Recent polling:
General Election: Paul vs. Obama Obama +6.8
General Election: Romney vs. Obama Obama +1.8
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ron Pauls Secret Weapon
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
Recent polling:
General Election: Paul vs. Obama Obama +6.8
General Election: Romney vs. Obama Obama +1.8
As of today, it's a statistical tie between Obama, Romney, and Paul in a general election.
Most up to date poll:
Romney leads over Obama - 47 percent to 45 percent
Obama leads over Paul - 46 percent to 45 percent
[three percentage point margin of error]
Most up to date poll:
Romney leads over Obama - 47 percent to 45 percent
Obama leads over Paul - 46 percent to 45 percent
[three percentage point margin of error]
Last edited by a moderator:
glfredrick
New Member
Realize that the polls only reflect the status of the campaign until now.
We are in the PRIMARY SEASON. Republicans (and if there were democrats seeking to nominate a candiate, they too) are trying to sort out WHOM of the REPUBLICANS will be THE candidate that runs against Obama.
Right now, they are campaigning against themselves.
Once they select a nominee and he begins campaigning against Obama the polls will actually mean something. Until then, they are only a tool that the liberal-dominated national media are using to "help" Republicans select their candidate -- just like they did with McCain. And, if given the chance, THEY will help Republicans select Romney, who appears to be THEIR candidate of choice.
They SAY that in every press release. The SHOW that when they post pictures of him (and the way the pictures of the other candidates are presented -- like the Santorum picture released yesterday where he is making a gesture during a speach that looks like he is holding the "LOOSER" hand sign over his forehead). They SAY that when they PRESUME a candidate is ALREADY the winner. And worse, PEOPLE BUY IT.
We are in the PRIMARY SEASON. Republicans (and if there were democrats seeking to nominate a candiate, they too) are trying to sort out WHOM of the REPUBLICANS will be THE candidate that runs against Obama.
Right now, they are campaigning against themselves.
Once they select a nominee and he begins campaigning against Obama the polls will actually mean something. Until then, they are only a tool that the liberal-dominated national media are using to "help" Republicans select their candidate -- just like they did with McCain. And, if given the chance, THEY will help Republicans select Romney, who appears to be THEIR candidate of choice.
They SAY that in every press release. The SHOW that when they post pictures of him (and the way the pictures of the other candidates are presented -- like the Santorum picture released yesterday where he is making a gesture during a speach that looks like he is holding the "LOOSER" hand sign over his forehead). They SAY that when they PRESUME a candidate is ALREADY the winner. And worse, PEOPLE BUY IT.
EXCELLENT post!!! We don't need polls, but just more, fair, unbiased information on each candidate's stands on the issues. But we're never going to get that. For whatever reason, many people don't want to think for themselves, study things out, research the candidates and the issues. And they have some strange conviction that they have to be on the "winning" side or on the side of whomever the media or talking heads tell them is the "only one that can beat" whomever. I actually had a very close, conservative, Christian friend get angry with me 4 years ago because, in the primaries no less, I was not voting for the fair-haired Christian leader who had been set up as the only one who could win the nomination, and also beat Obama/Hillary in the general election. (My candidate also happened to be a Christian btw, but that didn't matter and is neither here nor there anyway) She actually told me that the Bible said we had to vote for the one ahead in the polls who could win. I kid you not. Four years later I have yet to be given that chapter and verse. :BangHead:
There you go again....
You're contradicting yourself. First, in numerous previous posts you maintain that the media will select the Republican candidate, now you are saying "given the chance" they will help select the Republican candidate.
Second, you claim that the media selected McCain last time over the other candidates, including Romney. Now you say the media wants Romney. So why didn't they want Romney back in 2008?
Third, you are presuming that the Republican delegates, who are mostly informed political insiders and have heard your mantra about the left wing media manipulation for years, always buy into it. According to you they have no control over whom they select at the nominating convention because they are media controlled zombies.
I'm well aware of that.
The critics keep saying Ron Paul is unelectable in the general election. My point is that Paul is just as 'electable' IN A GENERAL ELECTION as Romney.
Last edited by a moderator:
glfredrick
New Member
Did I push one of your buttons or something?
No, I am not contradicting myself. The media DID help select McCain. They pushed him, they encouraged Democrats who could to cross over and vote in a Republican primary to select McCain. And, they used every opportunity to front that particular man over others who would have better served the people come time to actually elect a President.
In case you have forgotten, the core of the Republican Party did not get behind McCain after his nomination. They were rather ho-hum about him and there were considerable debates as to whether he was not just as liberal as Obama, and so some of those same people decided to chance the Democrat candidate for one of two reasons -- that he could ACTUALLY do what he proposed (which was actually nothing except rhetoric -- he only made a couple of actual promises) -- and that they would somehow "teach the Republicans a lesson" for the next election cycle, that being, "Bring a candidate that we can support next time!"
McCain's campaign never really took off at all until he brought out Palin, which energized the base in ways that were both exciting and scary at the same time. It was too little, too late, and too polarizing to win against "hope and change" and so we got "I hope that this change stops before we have no hope and no change in our pockets."
AT THAT TIME, the Republican core rejected Romney, or held him as a second chance sort of guy, and why? Because he was akin to McCain without as much charisma.
I answered this above. He was much like McCain -- a moderate at best -- and had no charisma. They liked the war hero aspect, I guess.
The delegates are elected to the convention during the primary season when votes are cast for the candidate that they represent (in most states). Some can change to a different candidate as they will, others are locked in by the voting in their home state. So, they get on board with the one who appears to be the winner, and that is often decided by media coverage well before the convention, not because of or at the convention itself.
Just like we are hashing out our opinions and going by what we know right now, our perceptions are colored by what we read and hear, and the media is playing a lot of people -- not all, for sure -- but a lot.
Perhaps it is time to do a "spin dry" thread where we talk about current media spin for this or that candidate? :laugh:
glfredrick
New Member
If he gets there... Doubt that he will. He's run before and had similar numbers.
Romney has also, but there has always been a more desirable candidate in front of him. Now, by attrition, he is the presumed candidate -- or at least that is what we hear all day, every day.
No he hasn't. His numbers have doubled or tripled since last time he ran...
Could be.
I noticed that the press is making a big deal about Romney's "I like to fire people" comment. If as you say, the press is favoring Romney why are they hyping this story yesterday and today? It's putting Romney in a bad light. They know they are quoting him out of context and not quoting his complete remarks. Why now, right on the cusp of the NH primary?
It would take an act of God, imo.