Obama in Close Race Against Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul

reply to post by kro32


From the OPs poll:

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking survey Aug. 17-18, 2011, with a random sample of 1,026 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

From the CNN poll:

Interviews with 1,008 adult Americans conducted by telephone
by ORC International on August 5-7, 2011.

From the McClatchy/Merist poll:

This survey of 1,000 adults was conducted last Tuesday through Thursday. People 18 and older who live in the continental U.S. Telephone numbers were selected based on a list of exchanges from throughout the nation.

From the FOX poll:

The poll is based on live telephone interviews with a national sample of 904 registered voters, and was conducted August 7-9, 2011 in the evenings.

From the Rasmussen poll:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary voters.....The survey of 1,000 Likely GOP Primary Voters was conducted on August 15, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports.

Let's assume the mainstream media polls are legit even though none of them said they were done randomly.

They were all done by phone and had around 1,000 people in the survey, but the one from the OP asked the participants about Obama versus the individual candidate rather than their Republican candidate of choice. So Ron Paul would have to get the nomination first to get that chance, unless he wants to run as an independent but that might just give Obama the win. Hopefully Ron Paul will continue to gain support or else it's not going to look pretty down the road.

But seriously, how are Palin, Bachmann, and Giuliani polling better than Paul this month? Are there really more people that support them than Ron Paul? I think that's a pretty strong indication of how powerful the MSM's bias can be on the vast majority of the populations views. Either that, or the vast majority of the population is clueless on a lot of serious issues.

The polls say that Americans want to elect a president who doesn't want to audit the Federal Reserve, wants to spend even more taxpayer money on the military and fighting wars, and wants to lower taxes because that worked out so nicely when Bush tried it. Because we can totally fix our economy by continuing to fight wars costing us trillions, and lowering tax rates. The government will just keep spending money, take in even less money from the people, and we'll make money! You gotta spend money to make money, right? Nah, he'll just create some jobs and whammo, our problems will be solved.

If that's really going to be who wins the election, we'll just have to see how things turn out with another puppet as president. Maybe we'll finally get put into these FEMA camps that I've been hearing so much about lately and the suspense will be over

I'm probably being overly critical because I don't support those candidates, but I can't see how can people be on board for some of their plans as president?

I am surprised this was not the Gallup headline:

"Obama trails Romney, ties Perry and beats Bachmann"

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


You say that they lie, and yet say you would ignore polls. Please stop making contradictory posts.

Voters Favor Their Party, but Republicans Lend Less Support to Bachmann, Paul

Above quoted from the OP article.

Ron Paul will not get the GOP nod, even if he somehow manages to eek out a lead in popular votes. Just like Hillary got more popular votes but the delegates went to Obama.

He will have to slink off into the third party position and take his 10% die hards with him, leaving a gap that in a closely divided nation will give Obama an easy victory. He will be reduced to taking $500 donations from some of his White Supremacist supporters just like in '08.

Paul keeps donation from white supremacist

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Yeah Ron Paul is supposed to screen every person before accepting an online donation

Why don't we hear Ron Pauls side of the story, and not MSNBCs version of the story? 3:30 --

I never get tired of your propaganda Tinfoil. Even though you've ignored this question 10 times before, I'll ask it again: Who do you plan to vote for, and why would they be a better candidate than Ron Paul? What issues do you disagree with Ron Paul on?

reply to post by TupacShakur


He kept the money even after it was revealed. Most sensible politicians would have returned it. Not Ron Paul though, he has the full backing of the supremacists and the like, they backed him from the beginning of his political career.

Just keep on ignoring the facts.

The main issue I have is that he is a shill to get Obama reelected. A few percentage points is all Obama needs to count on to not go to his GOP rival and he got the election locked up.

reply to post by TinfoilTP

He kept the money even after it was revealed. Most sensible politicians would have returned it. Not Ron Paul though, [color=limegreen]he has the full backing of the supremacists and the like, they backed him from the beginning of his political career.

Where is your proof of this? One white supremacist donated to him, so that means they've supported him from the beginning? Your attempts to slander Ron Paul get lamer every day, but keep it up because your pathetic quest to dissuade people from voting for him only highlights the fact that people who oppose Ron Paul are incredibly ignorant.

Just keep on ignoring the facts.

I'm not ignoring anything, I acknowledged that a white supremacist gave a $500 donation to him. How exactly is this relevant to Ron Pauls plans as president? Can you tell me where he announced racial segregation will be brought back, slavery will be re-instated, and that a KKK member will be his running mate?

I'll ask you for the 50th time, in really big green font so you can't miss it:

[color=limegreen] Who do you plan to vote for, and why are

they a better candidate than Ron Paul?

What issues do you disagree with Ron

Paul on?

reply to post by TinfoilTP


What's wrong with that? If the serpent gives the man money for an axe, it is by his own ignorance he looses his head.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


What facts? A racist gave money to a patriot. So?

If Adolf Hitler came to me in one of his meth highs, stared me in the face with his square stache, and said

Hey Mann. Ich gebe Ihnen diese Goldmedaille. Es lohnt sich 15 million Ihrer US-Dollar. Go geben einige verrückte Scheiße mit ihm!

I'd say.

Vielen Dank meinem Mann. Wird es verwenden, um eine Atombombe zu kaufen, um an Ihrer Basis fallen.

You still haven't told me why it would be wrong to do this.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

What facts? A racist gave money to a patriot. So?

If Adolf Hitler came to me in one of his meth highs, stared me in the face with his square stache, and said

Hey Mann. Ich gebe Ihnen diese Goldmedaille. Es lohnt sich 15 million Ihrer US-Dollar. Go geben einige verrückte Scheiße mit ihm!

I'd say.

Vielen Dank meinem Mann. Wird es verwenden, um eine Atombombe zu kaufen, um an Ihrer Basis fallen.

You still haven't told me why it would be wrong to do this.

edit on 23-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: le spelling

edit on 23-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

Lets speculate if it was Palin who accepted racist donations and kept them.....how would that have played out and would it be a non issue? LOL.
That's ok if you take it and keep it, just don't expect to ever get elected as President of the United States.

This is just a small sample of what Ron Pau supportersl would face hourly endlessly, he would want to talk issues and the entire 24/7 newscasts would be focusing on his issues with dancing with racist trash, money from them, his newsletters, his photos of him handshaking White Supremisist leaders etc. They will only ask him questions like, "ok who in your opinion should monitor the legal prostitution and heroin?".

I am just here to bring a little reallity to this circle jerk lovefest going on around here. Can't stand a little opposing point of view, well get used to it if Ron Paul foolishly keeps persuing a GOP nomination.

We all know he is only in the GOP so he can get his own podium time up there with the real contenders, he's really going to run third party. I would personally love to see someone make it in my lifetime as a third party candidate but this old rerun stuff is not going to be it.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


why would you need to monitor drugs or anything at all?

Why would they dance around with such issues if they haven't yet?

His record backs his words. And history teaches us that no government management is better.

After all, our revolution sparked massive social changes in Europe for the first time since the protestant reformation 200 years prior. But when we tried to force it with intervention in WW1? That led to WW2, the cold war, and Europe being in the nuclear valley of two war hawk nations.

Clearly history teaches we do not need to monitor nor check such prostitutes nor heroin. People can do that themselves.

You can bring these issues up all the time and post all the laughing animation faces you want. But most Americans won't take you seriously. After all, if they did, this poll would show so. It does not.

reply to post by Gorman91


This poll only shows that people will be voting like they did in the last 3 elections, split down the middle. The scenario of only Ron Paul vs Obama is a fantasy that will never happen so the poll is flawed in his case. There will a GOP nominee, Obama and a Ron Paul as third party fringer again as per usual.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


And how do you know?

What this poll shows is not that it is cut down the middle. It shows that half the country favors Obama's job, and half do not and would rather anybody else.

Remember. This question was posed together. And what that means is, from the results, that some 12% of Democrats will not vote for Obama under any circumstances, and that some 4%, just 4%, of Republicans will not vote for Ron Paul under any circumstances. This also shows that just 4% or so think Ron Paul is not a serious candidate, while the rest would happily vote for him against Obama without a second thought

Elections are usually decided by that 4%-12%. Any delegate for the Republican convention will see this, knowing that the republican party cannot win with without that.

Ergo, if a delegate wanted to maximize his democrat vote, he would go with either Romney or Paul. And Romney does not resegnate will because he's so similar to Obama in government inteventionalism.

Faced with this fact, many would go with Paul. A combination of the revelation of Bachmann and Perry's connection through the NAR to Palin will drop them off the radar in time, leaving just Romney and Paul. And Romney simply isn't popular when pressed in a real poll.

Paul does have a significant chance of winning. Though God knows you won't listen. Are you happy being that 4%?

reply to post by Gorman91


The Only possible exception I can forsee the GOP doing to make a fringer like Ron Paul their nominee is if he takes the hardliner fellow Texan governer Perry as his running mate. They then would be assured the presidency because of his old age and back Ron Paul till he keels over.

That would be interesting, seeing all of his worshippers witness the sellout but they would fall in line because more serious issues like racism doesn't matter to them one bit.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Why would any sane human on this Earth vote for Perry, let alone take him as a running mate? His mentors are as extremist as Obama's, accusing witches of being in the government, and performing acts for their god, rather than faith. He's got zero chance once his affiliation with the NAR movement is ousted. And you can dang well believe Obama will oust it.

There is no victory with Bachmann, Perry, or Palin. They are the fringe candidates.

You can even read it on their faces. Perry is basically George Bush all over again and only a retard of the highest order would consider him a serious candidate.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

Why would any sane human on this Earth vote for Perry, let alone take him as a running mate? His mentors are as extremist as Obama's, accusing witches of being in the government, and performing acts for their god, rather than faith. He's got zero chance once his affiliation with the NAR movement is ousted. And you can dang well believe Obama will oust it.

There is no victory with Bachmann, Perry, or Palin. They are the fringe candidates.

You can even read it on their faces. Perry is basically George Bush all over again and only a retard of the highest order would consider him a serious candidate.

Which is why Perry could sneak into the office when Ron Paul expires naturally from old age in mid term, they would be pretty confident the stress level would ensure a top post sometime during 8 years.
The only way the GOP is ever going to put their full support behind Ron Paul is if he takes a hardline party guy like Perry as VP.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by Gorman91

 

fine so polls are real, but still feel ron paul will win.

Is that a scientific feeling you have? does that feeling come with a +/- 5% error? Someone get all the pollsters on the phone and tell them to submit their resignation notices; Agent_USA_Supporter has it from here on out.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


You say things as if you know. As if you have a time machine and can find out.

I tell you this, you do not. So nothing you say is more than speculation. The oldest president ever was Reagan. And he came out surviving a bullet wound and the onset of Alzheimer's disease. You have no credibility saying what you do, when similar elections like these have shown it is perfectly possible for a fringe candidate to come sailing from the side while the rest bicker like fools, and snatch the nomination. And even if he didn't, his numbers are large enough now so that if he did run for independent, it more or less makes republican victory a guaranteed failure.

They have no choice. Either take Ron Paul, or lose the election.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

You say things as if you know. As if you have a time machine and can find out.

I tell you this, you do not. So nothing you say is more than speculation. The oldest president ever was Reagan. And he came out surviving a bullet wound and the onset of Alzheimer's disease. You have no credibility saying what you do, when similar elections like these have shown it is perfectly possible for a fringe candidate to come sailing from the side while the rest bicker like fools, and snatch the nomination. And even if he didn't, his numbers are large enough now so that if he did run for independent, it more or less makes republican victory a guaranteed failure.

They have no choice. Either take Ron Paul, or lose the election.

edit on 23-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: le spelling

edit on 23-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: le spelling

And Ron Paul has no choice, either take a VP the GOP accepts as a Party loyalist or go fringe away as third party loser again. The GOP can easily set its sights on 2016, with no Obama in the picture and let Ron Paul expire naturally, it would not be the end of the world.

Ron Paul really has no leverage over the GOP.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Again. You are speaking, but what proof?

What if Ron Paul is still alive in 2016? And are yous so quick to abandon this election? Do you know what happens traditionally when a party loses 2 elections in a row, and both the losers being embarrassments to humanity, all while having your party crack at its core between what it defines as values?

It's called the death of a party. I do believe that someone at the tea party shot the Elephant. What ever will they do with the room it's rotting in?