It looks obvious

“Things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” — Albert Einstein

Where is the natural support?

Comments

It is somewhat easy to explain the discrepancies between Ron Paul’s online popularity and his inability to raise even remotely similar support in the general polls. However the discrepancies between the assumed Libertarian vote and Ron Paul’s predicted votes are much more disturbing.

It is generally accepted that a successful campaign start with the ability to mobilize the base. In other words before attempting to get the swing votes successful campaign is measured in its ability to bring its likely supporter to actively votes for their candidate. In the 2004 Presidential election the ability of Bush’s campaign to bring the evangelical voters in large numbers to the voting booths was one of the keys for Bush re-election. 

One might argue that the study of the libertarian leaning voters is somewhat wishful thinking, and that the actual libertarian base is significantly smaller. In addition many of those who are leaning libertarian aren’t likely voters in the GOP primaries. However the difference between 13%-15% leaning libertarian and actual libertarian voting block and 0%-1% is very difficult to gap.

And if you can’t mobilized your likely supporters, how can you attract the rest of the public?

Tags:

No tag for this post.

Written by Rogel

June 19th, 2007 at 3:45 pm

Posted in 2008 campaign

« Evil shortcut
All-out war »

Viewing 5 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Hey Rogel,I think the reason for the discrepancy is that the vast majority of voters just aren't paying attention yet.  This means that name recognition looms much larger now than it will in a few months.  Also, Paul has yet to run any TV ads, but he will start in the next two months or so.  I read a poll that said only 6% of voters have "definitely" made up their minds about the primaries so far!  And I bet half of those are Ron Paul supporters :)Go Ron Go!    
    • ^
    • v
    Maybe, Zydeco, although I would assume that the level of interest in the early process (and after 3 national debates) spread evenly. I saw another partial explanation here , although it still doesn't explain the differences between the study that was based on polls and the current surveys.
    • ^
    • v
    Rogel,The level of interest in the Republican candidates is certainly not even roughly level.  Paul has more fervent and solid support than any other candidate by a wide margin.  For example, check out Andrew Sullivan's site today for a post where a Paul supporter calculates that a facebook friend of Ron Paul's is over 300 times more likely to donate money than a facebook friend of Barack Obama.  Unscientific, but it gives you an idea of how deeply Paul supporters tend to hold their beliefs.     
    • ^
    • v
    HOW TO CONDUCT BASIC RESEARCH FOR EVERYDAY LIFE, FOR HAIRLESS APES, CLASS 101 -- 1) IF YOU SUSPECT POLL DATA IS SKEWED, DO YOU A) SEEK AN EXPLANATION AT THE END OF THE POLLING PROCESS, OR B) SEEK AN EXPLANATION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE POLLING PROCESS? 2) THE CORRECT ANSWER IS "B" 3) IF YOU PROBE A BIT, YOU WILL FIND THAT MUCH OF THE POLLING DATA IS MANIPULATED AND SKEWED TO FIT WHATEVER POLITICAL AGENDA ONE MIGHT WANT TO HAVE THE SHEEPLE ALLOW INTO THEIR PARADIGM OF MASS UNCONSCIOUSNESS. 4) IF YOU PROBE A BIT MORE, YOU WILL FIND THIS HAPPENS IN EVERY ELECTION THAT IS FIXED BY FILTHY STINKING RICH INTERNATIONAL BANKERS BEFOREHAND.5) THE SOLUTION? SLEEP WITH THE BANKERS' WIVES AND GET EVEN.
    • ^
    • v
    Zedeco - I'm afraid that the statistics in the post you referred to, and to which I linked in the previous comment, demonstrate the opposite. Ron Paul has few thousend enthusiastic supporters, which no survey identify, while Obama has 300,000 likely voters (regardless their level of enthusiasm). Yes, on average Ron Paul collected more money per person - but candidates spend total, not average, amounts and again Obama collected much more money.

    Namit - I can only wish you luck :)

Trackbacks

blog comments powered by Disqus