Hunter wins - Paul 3rd

[Zydeco]

We don't need to put our own spin on this. We need to face the truth and that seems to be that we are not getting the word out good enough.

LibertyEagle, I don't think you can analyze the results of a poll without taking into account who was and who was not permitted to vote in the poll. Seems self-evident, no?

 

[TexMac]

Saturday, September 01, 2007
Duncan Hunter Wins Townhall.com Texas Republican Straw Poll; Fred Thompson Second
Posted by: Jonathan Garthwaite at 4:30 PM
16.17% Ron Paul (217 votes)
41.1% Duncan Hunter (534 votes)
20.5% Fred Thompson (266 votes)
6.4% Mike Huckabee (83 votes)
6% Rudy Giuliani (78 votes)
4.7% Mitt Romney (61 votes)
.46% Sam Brownback (6 votes)
.62% John McCain (8 votes)
.46% Tom Tancredo (6 votes)
2.2% Ray McKinney (28 votes)
.23% Hugh Cort (3 votes)
.77% John Cox (10 votes)

Wow. Almost 1300 people voted. That's more than I thought would show up.

And 16.17% of the hard core Texas Republicans are against the war? That's very encouraging.

 

[r3volution]

........

 

[TexMac]

I think the problem here is that of all people, Duncan Hunter won. I mean, if someone like Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney came in first- sure, but Hunter?? The guy barely registers on national polls, came third to last in the Iowa straw poll. And it's not like he won by a few votes- he won with 500 votes!

How did he get that many votes suddenly? Is Ron Paul hated that much by the MSM that they would pull their votes for someone like Hunter?

They were rewarding him for showing up. Same thing happened in Iowa, remember?

 

[njandrewg]

Hunter was the only candidate who didn't campaign in Iowa(he came in almost last), my guess he spent all that time campaigning in Texas.

His victory is pointless, kinda like Huckabee's victory. Doesn't really say much. One day of coverage, but no bump in $$$

 

[wgadget]

And the debate is next week....more publicity for Dr. Paul!!

Woohoo..No doubt he'll blow them away again.

But I'm wondering how the MSM will spin this poll.

 

[cjhowe]

In the 1984 Senate race, Ron only got 17% of the vote in the Republican primary, with Phil Gramm getting 70%. Ron has NEVER been popular among the Texas Republican elite, because of his perceived anti-defense and other Libertarian positions. A number of people were not happy when he became the LP candidate in 1988.

So frankly, I would have been surprised if Ron had won.

What is bad is that it will continue to fuel Hunter's efforts, which will muddy the waters even more.

Yeah, I was hoping a poor showing would send Hunter packing and leave the talk of military service to RP and McCain.

 

[Cowlesy]

1,300 Votes at $75 a vote I think? $97,500 raised for the Texas GOP by the delegates.

To put in perspective, their whole shindig raised less loot than Ron Paul did at one supporter's private fundraiser the night before where Ron raised $102,000.

 

[Hook]

You weren't in the parking garage. While Ron Paul bumper stickers lined the streets of Fort Worth going from the hotel to the convention center, the parking garage directly across from the convention center was filled with "W" and Bush/Cheney stickers

CJ, just a bit of friendly advice: You probably will make more friends if you are a little more gentle with your posts. Even when you are right, can say the same thing a less confrontational manner.
Just my $0.02

 

[angelatc]

Strong 3rd place finish, good result. Remember that these are party apparatchiks -- you had to be a former delegate to vote, so this is a group that would be reflexively anti-Paul. Regular people were not allowed to vote.

I agree with you... Don't get me wrong, because I desperately wanted first. But I think that seeing that we've got 16% of the old school Repubican vote gives us something to work with.

It's going to be a huge battle to get a bigger share of that, and time is running out.

The good news is that the more neo-condidates there are, the more likely that they'll split the vote in the primary.

Ron Paul can win primaries with 20-25% if the vote is split 5 ways.

 

[njandrewg]

And the debate is next week....more publicity for Dr. Paul!!

Woohoo..No doubt he'll blow them away again.

But I'm wondering how the MSM will spin this poll.

slight bump up to Hunter, slight bump down to Huckabee for not being able to repeat Iowa, all others will remain the same

 

[johnrocks]

No need to get down, no just the opposite!! I said on another forum the other day that I didn't think Ron Paul would win this straw poll since only previous delegates were allowed to vote, we should feel estatic that he got third with over two frigging hundred previous delegates voting for him!!

 

[wgadget]

1,300 Votes at $75 a vote I think? $97,500 raised for the Texas GOP by the delegates.

To put in perspective, their whole shindig raised less loot than Ron Paul did at one supporter's private fundraiser the night before where Ron raised $102,000.

Pre-paid was only $50 a vote.

 

[Johnnybags]

So true and LOL

1,300 Votes at $75 a vote I think? $97,500 raised for the Texas GOP by the delegates.

To put in perspective, their whole shindig raised less loot than Ron Paul did at one supporter's private fundraiser the night before where Ron raised $102,000.

And that was at a house party, never mind anything else he picked up. And 16 percent of hard core Republicans voted for him. I actually believe Ron will get more of a dollar bump from this than Hunter. I cannot wait for the meetup announcement. Think Hunter could copy that?

 

[angelatc]

They were rewarding (Hunter) for showing up. Same thing happened in Iowa, remember?

But I was discouraged when I saw another blog reporting that some Thompson reporters were former Huckabee supporters, who were mad that Huckabee stood them up at the big dance.

I understand that, but why align with a guy who won't even buy a ticket?

 

[wgadget]

Um, there's a whole lot more disappointment coming to the Thompson supporters.....starting......next week.

 

[TexMac]

But I was discouraged when I saw another blog reporting that some Thompson reporters were former Huckabee supporters, who were mad that Huckabee stood them up at the big dance.

I understand that, but why align with a guy who won't even buy a ticket?

You mean Thompson's numbers? Well, look what Lew said:

The Texas Republican Party set up its straw poll to hurt Ron Paul. That's why the voters were restricted to past delegates and alternates from Texas Republican conventions, that is neocons and party hacks for the most part. Ron Paul was supposed to get zero. Instead, he got more than 16%.


The Republican Party of Texas has been controlled by the Bushes since 1980. That means the Ron Paul campaign and all its volunteers and donors can be very proud. This is yet another step upwards in the growth of a movement that is already shaking the world of all the bad guys. Note: Hunter did so well because he alone, of all the warmongering candidates, bothered to show up. BTW, Fred the Late was supposed to win--that was Gov. Perry's plan--but he was elsewhere, delaying.
​

 

[Elwar]

A Hunter bump is great. Any bump to the lower tier war hawks is good for Ron Paul.

Spread that vote more.

 

[MsDoodahs]

You mean Thompson's numbers? Well, look what Lew said:

The Texas Republican Party set up its straw poll to hurt Ron Paul. That's why the voters were restricted to past delegates and alternates from Texas Republican conventions, that is neocons and party hacks for the most part. Ron Paul was supposed to get zero. Instead, he got more than 16%.


The Republican Party of Texas has been controlled by the Bushes since 1980. That means the Ron Paul campaign and all its volunteers and donors can be very proud. This is yet another step upwards in the growth of a movement that is already shaking the world of all the bad guys. Note: Hunter did so well because he alone, of all the warmongering candidates, bothered to show up. BTW, Fred the Late was supposed to win--that was Gov. Perry's plan--but he was elsewhere, delaying.
​

A. Men.

 

[tmg19103]

Here's my concern: Only two candidates showed and actively campaigned in this straw poll - Hunter and Ron Paul.

So, what happened here? The word in the Iowa straw poll was that Iowans had a history of rewarding those who gave them attention and campaigned a lot. That showed through in this years Iowa results.

But why Hunter - even though he did give Texans attention? Was it a protest vote because the big names did not show? If so, why not throw the protest vote to your native son?

What this shows me is how messed up our political system is. How many of those 500 who voted for Hunter will vote for him in the primaries? I bet 10 or 20. They will vote for someone else, but it won't be Ron Paul or they would have voted for him now.

RP's biggest hurdle with the GOP is his anti-war stance. If he were pro-war he would have won this straw poll by a landslide. While 70% of Americans are against the Iraq war, amongst the ever dwindling number of registered Republicans, support for the war is well over 50%.

No doubt these delegates, who really are Republican activists, gave Hunter the pro-war protest vote - voting against the big name pro-war types because they did not show.

The good news for RP is he has some money, his support grows every day, he still beat all the big names except Thompson, and he has support of newly registered voters, Independents and Democrats and members of lesser parties - all of whom could not vote in this straw poll.

Fortunatley this poll, over the holiday weekend, will get no real press and third on paper does not look bad. It's just bizarre to be run over by Hunter. No doubt a pro-war protest vote by political animal GOP delegates.

I'm disappointed, but what can you do? Quite simply - FIGHT HARDER for Ron Paul!!!!!!!

The way I see it, Rudy, Mitt and Fred will still carve up the pro-war/neo-con vote, giving RP an in for a lot of voters who hear his message and don't go for the neo-con bull.