# Start Here > Ron Paul Forum >  PPP MN Presidential caucus poll

## ZanZibar

Keep checking their website:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/

----------


## harikaried

Minnesota GOP caucus: Gingrich 36, Romney 18, Santorum 17, Paul 13: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...minnesota.html

----------


## swissaustrian

Crap:
Newt Gingrich has a large lead in Minnesota...for the moment. Our weekend polling there found him with 36% to 18% for Mitt Romney, 17% for Rick Santorum, and 13% for Ron Paul.

----------


## bluesc

> Minnesota GOP caucus: Gingrich 36, Romney 18, Santorum 17, Paul 13: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...minnesota.html


Booooooooo!

----------


## tsai3904

*Minnesota*
1/21 - 1/22
303 likely Republican caucus voters
+/-5.6%



01/21
01/22

05/27
05/30


Gingrich
36
5

Romney
18
11

Santorum
17
-

*Paul*
*13*
*9*

SE / NS
15
7

Bachmann
-
19

Cain
-
10

Huntsman
-
1

Pawlenty
-
38




*Ron Paul Crosstabs:*


01/21
01/22

05/27
05/30


18-45
26
21

46-65
5
9

>65
7
6

Man
16
11

Woman
10
6




*Second Choice:*


01/21
01/22


Santorum
21

Gingrich
16

Romney
16

*Paul*
*10*

SE / NS
37

----------


## tribute_13

This is fantastic. Gingrich doesn't have the organization to push delegates effectively. We are only 5% behind 2nd. Hopefully Paul will push the state hard with ads and become competitive straw vote wise.

----------


## Refresh the Tree

Maybe SC hurt us more that we thought?  I hope this trend doesn't continue after FL...

----------


## G8orballboy

Ugh...

----------


## thoughtomator

> Gingrich's favorability is a +34 spread (59/25) while Romney's is just +14 (50/36)


This is really bizarre... how's Gingrich get favorability ratings like that?

----------


## jrice

W
T
F
.

----------


## schiffheadbaby

> This is really bizarre... how's Gingrich get favorability ratings like that?


Most people just go with whoever has momentum.

----------


## A. Havnes

> This is really bizarre... how's Gingrich get favorability ratings like that?


'Cause he's anti-establishment and Pelosi hates him for it.

----------


## Antwan15

Just remember, in MN, it dosen't matter if we get a single vote or not, we are organized and prepared to enter the caucus in order to gather max delegates! Now, we could obviously use a good showing, so online community, we need an early assault on the campus's in MN, college turnout is key to victory, were workin hard, but we need you guys!!!

----------


## Sjuguy

You will get a large college turnout in Minnesota.

----------


## 69360

Oh well, this really isn't happening. I wonder what the long term game plan is going to be? Stay in to get the message out or switch to 3rd party run?

----------


## Lovecraftian4Paul

Unfortunately, this poll confirms most of what I see here on the ground. The average mainline Republican knows about Gingrich's horrific record, and they don't care.

The only success I have talking to people about RP is with independents and Democrats. Unless they turn out in force, we're really up the creek. On the other hand, the poll may be low by a few percent. Paul got about 16% here last time, but came in fourth place behind Romney, McCain, and Huck.

I don't see how he could possibly do worse than in 2008 unless hardly any independents show up.

----------


## brendan.orourke

Guys don't freak out. This race is so fluid, as we have seen...especially with Newt. Nobody has been more up and down that he has.

It's essentially a 3 way tie for 2nd right now.

----------


## A. Havnes

> Oh well, this really isn't happening. I wonder what the long term game plan is going to be? Stay in to get the message out or switch to 3rd party run?


I don't get why people push for a 3rd party run. They get very few votes and just don't win general elections.  I'll vote for 3rd party if it comes to that, but I doubt there's enough libertarian/constitutionalist voters out there to push Paul to presidency as a 3rd partier.

----------


## 69360

> I don't get why people push for a 3rd party run. They get very few votes and just don't win general elections.  I'll vote for 3rd party if it comes to that, but I doubt there's enough libertarian/constitutionalist voters out there to push Paul to presidency as a 3rd partier.


To kickstart a viable alternative party for those of us who believe in constitutional government. Ron wouldn't win, but if he could get say 20% of the vote it could start something good.

----------


## Agorism

Gingrich ahead is better than Mittons for now.

Romney still has big lead on intrade so keeping the field divided is good

----------


## realtonygoodwin

This is the state we are counting on winning right? How long until the voting?

----------


## scottish

MSM's propoganda is working,ignoring him in the debates and on the major news networks is hurting the campaign incredibly badly..

You need to fight back before its too late people,they are winning..

They dont care who is president as long as he is status quo,you say NO ONE BUT PAUL they are telling you anyone but Paul..

----------


## Highstreet

> To kickstart a viable alternative party for those of us who believe in constitutional government. Ron wouldn't win, but if he could get say 20% of the vote it could start something good.


I don't think it kickstarts anything. It usually just entails the major parties changing their election season rhetoric, and absolutely no actual change.

----------


## Lovecraftian4Paul

I really do wonder if we've done all we can in the GOP. The brand is so tainted and the people who are still the majority make me sicker every day. I just can't believe Gingrich is getting so much support. They knowingly cling to a hyper-flawed, disgusting, immoral candidate because he's seen as more electable than Paul (the TV told them so).

Their hatred and bigotry toward Muslims unquestionably has something to do with it too. Everything about my interactions with most Republicans screams that we're working with the wrong party.

----------


## tsetsefly

> I really do wonder if we've done all we can in the GOP. The brand is so tainted and the people who are still the majority make me sicker every day. I just can't believe Gingrich is getting so much support. They knowingly cling to a hyper-flawed, disgusting, immoral candidate because he's seen as more electable than Paul (the TV told them so).
> 
> Their hatred and bigotry toward Muslims unquestionably has something to do with it too. Everything about my interactions with most Republicans screams that we're working with the wrong party.


Hardly, this movemente started 4 years ago. This is a change that will take 15 years to really notice possibly less, if Paul does not win the election, I really think Rand has a better shot in 16. 3rd parties have 0 shot, especially when they all concentrate on trying to get a  president elected they should focus on smaller races maybe get a congressmen elected etc. 

Look how long it took the neocons to take over? To really change we need to take over the party and then the laws have to be changed so that 3rd parties have a shot. Right now the deck is stacked against them so we need to join our local GOP's get involved etc. Look how long it took for RP to get his message out!

----------


## Fredom101

This is exactly why RP needs a strong FL finish (3rd & 15%+) and why it's important to keep the marketing efforts going there. If we get last in FL and 8%, the perception that RP is done will kill us in upcoming states.

----------


## realtonygoodwin

This proves we are winning! Just like we won in South Carolina... I can't understand why you don't see it.

----------


## bluesc

> This proves we are winning! Just like we won in South Carolina... I can't understand why you don't see it.


bobbyw24, is that you?

----------


## Refresh the Tree

> This is exactly why RP needs a strong FL finish (3rd & 15%+) and why it's important to keep the marketing efforts going there. If we get last in FL and 8%, the perception that RP is done will kill us in upcoming states.


Agreed.

----------


## Sarge

You have approximately 75 colleges there, and need to get 500 or so people to show up from each college for the caucus. 

Might want  to try to identify them with a sign up sheet table or tables at each college, with one central place to report sign up numbers so they can see how much progress is being made.

----------


## 8ClicksPerSecond

Isn't Jesse Ventura still really popular there? He should do some campaigning for him

----------


## sailingaway

63% think they might change their vote.  They are floating on the waves, it is sad, but also very flexible.

----------


## truthdivides

> Isn't Jesse Ventura still really popular there? He should do some campaigning for him


No. People don't like Ventura here.

----------


## 8ClicksPerSecond

I don't quite understand how we got 15% there in 2008 and now are this low.

----------


## cdw

Sigh. We cannot come in last to Santorum in Minnesota, this would be unacceptable no matter what is said. Dude has no little organization and little money, so media perception, if this poll is correct, is what is winning the battle in Minnesota. This has to be concerning. The campaign made a "Big Dog" ad buy back in Feb for Minn, but that has not had he effect they hoped. It's time to whip out the big guns to see if that will get through to people.

----------


## 8ClicksPerSecond

> No. People don't like Ventura here.


Oh I thought he was really popular in Minnesota.

----------


## sailingaway

> Sigh. We cannot come in last to Santorum in Minnesota, this would be unacceptable no matter what is said. Dude has no little organization and little money, so media perception, if this poll is correct, is what is winning the battle in Minnesota. This has to be concerning. The campaign made a "Big Dog" ad buy back in Feb for Minn, but that has not had he effect they hoped. It's time to whip out the big guns to see if that will get through to people.


that isn't the right ad for Minn, what were they thinking?

----------


## 69360

> I really do wonder if we've done all we can in the GOP. The brand is so tainted and the people who are still the majority make me sicker every day. I just can't believe Gingrich is getting so much support. They knowingly cling to a hyper-flawed, disgusting, immoral candidate because he's seen as more electable than Paul (the TV told them so).
> 
> Their hatred and bigotry toward Muslims unquestionably has something to do with it too. Everything about my interactions with most Republicans screams that we're working with the wrong party.


It's not going to happen within the GOP. I want the party to change and get back to it's roots, but there is no sign of it happening in large enough numbers. The democrats are no better. We effectively have a one party system now with a facade of difference. If the country was ever ripe for a viable alternative major 3rd party the time is now. People on both sides of the false left/right divide are disgusted with government. RP supporters disaffected democrats and independents could combine to do something good. A RP 3rd party run, while obviously not able to take the white house could be a catalyst of something more.

----------


## angrydragon

What is Doug Wead thinking right now? Besides the delegates, what is their plan to win?

Doug must have something up his sleeve, being an adviser on both presidential campaigns to both President Bush's. 

The RP campaign has been quiet for the past few days, other than the Jack Hunter blogs.

Jack could also do so much more besides blogs, since they only show up on Ron's website.

Gotta break out of that box.

What are they doing?

----------


## RecoveringNeoCon

PPP: Gingrich winning in Minnesota

Gingrich: 36
Romney: 18
Santorum: 17
Paul: 13


edit: Just saw the results have been posted.

seriously?

Insane....

----------


## sailingaway

Everywhere is reacting right now to 'Ron Paul isn't competing in Florida' and the media pretense that he has essentially dropped out of the running. when they quit focusing on FL and start focussing on the caucus states-- ASSUMING WE DO OUR WORK-- Ron will be a necessary focus, and polls will change.

----------


## carterm

"eff."

----------


## TexMac

> Everywhere is reacting right now to 'Ron Paul isn't competing in Florida' and the media pretense that he has essentially dropped out of the running. when they quit focusing on FL and start focussing on the caucus states-- ASSUMING WE DO OUR WORK-- Ron will be a necessary focus, and polls will change.


Yes, and we are going to do really well in NV and we will have buzz from there.

----------


## ZanZibar

This is only the straw poll, which doesn't matter at all. Ron Paul will likely take many if not most of the delegates.

----------


## Roy Bleckert

This is not hard to figure out 

Starting with Iowa the baby boomers 45-64 have the largest voting block & have been bouncing between Santy, Mittens & Newty 

Look @ the cross tab in MN Ron went down from 9% to 5 % in the 45-64 group 

He has been losing support in this most important group in this election 

Ron needs to boost his support amongst the baby boomers to have a change @ the nomination 

That is the demographic I would target to win this race

----------


## Michael Landon

303 people were polled, is that correct?  If so that's  not a lot of people so that might not be a fair analysis.

- ML

----------


## 69360

Everyone has done the best possible job they could have, the campaign the supporters, everyone. The support within the GOP just isn't there. These later state polls are showing us that.

I just hope this movement finds a path forward somehow and doesn't break down with finger pointing and infighting.

----------


## Lord Xar

Isn't MN an "OPEN" caucus? If so, why poll only Republicans?

I am sooo confused :-(

----------


## SovereignMN

The crosstabs baffle me...
A)  Independents have Gingrich 26, Santorum 23, Paul 18, Romney 15. 
B)  Paul's support dropped from 15% in 2008 to 13% in 2012.  

Both of these are complete contradictions of the patterns we have seen in every race thusfar this year.

----------


## Fraulein

The majority of the "older" RP supporters are stuck in their own ways. They blindly follow the campaign and chastise all who criticise. F*** the GOP. Ron ain't winning the nomination as he has been effectively marginalized.

Time to give this country a viable alternative to the left/right paradigm and run third party. Get this country in the right direction.

----------


## pauliticalfan

We got 16% in 2008. No way in hell we're below that now. This poll is insane. 

If these results hold though, this thing is over. No way we can afford to come in 4th in Minnesota. We need to pull an Iowa there (surging to first in the polls) and quick.

Maybe Gingrich crashing and burning in Florida would be good for us?

----------


## Lord Xar

I think they are keeping Frothy in the Race to buffer Ron's momentum. I mean, he is near "second". Really?

I don't know man.. where are Ron's Foreign Policy Ads? His JOBS ads? This is scary.

We really need Ron to bust it out tomorrow in the debates. If he does, that is millions in free advertising. We need him to pwn the debate to gain momentum going into Florida for the subsequent states.

----------


## liberalnurse

> bobbyw24, is that you?

----------


## D.A.S.

> I think they are keeping Frothy in the Race to buffer Ron's momentum. I mean, he is near "second". Really?
> 
> I don't know man.. where are Ron's Foreign Policy Ads? His JOBS ads? This is scary.
> 
> We really need Ron to bust it out tomorrow in the debates. If he does, that is millions in free advertising. We need him to pwn the debate to gain momentum going into Florida for the subsequent states.


THIS ^^^ my sentiments exactly.

----------


## SovereignMN

> We got 16% in 2008. No way in hell we're below that now. This poll is insane. 
> 
> If these results hold though, this thing is over. No way we can afford to come in 4th in Minnesota. We need to pull an Iowa there (surging to first in the polls) and quick.


I agree.  It runs completely contradictory to every race thusfar.  In every state Paul has outperformed his 2008 total by 2-4x.  In every state Romney and Paul are near the top among independents.  In this one Paul is 3rd and Romney 4th.  Something is very fishy here or else South Carolina REALLY did turn this race upside down overnight.  

Would independents be that easily swayed though?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> The majority of the "older" RP supporters are stuck in their own ways. They blindly follow the campaign and chastise all who criticise. F*** the GOP. Ron ain't winning the nomination as he has been effectively marginalized.
> 
> Time to give this country a viable alternative to the left/right paradigm and run third party. Get this country in the right direction.


He's not going to run 3rd Party.  Deal with it.

----------


## da32130

One thing to keep in mind: The reason we do well in caucus states isn't because the people in those states love us more.  It is because of turnout.

Minnesota has 5 million people. 25k wins. 0.5% of the population. 

In Iowa we needed over 1% to win.

Last time in Minnesota barely 1% of the population even voted.

I can't vouch for the passion on the ground relative to other candidates, but having better turnout is how we win.

----------


## da32130

> One thing to keep in mind: The reason we do well in caucus states isn't because the people in those states love us more.  It is because of turnout.
> 
> Minnesota has 5 million people. 25k wins. 0.5% of the population. 
> 
> In Iowa we needed over 1% to win.
> 
> Last time in Minnesota barely 1% of the population even voted.
> 
> I can't vouch for the passion on the ground relative to other candidates, but having better turnout is how we win.


For comparison, South Carolina has a slightly smaller population than Minnesota. We pulled 78k there and 13% of the population voted.

----------


## Lightweis

> He's not going to run 3rd Party.  Deal with it.


He is going to run 3rd party! So you deal with it.. He can"t win the GOP nomination so accept it. They won't let it happen..

----------


## Lightweis

I feel like we should regroup and gear up for a 3rd party run.. I like our chances against Obama either way

----------


## Fraulein

> He's not going to run 3rd Party.  Deal with it.


They won't let Ron win. These boys play hardball. We all have to deal with it.

Everyone has heard Ron's message. The next best thing he can do is get this country on the right track by disrupting the left/right paradigm.

----------


## da32130

> For comparison, South Carolina has a slightly smaller population than Minnesota. We pulled 78k there and 13% of the population voted.


Another fun fact. In SC in 2008 we had 16k votes. In MN we had 10k.  

So this time SC gives us 78k. What will MN give this time? Last time 14k would have given us 2nd. Yes, under 0.3% of the population.

----------


## SwooshOU

Don't give up, people.  The seeds of liberty are sprouting.

Ask questions like:  What really is the role of the government?  How would we feel if Iran had 40 military bases in Canada and Mexico?  Lots of others, too... it just makes people think.

Press on, and truth will always rise to the top.

----------


## RonPaul101.com

> Gingrich ahead is better than Mittons for now.
> 
> Romney still has big lead on intrade so keeping the field divided is good


Very good point. However, i would have hoped we were a strong second to Newt up there. 

Will getting Jesse V to try and draw out indy votes for Paul help?

----------


## SovereignMN

Jesse Ventura will NOT help Paul in Minnesota.  He is very unpopular here now.

----------


## da32130

> Jesse Ventura will NOT help Paul in Minnesota.  He is very unpopular here now.


SovereignMN, can you give us a feel for how we are in MN now vs 2008 (ads, signs, etc)? Was there any visible sign that we would do so well in 2008?

----------


## 69360

> I feel like we should regroup and gear up for a 3rd party run.. I like our chances against Obama either way


Ron would not be elected president as a 3rd party candidate. However it is a noble cause worth supporting.

----------


## tbone717

> Ron would not be elected president as a 3rd party candidate. However it is a noble cause worth supporting.


If Paul does not win the nomination, running 3rd party will damage any chance libertarian candidate(s) will have running for the 2016 GOP nomination.

----------


## Lightweis

> Ron would not be elected president as a 3rd party candidate. However it is a noble cause worth supporting.


I like our chances more during the general electiOn than with te GOP!

----------


## Lightweis

> If Paul does not win the nomination, running 3rd party will damage any chance libertarian candidate(s) will have running for the 2016 GOP nomination.


That's why we should form our own party.. GOP is dying anyways and we shouldn't be a part of this corrupt organization.

----------


## 69360

> If Paul does not win the nomination, running 3rd party will damage any chance libertarian candidate(s) will have running for the 2016 GOP nomination.


So they might get .25% instead of .5%

Be realistic. Ron has more than 20x's the support of any candidate the LP might run. He could be a catalyst for something big.




> I like our chances more during the general electiOn than with te GOP!


If by some miracle he could win the GOP nomination his chances in the general would be rather good.

----------


## Imperial

> This is fantastic. Gingrich doesn't have the organization to push delegates effectively. We are only 5% behind 2nd. Hopefully Paul will push the state hard with ads and become competitive straw vote wise.


His Super PAC, Winning Our Future, is building a shadow campaign to have the formal organization in place, and they have apparently started hiring in Minnesota.

----------


## tbone717

> I like our chances more during the general electiOn than with te GOP!


I don't.  In 2008 the national exit polls show 39% Dem, 32% Rep, 29% Ind.  Roughly 90% of Dems and Rep voted for their respective nominee, Indys went 52/44 for Obama.  If Paul runs 3rd party, I would say that 90% of those Dems would still vote for Obama, he may pick up some Independents if he is shown to be viable.  And even though we like to think all of the Paul supporters are on the NOBP bandwagon, polls recently have shown it to be about 40% of Paul's support, which knocks the GOP support from 90 to around 85%.

It would take a herculean effort, something that is unprecedented in modern politics for Paul to win as a third party candidate.  And you think he is marginalized now in te GOP race?  Just wait to see what happens if he runs as an Independent.  My guess is that he would not even be invited to the debates.

----------


## Student Of Paulism

Problem is Ron's momentum is all but washed up right now and MSM couldn't give a $#@! about him at this point. It's all a matter of hoping that people will just wake up and turn out, in order to swing thing a bit, but time is running out. His message is out there, if people can't or won't grasp it, what can you do? As someone else said, these things can take decades, people. It takes a long sometimes, for people to wake up and listen, and they may have to learn the hard way (ww3 and economic disaster). Like the Samson story Ron talked about and how the people wanted a king. After Samson told them the danger of it, God told Samson to let them have it then. They want it so bad, let em learn the hard way. Whether you 'believe' or not, that illustration is logical and sensible. 

Sadly, SC was a huge pot hole for the campaign. It's unreal how 1 lousy debate for Ron, and Newt attacking a moderator changed everything 

It's true, people go with the hot hand, and it's Newt right now. I'm sure if you polled him anywhere, he would be over 30%, soft support or not.

And yea, i wouldn't mind him running 3rd party, mainly because id like to see the GOP writhe in pain over it, and bring their sorry asses down with us so Obama can win, and Rand will run in 2016, who has grown on me more than ever in recent months after listening to him speak and studying his career and character more in depth. The GOP has f'd Ron for months, and id love seeing him go out with a big FU into retirement and ruining their chances of winning against Obama.

However, Ron won't do that, because Rand would be blackballed from the party if that happens and Ron wouldn't wanna do that to him. Rand would be expected to vote/support the nominee and if Ron goes third party, anyone named Paul will be getting dumped on horribly for 4 years and it would make it that much harder for Rand to run for potus with the party $#@!ting all over him during a campaign for what his father did 4 years before.

You guys need to stop this 'gingrich has no money' thing either. You guys do realize he is an illuminist poster boy, right? With ties to many elitists with A LOT OF MONEY. Addleson is just one of many. If Newt runs low, he calls them up, gets a refill to his PACs and boom, he's back in business. So yea, Newt isn't going anywhere, believe me. However, i agree about Santorum, he is the last blocker for Ron, and won't be going anywhere for a while either. Hell, his moneybombs are better than Ron's right now, which is quite embarrassing. He is siphoning a good chunk of votes from Ron, but only staying in for blocking purposes, while jockeying to get a spot in Newt or Mitt's cabinet.

----------


## Wesley

Wow,

Kind of embarassing to see Ron polling so low in my state, very surprising.

However I think it's more just a symptom of the nation as a whole with all these people who go...


"Hmmmm, uhh Gingrich I guess"

it frustrates me that these people go out and vote based on the nonsense they see on tv. 


Anyway.

There is a good deal of Ron Paul support here, more than that poll would indicate. 
I feel like with a good GOTV effort we could move up to a close second.


What's the most helpful thing I can do right now?

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

im telling yaz.. we need to stomp newt in the nuts before he gains anymore momentum. we cannot let this guy be anti-romney and i hope ron paul campaign attacks newt in such a way that he cant explain his way out of it with bull$#@!. 

but attacking newt is a double edge sword. attacking newt exposes him (which doesnt seem to work very well atm). attacking newt also makes people feel that he is important.

if romney and ron really has an uneasy ceasefire this whole election, i think they must forcus their fire on newt and destroy him.

----------


## EndTheECB

It confirms my belief that Nevada is the do or die/Waterloo/Stalingrad-state for Dr. Paul. If he doesn't have any momentum going into the crucial day of february 7th he will have no chances whatsoever to win any states before or after supertuesday. Thats why RP-supporters must do their Hajj to cities like Las Vegas, Reno and Carson City while the Superpacs and campaign bombard the airwaves and TV-networks with Ads such as Compassion/The one who can beat Obama and Serial hypocracy. Veni, Vedi, Vici.

----------


## Epic

If EndorseLiberty could drop 3m+ into Nevada tv ads... that could swing it....

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

i have stocked up with enough water, gasoline, and food to last 3 months in the event Obama is still in office or if Newt somehow wins the election.

the universities/colleges in MN is our only hope to winning and i read that those college students are much more reliable when it involves voting.

----------


## 69360

> Problem is Ron's momentum is all but washed up right now and MSM couldn't give a $#@! about him at this point. It's all a matter of hoping that people will just wake up and turn out, in order to swing thing a bit, but time is running out. His message is out there, if people can't or won't grasp it, what can you do? As someone else said, these things can decades, people. It takes a long sometimes, for people to wake up and listen, and they may have to learn the hard way (ww3 and economic disaster). Like the Samson story Ron talked about and how the people wanted a king. After Samson told them the danger of it, God told Samson to let them have it then. They want it so bad, let em learn the hard way. Whether you 'believe' or not, that illustration is logical and sensible. 
> 
> Sadly, SC was a huge pot hole for the campaign. It's unreal how 1 lousy debate for Ron, and Newt attacking a moderator changed everything 
> 
> It's true, people go with the hot hand, and it's Newt right now. I'm sure if you polled him anywhere, he would be over 30%, soft support or not.
> 
> And yea, i wouldn't mind him running 3rd party, mainly because id like to see the GOP writhe in pain over it, and bring their sorry asses down with us so Obama can win, and Rand will run in 2016, who has grown on me more than ever in recent months after listening to him speak and studying his career and character more in depth. The GOP has f'd Ron for month, and id love seeing him go out with a big FU into retirement and ruining their chances of winning against Obama.
> 
> However, Ron won't do that, because Rand would be blackballed from the party if that happens and Ron wouldn't wanna do that to him. Rand would be expected to vote/support the nominee and if Ron goes third party, anyone named Paul will be getting dumped on horribly for 4 years and it would make it that much harder for Rand to run for potus with the party $#@!ting all over him during a campaign for what his father did 4 years before.
> ...


I wonder if Ron ran 3rd party and did rather well say over 20% of the vote, would it pave the way for a Rand 3rd party run where Rand could improve on those numbers even more.

I've also wondered about something really unconventional. Could Ron get on the ballot in the general election as a Republican without party support? If he met the ballot requirements what prevents it?

----------


## kasjun

I think Ron Paul needs to show that his foreign policy is sound by emphasizing the endorsement of the former CIA chief. I have heard several people say that they like his domestic policies but are afraid of his foreign policies. Maybe if we spread this video around it would help.

  <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Aiz85NejIyE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

----------


## da32130

> Wow,
> 
> Kind of embarassing to see Ron polling so low in my state, very surprising.
> 
> However I think it's more just a symptom of the nation as a whole with all these people who go...
> 
> 
> "Hmmmm, uhh Gingrich I guess"
> 
> ...


Wesley, do you remember 2008 at all? Can you compare the presence then vs now (we got 16% in the caucus then, when we were getting 4% in a normal primary)?

Here is some background on why MN is the focus:

One thing to keep in mind: The reason we do well in caucus states isn't because the people in those states love us more. It is because of turnout.

Minnesota has 5 million people. 25k wins. 0.5% of the population. 

In Iowa we needed over 1% to win.

Last time in Minnesota barely 1% of the population even voted.

I can't vouch for the passion on the ground relative to other candidates, but having better turnout is how we win. 

For comparison, South Carolina has a slightly smaller population than Minnesota. We pulled 78k there and 13% of the population voted. 

Another fun fact. In SC in 2008 we had 16k votes. In MN we had 10k. 

So this time SC gives us 78k. What will MN give this time? Last time 14k would have given us 2nd. Yes, under 0.3% of the population.

----------


## NinjaPirate

The numbers do leave much to be desired however the article also states the numbers are *NOT* set in stone:

_"Gingrich shouldn't get too comfortable though.  The race in Minnesota is incredibly fluid.  15% of voters are undecided and out of the 85% who do have a current preference, 63% say they could change their minds between now and the caucus in two weeks. That leaves almost 70% of the electorate up for grabs in the closing stretch..."_

With that said stay the course and continue working hard!  It's far from over!!

----------


## WD-NY

> Everywhere is reacting right now to 'Ron Paul isn't competing in Florida' and the media pretense that he has essentially dropped out of the running. when they quit focusing on FL and start focussing on the caucus states-- ASSUMING WE DO OUR WORK-- Ron will be a necessary focus, and polls will change.


Of course, but Ron isn't campaigning in any of the caucus states this week so Team Paul's argument that "Ron isn't campaigning in FL so that he can focus on caucus states" just isn't accurate or true. 

Is Ron sick? Is he chilling out in TX? Where the heck is he?!?!

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

regardless of how we do.. ride this out until the end. ron paul will expose these B@stards and expose the government.

----------


## gerryb

> To kickstart a viable alternative party for those of us who believe in constitutional government. Ron wouldn't win, but if he could get say 20% of the vote it could start something good.


What makes you think if we can't get 20% IN A PRIMARY we'd get 20% in a General????

Literally 10-20 times more people vote in a general election than a primary.

----------


## jkob

Last in SC hurt imo. We really need to try to beat Frothy in Florida.

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

Finishing last place never looks good.

----------


## EndTheECB

What if... Rand Paul debated instead of his father tomorrow? Is this possible? He would totally rock the stage and convert many neocons.

----------


## bluesc

> Of course, but Ron isn't campaigning in any of the caucus states this week so Team Paul's argument that "Ron isn't campaigning in FL so that he can focus on caucus states" just isn't accurate or true. 
> 
> Is Ron sick? Is he chilling out in TX? Where the heck is he?!?!


The campaign is playing the "secret shadow delegate" strategy where we don't have to win any states and just leave a few people behind to become delegates. That way Ron isn't needed because we don't need to win any votes 

It's all ridiculous, of course.

----------


## da32130

> Of course, but Ron isn't campaigning in any of the caucus states this week so Team Paul's argument that "Ron isn't campaigning in FL so that he can focus on caucus states" just isn't accurate or true. 
> 
> Is Ron sick? Is he chilling out in TX? Where the heck is he?!?!


Unlike everyone else he plans on doing this for another 6 months. So he is probably pacing himself.

----------


## doctorfunk

> What makes you think if we can't get 20% IN A PRIMARY we'd get 20% in a General????
> 
> Literally 10-20 times more people vote in a general election than a primary.


This.  If Ron would decide to run 3rd party (which I don't think he will), he'll be lucky to get 5% of the vote.  It may be enough to ensure that Obama wins, but it would hurt the movement as republicans would blame Ron and kick out Rand.

----------


## 69360

> What makes you think if we can't get 20% IN A PRIMARY we'd get 20% in a General????
> 
> Literally 10-20 times more people vote in a general election than a primary.


The polling.

----------


## da32130

> Finishing last place never looks good.


Well, it didn't prevent Newt from surging. He did horribly the first two states. Then wins the 3rd state and rockets in the polls. 

If we can do well in the caucus states we can turn this around. We focus on those states hoping our energetic base can increase turnout. In 2008 when we were getting 4% in the SC primary we got 16% in the MN caucus. We also got 9% in CO, 18% in Maine, and 14% in NV (all caucuses). At that same time we got 4% in SC, 3% in Florida, 6% in TN, 3% in AL,  etc. (all primaries).

This time we got 13% in SC. What will be the turnout at these caucuses? That is the question. Last time it was 2-4x percentage wise what it would have been in a primary.

Here is some background on why MN is the focus:

One thing to keep in mind: The reason we do well in caucus states isn't because the people in those states love us more. It is because of turnout.

Minnesota has 5 million people. 25k wins. 0.5% of the population. 

In Iowa we needed over 1% to win.

Last time in Minnesota barely 1% of the population even voted.

I can't vouch for the passion on the ground relative to other candidates, but having better turnout is how we win. 

For comparison, South Carolina has a slightly smaller population than Minnesota. We pulled 78k there and 13% of the population voted. 

Another fun fact. In SC in 2008 we had 16k votes. In MN we had 10k. 

So this time SC gives us 78k. What will MN give this time? Last time 14k would have given us 2nd. Yes, under 0.3% of the population.

----------


## One Last Battle!

You guys are overreacting (as per usual).

The last poll before 2008 Minnesota had McCain winning by 20% vs Romney and then Huckabee around 20% (to McCain's 40%) and Ron had 5%. It ended with Romney 40%, Huckabee 22%, Ron 16%. Caucus polls aside from Iowa are exceptionally unreliable.

----------


## EndTheECB

This Should be Dr. Pauls Schedule:

Wednesday:
10:00 Speech at College Y
11:30 Speech at University X
12:00 Veterans town hall meeting
13:30 Florida Seniors town hall meeting
19:00 Town hall meeting Reno

Thursday
10:00 ......Reno
11:30 ......Elko County
14:00 ......University of Nevada
....

Instead of:
10:00-15:00 Read economics textbook from 1952 in the hammock
15:00-16:00 Help my wife cook delicious dish from the Ron Paul Famliy cook book
17:00-17:45 Take a ride on my bicycle

----------


## da32130

> You guys are overreacting (as per usual).
> 
> The last poll before 2008 Minnesota had McCain winning by 20% vs Romney and then Huckabee around 20% (to McCain's 40%) and Ron had 5%. It ended with Romney 40%, Huckabee 22%, Ron 16%. Caucus polls aside from Iowa are exceptionally unreliable.


Do you have a link to that poll? I was looking for something like that. That gives some evidence of the turnout factor being important. A similar increase would put Paul  13% * 3.2 = 41.6% above Newt 36%.

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

> Well, it didn't prevent Newt from surging. He did horribly the first two states.


Gingrich did poorly, but he didn't finish last among the major running candidates.  Gingrich beat out Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman in Iowa; Santorum and Perry in New Hampshire.

If just about any other state after New Hampshire was next, Gingrich would be finished from those showings.  As with Romney and New Hampshire though, Gingrich got a state that neighbored his home state.

----------


## da32130

Just for reference. Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates still in, list by date):

caucus:
Iowa 10%
Nevada 14%
Maine 18%
Alaska 17%
Colorado 9%
Minnesota 16%
Montana 25%
North Dakota 21%
Washington 22%
Kansas 11%

primary:
New Hampshire 8%
Michagan 6%
South Carolina 4%
Florida 3%
Alabama 3%
Tennessee 6%
Connecticut 4%
Arizona 4%
Georgia 3%
Delaware 4%
California 4%
Arkansas  5%
etc.

The lowest caucus was 9%, the highest primary was 8%.
The highest caucus was 25%, the lowest primary was 3%.

Turnout can make a huge difference.

----------


## da32130

> Gingrich did poorly, but he didn't finish last among the major running candidates.  Gingrich beat out Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman in Iowa; Santorum and Perry in New Hampshire.
> 
> If just about any other state after New Hampshire was next, Gingrich would be finished from those showings.  As with Romney and New Hampshire though, Gingrich got a state that neighbored his home state.


Newt finished last amongst the remaining candidates in Iowa. And essentially tied for last in NH. Yet he won in the next state. 

He may do well in Florida, but within a few days Paul may do well in the next four states Coloroda, Nevada, Maine, and Minnesota. After those it is a couple weeks before another primary. Hypothetically, if Paul were to win 1-4 of those the narrative could change again.

----------


## rp2012win

I'm calling BS on this poll. Has paul at 5% with ages 46-65. The worst he did with this group was 11% in SC. And they only surveyed 303 people and the margin of error is nearly 6%. And was conducted saturday and sunday while people were watching news coverage of gingrich punishing romney in SC.

----------


## Esoteric

Guess that Ventura endorsement didn't help too much..

----------


## cstarace

> I'm calling BS on this poll. Has paul at 5% with ages 46-65. The worst he did with this group was 11% in SC. And they only surveyed 303 people and the margin of error is nearly 6%.


This. Paul is going to be campaigning like a madman in these caucus states. Too early to pay attention to the polls. Everyone keep your heads down and keep working!

----------


## bluesc

> Guess that Ventura endorsement didn't help too much..


I refuse to believe it! He is loved by Americans!

----------


## stillhere

Head to head numbers within the GOP for Minnesota in this poll:

*Gingrich 50%*
Romney 29%
Not Sure 21%

---

*Santorum 46%*
Romney 34%
Not Sure 20%

---

Romney 51%
*Paul 29%*
Not Sure 20%

----------


## bluesc

> Head to head numbers within the GOP for Minnesota in this poll:
> 
> *Gingrich 50%*
> Romney 29%
> Not Sure 21%
> 
> ---
> 
> *Santorum 46%*
> ...


It looks like that in every state. The anti-Romney argument sucks. Now they have silenced that and are switching to "we don't even need to win a state to win the nomination".

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

> Newt finished last amongst the remaining candidates in Iowa.


Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman were still running on January 3.

----------


## stillhere

Are you people kidding me??? Jesse Ventura's approval rating was in the TEENS when he left office. In the early year of 2002, less than 30% of Minnesota believed he deserved to be reelected. He took a lot of heat for how he handled the Paul Wellstone death.....and then the 9/11 attacks and his conspiracy theories. Jesse Ventura is WILDLY unpopular and disliked.

----------


## da32130

> Head to head numbers within the GOP for Minnesota in this poll:
> 
> *Gingrich 50%*
> Romney 29%
> Not Sure 21%
> 
> ---
> 
> *Santorum 46%*
> ...


Anybody but Romney, unless it is Paul. Pretty standard stuff. 

The reason why this state matters isn't because we expect it to be different, but because it is a caucus state in neutral territory. Winning it is based on increased turnout similar to 2008.

Here is a repeat for new viewers:
Just for reference. Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates still in, list by date):

caucus:
Iowa 10%
Nevada 14%
Maine 18%
Alaska 17%
Colorado 9%
Minnesota 16%
Montana 25%
North Dakota 21%
Washington 22%
Kansas 11%

primary:
New Hampshire 8%
Michagan 6%
South Carolina 4%
Florida 3%
Alabama 3%
Tennessee 6%
Connecticut 4%
Arizona 4%
Georgia 3%
Delaware 4%
California 4%
Arkansas 5%
etc.

The lowest caucus was 9%, the highest primary was 8%.
The highest caucus was 25%, the lowest primary was 3%.

Turnout can make a huge difference.

----------


## pauliticalfan

I've thought that the anti-Romney strategy was pretty bad all along. The split-field strategy is far better.

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

> I've thought that the anti-Romney strategy was pretty bad all along. The split-field strategy is far better.


How? Everyone is paying attention to Romney and Gingrich only.  The incentive for the large portion of the GOP primary electorate that doesn't like Ron Paul to vote for Paul is gone, now that there is a viable not-Romney candidate.

----------


## da32130

> How? Everyone is paying attention to Romney and Gingrich only.  The incentive for the large portion of the GOP primary electorate that doesn't like Ron Paul to vote for Paul is gone, now that there is a viable not-Romney candidate.


This is only until Florida. Right after Florida when four caucus states happen the dynamic might change again.

Here is a repeat for new viewers:
Just for reference. Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates were  still in, listed by date):

caucus:
Iowa 10%
Nevada 14%
Maine 18%
Alaska 17%
Colorado 9%
Minnesota 16%
Montana 25%
North Dakota 21%
Washington 22%
Kansas 11%

primary:
New Hampshire 8%
Michagan 6%
South Carolina 4%
Florida 3%
Alabama 3%
Tennessee 6%
Connecticut 4%
Arizona 4%
Georgia 3%
Delaware 4%
California 4%
Arkansas 5%
etc.

The lowest caucus was 9%, the highest primary was 8%.
The highest caucus was 25%, the lowest primary was 3%.

Turnout can make a huge difference.

----------


## SovereignMN

> SovereignMN, can you give us a feel for how we are in MN now vs 2008 (ads, signs, etc)? Was there any visible sign that we would do so well in 2008?


There weren't too many signs back in 2008 and there aren't alot today either.  Most Minnesotans don't put up yard signs in the winter because the ground is frozen.  My own perception, viewed through just my own lenses, is that there is more support for Ron Paul this time around than in 2008.  I know of at least a dozen friends/acquaintences that did not caucus for Ron Paul last time that are this time.  One was an Obama supporter, one was a Huckabee supporter, the rest stayed at home and this will be their first caucus.

----------


## da32130

> There weren't too many signs back in 2008 and there aren't alot today either.  Most Minnesotans don't put up yard signs in the winter because the ground is frozen.  My own perception, viewed through just my own lenses, is that there is more support for Ron Paul this time around than in 2008.  I know of at least a dozen friends/acquaintences that did not caucus for Ron Paul last time that are this time.  One was an Obama supporter, one was a Huckabee supporter, the rest stayed at home and this will be their first caucus.


Great news. Thanks for sharing.

This is in line with Paul polling higher now than in 2008. So if we got 16% in 2008 while only polling at 5% it would lead one to believe we could do even better this year.

How we do in Nevada on the 4th, three days before Minnesota, looks like it will be our first big tell on how turnout is fairing for us this year.

----------


## huckans

The highest primary was not 8% in NH.  The highest primary was 16% in PA.  PA was also the highest number of votes (even more votes than CA!)

----------


## WD-NY

> This is only until Florida. Right after Florida when four caucus states happen the dynamic might change again.





> Newt finished last amongst the remaining candidates in Iowa. And essentially tied for last in NH. Yet he won in the next state. 
> 
> He may do well in Florida, but within a few days Paul may do well in the next four states Coloroda, Nevada, Maine, and Minnesota. After those it is a couple weeks before another primary. Hypothetically, *if Paul were to win 1-4 of those the narrative could change again*.


And what makes you (or anyone else) think that Paul can/will 1 of the caucus states??

If Team Paul (re: the campaign) was actually serious about the 'caucus delegates ftw' strategy, Ron would be hosting 3 events-per-day/2-states-per-week both last week and this week.

Instead, Ron took 4 days off last week and 4 days off this week (sorry, showing up for debates doesn't count... nor does phoning in interviews to NPR).

How much longer is Team Paul going to keep pushing this FUD before the damage becomes irreversible (e.g. single digits + 4th place onTuesday)? The donations are drying up not because of Ron's 4th place finish in SC... they're drying up because RON = MIA from the campaign trail. 
The argument that FL = expensive is a total canard. It doesn't cost any money to hold town halls or meet & greet sessions. It doesn't cost any money to deliver a big speech.The campaign needs to start playing it straight or the grassroots is going to meltdown just like it did in 2008... It's not losing that crushes spirits and destroys moral, it's selling us a bill of goods like "we're focused on winning caucus states" then not even visiting those states during their 2 weeks of "not campaigning" in SC & FL.

Does anyone here honestly think any of us would be making a stink if the campaign schedule looked like this today, tomorrow and Friday?




> *Wednesday (Nevada):*
> 10:00 ... Speech at College Y
> 11:30 ... Speech at University X
> 12:30 ... Veterans town hall meeting
> 14:30 ... Florida Seniors town hall meeting
> 19:00 ... Town hall meeting Reno
> 
> *Thursday (Florida):*
> 11:00 ... Town Hall + Q&A
> ...


Instead it's more like what EndtheECB imagined:



> 10:00-15:00 ... Read economics textbook from 1952 in the hammock
> 15:00-16:00 ... Help my wife cook delicious dish from the Ron Paul Famliy cook book
> 17:00-17:45 ... Take a ride on my bicycle


The MSM's negative bias towards Ron means that he (and the campaign!) have to hustle twice as hard to get the same the amount of local coverage as the other 3 candidate. Right now, Ron & Co. aren't even trying (which is 10x more frustrating/soul-crushing than giving it their all, but losing in the end)

----------


## 69360

> The highest primary was not 8% in NH.  The highest primary was 16% in PA.  PA was also the highest number of votes (even more votes than CA!)


I was one of those votes and Ron is very popular here. 

But you have to put it into perspective. At that point McCain had the nomination locked in and everyone else had dropped out.

----------


## AngryCanadian

Santorum Santorum  errrr

----------


## da32130

> The highest primary was not 8% in NH.  The highest primary was 16% in PA.  PA was also the highest number of votes (even more votes than CA!)


I was only looking at pre feb 10th states.

----------


## tbone717

> The highest primary was not 8% in NH.  The highest primary was 16% in PA.  PA was also the highest number of votes (even more votes than CA!)


Keep in mind PA was meaningless, McCain had it by then. They were essentially protest votes. I wouldn't use that number as a measure of current support.  I think Paul was the only other choice on the ballot.

----------


## 69360

> Keep in mind PA was meaningless, McCain had it by then. They were essentially protest votes. I wouldn't use that number as a measure of current support.  I think Paul was the only other choice on the ballot.


Huckabee appeared on the ballot, but had already dropped out. He got 11%

----------


## da32130

> And what makes you (or anyone else) think that Paul can/will 1 of the caucus states??


Because Caucus results in 2008 were 3x what primary results were (3-8% primary vs 9-25% caucus).

So if Paul is polling in the teens now it could translate into 30-50% caucus results. These numbers give us some chance in almost every caucus state.

----------


## WD-NY

> Because Caucus results in 2008 were 3x what primary results were (3-8% primary vs 9-25% caucus).
> 
> So if Paul is polling in the teens now it could translate into 30-50% caucus results. These numbers give us some chance in almost every caucus state.


::sigh::

And how do we triple our 2008 numbers when Ron is relaxing in TX phoning in interviews and 'raising money'?? If the caucuses are so important, than wouldn't it make sense for Ron to be visiting as many media markets as possible while Romney & Gingrich are fighting over FL?? With no other candidates in town, the local media would have no alternative but to give Ron A MOUNTAIN OF FREE PRESS/COVERAGE.

And yet... Ron hasn't visited ANY OF THE CAUCUS STATES this week or last.

----------


## tbone717

> Huckabee appeared on the ballot, but had already dropped out. He got 11%


Good memory

----------


## da32130

> ::sigh::
> 
> And how do we triple our 2008 numbers when Ron is relaxing in TX phoning in interviews and 'raising money'??


They are ALREADY tripled. We were polling at 3-6% last time and got 9-25% in caucuses.

Now we are polling in the teens and could expect 30-50%. Without Paul doing anything.

He is in this for another 6 months and pacing himself.

----------


## Moebedda

> That's why we should form our own party.. GOP is dying anyways and we shouldn't be a part of this corrupt organization.


This

----------


## phil4truth

> ::sigh::
> 
> And how do we triple our 2008 numbers when Ron is relaxing in TX phoning in interviews and 'raising money'?? If the caucuses are so important, than wouldn't it make sense for Ron to be visiting as many media markets as possible while Romney & Gingrich are fighting over FL?? With no other candidates in town, the local media would have no alternative but to give Ron A MOUNTAIN OF FREE PRESS/COVERAGE.
> 
> And yet... Ron hasn't visited ANY OF THE CAUCUS STATES this week or last.


What is with all the negativity and misinformation?  You couldn't be any further from the truth:




> *Why Ron Paul is shivering in Maine instead of cavorting in Florida* 
> 
> 
> The other three GOP presidential candidates are stumping in Florida ahead of the Jan. 31 primary, a winner-take-all-delegates affair. But not Ron Paul. Here's why he's up in Maine.


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ing-in-Florida

Seriously guys stop allowing yourselves to get disheartened.  Ron will do very well.  What is the sense in him wasting his time and resources in Florida in a winner take all primary?  The drop in morale for some is the inherent human desire for constant success and frustration with anything less.  Ron finishing 4th in SC was not a set back considering the increase in his votes from 2008 and he will get 3rd in FL and it's onwards and upwards.  Just acknowledge that these poll results are not always true.  They are released in order to influence voters at decisive stages and they are very biased towards our campaign as are the MSM as is the establishment.  We have known that for the past 4 years and we know it even more today and that places us at an advantage in that we know the lay of the battleground and we know everyone on that battleground are there to see that we don't succeed.

What the campaign is doing is chosing its battles carefully and all this talk of difficulty for the campaign raising money - some people need a poke in the eye with a big stick.  The campaign's fundraising is doing very well.

Negative people...what else can I say?

----------


## ronpaulhawaii

Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain  and most fools do.  Dale Carnegie 

Do not listen to those who weep and complain, for their disease is contagious.  Og Mandino

When you consistently maintain a positive frame of mind, youll become known as a problem-solver rather than a complainer. People avoid complainers. They seek out problem-solvers.  Joseph Sommerville

Realize that if you have time to whine and complain about something then you have the time to do something about it.  Anthony J. DAngelo,

----------


## Shane Harris

Santorum??

----------


## alucard13mmfmj

look. its not fair for us to ask so much out of dr paul :3. he has a life too! he already sacrificed a lot.

----------


## Fraulein

> They won't let Ron win. These boys play hardball. We all have to deal with it.
> 
> Everyone has heard Ron's message. The next best thing he can do is get this country on the right track by disrupting the left/right paradigm.


This.

----------


## tbone717

> That's why we should form our own party.. GOP is dying anyways and we shouldn't be a part of this corrupt organization.


It's been done before and it just doesn't work - LP, CP, Green, Reform, etc.  A legitimate third party, that would truly have influence and a chance to win, needs to come from within the existing party.  You would need a nice handful of Congressmen, Senators, State Reps, State Senators and Governors to leave the GOP and form a new party.  It takes so much more than one man to pull it off.

Remember that John Anderson left the GOP and ran as an Independent.  It didn't work.  Perot ran as an Independent, and then formed the Reform Party.  It didn't work.  The LP and CP have existed for years and have yet to win anything above a state house race (in fact its been almost a dozen years since the LP has won a state level office).  The Green Party --- the same thing.  Zero, zilch, nothing...there is zero chance that it will have any effect.

If Paul runs as an independent, third party candidate or states a new party he will get support only from the hardcore Paul supporters.  Polls show that about 40% of Paul's support are part of the No One But Paul crowd.  That means nationally in a three-way race he'd be polling around 5 percent or so.  

Then you have to consider the money it would take to run a campaign nationally.  It is a struggle now to raise a few million with a moneybomb and he is actually in contention to win the GOP nomination.  How much harder will it be to raise 100's of millions when his campaign is essentially quixotic.  I know I wouldn't be able to sacrifice anymore money to the campaign, nor would I be able to volunteer hours and hours of time for a campaign that has no shot at winning.

----------


## da32130

> Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain  and most fools do.  Dale Carnegie 
> 
> Do not listen to those who weep and complain, for their disease is contagious.  Og Mandino
> 
> When you consistently maintain a positive frame of mind, youll become known as a problem-solver rather than a complainer. People avoid complainers. They seek out problem-solvers.  Joseph Sommerville
> 
> Realize that if you have time to whine and complain about something then you have the time to do something about it.  Anthony J. DAngelo,



bump 


Here is a repeat for new viewers:
Just for reference. Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates were  still in, listed by date):

caucus:
Iowa 10%
Nevada 14%
Maine 18%
Alaska 17%
Colorado 9%
Minnesota 16%
Montana 25%
North Dakota 21%
Washington 22%
Kansas 11%

primary:
New Hampshire 8%
Michagan 6%
South Carolina 4%
Florida 3%
Alabama 3%
Tennessee 6%
Connecticut 4%
Arizona 4%
Georgia 3%
Delaware 4%
California 4%
Arkansas 5%
etc.

The lowest caucus was 9%, the highest primary was 8%.
The highest caucus was 25%, the lowest primary was 3%.

Turnout can make a huge difference.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> To kickstart a viable alternative party for those of us who believe in constitutional government. Ron wouldn't win, but if he could get say 20% of the vote it could start something good.


Why do we need a alternative party for that?  We already have the Republican Party.  We have around 90 libertarian in the New Hampshire House of Representatives right now.  People that believe in constitutional government are very welcomed to partake in the Republican Party, at least where I live.

If people where you live are not welcome in the Republican Party, I suggest either changing that or moving so where else.

----------


## tbone717

> bump 
> 
> 
> Here is a repeat for new viewers:
> Just for reference. Here is the turnout factor from 2008 (all results from before Feb 10, when most candidates were  still in, listed by date):
> 
> caucus:
> Iowa 10%
> Nevada 14%
> ...


It is doable.  But we need a targeted focus by the campaign and the grassroots to pull it off.  Sign waving in a state that doesn't vote until May just doesn't cut it right now.  We need everyone that is able to focus on NV, ME, MN and CO.

----------


## tbone717

> To kickstart a viable alternative party for those of us who believe in constitutional government. Ron wouldn't win, but if he could get say 20% of the vote it could start something good.


Love my PA friends, but 20% won't start anything.  Perot got 18.9% in 1992.  He formed the Reform Party.  He got 8.4% in 1996.  Buchanan got their nomination in 2000 and got 0.43%.  Nader got 0.38% in 2004.  And in 2008 Ted Weill got a whopping 481 votes.  Hell I could get 481 votes just by getting my Facebook friends to vote for me.

----------


## da32130

> It is doable.  But we need a targeted focus by the campaign and the grassroots to pull it off.  Sign waving in a state that doesn't vote until May just doesn't cut it right now.  We need everyone that is able to focus on NV, ME, MN and CO.


right. that is why I gave the bump to ronpaulhawaii, but I should have included the phone from home stuff as well that was located in his footer.

----------


## MrGoose

Likely republican caucus goers? Isn't it an open caucus?

----------


## tbone717

> right. that is why I gave the bump to ronpaulhawaii, but I should have included the phone from home stuff as well that was located in his footer.


Yeah, it is a huge key to it all.  I cannot stress the need for focus enough.  I shake my head when I see people posting on here about voter fraud in states that already voted, twitter bombs of PPP because they don't like a poll result, sign waves in New Jersey (they vote in late June).  I don't think people understand the urgency that was are facing right now.  This is it.  I and many others here, have been at this for 20+ years and have been waiting for the opportunity to have a realistic shot at winning. To see people that have such good intentions, be so scattered in their focus is heart wrenching.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> The highest primary was not 8% in NH.  The highest primary was 16% in PA.  PA was also the highest number of votes (even more votes than CA!)


You cannot honestly think Ron Paul did better in the PA Primary than the NH Primary, can you?  There were 23 candidates in the NH Primary.  It was by far the most competitive and important Primary in the nation.  There were only 2 candidates in PA and the percentage of people that voted was a joke compared to the NH Primary.  Huckabee withdrew like 6-7 weeks before the Primary and still was within 30,000 votes of Ron Paul.

The NH Primary was likely the best Primary for Ron Paul in 2008.  If you ignore the number of candidates, I could also see a case for MT but that is a stretch, to me.

----------


## tbone717

> Likely republican caucus goers? Isn't it an open caucus?


It is open.  "Likely Republican caucus goers" means that when they asked the pollee if they were planning on voting in the GOP caucus they said yes.  It is irrespective of party.

"Republican" describes the caucus not the goer.

----------


## ssjevot

Like in 2008 the grassroots needs to do most of the work.  The campaign is better this time around, but it is still what I would call mismanaged.  I've been doing a lot of work organizing here in Washington and we had to make our own fliers because the campaign has no official fliers to target liberal areas like Seattle (nothing about anti-war or pro civil liberties).  My friends in Minnesota are giving me the same story.  We need to really stress grassroots, because I don't think we can rely on a big centralized organization to effectively target voters in our local communities.  We know our communities; and I'd argue talking to people in your community is more useful than Phone from Home which has yet to show us having any advantage in voter turnout over other candidates.

----------


## MrGoose

> It is open.  "Likely Republican caucus goers" means that when they asked the pollee if they were planning on voting in the GOP caucus they said yes.  It is irrespective of party.
> 
> "Republican" describes the caucus not the goer.


Ah I see thanks!

Reps for you!

----------


## truthsaga

Ron Paul isn't even the California polling.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> Yes, and we are going to do really well in NV and we will have buzz from there.


Let's hope so.  So far, we have only had buzz from NH.  That helped in the polls in SC (around 7 points) but it wasn't enough to not get last.  Thankfully, Ron Paul is doing better in MN before the NV Caucus than he was doing in SC before the NH Primary.  Maybe we will get even more buzz out of NV than NH but that is very unlikely without a win.

Paul’s New Hampshire Bump
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/entry.p...Hampshire-Bump




> In polls by three different polling companies, Ron Paul had a significant bump in South Carolina. According to the South Carolina PPP poll before the New Hampshire Primary, Ron Paul polled at 9%. In the PPP poll right after the New Hampshire Primary, Ron Paul polled at 15%. The pre-New Hampshire Primary Rasmussen Reports poll had Ron Paul at 11%. The post-New Hampshire Primary Rasmussen Reports poll had Ron Paul at 16%. The American Research Group polls before and after the New Hampshire Primary showed a jump from 9% to 20% for Ron Paul in South Carolina.

----------


## floridasun1983

Where are you guys seeing that we're doing great in Nevada?

----------


## Gravik

I feel like the way the media is propping up Gingrich, they want Obama to win by a landslide....

----------


## da32130

> Where are you guys seeing that we're doing great in Nevada?


We were getting 3-6% in primaries in 2008.  We got 14% in nevada.

Now we are getting 13% in SC (primary). What will Nevada be? 30% is possible

----------


## freneticentropy

> I don't get why people push for a 3rd party run. They get very few votes and just don't win general elections.  I'll vote for 3rd party if it comes to that, but I doubt there's enough libertarian/constitutionalist voters out there to push Paul to presidency as a 3rd partier.


No, there's not.  But I still would like a third party run if this doesn't work out.  A strong Libertarian showing will send a strong message to the major parties that they'd better shape up.   It will also help spread the message and help Libertarian fund raising and their ability to put up candidates for state and local elections.  In other words, it wouldn't be so much about 2012 but about 2014 and 2016 and beyond.

----------

