Disparity in Rally vs. Voter Numbers - Michigan

[Tyler_Durden]

In Michigan, Romney and Santorum are tracking to exceed 300K votes, yet their rallies only produced a few hundred while Paul's rallies yielded thousands.

Why the disparity? People won't go to Mitt/Rick raliies, but turn out in droves to vote for them?

 

[CTRattlesnake]

I dont understand people....


We have 83,000 votes right now.


I'm sure the people that went to the rallies are factored into that, its not like people are not voting.

Again, 83 THOUSAND votes have been cast for liberty


As for Mitt and Rick, we all know the deal. They have no energy, and soft support. Unfortunately, they're are more soft supporters than hard core supporters like us.

 

[joebus36]

And all the college kids can't vote because they are away from home and not in their precinct or from out of state.

 

[tony m]

TV

 

[justatrey]

Last I checked it's something like the 50 - 70 year olds who largely decide every election. They don't go to rallies, they don't have bumper stickers or yard signs, but they sure do vote. And I have a feeling they vote largely based on what they see on television.

Of course, I'm generalizing here. There are more and more 50 - 70 year olds who support Paul now too, just not enough yet.

 

[cmo4ever]

The majority of voters dont go to rallys. They just bandwagon behind the leaders. Rallys =/= general population. Its not a conspiracy, just a fact most people are ignorant and barely paying attention to politics.

 

[bobmurph]

TV

yup. that simple.

 

[justatrey]

TV

Or yeah, I could have just said this! Television is by far the biggest problem.

 

[SCOTUSman]

And all the college kids can't vote because they are away from home and not in their precinct or from out of state.

Nope, it is called absentee ballots. Also you could just register where you go to college. Plus they had early voting in MI. So there was plenty of opportunities to vote. If they didn't (which we have no evidence of) then they are pathetic.

 

[bcreps85]

Uninformed voters don't go to rallies. They vote for whoever they like the best from TV coverage. That's why no one wants to cover Paul...if he got the coverage the other 3 did, this would be over already.

 

[wgadget]

Uninformed voters don't go to rallies. They vote for whoever they like the best from TV coverage. That's why no one wants to cover Paul...if he got the coverage the other 3 did, this would be over already.

Truth^^^

 

[tbone717]

In Michigan, Romney and Santorum are tracking to exceed 300K votes, yet their rallies only produced a few hundred while Paul's rallies yielded thousands.

Why the disparity? People won't go to Mitt/Rick raliies, but turn out in droves to vote for them?

Because Paul has a cult like following among a certain segment. The others don't. But I would gladly take a rally of only 200 people if we were winning. So honestly, Paul packing places with 3000 screaming people means nothing to me anymore. It has shown that it is no indication of widespread support, it only indicates popularity within his voting bloc.

 

[floridasun1983]

I think the rallies are pointless. All they really seem to be are pep rallies for the die hards. All the other candidates are out doing old fashioned, tried and true campaigning, town halls, door to door stuff, while Ron has a tent revival with the faithful. How can they not realize this?

 

[joebus36]

Nope, it is called absentee ballots. Also you could just register where you go to college. Plus they had early voting in MI. So there was plenty of opportunities to vote. If they didn't (which we have no evidence of) then they are pathetic.

Just sayin, in my state absentee ballots are a bunch of really long forms. The average college kid isn't going to have the time to fill them out

 

[movingstone]

The thing about rallies is that Paul's supporters would go half way around the country to see him. Maybe some of those that attend those rallies are from neighbor states. Secondly, you can't win primary by just devoted base. You have to win the votes of the typical republicans also. But the results today is very similar to my average percentage of the recent polls. I have Dr. Paul at 13% in Michigan and 10% in Arizona. Right now, he is 12% in Michigan and 8% in Arizona.

 

[r3volution]

Last I checked it's something like the 50 - 70 year olds who largely decide every election. They don't go to rallies, they don't have bumper stickers or yard signs, but they sure do vote. And I have a feeling they vote largely based on what they see on television.

Of course, I'm generalizing here. There are more and more 50 - 70 year olds who support Paul now too, just not enough yet.

yep , i think focusing on the collage vote is a mistake . you should not ignore them but they are not reliable enough to be a primary voting block .

 

[kpitcher]

It's Michigan, a significant percentage of snowbirds are living in Florida this time of year who vote by absentee ballots. In a small way this is Florida part 2.

 

[Libertytree]

Can anyone here say... massive vote fraud? Sometimes it seems the more obvious it is the more people don't ( or don't want to) see it. Wake up folks, we are being conned.

 

[Gravik]

And all the college kids can't vote because they are away from home and not in their precinct or from out of state.

Here in Idaho, you live here for 30 days and you can register to vote.

 

[ssjevot]

Can anyone here say... massive vote fraud? Sometimes it seems the more obvious it is the more people don't ( or don't want to) see it. Wake up folks, we are being conned.

Conspiracy theories are not supported by reality. Try actually canvasing or phoning from home or going to a caucus and you will see most people simply don't support Ron Paul. It's not voter fraud, it's that we aren't getting enough voters.