Vote in the poll now:Ron Paul winning big on AOL straw poll
- Thread starter SupportingPaul
- Start date
Pastanoose
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Messages
- 33
This poll is pretty awesome. But I have a feeling that this will lead to a brokered convention just to beat RP.
itsnobody
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,576
nah none of the others have
What do you mean? I don't see anything out of the ordinary.
Ive been monitoring that poll on and off for a couple days and sometimes the map goes blank (all states say undefined) and theres a coding error when you click on the states. It lasts for about 5 minutes then goes back to normal. I remember the AOL poll before that seemed to have a built in buffer for vote counts so I find it suspicious that this AOL poll is doing flaky stuff.
Ah yeah, it's been doing that occasionally for me too. I think it's just a bug in the code; everything seems normal before and after it happens. (I had previously thought it was just because I'm using Linux, but apparently it's AOL's fault.)
jdrochon
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 104
The problem with the legitimacy of this poll is if you delete your temp files and cookies, it will let you vote again. So when Ron Paul wins they may point that out. It may be a set up to "prove" that Ron Paul supporters do spam, which I believe all supporters have a few spammers but I hope this doesn't back fire on us.
I doubt it's a setup.
terryhamel
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 261
Even if it's not a setup, the argument can still be made. The poll is a sham, folks. It has a flaw. You delete cookies from aol.com and you can vote again. The doc is a front runner, but this poll should not be used as evidence. Use the state straw polls and debate text message polls that only allow one vote per person as evidence.
SupportingPaul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 45
Well that's pretty disheartening. Whether or not people voted only once, The fact that you could vote more then once would be exploited by the media as a reason for Ron Paul winning. Next they would say Zogby had it wrong when he said the tides were turning in Paul's favor.
I still like to watch the count go up though. If any other candidate wins the poll they will claim it as a victory.
Figures.
I'm still going to watch the numbers climb though.
I still like to watch the count go up though. If any other candidate wins the poll they will claim it as a victory.
Figures.
I'm still going to watch the numbers climb though.
SupportingPaul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 45
Not sure if you know, But in the last page another member pointed out how this vote can be manipulated or, if a candidate the MSM doesn't want to win wins, can be discarded as "not a scientific poll".
If you were aware of this, but still want to watch the vote.... I am with you. I have voted one and one time only and I hope other Ron Paul supporters are just as honest about this. Even if it can be discarded as fixable I want to see the results.
Can't wait until the primaries start. Let's hope they steer clear of those diebolds though.
RON PAUL '08
The cookie thing is true. You CAN vote more than once.
HOWEVER, let's be realistic here. Every time you vote, you have to type in an alphanumeric code to certify the vote as well as choosing a state. This alone will probably prevent anyone from voting excessively....ie, I doubt anyone has the patience to sit there and vote again and again for Dr. Paul all day. Because that would be very tedious....and even if we did have a few who did this I doubt it will be any more than several hundred votes.
HOWEVER, let's be realistic here. Every time you vote, you have to type in an alphanumeric code to certify the vote as well as choosing a state. This alone will probably prevent anyone from voting excessively....ie, I doubt anyone has the patience to sit there and vote again and again for Dr. Paul all day. Because that would be very tedious....and even if we did have a few who did this I doubt it will be any more than several hundred votes.
SupportingPaul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 45
Agreed. So what do you think a scientific percentage of error would be?
Help please,
Need someone to copy the latest voting chart to the board. I am having a problem trying to vote.
I have a chance to convert 30 plus people tomorrow who are mainly hard core Democrats that have been watching the debates and can't make up their mind. I am trying to build my case for Dr. Paul today. If I can convert half I will feel good. Most are from VA and AZ so time to get them to re register.
TIA
Need someone to copy the latest voting chart to the board. I am having a problem trying to vote.
I have a chance to convert 30 plus people tomorrow who are mainly hard core Democrats that have been watching the debates and can't make up their mind. I am trying to build my case for Dr. Paul today. If I can convert half I will feel good. Most are from VA and AZ so time to get them to re register.
TIA
I have a hard time believing anyone is actually taking the time to spam this poll to the extent that it's changing the results. A comment pointed out that Kansas only has 7 votes - why not spam Kansas too?
I don't put too much stock in the poll, but I don't put too much stock in "scientific" polls either. I think they are both legitimately showing something, but saying just what they show is the tricky part.
I don't put too much stock in the poll, but I don't put too much stock in "scientific" polls either. I think they are both legitimately showing something, but saying just what they show is the tricky part.
SupportingPaul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- Messages
- 45
Similar threads
