Rand at 4% in Fox News Poll

Interesting how the Fox poll that has Rand higher and Cruz lower vs the WSJ and Quinnipiac which had Rand lower but Cruz higher.
 
Is it just me or does everyone put Rand last when he is tied with 3, 4 or 5 candidates to make him look worse than reality?
 
Interesting how the Fox poll that has Rand higher and Cruz lower vs the WSJ and Quinnipiac which had Rand lower but Cruz higher.

Shirley, you don't mean that polls at this stage are inaccurate/biased and near worthless, do you?!

Put on your hat and get in the corner..

14329037296379.jpg
 
They are going to announce who will make it, tomorrow at 7pm. So I guess it's not true that they will consider polls "conducted" through the 4th.
 
Chip Englander stated on twitter that Rand would be in the debates because of the Fox news 4% finish.
 
They are going to announce who will make it, tomorrow at 7pm. So I guess it's not true that they will consider polls "conducted" through the 4th.

MarcusI posted some good info in the thread over on the 2016 board. All the campaigns were informed today on who made it. Apparently Christie is out and Huckabee is on the bubble.
 
Why is Bush ahead of all the tied? Oh wait that's obvious... someone on Fox wants him to look better.

I imagine the order was just based on the total overall percent. Four people were tied at 4%, but that's because of rounding. That doesn't mean that they all had exactly the same percent. So for example, it's possible that Bush was the highest at 4.3%, then Kasich at 4.1%, then Rand at 3.9%, then Huckabee at 3.7%. That's just an example. I don't know what the exact percentages were, but they probably listed the candidates in the order of the exact percentages that they got in the poll.
 
I imagine the order was just based on the total overall percent. Four people were tied at 4%, but that's because of rounding. That doesn't mean that they all had exactly the same percent. So for example, it's possible that Bush was the highest at 4.3%, then Kasich at 4.1%, then Rand at 3.9%, then Huckabee at 3.7%. That's just an example. I don't know what the exact percentages were, but they probably listed the candidates in the order of the exact percentages that they got in the poll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_alphabet
 
If that fake Canadian (who everyone with an IQ over 70 knows is unelectable) wasn't running and even half of his votes went to Rand.... ugh I hate him and his stupid supporters
 
What has shocked me so far, and if it carries through to the rest of the cycle I firmly believe it will be the story of this election--Big Money and Citizen's United have not ruined democracy.

This was supposed to be the cycle of the Super PAC, where Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton annihilated anyone who even tried to run against them with tens of millions of dark money.

Instead, Hillary is fighting for her life against a completely grassroots insurgent, and Bush, with his unprecedented war chest, is fading into obscurity. Make no mistake. Rand's polling right now SUCKS. But tough times were to be expected.

The biggest surprise in 2016, way more so than Trumpmania or Carson, is how Jeb Bush failed the expectations game so hard.
If he truly does crash and burn, his will be a case study that students of politics will read about for some time.
 
Back
Top