It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Ron Paul is now being shown at 7-1 and only second to Hillary who is 2-1 in Vegas. Interesting again how the guys who make their living off of making odds see Ron Paul as a threat, and a serious contender.
Although I would personally love to see President Dr. Ron Paul, they would never let it happen. I thinnk Vegas is looking at the support, coverage, polls and other such info that would leaad them to believe that Ron Paul is growing daily and could in a real world be President. There is one thing that can make those odds go pastAl Sharpton who is coming in at 80,000-1, that is DIEBOLD.
Remember it is not those that casst the votes that decide anything, but those that count them... I will say ina REAL paper counted fair, no dead people voting kind of election, Ron Paul wins hands down. But alas we don't have real fair counted elections in this nation.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Originally posted by yuefo
I have to point out that in all three MSNBC polls, the before poll showed Paul at the bottom, and the after poll showed him waaay ahead.
Waaay ahead of who? Is he ahead of Giuliani or Romney?
Originally posted by uberarcanist
If that were true, why was the 2006 election such a major defeat for the Repuglicans?
Originally posted by tom goose
Originally posted by Togetic
I am a mathematician, and a pollster. Scientifically speaking, such online polls are useless as measurements because there is no control of the universe of people sampled.
no control over the people sampled? like if they were american or not? what else would matter? sounds like cherry picking to me.
These concepts empirically mean that if you were to take an infinite number of polls of the same universe of people asking whether they supported Paul, 95% of the resulting numbers would be within 3% of the actual percentage of people in the universe supporting Paul.
Second, a national poll with N=100 or N=500 isn't worth the paper it's printed on. However, at least in the polls that I have cited above, N=1000, which is standard for polls of national scope and results in a 95% confidence interval with about a 3% margin of error.
1000 people out of what? 300,000,000 and a 3% margin for error? come on, what does that even mean? 95% success rate of keeping you in the dark of what MOST people are acctually thinking.
In the polling I cited, his name is included as an option.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
You have to understand how hard it is to get Ron Paul as an answer here, controlling the sample means CONTROLLING the POLL as well as the answers they will accept.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I will say ina REAL paper counted fair, no dead people voting kind of election, Ron Paul wins hands down. But alas we don't have real fair counted elections in this nation.
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
I love how people try to spin the internet polls, like only ron paul supporters know how to use a computer.
It will show nothing other than that his supporters are more willing to make their voices heard than the other attendees. It will most likely have no impact on the 2% number of supporters.
Augut 11th - Mark it down in your calandar!
This is the day of the Iowa Caucaus Straw Poll. Where Iowans have to PAY money out of their own pocket to attend and vote for their favorite republican in person.
When Ron Paul finishes this live in person Straw Poll in the top 2, then his support will be undeniable by the mainstream media.
Originally posted by TogeticAt least for me, he supports juries answering questions of law, as well as questions of fact. That's a frightening prospect to me as someone who will soon be an attorney.
[Originally spoken or written by Cheif Justice John Jay U.S. Supreme Court Court 1789The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the facts in controversy.
[Originally spoken or written by Oliver Wendell Holmes U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1902The jury ahs the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact.
[Originally spoken or written by Harlan F. Stone U.S. Supreme Court Court 1941The law itself is on trial quite as much s the cause which is to be decided.
[Originally spoken or written by U.S. Supreme Court Court 1972 in U.S. vs. Dougherty, 473 F 2nd 1113, 1139The pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogitive to disregard instructions of the judge...
Originally posted by RRconservative
Ron Paul spammers are Democrats, who want support for an Anti-War(American) Republican.
Democrats almost fell for the internet hype in 2004. Republicans won't fall for it because we know whats going on with Ron Paul and his faithful Democrat internet spammers.
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
I support Ron Paul because...
Source: Ron Paul Campaign site
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
When Ron Paul finishes this live in person Straw Poll in the top 2, then his support will be undeniable by the mainstream media.
Do you think that they should, and if so, why? Further, I am not advocating for anything different than the system we have today, at least in my state. And perhaps you would be so kind as to elucidate my opinion for me, as I do not see "where I sit"?
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Originally posted by TogeticAt least for me, he supports juries answering questions of law, as well as questions of fact. That's a frightening prospect to me as someone who will soon be an attorney.
Interesting, a Lawyer to be who dislikes the Justice system, I imagine this lawyer to be would be for professional juries too then, which should give most readers a clue as to where he stands befre he tells you where he sits.
Let me give a few examples of more learned Constitutionalists views on what Ron Paul has said, I guess some are Constitutionlists and like the Rule of Law and others arent, funny how its always the attorneys against the law.
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
Togetic,
As a "future" lawyer I would expect you to understand that Ron Paul's Pro-Life stand has nothing to do with politics. Roe v. Wade was a Supreme Court Decision and the President can't change a supreme court decision. If you didn't know this then you are going to have a very difficult time making it out of law school and passing the B.A.R.
Originally posted by TogeticDo you think that they should, and if so, why? Further, I am not advocating for anything different than the system we have today, at least in my state. And perhaps you would be so kind as to elucidate my opinion for me, as I do not see "where I sit"?
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Originally posted by RRconservative
Ron Paul spammers are Democrats, who want support for an Anti-War(American) Republican.
Democrats almost fell for the internet hype in 2004. Republicans won't fall for it because we know whats going on with Ron Paul and his faithful Democrat internet spammers.
I also find it funny that you continue to say the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
You think he's a non-entity. Roger. We heard you the first 70 times.
Peace
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I see someone with no evidence except some bull*&^% MANTRA adding to this post. provide your evidence of your point of view. See I used the odds makers in this example, the oddsmakers make their living by doing this and they are very good at it, or they would lose their jobs. Remember the rest of you what Ghandi said,
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Prisonplanet.com is a leftist website, is that your opinion or some empirical fact??? George W. Bush's name is on it 18 times, does that make him a more leftist than Paul?
Interesting that no one wants to talk about Ron Paul or his message on the Neo-Conned side. Deflect to anything including name calling because he is on a websiste, anything but actually talk about the CONSERVATIVE CORE PRINCIPLES he speaks.
I do however find it amazing that politically orientated websites are covering Presidential nominee seekers, WOW thanks for bringing that to our attention...
EDIT - I just saw Dr. Ron Paul on FOX News, does that mean FOX News is leftist or does it mean Ron Paul is a Fascist?
[edit on 7/15/2007 by theindependentjournal]