December 17th, 2007 3:50 pm ET Even if he were not running as a Republican, I would not vote for Ron Paul. He’s a flake. | |
| Rose | December 17th, 2007 3:51 pm ET Dr. Paul attracts people from every point in the spectrum. The Ron Paul supporter is nondescript. This also encompasses the younger, once apathetic bunch who are constantly on the go in this age of cell phones. I personally don’t have a land line phone; in addition to that, I’ve not once participated in the primaries either. But you can rest assured, I will be there for Dr. Paul in full support when that time arrives. And this scenario plays out several times for other supporters, as well. As it has already been mentioned, the straw polls are another great indicator of Dr. Paul’s strength in supporters but how often is that mentioned by the mainstream media? | |
| Ruby Justice | December 17th, 2007 3:51 pm ET Who said Dr. Pau’s numbers are low?? Ha! Dr. Paul is only low in the “Old Media” polls because the Old Media (OM) take most of their own polls and report on the results in their own pre-fabricated way. Dr. Paul has won EVERY online poll, and EVERY post-debate online poll, and every international poll and every military poll; but the OM is still in denial and out-of-touch with the free people of America. Ruby Justice | |
| Trent S | December 17th, 2007 3:51 pm ET Jack, we need more intelligent media types like yourself to give RP a fair shake. If they did, America would get a chance to wake up and also get on the RP band wagon. Else, the polls do not take in to account supporters that areDemocrats, Independents, or others that have never participated in the political process before. If only the rest of your CNN counterparts could be as fair as you, instead of blindsiding RP with misleading questions, and always stating he most likely won’t get the nomination. Start saying that he could do it, and people and polls will follow. | |
| Chris Anticoli | December 17th, 2007 3:51 pm ET I’m a firm believer that Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls because he’s not getting the attention he deserves in the mainstream media. It’s a shame that personal image (i.e., being a woman or African American) triumphs core values and beliefs. Ron Paul is a hero to this country and it’s a shame that people haven’t been given the chance to hear him yet. | |
| Doubting Thomas | December 17th, 2007 3:51 pm ET Jack, is Paul Ron, Ron Paul, Peter Paul, Almond Joy or whatever the Ross Perot of 2008? Raise the money, run, hand the election to Clinton and disappear off the face of the earth. This guy’s got as much chance of being elected as Jeb Bush and is a lot scarier. Don’t worry guys, Osama won’t attack us again. It’s take him four years to stop laughing! Oh, Mr. Kucinich, we’ve got another passenger for the UFO space flight! | |
| David Conklin | December 17th, 2007 3:52 pm ET The best way to explain the great difference is by quoting a paulite “The British didn’t know they had a problem until Yorktown”. | |
| Martin Coates IV | December 17th, 2007 3:53 pm ET The land line phone poll work on the faulty premise that people haven’t moved to cell phones. And even those polls ( that is the ones that actually put Capt. Dr. Rep. Paul in options) get the reply that most do not know who he is. Of those that have viewed him speak either in person or on youtube.com, they not only campaign for him, they donate in the millions for him, I think they will also vote for him. If the media spent half as much time on the “Second Tier” as y’all do on the “First Tier”, then we would even have tiers, only people running for office. Give every candidate who’s name is on the ballet equal coverage, equal time during the debates, and stop constantly saying candidate x cannot win because you say he cannot; and then you will see Capt. Dr. Rep Paul surge in the polls. If the system is truly fair, then anyone whose name is on the ballet should have an equal chance of winning as anyone else whose name is on the ballet. -Martin Coates IV | |
| Travis French | December 17th, 2007 3:53 pm ET I question the accuracy of all these polls. The poll on CNN’s Election Center is a prime example. It shows Paul at 6%, an abysmal number when you consider the margin of error. Though there are eight candidates in the race. In addition to margin of error the fine print also mentions that the poll was conducted in October. Can a poll that old reflect what will really happen at the caucus? Paul certainly has enough money to last until Super Tuesday. | |
| Delain | December 17th, 2007 3:54 pm ET “There are lies, damned lies and statistics.” Mark Twain “There are lies, damned lies and polls.” Delain | |
| ed in kc | December 17th, 2007 3:55 pm ET Its only a poll if the numbers reflect who the elite want to win are winning. otherwise its spam if a candidate who is there to challenge the corrupt establishment is winning. Why? because the elite owned media and polling methods are there to herd you sheep into another 4 years of desparity, and you will fall into line, and vote for the “winner”, just like you won with bush, the last time. WAKE UP PEOPLE, vote for FREEDOM And LIBERTY, Stand Up and count for yourself and the USA. Do you realize - 40% of the population has only seen a Bush or Clinton in the White House in thier entire lifetime? Do you really want to be ruled by the Elite? Register to vote in your Republican Primary NOW! | |
| Mary Ann | December 17th, 2007 3:55 pm ET That is the 6 Million dollar question. I was polled by phone just last week and didn’t catch the name of the poll. I was given 1-5 named choices, #6 was OTHER #7 “don’t poll me and remove my # from the call list. I didn’t here the name of my choice and pushed #6, ( sorry we will remove your number from our calling list and will not call you again) WHAT!!!! WAIT!!! THAT WAS #7’s BUTTON, NOT #6. The numbers will never match the money until the polls are all inclusive. “We The People” are a patient lot and there will come a day when the nation will not be able to ignore us. www.ronpaul2008.com | |
| marty | December 17th, 2007 3:56 pm ET Ron Paul will win. | |
| Anthony Garritano | December 17th, 2007 3:56 pm ET He’s an anti-Iraq War candidate trying to get the support of mainstream Republicans. Good Luck Mr. Paul. There’s a greater chance of President Bush himself coming out and telling to truth that he trumped up the case to get us in the war in the first place, then there is of any anti-Iraq War candidate getting support in the Repiblican primaries. Start lying to the American people and pandering to big business, that’ll get you the support of mainstream Republicans. Forming a third party would be a wise use of all that cash so this way Republicans with commonsense can have a good candidate to get behind. But then again most Republicans don’t use commonsense, you might be better off just taking your millions and running as far away with it as possible. | |
| Tim Ryan, Cartersville, Georgia | December 17th, 2007 3:56 pm ET That’s a very good question, Jack. Why indeed? We have a paradox. I choose to believe what I can see with my own eyes rather than polling methods financed by special interests. Ron Paul has broken fundraising records, wins countless straw & online polls, has the most creative and active supporters, and even has his own blimp! With broad support of “unlikely” Republican voters his impact on this race will not be measured until the elections. | |
| Tyler, NC | December 17th, 2007 3:57 pm ET Personally, I’m astonished that Ron Paul received 6 million dollars yesterday. It seems like a lot of money going to waste. Polls or not Ron Paul has no chance. | |
| Bryan in Iowa | December 17th, 2007 3:57 pm ET Is it me or does the media not get it? The ‘polls’ are not true scientific guages on how the population truly feels. When I took sociology in college I was taught a verifiable sampling of any population must be at least 10% of the population. The polls taken by media outlets usually include 1000 respondents or less…this is hardly 10% of the population. I do enjoy watching the CNN.com Quick Poll, it usually has several tens of thousands respondents…which is more accurate. To say it is not viable due to multiple hits by one user is insignifant. I don’t think too many people sit at the computer simply to inflate a poll. | |
| Josh Hostetler | December 17th, 2007 3:59 pm ET Jack, | |
| Chris Rhoades | December 17th, 2007 3:59 pm ET It should come as no surprise. In CNN’s own YouTube debate the questions picked for him were deplorable. One was trying to make him look conspiritorial whereas the other one asked if he was going to run 3rd party for the umpteenth time. I’m sure if America would hear of his views of limited government, fiscal conservativism, and a strong national defense - his numbers would be higher. | |
| Rich, McKinney Texas | December 17th, 2007 4:00 pm ET Just because people invest in fools gold it does not make it anymore valuable. People go to Casinos all the time and throw their hard earned money away on hopes and dreams of striking it rich. The average donation to Paul’s campaign was 50 dollars that equates to 120 thousand people and THAT is a very small percentage of America. That will not buy Ron Paul an isle seat on the so long farewell failed candidate train that is about to pull out of the station. | |
| John Smith | December 17th, 2007 4:01 pm ET The thing to keep in mind about Dr. Paul is that he appeals to a younger generation as well as individuals who have sat idley by the last few election cycles pesimistically scoffing at their continued choices of one evil over another. As a New Hampshire supporter stated at a ralley “For the millions of people who don’t vote…this is the guy you’ve been waiting to vote for”. Ron Paul and his “WAR ON ‘ERROR” has awakened the slumbering giant that has been disenfranchised for the last 16 years. I find it laughable that the very polls that claim to be scientific only actually “poll” a very small select segment of the population. What these polls have failed to do is query the millions who are fed up with our federal government and who have not voted in the last two elections as well as those who were teenagers during the 2004 elections who are now awakening to the fact that they are going to get nothing for Social Security, a state of perpetual war and a lifetime of providing entitlements to the indigent cheap labor that big business brings into this country as well as the continued assault on their civil liberties. The only people who hate us for our wealth and freedoms seem to be our crooked elected officials who continue to peel away our civil rights and tax us into oblivion. John Smith, Alpharetta, GA | |
| Brandi | December 17th, 2007 4:01 pm ET The media is not giving the proper amount of attention to Ron Paul. The people who somehow find out about him like his ideas, and are the most fervent supporters of any candidate I’ve known about. If the mainstream media is not giving the “people” what they want, you can’t blame us for wondering why. If they truly are the unbiased information providers they claim to be, then they have nothing to lose by letting the people in on this wonderful man. So please fill in the missing variable of this equation, because I cannot get it to add up. | |
| Mariah | December 17th, 2007 4:02 pm ET Welcome to the Twilight Zone. Ron Paul is the most searched for candidate online, but he garners the least amount of mainstream media coverage. He receives the most donations from declared military, but he’s slammed for his foreign policy. He speaks truth and makes logical, informed sense, but he’s labeled as “fringe” and “wacko”. Some even have the audacity to say he’s not a Republican even after winning 10 terms as one and espousing true conservative values: lower taxes and limited government. Should we really be surprised that he’s not polling higher in traditional polls despite attracting 20,000 first-time donors in one day? | |
| cliff | December 17th, 2007 4:02 pm ET He doesn’t poll higher because allot of the phone polls don’t even have him as a choice. There is also the issue that allot of the phone polls only contact people with a land line and now with more and more people that have VOIP and cell phones they don’t even get asked. Most of the time all they are asking are older people that are not up on new technology, it’s not brain surgury to figure out. On top of that the polls you guys site are polls that weren’t even accurrate way back in the day. Now people are more online than ever before but for some reason you guys don’t take the online polls seriously. These polls are just as accurate as all the others yet they get no mention. Think about this for a second, if the other candidates are so high in the polls then how come it doesn’t show online as well? Where is there support? If they are so popular where is the money at? Where are the people in the streets? CNN can not expect us to ever take them seriously if everything we see contradicts their coverage. Don’t the executives there understand that by ignoring a movement like this they are shooting themselves in the foot? Why would you ever be worthy of our trust when at every turn we are ignored by you? Every minute that media outlets ignore this they are losing future viewers to online media which has proven lately to have more substance and information. Jack….you are too smart to be asking a question that you already know the answer to. Quit dumbing down the discussion and just say it out loud “RON PAUL IS REAL AND HIS SUPPORT IS REAL”. Throw away your polls Jack, you know they aren’t real, if they were we wouldn’t be blowing up the internet and the street corners with Ron Paul propaganda. The fact is that no matter where Ron Paul goes his people will follow. Even if he doesn’t get the republican nomination and goes independant we will vote for him. If he drops out completely we will write him in. This is not about Ron Paul, this is about us and Ron just happens to be the guy we picked. Regardless of your lack of Ron Paul coverage i still ove you Jack. You need your own show. 30 second doses of Jack Cafferty are no good we need an hour every night. | |
| Darren D. | December 17th, 2007 4:02 pm ET Hi Jack, Thanks for your integrity. The polls did not help Wesley Clark and Howard Dean in 2004. The polls did not help Mario Cuomo, Jesse Jackson, and Gov. Brown in 1991. The polls don’t elect Presidents, people getting in their cars, going to the polls, and voting get Presidents elected. President Paul’s supporters will go to the polls. | |
| Travis | December 17th, 2007 4:02 pm ET Perhaps it’s in the personality of the kind of people that back Dr. Paul. I know I have very little patience for pollsters, telemarketers and the like. It is very difficult to get someone’s opinion when they don’t want to talk to you. | |
| Randy | December 17th, 2007 4:03 pm ET Jack, Ron Paul is off the chart in all indicators except these ’scientific polls’, He raised more money in one day then Mike Huckbee the ‘frontrunner’ has raised all this quarter. He has won more GOP straw polls then any other by wide margins, He has grassroots support out of this world, etc, etc It is a no brainer to which i trust, all of these indicators of strength and the thousands and thousands of people willing to give money right before Christmas to a political candidate or these ’scientific polls’. I think i will go with all these other indicators rather then these ’scientific polls’, which i believe are totally unreliable and biased on how they are structured. Someone told me that Zogby did a fair and balalnced poll and in that poll, Ron Paul pulled 30% of the vote beating all others. Why did we not hear about that polls result in the mainstreet media? Let me ask you a question Jack, what if Ron Paul wins and the people fiqure out these polls are not reliable, will they blame just those who put out these polls or will they blame the main street media also which touts these polls as Gospel when it is the worst kind of false trash to assist the mainstreet media in trying to select the President for the American People ???? | |
| Kent D Oyler | December 17th, 2007 4:03 pm ET Jack, It is probably because the polls are wrong, that is the polls that say 70% of Americans want a rapid end to the war in Iraq. | |
| cee cee carter | December 17th, 2007 4:04 pm ET No one has ever polled me or the hundred or so Ron Paul supporters I know personally. NOT ONE of us has ever been polled…and my guess is that the POLLS will never reflect the true level of Ron Paul PLATFORM support. | |
| Adam Yonce | December 17th, 2007 4:04 pm ET I believe Congressman Paul’s poll numbers are low for several reasons. First, he doesn’t have the name recognition of some of the other candidates, although that is changing. Second, the name Ron Paul often gets left out of the polls. I don’t understand why the media puts up with this. You are all aware of the unprecedented grassroots movement out in the streets of America. If you doubt the pervasiveness of this movement, walk into a bar and say “Ron Paul!” and see how many people shout back and offer to buy you a drink! Third, the Republican National Committee hasn’t really supported him. I suspect they are hesitant to support a candidate from their own party who is such a philosophical opposite of President Bush. After all, they did get Bush get elected twice. The RNC fails to see however, that the American people have lost faith in Bush, and we feel that we have given up too many of our personal liberties and rights as a result of the Bush presidency. | |
| Chad | December 17th, 2007 4:04 pm ET Simple Answer : Name Recognition. But as name recognition increased so have his poll numbers and fundraising capability. Perhaps you can answer a question for me. Why doesn’t the media talk about polls like this? http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1391 closing paragraph: “The blind bio question was also posed to a larger pool of 1,009 likely voters nationwide, including Democrats and independents, and Paul was the big winner among that universe of voters, winning 33%, compared to 19% for Giuliani, 15% for Romney, and 13% for Thompson.” Thank you for your work, | |
| Kate Jacobson | December 17th, 2007 4:05 pm ET This morning I was polled by phone by an auto-poller. I was presented with a list of names: Press 1 for Giuliani I pressed “6″, but nothing happened — the automated voice kept reading further choices. I thought that maybe I needed to wait until all the names had been read, but after I pressed “6″ again after the last choice had been read to me, I still didn’t get any acknowledgement that my choice had registered. Then the poll started OVER! It seems like my vote for Paul hadn’t been recognized. This time, my choices were the 5 supposed “top tier” candidates (didn’t include Paul), and then “6″ was Other. (”7″ was to select to not be included in future polls.) I pressed “6″ again, and I received the response, “Thank you for your input. We’ll be sure not to bother you with future polls.” | |
| Shane | December 17th, 2007 4:05 pm ET Jack, | |
| Mary Dickinson | December 17th, 2007 4:06 pm ET Apparently, the arrogant press drives the candidate choice for the American electorate. Senator Gravel was treated so disrespectfully by the press that I was embarrassed. Of course, don’t expect the corporate owned and run press to recall that Gravel was a major force behind the anti- war movement and stopping the draft, or to acknowledge that Ron Paul has some excellent ideas. Both parties are bought and paid for by the corporations. There is no difference b/t either of them. Any politician w/ guts to tell the truth is locked out. Jack, Romney is so slick that he could sell outhouses to plumbing contractors! | |
| John Long | December 17th, 2007 4:07 pm ET Simple. The polls do not take into account the diverse group Ron Paul has brought into the political forum. If you look at straw polls across the country and other polls you will see Ron Paul is very popular and very high on the polls. Instead of looking at the poll numbers you may need to look at the polls you get your information from. | |
| Steve K | December 17th, 2007 4:08 pm ET I think the overwhelming answer is that those precious polls, so beloved by MSM and status quo politician alike, are seriously flawed. Oh how I look forward to the rude awakening that lies ahead! | |
| Rob J | December 17th, 2007 4:08 pm ET The “old line” of the Republican Party leadership spent a lot of time in the early months trying to squash Ron Paul talk and did a very good job convincing the media that Dr. Paul was a non-entity. The reason is clear, they do not want to give up the power they have created inside the Party. The Republican Party needs to reread it’s our charter to understand they have strayed from the true path of conservatism. Congressman Paul is not the messenger they wanted. Fun thing is the Republican Party is learning what the Democratic Party already knows, when you give people a voice they talk. | |
| David | December 17th, 2007 4:09 pm ET Dr. Paul is the only candidate of either party who suggests that the government act ethically. Most people have no idea how rare that is. Usually, suggestions that the US act ethically, especially with regard to foreign policy, are met with loud boos. Until we, as a nation, admit that we keep sickeningly hypocritical double-standards, we will always elect scoundrels and never deserve a decent man like Ron Paul. What you do you must condone. Another problem for Dr. Paul is that he is the only one addressing the most serious threats to America, but people are entirely ignorant of these problems — they are not informed. This ignorance results in subjective “crazy old uncle” comments. It’s also why the other candidates don’t address these things — they are playing to the lowest common denominator, which is a dumbed-down public. | |
| Jack K. | December 17th, 2007 4:09 pm ET Jack, I think Ron Paul’s whole wacky campaign is a fund-raising scheme created at the highest level of RNC leadership. The RNC knows contributions to conservatives are way down. But the moderate and liberal voices are making record contributions to the democrats. By putting Ron Paul into the race–with his absurdly liberal agenda (which will NEVER get him elected as a Republican) will generate tons of revenue from liberals and moderates who are against the war. After the primaries, and Ron Pauls sure loss– all the money will go to the general election coffers of the RNC . The GOP will have lots of cash for the general election–provided by liberals!!! The Chairman of the RNC is a genius!! And Ron Paul is either unaware he’s being used–or also part of the conspiracy–to beat the liberals with their own money. They’ll be laughing all the way to the bank!! | |
| Solomon | December 17th, 2007 4:10 pm ET I think it is important to distinguish between active and passive measures of support. In every active gauge of popularity Dr. Paul’s results are amazing. He raises the most money from more individual donors than any other candidate, wins every internet and text message poll, wins a huge percentage of straw polls, and is searched for more on google than any other candidate (democrat included). In passive polls, the telephone polls to likely voters, Dr. Paul is not doing well. This disconnect between active and passive metrics is simple to explain. The methods through which the passive voter gets information; television, radio, and newspaper, give little attention to Dr. Paul, and routinely announce that he has no chance of winning. Generally, traditional news sources pay a lot of attention to these active measures of support and report the results to the passive voters. This has not happened in the case of Dr. Paul. However, in evaluating “likely republican voters,” I feel these active measures more accurately predict who’s going to brave the cold weather to go vote in a primary. Sincerely, | |
| Mike | December 17th, 2007 4:10 pm ET Ron Who????????? | |
| Tony Andrews | December 17th, 2007 4:10 pm ET Jack, I really appreciate guys in the media like yourself, who make it a priority to get the answers to questions, no matter who likes or dislikes what those answers might imply. Ron Paul IS registering in the polls. However, for some reason, he is omitted from many polls, or is counted in a catch-all ‘other’-type category. I don’t think the American people really trust polls anymore, anyway. Even the candidates tend to shy away from quoting poll numbers, these days. Too many pollsters know how to get the results they want, or the kind of results that would make the group that commissioned the poll happy. There is a conflict of interest, there, I fear. Another problem is the people in the media who don’t make objectivity a priority. Many are too lazy to get all the facts, or even state the few facts they’ve collected accurately. You don’t fall into that category, but many do. Very many. Thanks again, | |
| Christian | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET The media weighs in on who they think will win. Also are polls regulated by any governing body? | |
| Darren Casella | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET Jack, If you really want to understand this phenomenon, just check out these four youtube videos - they explain everything through demonstration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENA0vxLwoq4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KloETuVJx2c http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIBPGvK7Pg0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFfhObkxzBE p.s. - love your show ! You and Lou are two of the best out there. Darren | |
| Matthew | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET Obviously there is something wrong with these polls, since every other metric seems to indicate that Ron Paul is wildly popular. | |
| Jessica | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET Money does not equate to political prowess. Rabid fan bases do not equate to sound concepts and ideas that will better our country. | |
| Jason Copenhaver | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET I’d ask your boss why he doesn’t want Ron Paul having more media spotlight. | |
| Dave C | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET Simple. Limited, if any, media coverage. | |
| Dee Dee | December 17th, 2007 4:11 pm ET Ron Paul isn’t one of the media’s favorites or considered one of the chosen few. If he were to get more media coverage he’d score higher on the polls. | |
| Mike | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Jack, is this a trick question? It’s very simple . . . the media. | |
| Jon L. | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Jack you forgot to mention how it’s the biggest 24hr fundraising drive in POLITICAL HISTORY! | |
| Yaniv | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Ron Paul is lagging in the polls because the media tries to bash him. In the last CNN Republican-Youtube debate, he got very little time to speak. Furthermore, the questions he was asked, particularly by the person who suggested Paul should Ron as an independent because he has no chance, are completely defaming. They make Ron Paul look bad, and that’s what the media wants. Shame on you, CNN. | |
| John V, Sacramento, CA | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET As a Liberal Democrat, I have watched Ron Paul over the last year. I don’t understand why the media doesn’t get that he represents a very disaffected segment of the Republican Party that hasn’t had a real voice since Pat Buchanan in 1992. I’d never vote for him because I disagree with him philosophically on just about every major question of the day (on the instances where I do agree with him, it’s for very different reasons). The Republicans operate like a massive corporation. And Ron Paul represents a shareholders revolt. Won’t be successful, but for them, getting their issues out is tantamount to victory. | |
| Alex Smith | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Two words Jack. Media coverage. | |
| David Rand | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET The reason why he’s not higher in the polls is because these “national polls” are conducted by “likely” republican voters. What the people do not understand is Ron Paul’s supporters are mainly apathetic voters who are voting for the first time or democrats who have left the Republican party. The fact is, Ron Paul has more supporters then any other candidate running for president. Republican and Democratic COMBINED. The supporters are not listening to “national polls” and their voice will be heard. David Rand | |
| Suhail Syed | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Many of those “scientific polls” seem to lack science and be used in a biased way. 2 examples: 1) Ron Paul’s name is not included in many of those polls. 2) Samples are taken from previous Republican voters who are “considered likely to vote”. Traditional Straw Polls have been ignored by mainstream media, even the national caucus. Anything pointing to Ron Paul is disregarded or discredited. If he supported the war then I’m sure mainstream media would love him, but thank god he’s against the Iraq war. | |
| Ken KS | December 17th, 2007 4:12 pm ET Jack, | |
| Ken Haywood, Effingham, Illinois | December 17th, 2007 4:13 pm ET I think the numbers in the polls for Dr. Paul will start to rise as more and more people do thier civic duties of researching thier choices. They will start to find what Paul supporters have already discovered, consistency in his values. That is why his supporters are so passionate about hier efforts, they believe in honesty and integrity. If that message goes nationwide now that Dr. Paul has the money to get his message out, polls are going to matter. | |
| Brandy Wilson | December 17th, 2007 4:13 pm ET The reasons are the “Push Polling” of Ron Paul…or The pollsters are not giving the “RON PAUL” as an option…that’s not soooo hard to figure out! | |
| Eric Herdzik, NY | December 17th, 2007 4:13 pm ET Because the national polls are based on who voted in the 2004 primary elections. Let’s not forget that Bush ran for reelection in 2004 and had no opposition in the primaries, therefore most of the people being polled are devoted Bush supporters. Had registered republicans been polled in general regardless of whether or not they voted in 2004, I’m confident you would see quite different numbers. You know the poll results are innaccurate when the only people who show up to see Rudy Giuliani speak are Ron Paul supporters who run him out of town. | |
| Brian | December 17th, 2007 4:13 pm ET Because Polls are called to more traditional homes, the ones who still use landline Telephones. As you know, the new generation uses cell phones and internet communications, and do not have a hardwired phone. This is an entire generation not covered by traditional polling. | |
| Trish O. | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET I’ll tell you why he is so low in the polls. It is because the polls are useless these days. Most people have no home phone so they can’t get a poll call. Also, they are not calling all the democrats and independents that are supporting Ron Paul. We are all democrats here and we are ALL supporting Ron Paul. He is the only candidate that is telling the truth. He isn’t a controlled plastic cut out of a candidate. I’m disgusted with the rest of them. | |
| Mike Binns | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET It’s simple: He gets no air time on main stream media. He breaks all records yesterday, and yet today Lieberman is getting more air time than he is. | |
| James Shaw | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET People want to believe in some thing, but we also understand that Paul is not a President. Nothing about him looks presidential. He has great ideas but his ideas are things that we hope for but understand can not ever be done. We give me because we hope, but we vote for others because we understand. | |
| RonPaulForTheLongHaul | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET I pray that the mainstream media embraces this as an opportunity to debate Ron Paul’s positions in an intelligent and informed manner. We’ve already seen the disastrous effects of a complacent media that parrots the talking points and opinions of pundits from the government with regards to the Iraq war. We’re also seeing a similar push for war in Iran. Please see the excellent Bill Moyer’s story “Buying the War” for a record of this lack of reporting and critical analysis. If Ron Paul is as wrong about a non-interventionist foreign policy as many in the establishment media say he is then it should be simple for them to demolish his arguments without resorting to distortion and name calling. What we have not seen is any attempt at a discussion over US interventionist foreign policy vs non-interventionist foreign policy. No, the media and the other candidates would rather resort to labeling Ron Paul as isolationist (which is obvious doublethink) or comparing Iran to Nazi Germany when it is the US that is the aggressor. Just a few days ago, Newsweek ran a story that celebrates the patriotism of Anh Duong, a Vietnamese refugee that now works for the DoD on mobile death labs that will be used to determine if an Iraqi insurgent should be killed on the spot by referring to a biometric database. These Iraqi insurgents are just trying to defend their country, their religion and their way of life. Iraq has never posed a clear and present danger to the US - despite the lies and distortion that come from Washington. Has the US become the Nazi Germany of the 21st century? The US is like a dumb kid with a stick that goes around poking bee hives (Muslim nations) to get at their honey (oil). When the dumb kid is repeatedly stung by bees the dumb kid labels all bees as evil and commences a campaign to destroy all bee hives which only provokes more animosity from the bees and more stings. If the dumb kid would just leave the bees alone perhaps he would be better off. | |
| Deb Thomsen | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET Maybe he doesn’t move up in the polls because you spend all your time reporting the poll numbers and never reporting what Ron Paul actually says. Try reading this: http://www.extremeink.com/awtk/2007/12/ron-pauls-tea-party.html . | |
| Charlie Cregor | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET Dear Jack, Congressman Ron Paul doesn’t receive the numbers in the polls because the Neo-Cons and the Mainstream Media don’t want him to win. The polls are “bogus and meaningless!” Dr. Ron Paul represents the change I want, and he’s picking up Democrats like I who are furious with the Democratic Party! Charlie Cregor | |
| Evonne/ Trinity, NC | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET Maybe the pollsters aren’t asking the right people. I know I’ve never been contacted. | |
| gt | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET They are polling the wrong people. | |
| Kevin Barber | December 17th, 2007 4:14 pm ET Ron Paul’s campaign stances do not fit on a postcard, a billboard, or a few minutes spread across a few debates. Ron Paul’s principles and stances on the various issues affecting our country have to be fully researched and understood before you can come to understand that it’s the right path for conservative republicans and in a greater sense, this country. You cannot support his position on limited government without research. Same for his views of our monitary policy, pollution (enviroment), or even the war in Iraq. Put out a poll asking what a non-intervention policy means, and you’ll see the 5% who know are the 5% voting for Ron Paul. The United States was founded as a Republic, and Ron Paul is standing up for it. The 5% who support him nationally are the 5% whom have done the work to understand him and his plans to inflict change upon the serious isues affecting this country. In fact, no wonder he has such an Internet following, b/c the Internet is the primary tool you’d use to discover, research, and understand Ron Paul. Until he becomes a leader in the polls, there is no other way to get the info one ‘needs to know’ about Ron Paul to make an educated decision to loyally support him for President of the United States. | |
| Matt | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Ron Paul can’t get ahead in the polls because he sticks to his guns and tells the truth. Get with the program Jack, we have no room for honest people in our government. | |
| Bobby | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Mr. Cafferty, Pauls raising money just proves that many people believe in him. He just needs to re-think on some of his issues and he might have a shot. Bobby | |
| Matt M. | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET The answer to your question should be obvious: The true Owners of this country do not want a man such as Ron Paul elected because he does not unfailingly support Big Business. Ron Paul does the exact same thing our original Founding Fathers did, and that is to put the American people above the interests of the Federal Government. To the real owners of this country, this is a pretty big wrench in the works. | |
| Jacob | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET The only reason Ron Paul does not get the respect and media attention he deserves is because the same people that own the media own the weapons manufacturing companies. They want more war so they can make more money. It’s sad and the American people are bamboozled. We are only told what we are supposed to know. Even worse we are lied to. Ron Paul is Americas only hope. This is the most important election in modern history. | |
| Travis Payne | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Jack, the real question you should ask is how many of the polls actually had Dr. Paul listed as a choice? Although the media has gone to great lengths to pick our candidates for us, the American people have other ideas this time around. Now a question for you, are you really that surprised? Travis Payne | |
| Aaron Kreke | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Ron Paul just HAS NOT been mentioned in the mainstream media enough. He has won every post debate poll, he has won every straw poll, he has raised over 6 million dollars in a 24 hour period - still no mention. What do we have to do to get our voices heard? | |
| Erik Viker | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Here’s a conspiracy theory for you: Those who own controlling interests in major U.S. media companies are expected (or required) by prior agreement to support so-called Republican frontrunners. The polls, which are for the most part generated by media companies, therefore are carefully engineered to exclude Congressman Paul as a serious candidate. Congressman Paul does not support the mainstream Republican party line so the RNC works hard to eliminate him as a candidate. | |
| Ryan, Swansboro, NC | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET If Ron Paul recieved the amount of airtime that John McCain has recieved on national news programs (someone with the same polling numbers as Paul in many states), I have no doubt that he would be a front-runner. The little airtime Paul does get in the news is usually accompanied by snide comments from anchors and hosts. Show me unbiased, equal treatment of candidates by the mainstream media, and i will show you President Ron Paul. | |
| superkev | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET I think the reason he’s not ranking in the polls is because of the method for polling. I’m 23 and highly interested in politics, and I’ve noticed that those in my generation don’t seem to receive calls from the pollsters. We have cell phones instead of land-lines. They aren’t geographically-based and people are less likely to agree to a lengthy survey due to wireless minute rates. More accurate, I think, are the straw polls. Just like the primaries, straw polls require people to actually get off their butt and be proactive. Ron Paul supporters are more likely to get out there and vote than any other candidate. | |
| Fabian Rivera | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET 1. Ron has won more straw polls than everyone else. 2. He has received more donations and support from military servicemen than all the other Republican candidates combined. 3. Well over 200,000 donors have contributed to the campaign this quarter. As mentioned before, these polls do not reflect the reality of who’s receiving the most support. Ron’s message is spreading like wildfire, and we are now the majority. | |
| Jack | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET because the mainstream media thinks an endorsement by a has been like Joe Lieberman is more “news worthy” than a man who raises $6 million in one day. | |
| Lynn from Jersey Shore | December 17th, 2007 4:15 pm ET Because the media has underestimated him… and it is really a-PAUL-ing!!! | |
| Calvin Tussey | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Polls, Polls, Polls… The reason Ron Paul’s support doesn’t translate to national polls is because he is often left, or excluded due to his absence from “top tier” candidates. How come someone who has broken fund raising records isn’t regarded as top tier when we are illusioned to believe that the other candidates are even worthy to represent and uhold the contract between us, the people, and the government. In my college courses I must cite my sources, to insure their credibility. Why, then, must we be faced to believe magic numbers that OBVIOUSLY do not represent national opinion. Cafferty, this is a war between the people and big business. | |
| jovan | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Usually, $6,000,000 gets you a lot of attention. Not anymore, unfortunately. Dennis Kucinich is ignored even more than Mr. Paul by the media. How come no one talks about Dennis Kucinich but me and other feminist bloggers? I don’t know how Mr. Paul is not getting anymore attention than he should, but this I do know: He is not a libertarian. He has advocated government’s control over women’s lives. That is authoritarianism, not libertarianism. | |
| Andrew Leibfried | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET It takes more than just money to get the nomination for president. If for just one day Ron Paul got as much news coverage as Hillary or Romney his national numbers would increase dramatically. I think more coverage on the fact that Dr. Paul would remove troops from Iraq as soon as he took office is greatly needed. There are millions who share Dr. Paul’s ideas but have never heard of him. I wish the news with the help of CNN could help get his name out there. | |
| Warren | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Has anyone ever thought that the polling process is antiquated and does not reflect the population’s opinions? A single digit candidate does not raise that kinnd of money unless they are demorats and its union money or republifatcats getting oil money | |
| Tom Bulger | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Pollsters ignore anyone they don’t expect to be politically active. Ron Paul supporters are what I call Jeffersonian Democrats. They believe in the Constitution and the founding principles of America. No true American has run for public office in a long time so Jeffersonian Democrats have had no candidate to support. | |
| Ken Haywood, Effingham, Illinois | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET edit….polls are NOT going to matter. | |
| Ryan Amidon | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Jack, this is a game. Pollsters call likely Republican voters when calculating their numbers. Ron’s support, and therefore money, comes from people who maybe once belonged to the Republican party but abandoned it, when it abandoned it’s own platform. Many voters declare themselves Independent. Ron Paul could bring these voters back in and expand their party, but the party won’t let that happen. So they choose to be close minded and whiter away year by year. | |
| Troy | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Give Ron Paul the time on the air that the other candidates receive and the polls would shift dramatically. Look at how much time McCain is getting right now over something as trivial, and worthless, as support by Lieberman. Give Ron Paul the attention he deserves without just saying “a long shot with little chance to win” and Ron Paul will win the primaries, the elections, and turn this country around. | |
| Jake from Broken Arrow, OK | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Jack, the national polls have only been contacting people who were registered Republican and voted in the 2004 primaries for George Bush which was uncontested. Plus, as evidenced by taped phone polls, Ron Paul’s name isn’t even included on the list! | |
| Steve | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Simple…exposure…he isn’t a MSM darling. The elites and the MSM have picked who they want to lead the country and promote them….CNN devoted a 5-10 minute interview with chillary this morning…do they interview Ron Paul for that long? NOPE…they pick and choose who and how to portray them…need I say more…Dr. Paul does need some polishing but look at jorge…his public speaking ability is limited and always comes across as a complete moron for the most part…Thompson is about the only one who is polished in front of a camera… Dr. Paul would be better off going independent and taking Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo with him…they might actually stand a good shot at it…none of the two-party candidates are worth it…they hispander and will do nothing for WE THE PEOPLE… | |
| joe Kitchell | December 17th, 2007 4:16 pm ET Beyond the obvious fact that Ron Paul appeals to independents, polls and politicians represent many things, but they rarely represent the will of the people. They both are easily manipulated by special interest. | |
| dthomasdigital | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET I agree, with allot of folks please stop asking if he will run under a 3rd party, let him run the way he is running. Why is he not getting the attention he deserves, might need to ask the media why that is. He raises 6 million plus and he gets a blurb here a blurb there. We all know the right thing to do and that is to support those who believe in letting the people run America not people who think they know how to run it for us. | |
| Ray Agrinzone | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Ron Paul signifies what America is about. Honesty, courage, and truth. Ron Paul is not for sale. We are truely witnessing a part of history. The Pandora’s box did not only open, it exploded. Wake up America, it is time for change! Real Change, forget about the newly formed dem-rep party where everyone has the same agenda. Vote RP 08 | |
| Robert Carlstrom~ Grand Rapids, MI | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET If you drive around Michigan the only signs you see are Ron Paul; there are more and more every day. As to why he isnt polling very high I wonder if the people doing the polling have an agenda to fill. There are a number of polls that Ron Paul is left out. Also what percentage of Ron Paul supporters have a land line for the pollsters to call, I dont. If you look at almost ever internet poll noboy is close. Ron Paul had a last start but he’s here now. The revolution has begun we wont give until we get in the White house. Ron Paul jump started a movement our country desperatly needs. | |
| Brian | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET I received an automated phone poll last week in which Ron Paul was included in the selections, when I pressed 6 to vote for Ron Paul the automated voice told me that I had chose the option to remove myself from the call list . I would not have thought this actually happened until it happened to me. I no longer trust the polls. Ron Paul has more support than the polls show. Brian | |
| Kim Parone | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Many times his name is not included in the polls and there are also times that Ron Paul supporters have actually been turned away from straw poll events even when they have payed money (you can see proof of this on youtube). Also mainstream media barely speaks about him and when they do they usually add something in a derogatory way, this comment dissincludes you because you seem to be one of the only ones out there that keeps a fair outlook to all the candidates running. Thank you for that. | |
| ggbell95 | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Ron Paul does not poll well because the media’s “scientific” polls are not well prepared for a swelling populist movement like the “Ron Paul Revolution”, which rapidly brings a large number of disenfranchised and disillusioned people from across all party lines into the political process. | |
| Charlie Murphy | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Jack, The fact that Ron Paul’s message is so powerful and so epic, only goes to show the monetary and grassroots support he is receiving. Since the media doesnt expose his message as much as his supporters would like, Ron Paul supporter’s do it for them. Many supporters never heard of Ron Paul until they saw his message on the internet. We are greatful for the mention on CNN, our point came across, that his message is important. Whether you realize it or not many other presidential candidates are looking up to Ron Paul’s site for fundraising ideas. “Stop the handshows for Thompsons campain sought 2,400 supporters ” Huckabee has a december goal of 1.1 million dollars… seem familiar from Ron Pauls 12 million dollar 4th quarter goal. I think so. Ron Pauls message is slowly being adopted by the other candidates. It’s Ron Paul who has been correct for his entire campaign, now America is realizing that he was right all along. | |
| Derek | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET You know the answer Jack; land lines and registered republicans that voted in the 2004 primaries. Most of the responders here seem to know that. It’s very easy to slant statistics in your favor to justify any argument. I think the real question should be two-part: 1) Why don’t the talking heads say how the poll is conducted every time they read the statistics and 2) why don’t they question the rationale of this type of polling? Derek Silver | |
| Dustin | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Hi Jack, Dr. Paul is low in the polls for one simple reason, he is not listed as a candidate. On the telephone polls I have seen, he has been either left off or considered “other”. How could anybody do well in a poll in which they are not included? | |
| Rich, McKinney Texas | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET Ron Paul has sponsored many more bills than the average representative, such as those that would abolish the income tax or the Federal reserve. Many do not reach the House floor for a vote because most are worthless. I can not think of one piece of legislation that Ron Paul has gotten passed that is of any benefit to a majority of people. And this is after years of having the ability to do something worthwhile in congress and failing to do so because he devoted his time to pipe dreams like abolishing income tax instead of what he was paid to do. That in my honest opinion is why Paul does not do well in the polls. He is half a bubble off level. | |
| Lesley | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET From the beginning, the media and the public have doubted Ron Paul’s chances to win. Everyone I know who likes Ron Paul’s ideas are convinced that he will never make it past the primaries, but sympathize enough with his efforts that they’re willing to make a donation. Nobody thinks Ron Paul has a chance because he doesn’t look like a President, or act like a President, he doesn’t play the games and he talks about a revolution. These are all things the public are becoming more and more desperate to see in the candidates, but the idea that someone who has those qualities could actually win…? Well that’s not how our government has worked, at least not in my generation. Ron Paul is the only candidate running as a Republican that I have ever really considered voting for. If he and one of the three front-runners on the Democratic side end up running against each other next year, I will be happy with whoever wins. For the past twenty years we have been struggling to choose the lesser of two evils, and finally there is hope that we will soon have the pick of the litter. | |
| Karin | December 17th, 2007 4:17 pm ET It depends on who is getting polled. I have never been asked or given the opportunity to take a national poll…it would be my guess that it goes the same for other Ron Paul supporters. There are probably alot more of us out there…we’re just not being heard…yet! | |
| Kyle | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET The answer is simple Dr. Paul’s number seem low because the media polls people by telephone only. Why don’t they show the online polls of Ron Paul’s numbers or how about the states straw polls which Paul has won the majority of. If the media would be as bold as you are to talk about the amazing grass roots, there would be a revolution to put the only candidate of integrity in the White House. God bless you Jack, and God bless Ron Paul. | |
| peter guellard, Pittsburgh | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Jack, I can’t believe that such intelligent journalist like yourself can even post such dumb question. It’s the land line phone polls stupid! | |
| Brian | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Because Ron Paul is changing the face of Politics in America……. The Polls are askew my fine friend. | |
| James Shaw | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET People want to believe in some thing, but we also understand that Paul is not a President. Nothing about him looks presidential. He has great ideas but his ideas are things that we hope for but understand can not ever be done. We give money because we hope, but we vote for others because we understand. | |
| Justin In Buffalo | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Jack, -Justin | |
| Elaton Georges | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because polls are meant to manipulate perception and you guys in the media are doing a good job at ignoring him. If Hillary made 6 million in a day you’d have to turn the tv off to stop hearing about it. | |
| Rich | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Its really simple Jack, Your looking at the polls that do not include Rons name unlike the straw polls across the nation that he has won more than any other candidate running for the GOP nomination. Americans are waking up and we’ve had a belly full | |
| Tom Rasor | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Ron Paul is becoming more popular with everyday Americans because they identify with his concerns and values. We have been under the spell of the elite few, whose politics have lost all touch with the average citizen. Anyone that takes time to view Dr. Paul’s message and filter out the elitists’ propaganda, will see him as the presidential choice whose time has come. | |
| Maria | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Here’s my question: If Ron Paul supporters independent from the campaign can raise $6 million in one day, why can’t I-am-higher-in-the-polls-than-thou Giuliabee McRompson? | |
| Robert | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Most polls are taken by people answering there land line phones and have previously voted for a particular party. I have not had a land line in years. Ron Paul draws votes from Independent, Republican and Democrat. There is no base to poll off of. Ron Paul is creating his own base. You would think that candidate generating that much income on a day and that much buzz every time is name is mentioned would garner more coverage from the news outlets like CNN. Sadly it seems that the mainstream media is not following the mainstream pulse of this nation. | |
| Ashton | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET I think Ron Paul hasn’t been getting the love he deserves because they’re aren’t enough individual thinkers out there. When you just go-with-the-flow for a long period of time, it’s hard for anyone to even consider change. What people don’t realize is that this guy brings all types of people together! Who wouldn’t want someone like that running our country? | |
| Clayton | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET Jack, It’s simple. We haven’t figured out how to use our “spam bots” in the “real” polls just yet. Trust me, the Ron Paul Grassroots movement (and American People) will know how to do it in 17 days. Take my word on it. | |
| John | December 17th, 2007 4:18 pm ET uh…umm..hmm..could they be it fixed? Who are they asking? what are they asking? How is it being asked. It could also have to do with the apparent lack of questioning during debates. The Medias/political dismissive attitude or the lack of print coverage. | |
| Jama | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET The polls are notoriously unreliable…didn’t Kerry win the exit polls in ‘04? The media plays a big part in deciding who the “frontrunner” is going to be. Name recognition plays a big part and the candidates the media decides to focus on are the candidates that people recognize…sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy from our illustrious news writers. However, I have to wonder if people who say they’re going to vote for a particular candidate in a poll are really going to put forth the effort to go out and vote for that candidate if they won’t even put forth the effort to write a check (or enter a credit card number, as it were). Mike Huckabee is “surging” in the polls, but has raised a measly $1 million this quarter. That’s not evidence of passion or commitment from those who say they support him. You can bet your life that those of us who are a part of the Ron Paul REVOLUTION are going to be at the polls, come hell or high water, and that’s what matters…not some CNN news poll. | |
| Brendan H. | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET I will say I think the Paul campaign has stumbled a bit on advertising, and keeping on message. I have seen most of the campaign produced TV spots, and was frankly, unimpressed. His ads need to be kept simple and on message. I was first attracted to his campaign based on a simple message outlined on his site: That he never voted for an unbalanced budget, or to raise taxes. He also voted against the Patriot Act and the Iraq War. If he sticks to this simple message in his advertising, he will gain a lot more support. | |
| Justin | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET First of all, I would like to thank you for taking note of Dr. Paul. The media recognition helps him out tremendously, yet lies at the heart of why he is not higher in the polls. Many news networks refuse to mention his name. The most media attention he has gotten so far took him raising 4 million and 6 million dollars in one day. The media only takes note when such an amazing event forces their “front-runner bias” attitude to turn their head in attention. In the debates, excluding the Des Moines Register, he is given an unfair amount of time to discuss his views. The YouTube debate ignored a drastic amount of videos directed at Dr. Paul, yet included one asking him if he would run under a 3rd party ticket. The media doesn’t seem to want people to believe he is electable, or able to gain enough support to win the nomination. His views also are not popular with his party at this moment in time. The Republican Party has been overrun with neo-conservatives with goals much different than his own. These “money bombs” are showing just how much people are sick of the horrible leadership going on Washington. So many of these candidates should be ashamed of themselves. They should realize, if this was an earlier part of US history, they would be the ones thought of as “The Crazy Uncle” and “Dr. No.” | |
| Lona | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET Answer to your question. It is obvious,, the polls are not honest!!! They pick a group of people who will vote the way they want them too. My suggestion to you Jack is this,, Ask for a poll of the American people on your show, that way you will see the truth!! Make sure you include all the candidates in the poll, and not just the ones the Media covers all the time! | |
| Dan | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET Hi Jack Ron Paul is truly the peoples’ President. Dan | |
| Nate | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET The mainstream media creates a false reality that Ron Paul does not have a chance. They give him minimal coverage at best, and so the uninformed general public is not even aware of who he is. If Giuliani, Hillary, Obama, etc. broke the all time record for one day fundraising, you can bet that it would be major news across every network and every newspaper. Help us Jack…… | |
| Kyle Sanders | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET Maybe what you should be asking is, ‘Do these polls accurately reflect a modern American demographic?’ The only people I know with land-line phones are over 50. And soon, corporate TV may be a thing of the past as internet sites like Youtube take over. Ron Paul dominates the internet, but apparently the lame stream media pretends it isn’t happening. | |
| Fred | December 17th, 2007 4:19 pm ET Ron Paul stays behind in the polls for a few reasons, the most obvious being that most phone polls are based off ‘likely republican voters’, or people who voted republican in the previous primaries. For one, Dr. Paul has converted a lot of people from the democratic party and all sorts of third-parties. For another, there is a saying among many supporters that goes “Dr. Paul cured my apathy”, and a good example of this is the man that organized the November fifth fundraiser — he has never even voted in an election before. Also important to note is that Dr. Paul has actually won quite a few straw polls, his website lists him ahead in quite a few of them ( http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ ). There are also some supporters who have recorded telephone polls in which Dr. Pauls name was not an option, and selecting “Other” removed them from the call list. Lastly, I think he lags behind in polls due to lack of exposure. I think any potential voter could turn on any news channel, or pickup any newspaper, and hear a lot more about McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Clinton, and Obama, with more and longer articles. It seems as though for every 30 seconds Dr. Paul gets, these other candidates get about 20 minutes. This may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it is certainly how it seems from a casual viewpoint. | |
| Anthony Lilja | December 17th, 2007 4:20 pm ET Jack, Is this truly a question you need to ask? Most rational Americans understand why he is not mentioned more in the MSM and given his most proper due. The real question is how do we go about changing that unfortunate fact. Thank you for doing your part to bring about a positive change. | |
| jreemy y. | December 17th, 2007 4:20 pm ET there are a few reasons why the polls aren’t registering ron paul voters accurately: -a lot of ron paul supporters aren’t registered with a particular party, and are of the pollsters radar. - the cell phone thing. ron paul attracts a younger crowd, which is harder to pin down with standard home phone calls. - the big reason: polls in general are usually biased and flawed. ron paul is NUMBER ONE in ONLINE POLLS, but not landline phone polls?? which one is correct? as homer simpson said: im voting for ron paul, and nobody called me to ask who i was voting for. | |
| Jason Blain | December 17th, 2007 4:21 pm ET Polling centers won’t call your cell phone, they won’t call you at work, and they certainly don’t leave a message. That knocks a lot of people out of your data sample immediately. Most of us have things to do when these people are calling, and many of us no longer have landlines. So when someone polls at 6% you have to ask yourself, 6% of what and who exactly? Does 6% of whomever is sitting on their couch at 3:30 in the afternoon really matter in the vast scheme of the working class who will undoubtedly outnumber them at the day’s end? I think not. | |
| Eric Pangborn | December 17th, 2007 4:21 pm ET Great question Jack! Why don’t you ask your wise and loyal followers to visit Dr. Paul’s web site to find out why he should be higher! | |
| Michael Sites | December 17th, 2007 4:21 pm ET Jack, That’s an easy question to answer. When the pollsters call they give you six choices: 1 for Giuliani, 2 for McCain, 3 for Thompson, 4 for Romney, 5 for Other and 6 to be removed. When you press 5 to support Ron Paul, the message states “Thank You! We will take you name off the list and not poll you again!” Michael | |
| Leonard L. Radline | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Dear Mr. Cafferty: People in this country don’t understand we are at war with the Washington Establishment. Too many people are locked into a Republican or Democratic mindset. Ron Paul isn’t getting the coverage he truly deserves. A third party candidate in this country is at a huge disadvantage of qualifiying for access to be put on a ballot. The chips are stacked against any 3rd party candidate and that is why he probably won’t run as an independent. People need to wake up and realize if we vote for one of those other nimconpoops we will wind up with the same old status quo. Wake up America, Ron Paul has the answers and we need to embrace his candidacy. Anything less we will wind up with MORE GOVERNMENT, MORE TAXES. iF YOU VOTE FOR A LESSER OF TWO EVILS YOU STILL WIND UP WITH EVIL. Len Radline, Kane Pa | |
| Ronin Reed | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Ron Paul stands against everything that the Council on Foreign Relations, the New World Order, big business and the globalist agenda try and shove down the throat of the America people. The polls are rigged and misleading and twisted to push whomever these fascist organizations want to be in the “front-runner”. The rest of the candidates are shills and are not even real options. The major news networks should be ashamed of themselves. Thank you Jack for not backing down and giving Ron Paul the coverage he deserves. | |
| Kamel | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Dr. Ron Paul’s stand in the polls is a true reflection of the nature of America in today’s world. We choose our leaders for the wrong reasons. We went to war with Iraq even though we had concrete evidence they had no WMD. We kept pushing for confrontation with Iran even when the president knew all his rhetorics were based on no evidence. If you want to be president in America, just be sensational and leave the rest to the media. I think the media is doing a terrible job at selling Dr. Paul’s message and that is why he is running low in the polls. I would not be surprised if our next president is Hillary, Rudy or Mr. Hussein Obama. If you want to know how terrible our judgment is as voters, just think about the current occupant of the White House. Kamel | |
| Phil | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Dr. Paul is not higher in the polls for a couple of reasons. It is not the man, it is the message. Liberty, freedom and limited government is what both left and neocon right are fighting against. Wake up America. It boils down to this: individual sovereignty or the State. You choose. As you have put it Mr. Cafferty, America want a new way. | |
| Lorenz | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Take a look at the people who run this country. We have sheep fo voters. There is more loyalty for party rather than to country, and it certainly shows with the disgruntled congress. You have people voting for Hillary because she is simply a woman, you have people voting for Obama because he is black, and you have people voting for Guliani because he “ran New York City.” What it comes down to is this; People are not educated, they choose not to learn, and they isolate themselves from reality. It’s time to wake up America. | |
| Josh | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Simple, not all good salesmen are capable of being good managers. | |
| suzanne shatto | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET i think many of these comments are just flawed theories about polling. perhaps you could ask one of the pollsters to come and be on your show to explain how they do polling. might be of general interest. | |
| Sam | December 17th, 2007 4:22 pm ET Although I’m an Afghan immigrant and know that Ron Paul will probably pull the troops out of Afghanistan I’m still sending him money and he will get my vote. I’m an American and to me America comes first. It’s a decision that occupies my mind often but it’s the right choice. Thanks Jack for talking about Dr. Paul. | |
| Vote RonPaul | December 17th, 2007 4:23 pm ET There is an incredible disparity between polling percentages for Ron Paul. The disparity is very striking because Dr. Paul either wins a poll ( ~30%) or comes in dead last (~2%); and there’s almost never a placement in the middle. Therefore, one certain conclusion which can be inferred from this anomaly is that there is much more than the claimed 5% margin of error in main stream media polling. | |
| Merry Milton | December 17th, 2007 4:24 pm ET First of all, thank you so much for recognizing Dr. Paul. He has never received the amount of media he deserves. | |
| Renee McCrady | December 17th, 2007 4:24 pm ET I am one of these ’spamming, revenge of the nerds’ Ron Paul supporters. I’ve never been callled or solicited to take a poll. I also voted democrat in every past election. Maybe that has something to do with it? Maybe the polling techniques are outdated? Maybe the media has no idea what is truly going on in America right now? | |
| Pete , Yuma, AZ | December 17th, 2007 4:24 pm ET Hi Jack , This is my first time I have written a letter to you and by the way thank you for taking this moment to speak about Dr. Paul. I am almost 50 Yrs old and I read some of the posted commentaries stating that the only ones that are interested in voting for Dr. Paul are the youth. I am glad ,but also, I am glad that I can voice my opinion about the matter because I still feel like 18.. lol. I believe that Ron Paul has a great chance of winning this coming presidetial election with or without the media’s help because We Americans are not so naive about the politics that is in our nation today. The average American is well informed , it’s a matter of will to vote. Again , Thank you! | |
| Chuck Cavanaugh | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET An awful lot of people have their hand in the taxpayers pocket and for them to vote for somebody who wants to drastically reduce government spending might seem to go against their self-interest. They must know the U.S. economy is the sinking Titanic but as long as the tilting economic behemoth can keep the lights on they don’t want to venture far from what’s familiar. | |
| J. Horton | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET Do the polls call VoIP telephones or just traditional analog landlines? I, like many other Ron Paul supporters, only use a digital telephone line provided by Time Warner; many others only use cell phones. I have never received a polling call. Could it be that the means of gathering poll data have not yet caught up to the technological realities of the U.S. today? Perhaps the individuals that are being polled are senior citizens, one of the few groups still primarily reliant on landline based telephony, who have not heard of Dr. Paul due to your own network’s, and the rest of the old world MSM’s, reluctance to provide (positive) coverage of the man? Nah, it couldn’t be anything like that. If you dinosaurs don’t wisen up to the changing political landscape afforded by the internet then you are destined for extinction. We won’t miss you either. J. | |
| Casey | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET Many polls simply exclude his name. If there were a study done on how many polls excluded Ron Paul, you would notice that the number is great. | |
| Jacob Martin | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET There is an incredible disparity between polling percentages for Ron Paul. The disparity is very striking because Dr. Paul either wins a poll ( ~30%) or comes in dead last (~2%); and there’s almost never a placement in the middle. Therefore, one certain conclusion which can be inferred from this anomaly is that there is much more than the claimed 5% margin of error in main stream media polling. | |
| Ryan | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET The Ron Paul Revolution is just that-a revolution, one that will unite both parties which will result in a hopeful future for America. Paul is not recieving the amount of media that the other hopeful candidates are getting because of his position on Iraq being very different than all of the other candidates. His has the most credible voting record, has recieved more donation support from active militray soldiers than any other candidate, has set a world record of over $6 million dollars in one day, and has one every post debate poll so far. Why does that Main Stream Media not include Ron Paul-who knows, but I know that my vote in the end will go to Ron Paul. | |
| Blue | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET These polls are manipulated to get answers that are sought. Here is an example (proof): “Ron Paul Being Censored In Telephone Polls” | |
| AJ | December 17th, 2007 4:25 pm ET The reason is clear, it’s because the media only gives attention to certain candidates in both parties and when those are the only candidiates they talk about it is easy to forget about the others! | |
| Larry Horn | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET Ron Paul will win any Poll that is publicly open for anyone and everyone to participate in. Just look back at your competitor station (F X News) after the Republican debates. Dr. Paul won hands down with the closest candidate way behind him. Better yet Jack can you tell us Ron Paul supporters why the media couldn’t quit talking about Mr. Huckabee the day after the F X News last Rep. debate when Ron Paul had double the voter call in response and at that time set his first fund raiser record.. Give Ron Paul the daily exposure that the media has given Huckabee and see what happens. | |
| Connor Heep | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET 2008 will mark the year when polls become irrelevant. | |
| Chris | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET Having read many of these posts, the resounding answer here is that the media isn’t giving Ron Paul a fair shake. On the contrary, I think the media is giving him a great shake! Look, those on top of the polls are the ones who are going to get the coverage. Rudy, McCain, Mitt, and Huckabee (now) are getting the coverage. On the Democratic side, this argument could be made by Richardson, Kucinich, or anyone other than Clinton/Obama/Edwards. The fact that Ron Paul gets ANY coverage is more than he should expect at this point. He is proving to be a fundraising force, but he’ll never win. Where I am, you have to be Republican to vote in the Republican primary; someone this independent doesn’t stand a chance. Not only is the media giving him some free airtime, but they also hit the nail on the head when it comes to his chances. Call it pandering to the party if you like. I call it winning. In the end, all of the hoopla and signs and YouTube videos do nothing if the candidate doesn’t take occupancy in the White House in 2009. | |
| Andrew Gaiziunas | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET There is a lack of transparency of the polling process; how are the participants selected, and how are they polled? Without transparency in this process, I do not believe any of the Ron Paul supporters will be dissuaded by any poll numbers, as there is an abundance of straw poll results showing him with a clear lead. The only thing that will convince (or support) Paul-ites will be the numbers when the real polls open and people start voting. | |
| DigitalBob in Michigan | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET Most polls sample between 400 and 2,000 people. Many polled are people who have the numbers listed in a phone book and have old-fashioned land lines. I have neither. Many polled are of those who voted Republican in 2004. I didn’t. Bush ran unopposed and Kerry was a disappointment. It was like getting two brands of vanilla ice cream. The challenge for the Ron Paul campaign is to get more broadcast media air time. The moneybomb and blimp are stunts to get the message out, since Dr. Paul cannot compete with Hillary’s Laugh or Giuliani’s picture on every 9/11 documentary. There is an America outside of New York. Even so, his ideas are getting out. The Internet has been liberating. The electorate are tired of the Iraq War. We believe government is the source of problems and not the solution. We’re tired of being lied to. We want our money back in our own pockets, not in those who get sole-source emergency war funding. Same-old-same-old isn’t going to get it anymore. The other guys negotiate our treasure and constitution down the toilet. | |
| Andrew Smith | December 17th, 2007 4:26 pm ET Jack, Thank you for your fair and unbiased coverage of the Ron Paul campaign. If the rest of the media covered ALL the candidates fairly, they would see the true breadth of support for the Ron Paul campaign. The fact that the polls, the TV stations, the radio, the reporters, and the rest of the mainstream sources don’t report on more than half of the field with any regularity is very telling. It seems as though they are trying to tell us that they cover the candidates the people want, the top poll-getters. Huckabee’s campaign was nearly broke, yet he started to get coverage because his poll numbers went up. After the initial coverage, his poll numbers are going even higher. Yet, Fred Thompson jumped into the race after tons of coverage not even being a candidate, and his numbers are sinking. So, it can’t be just the polls. Ron Paul has now outraised every other candidate this quarter, yet he’s only getting coverage for this one issue. Why? Isn’t this phenomenal fund-raising a clear sign that the people do want more Ron Paul? So why isn’t there more fairness in the media? It can only be that the media has already chosen our candidates for us and they’re feeding us the ones they believe are winners. When we allow mass disinformation like this, we allow our votes to be usurped. Thank heavens there are people out there like you who pay attention to these things and at least acknowledge the great disaparity between what the media would like us to believe, what we believe… the truth. | |
| Christian | December 17th, 2007 4:27 pm ET Thank you for finally starting to give this amazing man some credit. He should be #1 in the polls, and in your conversations, but the bias media is trying to keep him down, that is why, one main reason there is so much, an overwhelming support for him by donations and people online. People want him. He is the only one out there that speaks what our founding fathers of America wanted for America. We can all learn a lesson or two from Dr. Paul. | |
| Christopher Esparsen | December 17th, 2007 4:27 pm ET All to say is that Ron Paul has that extra something that this election is missing. The 6-million dollar man brings a new course of direction for this country. His ideas may not sit well with all Americans, but its the idea of change that may have led to his recently acquired fortune. Let’s hope we don’t have to live through another Clinton presidency. | |
| Pat | December 17th, 2007 4:27 pm ET Most news reporters mention Ron Paul only as a foot note. Why don’t we see more discussions regarding the topics he raises. All this other fluff that the other candidates are talking to will not save this country from becoming a 3rd world country. Its up to the media to speak to the issues that this country are really up against and to ask these questions of the candidates. Thank God for you and Lou for asking tough questions. Think you will find that Ron is about the only candidate that has common sense answers to your questions. I have voted Democrate for almost 40 years but plan on voting for Ron because he is the only candidate currently running that can be trusted. Will vote for him regardless of who is on the ballot. This is also the first time I have sent out emails to all my friends to asking them to educate themselves on the issues and Ron. We have got to get back to the constitution. I also understand why the election collage was created, how it defeats a third party candidate and how it prevents us from having a democratic election. Ron Paul spoke to this in a recent interview. Have you? | |
| Dina Califano | December 17th, 2007 4:27 pm ET Jack, I’ll also ask you this - Why is it that even when Dr. Paul has placed higher in those so called OFFICIAL polls, that his percent is never displayed? He has placed higher than McCain, but who do we see as the top five over and over? Rudy, Mitt, Mike, Fred and John. These are the reasons why Dr. Paul can raise 6 million dollars in one day, and doesn’t place higher in the polls. | |
| Aaron Kreke | December 17th, 2007 4:27 pm ET Ron Paul supporters have taken the internet by storm because the mainstream media is not speaking for the people anymore, enstead they are trying to convince the people of what to speak. They do this by contacting 2004 GOP voters on their landlines. He has won every straw poll, won every debate, raised more money in a 24 hour period than any other canidate in HISTORY and still, not more than a 30 second spot on any mainstream media channel. Our voices are not being heard. What do we have to do? | |
| Ken Campbell, Jr. | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET ron paul raises more than $6 million in one day from a fundraiser not initiated by his campaign but by independent grassroots enthusiasts. the average donation was only $50. nearly 25,000 first time donors. and yet the media still portrays ron paul as an internet phenomenon with no chance of winning. interesting, the media also portrayed jfk as a television phenomenon with no chance of winning. obviously there’s something flawed in the polls. not all of them tho, the polls where he’s won in a landslide have just been dismissed. | |
| don Carter | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET It’s interesting to me how the polling system used to determine a candidate’s standing is more about national name recognition, media preferential treatment and favoritism as well as factors other than the legitimate on the ground voter support that person may have. As the saying goes, money talks and b.s. walks so seems to me some folks below the so called candidate polling radar are talking with their money that they believe in what Ron Paul has to say. | |
| roger faulk | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET I truely believe washinton is run by lobbiest and special interist groups, thay are not going to want Ron Paul as president. | |
| Merry Milton | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET Secondly, Ron Paul is not high on the polls for a Republican Nominee because alot of Independents cannot or will not vote in a Republican Primary depending on their states. | |
| Bryan | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET Polls can be manipulated and often times are to keep the sheeple in check. | |
| Sean Lee | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET The discord between Ron Paul’s poll numbers and fund raising is due to the methodology of the polling. Paul relies on young people from mostly urban or suburban regions for his base of support. These people are very likely to not have any hard-line phones; however, major polls do not call cell phones. Furthermore, the polls give greater weight or only include the responses from “likely voters.” Determining who is a “likely voter” is largely determined by past voting record. The last Republican primary was for the 2000 election, so no one under 25 has had a chance to vote in a Republican primary and therefore would be more likely to be classified as a “unlikely voter.” Lastly, Paul’s message is quite different than his opponents. It is highly conceivable that Paul supporters would have poor voting records because they have had little in common with candidates in past elections. | |
| Josh | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET I think that Ron Paul has such a low poll rating because the American people are ignorant of the IMPORTANT issues that he is championing. NO ONE in the mainstream media talks about how we’re getting screwed by our greedy government officials who continue to support PARASITIC organizations like the Federal Reserve. I would love to see a lineup of congressman asked if they had a clue why we caved in to the international bankers in 1913 by giving them ALL that this nation had worked soo hard for. Why our government has allowed them to fleece the american people with such CRIMINAL avenues of interest the FRACTIONAL RESERVE system allows. Appropriations Bills, I’d like to take a poll to see if america knows what they are! Its easy not to tax the people in your administration if your allowed to put the burden of these bills on the FUTURE OF AMERICA, IF THERE IS ONE! | |
| Chris Barrows | December 17th, 2007 4:28 pm ET It comes down to pride. The MSM already had their candidates, gameplans and questions picked out months ago. Unfortunately, the game hasn’t gone as they had planned because the American people have upset the applecart. Since they can’t find an elegant way to swallow thie pride and say “Oops! Our bad! We had it wrong!”, they’re just ignoring the fine doctor and polling the same way they always have. But the political game and the rest of the world has changed in the last four years. After Iowa and New Hampshire, I don’t think there will be an informed citizen alive who won’t be able to recall hearing the name “Ron Paul”! | |
| Bob Cornero | December 17th, 2007 4:29 pm ET Dear Mr. Cafferty, There are many reasons and evidently many people from different walks of life who absolutely love Ron Paul. The man is the embodiment of everything we need right now in the White House. He beckons us back to a time when people were independent and free and yet simultaneously deriving their strength from their relationships and communities. A nation is only as good as it’s people and perhaps he is reminding us all of that we can be good Americans; that we don’t have to live in constant fear, that we can be intelligent and resourceful and successful, that we can return the US to its former status of being a City on a Hill for liberty and freedom. It would seem there is a great disparity between the traditional polls and what’s happening on the Internet. The Internet is without a doubt the greatest technology we have today, empowering people all over the world. For Ron Paul, it has brought his supporters together on public forums, news sites, and in areas where open dialog can once again take place in America. Perhaps the polling methods of the past are not so good anymore. If that were the case, the polls surely would have seen all this coming. As it stands, they have proven to be poor indicators of anything, leading many to believe they are now entirely irrelevant. Imagine, the candidate who polls the lowest receives the most money and has the most ardent supporters! Anyone with common sense can see the disparity! These very same polls are subject to the whims and interpretations of their creators, who are seemingly never without bias. Perhaps it is time we acknowledge this phenomenon for what it is. Perhaps we should acknowledge what the most powerful technology of our time has shown us. Perhaps it is time to see that this man, Ron Paul, is indeed a top tier candidate, if not the GOP frontrunner! And it’s all happening because of the power of ideas! Thank you | |
| Randy Turner | December 17th, 2007 4:29 pm ET Professional pollsters have been manipulating the questions asked in the so-called national polls with Americans being easily manipulated by the handful of news media outlets on television quoting these polls. Also, there has been no mention on television news of Dr. Ron Paul’s stance, winning a national blind poll done by Zogby. 32.8 percent chose the description matching those of Dr. Paul, which out ranked the other candidate positions. Question answered. Randy Turner | |
| Bill Ogden | December 17th, 2007 4:30 pm ET Ron Paul is not part of the “Clique”. He is doing things the right way instead of using political steroids. Ron Paul is a “Statesman”…the others are typical Opportunists/Politicians. Thanks Jack for mentioning Ron Paul on your show. | |
| Fred | December 17th, 2007 4:30 pm ET pretty hard to gain support if you aren’t a part of the trilateral commission, CFR, Bildeberg, or call for an immediate pull-out in Iraq | |
| Tom | December 17th, 2007 4:30 pm ET The polls and media coverage is specially tailored to the elite mainstream candidates that are characterized more as movie actors, not politicians. They have become out of touch with the daily needs of Americans. We, as a nation, have become shallow at the surface and Dr. Paul’s message reaches to the heart of the sincere public. However, it is fighting upstream against the mainstream. | |
| Cat Neal | December 17th, 2007 4:31 pm ET Ron Paul is a Libertarian who espouses the Constitution as the basis for defining the role of government, thereby making him the only true candidate for President. His supporters, on the other hand, are usually one-issue voters who are willing to monetarily support any candidate who promotes the elimination of government entitlement programs and the legalization of drugs. Drew carey, the comedian, once called Libertarans “Republicans on drugs”. The Second Admendment is also a particular favorite, even at the expense of the others. Our local Ron Paul Revolution organizer was, a few years back, dragging his small son to anti-abortion protests, that being his “one-issue.” Ron Paul has the right idea but his supporters, though willing to put their money where their mouths are, do not get the big picture and come across as wackos. | |
| M. Kirston | December 17th, 2007 4:31 pm ET Who is getting polled? I am a registered democrat but I am switching to republican so that I can vote for Ron Paul in the primaries. I have never been asked or polled on my opinion. There is an underground effort of the people happening right now which is evident in the amount of donations. The news largely ignores this effort and continues to call Dr. Paul a long shot. What the MSM fails to understand is that this is a real movement and I believe the polls are flawed. If there was fair reporting, the success that Ron Paul will have in the primaries would not be called a “surprise” or an “upset”. | |
| Cody | December 17th, 2007 4:31 pm ET Answer: Iraq is the issue that keeps Paul down in the national telephone polls. The likely voters targeted by the phone polls are prejudiced against Paul. Those likely voters have allowed their fear of terrorism to be stoked, and allowed themselves to be manipulated into unquestioning support of a foolish foreign entanglement in Iraq. Paul’s supporters are doing our best to wake up the rest of the voters. There are real solutions to minimizing the impact of violent terrorists, real solutions that would preserve civil liberty and be much more effective than the draconian Patriot Act and the McCarthy-esque Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. Cody R. Peeples, | |
| Ramsey Turner | December 17th, 2007 4:31 pm ET What’s your record for number of answers Jack? Ron Paul doesn’t poll higher because: 1.) Many people now only use cell phones (I am one of them). As you know, pollsters only call landlines. 2.) The mass media is incredibley biased against him. Every mention of how well he’s doing is followed by a “but, he’s a second tier candidate” (who decides that by the way?), or “he’s not going to win”, etc. 3.) Many polls don’t have him as an option (since someone decided he’s a second tier candidate). Or, he’s in the “other” option. 4.) The amount of talking time in the debates is so obviously not “fair and balanced”, it’s just ridiculous. Romney, Guiliani, Thompson, etc get so much more air time the average un-plugged person can’t help but notice. | |
| Javier | December 17th, 2007 4:31 pm ET Ron Paul’s poll numbers are low, because those polls are deliberately trying to keep him down. The same thing is going on with the Media’s coverage of Ron Paul, you are one of the few that even mentions Ron Paul and the positive activity happenning in his campaign, why is that? Just another example of a deliberate attempt to keep Ron Paul down. Ron Paul wins every post debate online/text poll, how can that be? | |
| Timothy Heilshorn | December 17th, 2007 4:32 pm ET A better question might be, why is Ron Paul ahead in every other poll except the ones in the main stream media? The amount of money that has been donated to Ron Paul’s campaign should eliminate the notion that there are only a few spamming the online and text polls. The average donation yesterday was only 50 dollars. | |
| Amy Wolfenberger | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET It is not very hard to realize why Ron Paul’s fundraisers aren’t translating into votes. Ron Paul basically wants us to return to the Gilded Age so of course he isn’t going to get that many votes. Ron Paul can raise a lot of money because his followers are fanatical and willing to bankrupt themselves for a lost cause. He cannot, however, raise a lot of votes because it is hard to find that many people who were as bad history students as he apparently was. | |
| Josh | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET Jack, Our American people are being blinded by false perceptions and have forgotten much of what they learned in government class in school! So many are willing to compromise on core principals of our nation. This is a primary reason for the youth being so involved in the Ron Paul campaign … they have not been jaded yet! Many people forget that this country is a Constitutional Republic not a direct Democracy. A true Democracy is tyranny by majority. The founding fathers understood this and setup our Constitution to provide a Republic where the rights of the individual are protected from the will of the majority. True “American Patriotism” as our founding fathers saw it, is the resistance of Government tyranny when it infringes on the rights of the individual. Freedom and personal liberty belong to each and every human being regardless of the existence of a government. The founding fathers revolted against King George and the British government by declaring these concepts, indeed risking their lives in the process. Those same men are now some of our greatest heros in history. Today, men and women who stand for these same ideals are commonly ridiculed. Great men such as Ron Paul who stand firm on concepts that matter to our personal rights, freedom and liberty … as well as the Declaration of Independence and Constitution are often ignored. Too often all of us are blinded by false perceptions. Republicans and Democrats are, for the most part, busy wrapped up in using the government to pursue and execute their personal agendas. This concept is wrong. The role of government is not supposed to be social engineering our country the way the majority feels they think it should run. That logic results in oppression of individual liberty that is no different than the fascists we have fought over the years and that we continue to fight today in the Middle East. Instead, the role of Government is supposed to be protecting the rights and liberty of the citizens. Government is indeed needed as designed in a Republic to protect the liberty of each individual from every other person. We need our country back … Jack, we need Ron Paul. | |
| Wes Duerr | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET Mis spellings above please read this one. LOL The reaseon why Ron Paul is low in the polls is the survey research. Any time I have been called about a poll it is always scewed towards republican or democrate. Third parties are over looked because we are in the mind set of a plutocracy. Most people think we go to chocies and are content like sheep. If we the people would listen to new ideas and not glance maybe “We The People” would have a better government. | |
| Jeffrey Shakoor | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET The polls only measure likely Republican voters. Anyone who spends time with Ron Paul supporters understands they are anything but. They’re people that have given up on the party and politics all together, Democrats (like me) and Independents who thought our voices couldn’t be heard and represented any longer. Now we have a candidate who can speak for us, but it seems no matter how loud we scream, you guys don’t want to hear it. Instead why not ask the question, “If the guy who’s supporting freedom, liberty, and the Constitution is the crazy one, what has America become?” | |
| atlabs | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET This just goes to show how out of touch the media is with reality. Wake up! | |
| Karen | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET I’ve considered myself a Democrat all my life. Now I find myself planning to vote in a Republican primary and even donating to the Ron Paul cause twice. And I’m probably not the only one | |
| Katie Tantrum | December 17th, 2007 4:33 pm ET Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because he is either discredited in every poll he does win, or it is due to the fact that not many Americans have heard his message. | |
| Yannis Piotoyannakis | December 17th, 2007 4:34 pm ET Ron Paul is like an iceberg. What is visible above the surface is a lot smaller in relation to what is below the waters below the field of vision. | |
| Justin Fowler | December 17th, 2007 4:34 pm ET I have to wonder who “they” are polling? If you polled one hundred Red Sox fans about which baseball team they favored, you probably wouldn’t hear much about the Yankees. I believe these polls tend to cater to middle-aged, upper-middle-class, newspaper readers. Dr. Paul’s internet presence is a realistic indicator of his impact on a previously overlooked (and previously non-voting) constituency: the average, tax-paying American. Justin Fowler | |
| Kenneth Harwood | December 17th, 2007 4:34 pm ET RP is polling in single digits because the | |
| Eric | December 17th, 2007 4:34 pm ET The mainstream media basically ignores Dr. Paul. It seems like the media is picking the candidates for us. The establishment of corporate and banking elitist’s are scared to death of Dr. Paul because he speaks the truth and has the potential to ignite the revolutionary spirit inside all of us, also Dr. Paul is not “owned” by the elitist’s like the rest of our so-called “choices” of candidates on both sides. The alarm clock is set America will you wake up | |
| Jeff Workman | December 17th, 2007 4:35 pm ET Most polls are rigged Jack and either they don’t mention his name or refer to him as “None of the Above”. Most of us are NOT stupid no matter how much the media tries to push these biased poll results in our faces. | |
| Clint Fuller | December 17th, 2007 4:35 pm ET Well Jack Considering the issues Ron Paul is talking about (ending the war,ending the income tax and IRS and abolishing the Fed, and obeying the Constitution ). I would venture to say there are some BIG money people with a vested interest to - you might- stack the deck against Ron Paul and the American people. What I’m trying to say is, for the most part, “The media lies and the polls cheat”. | |
| Karl | December 17th, 2007 4:35 pm ET Make us proud Jack! You can be a leader you just have to do the right thing! | |
| Artus Register | December 17th, 2007 4:36 pm ET Polls frequently ignore Dr. Paul’s campaign. If ten polls are averaged and eight of them exclude Ron Paul, he is going to poll quite low. Also, a great many of Dr. Paul’s supporters are Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, Greens, and apathetic Republicans who had given up on the political process. Given the abysmally low voter turn out, especially for the primaries, how can the media ignore the enormous majority who until recently would have been called UNlikely voters. | |
| Tim | December 17th, 2007 4:36 pm ET Jack, | |
| Thomas Connolly | December 17th, 2007 4:36 pm ET Hopefully he is polling so low because of the bias, untended and intended, that exists in modern day polling. Ron Paul supporters are widespread and diverse, we can only hope his true level of support will be reflected on primary day. Thanks for your coverage Jack. If there was more of it from your colleagues those national polls would be more reflective of true democracy, not bias media selection. | |
| Nate | December 17th, 2007 4:36 pm ET The proof is already out there on how Dr. Paul is ignored on many of these polls as falling under the “other” category. Where is all of the coverage on how many straw polls this man has won, including the New York State Republican Straw Poll in the hometown of the so called “front runner”? I think we are seeing a new era, where not only the GOP, but the media alike are dead afraid of this man because of his pure record and honest message. Its not in their best interest to have a candidate representing your party that you cannot control. | |
| alex | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET Why do we have the Patriot Act? Why do we have a national offense instead of a national defense? Apathy + Constitutional abuse = a political environment that no true libertarian could survive. | |
| Robert | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET Important facts. CHECK THIS OUT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yuzMYIXhTE | |
| David Netes | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET The reason he hasn’t been doing well in the polls is because the media doesn’t give him fair coverage. We love Ron Paul because he has morals. I’m an atheist he’s a christian but he keeps his faith at home where it belongs and doesn’t wave his christian flag the way the Huckster does while buying his wife clothes and remodeling his house with campaign money. He doesn’t believe his religion is what should put him in the white house. We love Ron Paul because he knows about foreign policy and understands the changes that are needed, he doesn’t pound the war drums like Rudy who probably whose companies do buisness with our enemies. We love Ron Paul because he understands buisness and responsibility, unlike Mitt who was succeful in buisness only by firing Americans and sending their jobs overseas. Ron Paul understands the country is being ruined by the Federal Reserve and opposes it, thats why we love him. He’s done his homework and knows where this country needs to go and we haven’t had that since the killed Kennedy. | |
| Ileen | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET Jack, | |
| sam | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET Because most polls are created with an intent behind the outcome. Pollsters can’t always include all the available candidates. If the pollsters decide Paul has a no real shot ( Like expressed by many interviewing journalist), why would they list him? If not listed what kind of shot would any candidate have. The polls tell a portions of the truth, but not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It’s simply unrealistic to relay on polls to pick an elections outcome. The people of the united states are to dynamic for that. | |
| Ruth Filippone | December 17th, 2007 4:37 pm ET It sure is a stumper! Ron Paul has more grass roots support, more internet presence and hits, raises more money from a larger base than any other candidate. He wins most grass roots polls & most debates (and each person can vote only once, in spite of Sean Hannity’s lame comment). It seems to me that the National Polls the mainstream media quote ad nauseum are not very accurate. One element in their inaccuracy might be that they poll Republicans who voted such in the past, and Ron Paul has mega support from Americans who were apathetic before they became Paulites, or who are Independents, or even Dems who have converted. This is truly a Revolution. | |
| Marc B | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET Since Ron Paul’s support is obvious, then obviously these polls are wrong. Look at unstructured measures, like straw polls, the money bomb, and internet traffic. The question isn’t “why are Paul’s poll numbers low?”, it’s “why is the media reporting low numbers for Paul despite knowing better?” And why isn’t the media following Ron Paul’s and (other candidates’) comments on issues like the NAU, the IRS, etc? Follow www.ronpaul2008.com to part III of the zeitgeist.org documentary. It seems that Ron alone has the guts to face these issues — not the other candidates, and so far, not the media. But the voters are getting smarter, and using the internet (NOT the media) to investigate the issues and the candidates. Is CNN bold enough to publicize these issues that have captured the attention of the American public? It’s obvious that your viewers are interested but have to seek that information elsewhere. | |
| Kevin Hemp | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET Jack that one is easy | |
| Fred M | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET Polls? We dont need no stinking polls? We are going to shake the foundations of Washington DC come the primaries. And there aint a damm /g they can do about it You can take that to the bank Jack! | |
| Susanna | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET Ron Paul’s low “polling numbers” can be atributed to two things- outdated polling methods and lack of media attention to alledged “second tier” candidates. Sad to say, but his campain has had to stoop to traditional methods (as in money) to draw attention. Sure enough- now you are talking about him! | |
| Christopher Barker | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET I believe that the mainstream media, collectively, is engaged in a deliberate attempt to marginalize the candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul. From limiting his questions in televised debates, to doctoring online poll results (as has been documented), to having the most offensive of all “news” personalities Glenn Beck insinuate that Ron Paul supporters are terrorists, I believe that the powerful, elite ruling class of this country is indeed threatened by Dr. Paul’s popularity, and so are taking steps to marginalize him in this race. But his supporters, his MANY supporters are, and will remain, undeterred. Thank you for covering this topic… I hope it will be the beginning of more fair coverage going forward. | |
| Jon Richards, Houston, TX | December 17th, 2007 4:38 pm ET Jack, I’m 47 years old and probably the poster boy for the Republican Party poster given my demograhpic profile. There are so many things that I could look for in a candidate that would protect or subsidize my little microcosm. I work in the medical field and I make a comfortable living. I am pro-choice to the max as is my wife, a registered nurse. We are both voting for Ron Paul. Why? Because sometimes voters are forced to prioritize the issues that concern them most and getting this country back on course has to be number one. We truly believe that our foreign policy will bankrupt this country if left to continue. I have nothing but the deepest sympathy for all the American families that have lost children, husbands, fathers, or uncles in Iraq. Those sacrifices will always be in our hearts but we need to bring them home. Recalling the troops will not marginalize those that have made the ultimate sacrifice, but will stand in testement as a symbol to the moment when the American people stood in one voice and said “Enough”. We are taking back our country and handing the reins over to the one man who has demonstrated for decades that he is not in it for himself….he’s in it to repair the damage done and to make this country what it once was…by the people, for the people. | |
| Gus | December 17th, 2007 4:39 pm ET Because people like the status quo. Sure, the dollar is losing value, we are in a war we cannot win and those essential freedoms this country is based upon are slowly being gobbled up. But how is that affecting your everyday American right now? Our standard of living here in America is great compared to the rest of the world. The Ron Paul campaign has become a beacon for people disgruntled with the system and aware of the dangers the future presents for this country. They understand the reason this recession is breathing down or necks is the Federal Reserves butchery of the interest rates. They understand that the war we are in now is a perputuative cycle of destabilization in the Middle East, fueled by disgust for American Foriegn policy in the region and manifested in dictators and terror leaders like Osama Bin Laden. The people who comprehend the possibly dystopian future of not only America, but the world itself have really been left without a path to get thier views to a point of prominence. They are very passionate about how they feel, so much so as to spend say 4.2 million and 6.3 million dollars in consecutive months. But each vote only counts as one, you can spend the 4 years leading up the election reading literature on a candidate and grasping for all the more reasons to vote him but in the end your vote will matter just as much as somebody else who may not even know of more than 2 or 3 of the candidates. Unfortunately, the way we are headed, something horrible may lie on the horizon. And those who see it coming have united under the Ron Paul banner. But the majority likes the America it sees, so until theres a colossal shift in the way this countries collectively views the world Ron Paul and like-minded individuals will never poll well or have the say in policy they so dearly deserve. | |
| Amy | December 17th, 2007 4:39 pm ET There is no one answer to why he’s low in the polls, the following is my take: 1. Not as much name recognition. That’s the short list Mr. Cafferty. Thanks for asking the question. | |
| Liberty | December 17th, 2007 4:40 pm ET It’s too bad that you people in TV land are cowards. The American people are so sick of being patronizing. You people insult our intelligence. You would rather talk about Lindsey Lohan than Ron Paul. This is only the most important election in modern history or possibly ever. Why is Ron Paul not higher in the polls? Please ask me a tough question. He’s low in the polls because although we preach democracy to other countries and force democracy on other people we crush democracy here in America. This country is not a democracy or a republic, it’s a hypocritical state. | |
| Randle Turner | December 17th, 2007 4:40 pm ET If the MEDIA treated him like a viable candidate he might get more respect but if he is treated like he is undeserving the respect he should have as a member of Congress and a candidate for the office of President of the United States of America he will be seen as less. Hello ! I think the man deserves much more & by the way give Joe Biden a break too ! | |
| Thomas | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET First the media writes him off because he has no money. Now the media writes him off because he is low in the polls. Need I remind you that one month ago Mike Huckabee had no money AND was low in the polls? Need I also remind you that John Kerry was polling at 4% in Iowa when he came out with a victory? | |
| Kent | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET Why not higher in the Polls? Because the polls are inherently flawed as has been pointed out many times. Six million dollars in one day from real people without a corporate sponsor anywhere. Are you really that dense as to not understand what is going on? | |
| Dennis | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because the American public realizes that for the most part, Ron Paul is a nut job. What kind of candidate seeks a position in the very level of government he thinks should be abolished? Ron Paul’s hard line Libertarian beliefs are quite similar to those of the silly Anarchists of the early 90’s. The movers and shakers behind Ron Paul’s on-line movement are just Gen X Anarchists who have traded their grunge look for a suit and tie. | |
| Karen, Des Moines | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET Ron Paul is not getting bigger numbers in the polls because people are aware of what happened to John Dean. Until people can vote online, this internet support will not translate into warm bodies at the Iowa caucus on a cold winter night, or even into primary votes in New Hampshire. Computer geeks have proven themselves to be unwillling to participate in the process in person so far. You do not get to click a mouse to get a President. If Ron Paul can motivate these supporters to actually show up in the flesh, that will be another thing entirely. | |
| Juan Reynoso | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET Ron Paul is not acknowledge by the media or the pools because Our corrupt politicians are in the pocket of the Bankers and the multinational corporations, they pass legislations to support the corrupt system is that simple. but we will take our country back they can not pass legislation to control or buy our votes. The choice is ours, to let them make slaves out of us, or to take our country back from the corrupt politicians, the Bankers and the greedy disloyal corporations. Juan Reynoso | |
| David Reed, Texas | December 17th, 2007 4:41 pm ET He is continuously kept out of main stream media, I am finding people daily that have never heard of him because they haven’t seen him on any major news channels, Jack Cafferty surely you are for a fair campaign? Help us Jack please! get it out that the MSM is blocking his campaign, let it be known, you know it is true and I implore you Mr. Cafferty to help us a good American. | |
| Wade | December 17th, 2007 4:42 pm ET Maybe you can answer your own question by trying to answer this - why would ABC’s 20/20 do a full on-camera interview with Dr. Paul, and then not air it - instead opting for ‘on-line only, because that’s where his support is.’ Thanks for your coverage! | |
| Mark | December 17th, 2007 4:42 pm ET Cafferty is the only reason I still watch CNN. An honest, down to Earth guy who doesn’t take any crap. Always honest reporting. They need to give him his own hour. | |
| Suanne Skidd | December 17th, 2007 4:43 pm ET Jack, Please be fair and stop censoring Ron Paul. He is the only candidate who would change the disastrous course our country is currently on. He is the only hope we have left. He is also the only Statesman in this race. The rest are just politicians. | |
| Cristian | December 17th, 2007 4:43 pm ET What better poll than what Boston Tea Party did yesterday? A GOP candidate raised $6+ million and THAT is not the “story of the day”? Jack, it is a shame…I am not an american, but it is a shame…A few thousands americans gave money to Ron Paul in a single day, and we are asking about polls…You should ask how come that the mainstream media doesn’t give him too much attention! Who you represent? Because it looks to me that Ron Paul represents american people…And media??…I don’t know! | |
| Cheryl | December 17th, 2007 4:43 pm ET Jack, I have a challenge for you: Try promoting Ron Paul as much as promoting the others, and I guarantee his poll numbers will rise accordingly. His poll numbers are largely due to the fact that the media chooses our candidates for us. From the very beginning of this campaign Ron Paul has seldom been mentioned and when he is, it is preferenced with, “he can’t win”, “longshot”, or talk of a third party run. From the beginning, the media has never treated him as a serious candidate of equal importance. Do some research and compare the number of times Ron Paul has been favorably spoken of compared to the media choices of Giuliani, Romney, or their sudden choice of Huckabee. Even today with the news of Paul’s 6 million dollar day, we are still hearing more about McCain and Huckabee than Paul. The simple answer is because he is not the media’s choice for a candidate. Do some favorable promoting of Paul in the media and his poll numbers will rise. Try it. | |
| Daniel Hagquist | December 17th, 2007 4:43 pm ET Ron Paul is not shown in the polls because it is not in the best interest of the elite who own and control the mainstream media to give him any airtime. If the elite allowed Ron Paul to get the exposure he deserves then that could potentially spell the death of their big businesses, their money ties with the media, and ultimately their control over the american people. | |
| Freedom | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET America is not a Republic or a Democracy but instead a hypocrisy. The American people are tricked and fooled and don’t even know it. Even the ones hearing this now have no idea what I’m talking about. Freedom | |
| Angela Canny | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET I suspect that reason that Paul is not higher in the polls is because the media spends more time reporting poll numbers than they do reporting voting history and integral policy differences. | |
| Teresa | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET Not sure who these ‘polls’ are calling. As a registered republican who voted for Bush (DOH!)- nobody has tried to call us to answer any polls. I really do not understand why the poll #s are so off. Perhaps they only call certain people in the executive committees? I can’t wait to see what happens when all those no party affiliated, newly registered Republicans and Independent voters get to the voting booth! I have a feeling it is the end of ‘elections’ as we know them. Anything can happen at this point! | |
| Jaime G. | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET Ron Paul’s appeal lies in the fact that he is not polished and plastic like many of the other candidates. I haven’t voted for anything in over 10 years, but I am now a registered Republican who will be at the Kansas caucus on Feb. 9th supporting Ron Paul with pride. | |
| wally in mount vernon illinois | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET Life long democrat, vietnam era veteran, retired police dispatcher. Go RON PAUL. | |
| Clayton Allgood | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET Mr. Cafferty, The Answer is the MSM is giving other candidates much more coverage but not focusing their “plans” to solve the critical problems that we have. They don’t have the solutions to the problems because they want more of the same. By doing that the MSM is suppressing the message of Freedom of Ron Paul and the grass roots following and the overall poll numbers. Our numbers are rising though and with our without the MSM the message will continue and grow. I have always respected your commentary. You are on of the few lone voices of reason and perspective. Thanks for being a part of the solution not the problem. | |
| JP Bonner | December 17th, 2007 4:44 pm ET First, it must be mentioned that Paul has won more state straw polls than any other candidate- except at polls where his supporters are barred from participating. However, there are two major reasons for Dr. Paul’s low profile in the polls and overwhelming presence on the internet. The dedication of his supporters may point out some of the flaws of our polling system. With only 10% of registered Republicans voting in primary elections, the Paulites believe that they can make a splash simply because their attendance rate will approach 100%. | |
| Tom McArdle | December 17th, 2007 4:45 pm ET Journalists, Politicians, Military Industrial Complex employees are faced with major changes in a Ron Paul Administration. Rather than change they prefer the status quo, so they ignore Dr. Paul. | |
| Ed | December 17th, 2007 4:45 pm ET I am an Ind who finds it hard to support anyone who represents either one of these 2 corrupt and incompetent parties. I have a hard time voting for a Rep because they want to legislate religion, and even more reasons for not voting for a Dem. The only reason I would consider RPaul if he were to get on the ballot is because he is the only one who actually talks about the job the right way. The job of every elected official is to defend the Constitution, and to only make laws that the Constitution gives them the right to make. I dont think the majority of politicians even know what the Constitution is, let alone what it says. | |
| Willem de Wit | December 17th, 2007 4:45 pm ET If Ron Paul has as little support as the (scientific?) polls suggest, how come he can raise more than $6 million in one day? | |
| Matt Otremba | December 17th, 2007 4:45 pm ET Jack, I long for a day when ideas and consistent intergrity are more important qualites then who the mainstream media knights as their ‘top tier’ candidates. When I think of Ron Paul and his supporters I am reminded of a quote by Samuel Adams: “It does not take a majority to prevail … but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Matt | |
| caroline | December 17th, 2007 4:45 pm ET The “polls” don’t seem to reflect the kind of voter I am. Formerly registered Independent (now Republican just to vote Ron Paul). I only use a mobile phone and only get my news on the internet. Maybe the establishment will be surprised by how many of us come out on caucus day. | |
| Kent | December 17th, 2007 4:46 pm ET Worth a second posting. “Troy: Give Ron Paul the time on the air that the other candidates receive and the polls would shift dramatically. Look at how much time McCain is getting right now over something as trivial, and worthless, as support by Lieberman. Give Ron Paul the attention he deserves without just saying “a long shot with little chance to win” and Ron Paul will win the primaries, the elections, and turn this country around. | |
| SteveH | December 17th, 2007 4:46 pm ET CNN: You are as guilty as any out there who manipulate polls, or pull them from your web site when the out-come is not what you want. We need the JNN: Jack News Network | |
| Joe Corrigan | December 17th, 2007 4:46 pm ET Jack, | |
| Patricia | December 17th, 2007 4:46 pm ET The NEO-CONS & the “Religious Rightists” are not going to let Ron Paul win the nomination. It’s just that simple. | |
| Yannis Piotoyannakis | December 17th, 2007 4:47 pm ET Jack, | |
| Crystal Spargo | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET Dr. Paul has a wonderful and strong support base, but that is where the problem lies. He has a very powerful message, calling for major changes in this country. This message seems to resonate deeply within America’ s multitudes. Unfortunately our efforts are not being met graciously by the mainstream media, which justifies our cause that much more. It would take an ounce of support from the mainstream media for Dr. Paul’s campaign to fly across this nation, but to no avail…we have not received such support yet. I am hopeful though because 6.6 million dollars can buy t.v. time, even if it is not offered, the people have spoken and we will be heard!! I thank you so much for your time and your willingness to offer this support. | |
| Titus | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET If Ron Paul supporters get off their rears and vote for him in the primaries and caucuses, he will win. If they don’t, then this country deserves to sink. As for Democrats, I honestly don’t get how they can consider not jumping ship just for the primaries. Do they want an opposition party like the one they’ve been dealing with? Then they deserve Huckabee, cause thats what they are going to get. | |
| Brandon | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET The reason why Ron Paul’s numbers are so low in the polls is that polls are engineered for a determined outcome. Who determiens the outcome? Our great watchdog media and their bosses. It would be a shame for special interest groups and large corporations should Ron Paul win the nomination, so their children companies don’t report, or include him in polls. | |
| Charles | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET It be because the polls are ineffective at producing accurate results. They are still conducted in ways that no longer fit with the direction that politics is heading. The only polls that he is low in are the one’s run by power hungry corporations that currently have a stranglehold on our news media. Check any poll that is not “screened” such as those on the internet and true free speech media outlets and they will all show what we all know, that Ron Paul is the bright light in our future and will win the Republican nomination. | |
| Kris | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET The National Polls do not mention his name during the calling/polling process….Dr.Paul is referred to as “Other”. It is so obvious that the MSM is ignoring Ron Paul, and it only makes people want to find out more about him. 6 million in 1 day and CNN talks about it for 30 seconds. | |
| Annette Hardman | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET Hey Jack, Also the polls are taken from only republicans who were registered in the last election who voted for Bush. That is a very slim slice of the electorate who will put Ron Paul in the White House, barring voting booth shenanigans of the last election for Bush. There are thousands of people who are supporting Paul who have never voted before. He has cured tremendous apathy in this country from the last presidential run. Could it be his his ideals of smaller government and foreign policy of non intervention?? Voting for the less of two evils is pretty sad in this country. Ron Paul and is platform and voting record are hungrily sought after today with so much wrong in our government and in our world. He is a true choice for the first time in a long time. How refreshing!! 70% of Americans want us out of this war Jack, and except for Ron Paul the rest of the republican candidates are parroting Bush’s foreign policy and so are the democrats, which by the way has been a total and utter failure the entire time. There are a lot of really angry democrats who were elected to this congress to end the war. What do we have now…..more of the same. They have handed Bush everything he wants. They, also will be voting Paul, like me. We are sick of the same old CFR groomed candidates that they roll out every election cycle. Two sides of the same neo-fascists corp-gov controlled wimps! Politician’s quit working for the people a long time ago and people are just now waking up in droves to what has gone on under their noses! They are damn mad about it too Jack! I am have been a registered democrat all my adult life, I have crossed over and plugged my nose to register republican in this primary and my vote will go to Ron Paul. He is our last hope to save an America that we lost somewhere down the line. He has awakened the country to the dire danger we face of losing our Constitution and our country. Thanks Jack for the mention and it would do your network good to actually follow the Revolution. It is really getting huge. It will show up in New Hampshire and you guys will have to twist in the wind and be all embarrassed that you didn’t give this true statesmen more air time. Viva la Revolution Jack!!!! Annette Hardman | |
| Fred M | December 17th, 2007 4:48 pm ET There is something almost sad when the people have to inform the press of what is going to happen, if you cant see this tsunami coming , then you guys are in the wrong business. many reasons the polls dont refect him , cell phones not on polls ect… we ll see. | |
| Austin Duggan | December 17th, 2007 4:49 pm ET The answer to your question first requires an examination of its assumptions. First, who are the “most” that “consider him a distant long-shot?” Are they a loud minority of professional journalists, academics and political commentators? Do they include even one of the more than 100,000 Ron Paul supporters? I think that it goes without saying that there is a divide between the media and the public, not to mention a disparity between the public and their political representatives, a fact that would be relentlessly reported by any organization which took its free speech seriously. Nevertheless, let us suppose that your first assumption is correct, and that the polls really do reflect general opinion. Might Ron Paul’s low numbers have to do with the fact that he is excluded from much articulate commentary, relegated instead to biased coverage of how “wacky” the old-school republican is? Or worse, the shameless coverage of so-called “front runners,” who rarely receive such unprecedented grass-roots contributions and who garner their support instead from the same wealthy, elite minority that controls media outlets? If you can address your presuppositions honestly, then the question “how come he’s not higher in the polls” should evaporate, the capacity for sincere dialogue pending. | |
| American | December 17th, 2007 4:49 pm ET This country is no longer a Republic or a Democracy but instead a Hypocrisy. The American Sheeple are tricked and don’t know it, in fact the people who are hearing this now don’t know what I’m talking about. Ron Paul 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
| Daniel | December 17th, 2007 4:49 pm ET Huckabee had low poll numbers for a long time. Just wait and watch Ron Paul’s Tipping Point. | |
| Katie | December 17th, 2007 4:50 pm ET I don’t understand myself why anyone would support Dr. Paul, and here’s why: my elderly mother suffers from RA and COPD. She is so far below poverty level that it’s laughable, and requires a number of expensive medications that she would not be able to afford if it were not for Medicare D, a program that Dr. Paul and his ilk want to do away with. I’m not likely to support any candidate who wants to decide who in this country gets to live and who gets to die because he thinks government should not help ANYONE. Perhaps Dr. Paul and his supporters should look to Dickens–after all, was it not Ebenezer Scrooge who thought the poor “ought to die and decrease the surplus population”? He only points up why there are those who think conservatives, far from being reasonable people, are in fact heartless bastards. | |
| Matthew Bonnstetter | December 17th, 2007 4:51 pm ET 80% of Americans have known for years that our government has not been doing the will of the people. We know there is a lot of waste and fraud going on. We know the war on terror can’t win the way we have tried it. We know lots of people give lip service to supporting our troops, but they don’t get the support they need and deserve. We also know that we NEED change and we finally have someone who is honest, consistent and can talk without a speech writer. I’m proud to call myself an American today. Thanks Ron Paul supporters. It is a time to sacrifice for our constitution just like our founding Fathers & Mothers. | |
| RonPaulForTheLongHaul | December 17th, 2007 4:51 pm ET Ron Paul has sponsored many more bills than the average representative, such as those that would abolish the income tax or the Federal reserve. Many do not reach the House floor for a vote because most are worthless. I can not think of one piece of legislation that Ron Paul has gotten passed that is of any benefit to a majority of people. And this is after years of having the ability to do something worthwhile in congress and failing to do so because he devoted his time to pipe dreams like abolishing income tax instead of what he was paid to do. That in my honest opinion is why Paul does not do well in the polls. He is half a bubble off level. So Ron Paul should abandon fighting for the Constitution and the American ideals of freedom and a non-interventionist foreign policy just because they’re not popular with everyone else? Ron Paul has been doing a service to this country by acting as the Constitutional conscience of Congress. He now has a strong record of 30 years that warned that the dangerous interventionist foreign policy that was most popular with Congress would lead to disaster in Iraq and more terrorist attacks. He’s also been warning of the dangers of loose monetary policy that have led to the current housing bubble and the $10 trillion debt. Some people fight for what they believe in. Some people just go with the flow. Ron Paul is the former. Read his book “A Foreign Policy of Freedom” or forever hold your peace. | |
| Michael Trainor | December 17th, 2007 4:51 pm ET I think what people are forgetting that is not only a land line issue, it is a caller ID issue. I never, never answer the phone if it is a number I do not recognize or looks like telemarketing. I am sorry, but the polls are out dated and all you have to do to realize this is look at 2004. You are the reporter, why don’t you get out there and report on this revolution taking place. All it takes is removing your blinders and you will see that he is by far and away the most popular candidate. | |
| Michael | December 17th, 2007 4:52 pm ET Jack, I want to thank you by giving this story the attention it deserves. As I scan the hundreds of responses to your question I see many factors that undoubtedly impact Ron Paul’s poll numbers. It’s true that his name has been excluded from many polls, and it’s also true that more and more Americans are switching to alternatives to the traditional land-based phone lines, which may not be contacted by these pollsters. But the real reason why Ron Paul is so low in the polls is because he is running as a Republican. When I registered Republican, the party represented small government and fiscal responsibility. Unfortunately it now stands for an imperialistic foreign policy and refuses to consider a candidate who stands for any less. They realize that this position is unpopular, and so their focus is shifted to rallying voters AGAINST Hillary. Ron Paul is the most Republican candidate among them, it’s just too bad that they are unable to look past this one issue and really listen to the American people. | |
| Dwayne Dull | December 17th, 2007 4:54 pm ET At a average of $50 per donation thats a lot of people, If you give $50 logic says you will go vote! | |
| Jacob Lyles | December 17th, 2007 4:54 pm ET Jack, Ron Paul still has a name recognition problem. Last week the Washington Post ran profiles of each of the “front-runner” Republican candidates, excluding of course Dr. Paul. Not too long ago, the Des Moines Register profiled six Republicans, excluding Paul though including Tancredo. Every trivial utterance of Romney, Huckabee, and the others makes prime-time news. Paul may reach that point, but at present his story needs to be carried to the people by volunteers. There is a news blackout. | |
| Brian Dunn | December 17th, 2007 4:54 pm ET Probably for the same reason that Paul is so popular within the military. The vast majority of Americans can afford to make voting decisions based not on research, but on 30-second commericals; they are individually content with the status quo and can expect little impact from federal policies in their own lives. To those in the military or those who are patriotic enough to inform themselves before voting, the current status quo in unacceptable. No matter how small their polling numbers, I respect his supporters for admirably informing themselves and refusing to be cowed into voting for yet another mediocre politician. | |
| howieb | December 17th, 2007 4:57 pm ET Jack, I’m a newly registered Republican in San Francisco and I saw first-hand how we, the Ron Paul supporters, are changing the face of the Republican Party. The local GOP here held a straw poll a couple of weeks ago. The Ron Paul supporters showed up in droves to vote for our guy. When the GOP organizer, Gail Niera, saw our overwhelming numbers she cancelled the poll. The lesson for me is, if you ask previous Republican primary voters (who voted for Bush remember) which candidate they will vote for of course Ron Paul is going to be in the single digits but that’s only half the story. The pollsters need to ask us, the new Ron Paul Republicans how we’re going to vote. We’re energized and we’re going to make sure Dr. Paul gets the nomination. | |
| Tom | December 17th, 2007 4:57 pm ET The only poll that matters is held on election day. On that day Jack, you and all the other MSM prognosticators will feign surprise when Ron Paul sweeps, in an effort to maintain an iota of credibility. Heres a tip, bring a spatula to work, it will help you scrape your jaw from the floor. RP08 | |
| european | December 17th, 2007 4:58 pm ET “Here’s my question to you: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million in one day, how come he’s not higher in the polls?” That is an incorrect question. Even at your own polls he scores 90% but those polls get ignored by | |
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You are not right. I am assured. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
Very good information
All nude celebrities [url=http://www.123video.nl/members/gebruiker.asp?MemberID=9830106&Name=Nudecelebrities&CU=0] nude shoots[/url] Naked celeb
Post a Comment