PPP Tweet: ARG poll "seems impossible"

[BUSHLIED]

No surprise here...you think we have seen it all?? No way. All the tricks are going to come out.

I bet this ARG poll tried to match up with the new insider advantage poll that put Ron at 17.5%...that is the explaination I offer. Poll manipulation to confirm the narrative that Ron is losing ground...good for PPP to point this out.

 

[ItsTime]

Unless there was a slight imbalance in the first place - Say 60/40 women/men.

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer PPP, and PPP has a better historical record, just pointing out something that looked odd on that link.

True. But still makes this poll invalid.

 

[Rincewind]

Geese, we must pick up the nongender vote immediately. Everyone else got credit for nongenders apparently but us.

Santorum has lots of support from inanimate objects.

Which isn't surprising, since he's pretty much one himself.

 

[ItsTime]

He's behind in the Alien vote.

Thread winner +rep

 

[jer4liberty]

I love how we were citing these polls last week, when Ron had a 6 point lead in the INsider Advantage one, and a 4 point lead in the ARG. Now these polls are tools agaisnt us and inaccurate? Maybe it was a typo...all their other cross tabs on the ARG poll work out.

 

[G-Wohl]

they are just pro-fairness and pro-integrity with respect to polling.

This. Seriously, it only takes a few minutes of digging to see that they definitely don't have a political allegiance to our cause at all. During the 2010 senate races, the PPP twitter feed exhibited quite a bit of resentment for the Ron Paul people always voting for polls in CT and KY where we had liberty candidates running that year.

 

[pauliticalfan]

MSM Narrative: Mitt Romney is winning in Iowa*

*As long as we don't poll independents and those with penises

 

[specsaregood]

It's weird how PPP of all places has become gung-ho Ron Paul supporters. I know, I know, but still!

See:

Not trying to take any credit, but I think they are friendlier to Paul than they otherwise would be in part because of me. They were a big part of why I won in 2010, actually. I commissioned a poll that had me 8 points ahead and allowed me to enlist support that would otherwise have simply ignored my race. My record in the NCGA makes NC Dems (including PPP) more friendly to our platform than any other Republican philosophy.

Seriously not trying to wrestle credit out here, but I know the two guys who run that operaton. Personally. Hardcore libdems, but otherwise sincere and well-meaning. They would not themselves support RP, but would be much much happier (and less antagonistic towards Republicans) if all Republicans were of the Pauler prototype.

 

[braane]

Fox just used it to push the narrative. I am ok with that though... They said "Newt is in second in a poll that came out today"... maybe that will stall the Santorum push.

 

[RickyJ]

I love how we were citing these polls last week, when Ron had a 6 point lead in the INsider Advantage one, and a 4 point lead in the ARG. Now these polls are tools agaisnt us and inaccurate? Maybe it was a typo...all their other cross tabs on the ARG poll work out.

Typo my butt! They make their living off of accurate stats, they check, double check, and triple check anything before they put it out then they have someone else check it! This wasn't some dumb secretary typing something out real quick that put this out, it was professional statisticians!

 

[RonPaulCult]

Some are saying that the women percentage is a typo, that he probably didn't get 16% there and that it was listed after Santorum who got 15% but before Perry who had 10% with women. But even if you average 24% and 11% (the lowest it could be given that order) that still comes out to 17.5% if both men and women were surveyed equally. Something STILL doesn't add up.

As somebody else mentioned, more than half of Iowa caucus participants in 2008 were men. I find it VERY hard to believe that Paul would be polling at 24% with men but only 11% with women.

Either the 24% for men is the typo, or this poll is bullshit.

If my math is off please correct me.

 

[justatrey]

I'm starting to think we should just move all of these BS polls straight to Hot Topics, with the exception of PPP polls.

 

[tremendoustie]

Wow, ppppolls has a very good point. I'm sure they put some thought into it before tweeting it. Oh well, I'd don't think an inaccurate poll is bad for us. Maybe someone will start attacking the warmonger Santorum.

The only way polls showing us lower than we are is bad for us, is if they're setting us up for voter fraud.

 

[RickyJ]

I'm starting to think we should just move all of these BS polls straight to Hot Topics, with the exception of PPP polls.

I'm thinking we have enough people in Iowa to take our own unbiased poll! Who needs any of them? We can know for sure what the real score is if we want to. I think we should do exactly that.

 

[RickyJ]

The only way polls showing us lower than we are is bad for us, is if they're setting us up for voter fraud.

The only reason they would release a BS poll is for voter fraud. We need a unbiased poll done pronto by our own people in Iowa so we can know if they are about to attempt to steal this election from us or not. I think they are going to steal it!

 

[specsaregood]

Typo my butt! They make their living off of accurate stats, they check, double check, and triple check anything before they put it out then they have someone else check it! This wasn't some dumb secretary typing something out real quick that put this out, it was professional statisticians!

It isn't out of the realm of possibilities for pollsters to just make crap up. dailykos old pollster (before PPP) was pretty much caught doing just that.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/06/29/880179/-Research-2000:-Problems-in-plain-sight

 

[Johnnybags]

Changed to 7 percent to make number work, all fixed fellas. Bwahaha, better to lie and keep # low than admit the truth.

 

[DRV45N05]

Hahaha.....

FOX is using a poll other than Rasmussen because it serves their purpose.

 

[Carole]

Seriously, how is this possible? ARG has some explaining to do.

Would it not be a function of how many women were asked and liked him (say 2 out of twelve or 1 out of six)) and how few men were asked and liked him (say 1 out of four or 3 out of twelve). It all depends on how few men and how many women were actually asked does it not? Someone can do the right formula to come up with an answer.

Anything is possible.

 

[ItsTime]

Changed to 7 percent to make number work, all fixed fellas. Bwahaha, better to lie and keep # low than admit the truth.

So not only did they have a typo, they had Ron in the wrong place? I call super bullshit. They are making the numbers up.