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 Xcalibur254
reply to post by Wookiep
In order for these projections to be so wrong there would have had to be a large problem with the methodology behind them which is very unlikely considering the accuracy they've had in other states.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Wookiep
It makes sense to project a winner even at 0%. Every poll is showing Gingrich taking the state easily with almost 50% of the vote and the next closest candidate with about 25%. With results like that one can quite confidently project at 0%. As for Virginia I'd say you could also make a pretty accurate projection of Romney taking the state with only 3% of the vote reported. Every poll is showing Romney being about 40 points higher than Paul. In order for these projections to be so wrong there would have had to be a large problem with the methodology behind them which is very unlikely considering the accuracy they've had in other states.
Originally posted by freedom12
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Wookiep
It makes sense to project a winner even at 0%. Every poll is showing Gingrich taking the state easily with almost 50% of the vote and the next closest candidate with about 25%. With results like that one can quite confidently project at 0%. As for Virginia I'd say you could also make a pretty accurate projection of Romney taking the state with only 3% of the vote reported. Every poll is showing Romney being about 40 points higher than Paul. In order for these projections to be so wrong there would have had to be a large problem with the methodology behind them which is very unlikely considering the accuracy they've had in other states.
And yet Dr Paul trails by 18% in Virginia(59-41) with 78 % of the vote counted in Virginia??
If Dr Paul trailed in "every poll" by "40 points" and actual results at 78% reporting are 22% off, should one start looking for a "large problem" with "methodology"??
Yeah, the same people who are constantly telling us that exit and straw polls are meaningless... I am a big fan of equality.
You cannot argue that Dr. Paul does not get adequate media coverage. Let us assume right now that he has no chance to win the nomination--FINE. But from the start, with no delegates allocated they should have given every candidate a fair shot to present their case. ALL OF THEM. That was the first large failure of the people giving us predictions.
And now we look at it (still with pretty poor media coverage) and they call the votes at 3%. This comes down to what they want to plant in people's minds. How many people do not know that only 3% of the votes are counted? They turn on their tv real quick to find what?? Checkmarks next to someone that may not have even won. Do they tune back in to make sure? Not always. So then the media perpetuates this mentality in everyone's minds, that Romney is winner of the lands and will become the GOP candidate.
So then you come into your own thread and progress the same ideals. Yeah, Georgia and Massachusetts can probably be predicted pretty easily. But the other states (and even those two) need FAIR attention. And from what I have seen you post in other threads, I think you would agree with that.
Originally posted by nofear39
www.cnn.com...
rp only wins in the 18-29 catagory ....... cnn bs
Originally posted by SonicInfinity
Ron Paul won't win one single state in this entire Super Tuesday contest.
Not even one.
I don't say this out of hate, but let's be honest here: Whether you believe he just isn't popular with the general populace or they are rigging the votes, how can Ron Paul win any of these states if he couldn't even win Maine?edit on 3/6/2012 by SonicInfinity because: Minor edits