This poll makes no sense.

[maskander]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/cnn-poll-race-tightening-up-in-battleground-ohio/


I thought ron paul had a big support base in ohio.

 

[sailingaway]

do you wait on the phone for presidential polls when your candidate won't be on it? If they hang up they aren't even on there.

A lot of people who support Ron may still want to impact the poll for one of those two, also. Supporting Ron doesn't necessarily mean not having a fall back if he loses, as well. I wouldn't vote for Romney, but others might. Or might vote for Obama to beat Romney.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

It sort of does.

1) call people from a list of likely republican and democratic voters.
2) if a candidate mentioned as "other" is not on the ballot, file in circular filing cabinet.

-t

 

[maskander]

do you wait on the phone for presidential polls when your candidate won't be on it? If they hang up they aren't even on there.

A lot of people who support Ron may still want to impact the poll for one of those two, also. Supporting Ron doesn't necessarily mean not having a fall back if he loses, as well. I wouldn't vote for Romney, but others might. Or might vote for Obama to beat Romney.

so you are telling me that ron paul lost 95% of his supporter base, he had like 10% of the vote

 

[sailingaway]

so you are telling me that ron paul lost 95% of his supporter base, he had like 10% of the vote

No, he wasn't on the poll and those who even stayed on to answer at all (and were likely voters, not new voters as in college students) picked second choices, whether they really plan to vote that way or not. Or said they didn't plan to vote and were dropped out as not likely voters....

I don't know that is the case, but if you are asking if I think those seriously supporting Ron Paul are no longer serious supporters, I think they would still support him.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

And Johnson has a national average of 6% that I believe is better in OH. Clearly, there is some culling going on in the poll methodology.

-t

 

[svf]

It sort of does.

1) call people from a list of likely republican and democratic voters.
2) if a candidate mentioned as "other" is not on the ballot, file in circular filing cabinet.

-t

Note the wording of the question:

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/pollingcenter/polls/3250

Suppose that the presidential election were being held today and you had to choose between Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the Democratic Party's candidates, and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan as the Republican Party's candidates. Who would you be more likely to vote for -- ?

Unless somebody volunteered "other" or "no opinion" their answers were not included in the poll. I also assume anyone who said "neither" was not included in the "other" or "no opinion" categories, but most probably hung up well before then.

 

[DeMintConservative]

And Johnson has a national average of 6% that I believe is better in OH. Clearly, there is some culling going on in the poll methodology.

-t

Where are you getting that Johnson average? I really, really doubt Johnson will get to 1% and he doesn't even register in most polls

Is your point that 3rd party candidates should be polling higher in this poll? Because Ron Paul had support in Ohio?

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/cnn-poll-race-tightening-up-in-battleground-ohio/


I thought ron paul had a big support base in ohio.

What doesn't make sense? Obama's numbers? Romney's numbers? Johnson's numbers?

Johnson won't get 2% in November. Really, he'll probably be right around the Libertarian Party's 0.5% average in presidential elections.

 

[DeMintConservative]

Note the wording of the question:

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/pollingcenter/polls/3250



Unless somebody volunteered "other" or "no opinion" their answers were not included in the poll. I also assume anyone who said "neither" was not included in the "other" or "no opinion" categories, but most probably hung up well before then.

Not correct, check the pdf, they included 3rd party candidates in the following question:

Now suppose that the presidential candidates on the ballot in your state included Barack Obama
as the Democratic Party's candidate, Mitt Romney as the Republican candidate, Gary Johnson as
the Libertarian party candidate, Jill Stein as the Green party candidate, and Virgil Goode, as the
Constitution party candidate, who would you be more likely to vote for -- (IF UNSURE As of
today, who do you lean more toward? (RANDOM ORDER)

Gary Johnson got 3% of the vote and Obama's lead over Romney is cut to 3 points - which fuels my suspicion that Johnson will end up hurting Obama more than Romney.

 

[sailingaway]

Not correct, check the pdf, they included 3rd party candidates in the following question:


Gary Johnson got 3% of the vote and Obama's lead over Romney is cut to 3 points - which fuels my suspicion that Johnson will end up hurting Obama more than Romney.

but it did NOT include Ron Paul.

 

[erowe1]

so you are telling me that ron paul lost 95% of his supporter base, he had like 10% of the vote

Ron Paul got 113,000 votes in the Republican primary in Ohio. That amounts to 1.9% of the 6,000,000 people who will vote in the general election in Ohio.

Plus, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Ron Paul is not running any more.

 

[sailingaway]

Ron Paul got 113,000 votes in the Republican primary in Ohio. That amounts to 1.9% of the 6,000,000 people who will vote in the general election in Ohio.

Plus, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Ron Paul is not running any more.

but he had been already declared to have lost by that point, by media.

Unfortunately just as that keeps people home, I suspect a lot of Ron Paul voters won't vote. I wish they would on other things and just not vote for president, to show rejection of the choices rather than what will be spun as apathy or contentment. But that is just my viewpoint and it is their vote.

 

[DeMintConservative]

but it did NOT include Ron Paul.

Of course not, it only included candidates who are running for president and qualified for the ballot.

It also didn't include Santorum, Gingrich, Cain or Hillary.

 

[Ivash]

And Johnson has a national average of 6% that I believe is better in OH. Clearly, there is some culling going on in the poll methodology.

-t

...Johnson doesn't have an 'average' of six. He had one or two good polls months ago where he was used as a 'not sure/none of the above' option. He won't get anywhere close to 6 except in perhaps New Mexico, though I doubt even that.

 

[sailingaway]

Of course not, it only included candidates who are running for president and qualified for the ballot.

It also didn't include Santorum, Gingrich, Cain or Hillary.

But the OP didn't frame their question in terms of what became of Santorum or Gingrich or Hillary voters.