Skip to comments.Tea Party Voting Bloc
Posted on 09/29/2012 5:53:03 AM PDT by no-llmd
The Libertarian/Tea Party insurgent voting bloc of 2010, that swept the GOP into office in mind boggling historic numbers, is still out there in force. But this bloc is resistant to being sampled in the polls, and this causes the polls to be skewed towards Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at strata-sphere.com ...
41 Million Tea Party Supporters Set to Vote
The AP/GFK poll shows that 31% of likely voters consider themselves Tea Party supporters. With 131 million votes cast in the 2008 elections, that translates into an incredible voting bloc of 41 million Tea Party supporters waiting to cast ballots. These voters have already made their voices heard in Wisconsin earlier this year, as well as in Republican primaries in Texas and Nebraska.
I hope and pray the Tea Party rebels will be enogh to push Obama out. America’s (and the world’s) days are numbered but I’m hoping for a temporary receive even though the sooner it all begins to happen, the sooner will be the sign of Jesus return.
You mean the socialists, right? Democrats are basically socialists followed closely by the GOP. How do get the Tea Party aligned with that?
I'm a Tea party guy and what I stand for is individual liberty and economic lassez faire and government limited by the Constitution.
“I consider Libertarians to be closely aligned with Liberal Democrats.”
Yup. It is odd how libertarians viciously criticize Republicans but give the Kenyan Impostor a pass.
You're saying Libertarians (not Tea Partiers) are aligned with the socialists.
I still think that's a stretch.
They all three imagine themselves to be a far larger group than they really are.
I haven’t been polled in weeks. Not since I told them I was a black democrat veteran, who voted for Obama in ‘08 and am voting for Romney. Guess I don’t fit into the profile of what they’re looking for.....
Socialists? Democrats are certainly socialists. Are Libertarians socialists? I would say No. Socialists want government to be a lot bigger. Do Libertarians want government to be a lot bigger? I would say No. But do Libertarians really push hard to make government smaller? I would say No. Libertarians whom I have known are not especially fiscally conservative and do not really care if government is big or small. They only seem to want socially Liberal policies in place so that they can have some fun.
I do not associate the Tea Party with the Libertarians. At all.
We can hear you now!! You will be polled again on Nov 6, 2012.
That depends on where you are viewing from. Liberal Democrats consider Libertarians to be closely allied with Conservatives.
I rarely ever pick up the phone and do a survey, but last night one of the robo call surveys was starting on my answering machine and for the heck of it I picked up.
Are you going to vote? Yes, press 1.
Are you a Republican? Yes, press 1.
Are you male or female? Male, press 1.
When I pressed 1 for male Republican that is going to vote, the robo call survey hung up on me.....
Next time I guess I’ll put in I’m an undecided, unaffiliated, female and see where it takes me....
When I think of a Ron Paul voter, I think of a college student who is arrogant and thinks that they know everything. Probably anti-religious too.
When I think of a disaffected Ron Paul voter, I have to ask myself: will they be more likely to vote for rich man Romney and his Mormon background, or will they vote for super cool, super secular Obama?
I think the Ron Paul voters have left the tent and will be supporting Obama, because Libertarians are aligned with Liberal Democrats.
The reasons are:
1. Obama's campaign is using social networking and mapping software to track individual voters. They already know who everyone is and who they are likely to vote for.
2. When someone calls with a poll who the hell is asking? Most of these polls you are likely to get are internal campaign polls, or push-style fundraising calls disguised as polls.
3. If i tell an Obama sponsored poll that I am not voting for the one am I risking political retaliation in the future? Will the IRS come knocking? Will they have a "talk" with someone at work about that government contract someone is wanting?
Just the everyday concerns of living under fascism.
“But do Libertarians really push hard to make government smaller? I would say No.”
Then you would be uninformed. Look at Ron Paul, who despite his odder ideas is clearly in favor of much smaller government than either 0 or Romney.
Libertarians want much smaller government, much less regulation of all kinds, and generally a return to the legal framework of, say, 1850. Note that “drugs” (meaning drugs that are illegal now; a myriad of drugs are currently available legally, with or without prescription) and prostitution were both perfectly legal at that point, at least in much of the US. There is certainly a “freedom” argument to be made in favor of both issues - especially considering they both remain rampant despite many years of trying to control them.
It doesn’t get much more “conservative” than to wish to roll the clock back 150 years or so. ;-) Practical? Well, that’s a different story...
Look at my reply at #14.
Ron Paul has one vote.
Ron Paul supporters have many votes. And I believe those votes will go to Obama.
I have been sampled by phone poll no less than three times in the last seven days. Each time I have given them my honest answers. If they skew them to Obama’s benefit there is nothing that I can do. If I didn’t answer then I’d go into the undecided pool anyway or they would make up the result they wanted. Since the poll requires the respondent to answer via touch tone I must assume that the data is tabulated electronically. What they do with it afterward is anybody’s guess.
I concur with that. And I think we were fully aware that it was going to take more than one election cycle to get enough Senators and House members to turn this around. We need more than 60 conservative members in the House and a simple majority in the Senate. Mitt Romney is only ONE PIECE of this puzzle. No matter whether you like him or not, you HAVE to vote for him, otherwise this whole situation falls apart. If we Don't, we get Obamacare, the continued economic quagmire, a failed Foreign Policy, and Federal Regulators that are ready to sharply curtail Energy. The Debates mean nothing to me. All we are going to get is Far Left Moderators letting Obama stand at a podium and lie with a straight face to the American Public.
Yes, all that plus a far left Supreme court to handle any objections to the obama from the concerned American People.
Current sign on the back of my truck:
Vote For The American
Tomorrow I’m switching it to:
Keep Working! There Are Millions Of Parasites Counting On You
"Understanding" doesn't make as much noise as hundreds if thousands of marchers waving flags and home made posters, even that noise didn't arouse the news media then, no wonder they misread the silence now.
You see, "Understanding" is quiet. There are millions of us that graduated from the TEA PARTY UNIVERSITY. We don't make a lot if noise now, but we quietly UNDERSTAND and know what we must do to save the country. We will be there at the polling places, in greater numbers than in 2010 because we have also educated those near to us, the ultimate grass roots effort. For the media, it will be "unexpected" and a "strange happening" something they "did not see coming." This may well be the LOUDEST LANDSLIDE ever and directly attributable the "silent" majority.
The media has declared us dead, so no coverage and no threat. They have no idea of the numbers of millions if us who will decide this election. We are not in their stories, their polls or even their thoughts. There is an army if voters coming to the polls they don't even see coming. The lack of reporting and skewed polls is the ultimate proof, I need no more. Join the landslide, be on the WINNING side for a change. It's OUR turn at bat.
...resistant to polls...
No kidding. I'm so tired of pollsters that when someone says "I'm taking a poll" I press the "OFF" button on my phone. Reflex. I do not participate in unofficial straw polls any more. I'll participate in the one poll that counts. (I live in Nevada, which may explain the frequency of pollsters calling.)
I'm fed up with the coverage of this "contest" as a horse-race and a parade of cheap shots. Both candidates are short on facts and long on snipe. And reading Free Republic has dropped on my daily priority list because many of the commenters here on political articles are sloganeers, not thoughtful writers. (By the way, Politico is just as bad, just the wind blows in a different direction there.)
The worst of the sniping and selective presentation is in the editorial cartoons. Yes, some of them are funny, but the majority of them represent a particular point of view to the exclusion of everything else. So I'll enjoy the funnies, but discount the message as vacuous and incomplete. The panels about the NFL replacement refs was more balanced, fair, accurate -- and funny -- than the majority of the political panels.
I have yet to see a good, accurate side-by-side comparison of the positions of the two campaigns. Of course, the mainstream media is more interested in reporting things that move papers and magazines and attract eardrums and eyeballs, not providing the electorate good, concise reporting of the unbiased facts. That include Limbaugh, Beck, Drudge, and their ilk, by the way. It's what they don't report that's the problem.
Being accurate and unbiased doesn't sell, apparently. And whose fault is that?
So this independent is not going to be sampled outside of a voting booth.
The Tea Parties are a social club. Their infighting and sniping during the primaries wounded whichever candidate the GOP would have nominated. For the sake of purity I expect they will stay home on Nov 7 handing the House and Senate into Democrat control. There is a reason that all the pollsters are showing a vastly superior turnout for the Democrats, because the “pure of heart” have indicated that they are at best reluctant voters but are tending to stay home.
One think I want to say about polls even though I do not think it is statistically significant.
I see a lot of people here who say if a pollster calls them, they lie to them.
Now, I used to do survey work, so this kind of annoys me, but what I really want to say is I hope those are not the same people who then complain about polls being inaccurate.
It is pretty clear that a lot of the recent polls are WAY off in terms of the party allocation.
But look at all the other lies the media is telling this election season.
I’m sure everyone here realizes that if Obama were a republican we would have seen our poor murdered Ambassador’s body being dragged through the streets every morning noon and night since it happened. (OK, for his family I’m glad this isn’t happening, but that is not the point.)
The deceitful MSM isn’t even reporting on the ongoing protests at our embassies.
The administration treated their own guy, THEIR OWN GUY, like he was chopped liver.
They sent Susan Rice out to lie to our faces. And she did it. She should resign, but it is too late, she should have resigned when asked to lie to the American people.
Maybe she even believed the BS story about the video. But how in God’s name she could go on national TV and maintain the security was “adequate” after 4 people were brutally murdered is beyond me.
Sorry, if you house gets robbed your security wasn’t “adequate”.
I keep saying this, but this election is no longer about Obama and Romney, it is about the media who are actively betraying the public’s trust.
Pat Cadell is 100% correct about this.
The media must be slapped down good and hard in November. If not it will only be a matter of time until we have a true dictator running this country. Be it Barack Obama or some future “god” anointed by the media.
Sorry, got a little OT on my rant.
“It is odd how libertarians viciously criticize Republicans but give the Kenyan Impostor a pass.”
That has been a “normal” since I joined Free Republic.
Regardless of how bad the rats in power or seeking power are $crewing this country, the Republicans get blamed by certain Freepers. After a decade of this bs, I just ignore it.
He hates you,
He hates me,
That’s why there is a Tea Party,
With a nick-knack paddy-whack,
Obama has no back bone,
In November we’ll send him home!
And here I thought I was the only one who hung up on pollsters!
Being accurate and unbiased doesn't sell, apparently. And whose fault is that?
My take is that while it is possible and desirable to attempt to be objective, it is not possible to know that you actually are objective. And that attempting objectivity must start with self-examination - a conscientious effort to be open and above-board about ones own incentives and motives.
But that leads directly to a caveat: if you claim that you are objective, you are rejecting the need to examine your own motives, and you are stating as a fact something which, in the nature of things, it is impossible for you to know. So if I hear you declaring your own objectivity - or, still worse, if I see that you belong to an organization which claims objectivity for you - I have to recognize that you not only are not objective, you are self-deluded or else consciously tendentious. Objectivity which is self-declared is an oxymoron.
It is not far to look to find organizations which claim objectivity for their members; every major newspaper or broadcaster claims objectivity for its reporters and editors, and every wire service or broadcast network claims objectivity for its member newspapers and broadcast stations. This directly leads to conformity masquerading as objectivity. The fractious independence for which newspapers of the founding era and up to the Civil War were noted is no more. Killed, IMHO, by the Associated Press (which started in the middle of the Nineteenth Century).
Since it is not really legitimate to judge someones objectivity by their claim of objectivity, its necessary to evaluate any commentary on the basis of what we know of the interests and motives of the commenter. Thus a Rush Limbaugh, who doesnt claim objectivity but is openly conservative, may in reality actually be relatively objective - especially when compared to the pseudo-objectivity of journalism.
From my POV, liberals - and moderates and as well - are simply people whom pseudo-objective journalists give positive labels to. And conservatives, right wingers, - you name it - are simply people whom the pseudo-objective journalists seek to marginalize. IMHO progressives seek to minimize the credit which accrues to people who actually provide goods and services which we-the-people want and need. And to promote themselves in the process. See, you didnt build that. Such people get positive labels from pseudo-objective journalists for the simple reason that journalists are engaged in exactly the same behavior, and they therefore find common ground.
“Join the landslide, be on the WINNING side for a change. It’s OUR turn at bat.”
Excellent, I couldn’t agree more. I don’t think many patriotic Americans will be sitting home come November 6th.
“There is a reason that all the pollsters are showing a vastly superior turnout for the Democrats, because the pure of heart have indicated that they are at best reluctant voters but are tending to stay home.”
The reason the “pollsters” are doing that is to suppress Republican turnout.
Nice demonstration of “useful idiot” behavior, Mike. ;-)
1850 America would have been lynching libertarians pushing homosexual marriage, abortion, polygamy, open advertising and selling of porn, prostitution, homosexualizing the military and adoption, homosexual teachers and youth leaders, etc., not praising their traditional Americanism. Libertarians and the left have made their imprint in the last 60 years.
I have never been polled. Vote in every election, large and small and have never once received one call. Now that we don’t have land lines in the house, I don’t expect to ever get a call either.
Who are the useful idiots? Instead of playing little games they should come out for GOP candidates loud, strong and now.
I actually don’t know that much about the formal “Libertarian” Party, but I consider myself an economic libertarian (small “l”), similar to Milton Friedman. There was little that he stood for that I didn’t agree with.
The only thing going for Romney is that he’s not Obama. That’s enough for me. Hope it’s enough for enough other folks.