Posted on 10/19/2007 3:48:29 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
October 19, 2007
Des Moines, IA — In what he called "a major abuse of the electoral process," former Reagan administration diplomat and long-time national conservative activist Alan Keyes has been blocked by the Florida GOP from participating in Sunday's Fox News presidential debate in Orlando.
The Florida party used a 1% or better showing in polls from three of six polling firms as their criterion for inclusion in the event, even though none of the selected polling firms included Keyes, the latest entry in the presidential race, in any of their statewide surveys to date.
However, had Keyes been included in these polls, objective observers — including staff of some of the polling firms in question — agreed, based on past electoral performance in Florida, and on current polling that is taking place in other states, that he would have received a percentage meeting or exceeding the threshold.
In 2000, in the last contested GOP presidential primary, 32,354 — or nearly five percent — of Florida Republicans, and about one million voters nationwide, cast their vote for Keyes. He was included in the Values Voter Debate in Fort Lauderdale last month, after only three days in the race. In the post-debate straw poll, Keyes surpassed all the other candidates in the GOP field except Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.
The Des Moines Register's Iowa Poll, the most-recognized media measure in the first-in-the-nation caucus state, was released during the time period in question, showing Keyes at 2% after only two weeks in the race, equaling or surpassing several long-time GOP candidates, all of whom received invitations to the Orlando debate.
When asked about his exclusion from Sunday's debate on the Adam McMannus radio program Wednesday, Ambassador Keyes said, "Rather than thinking about what they should be doing to make sure that voters are informed and able to get a clear idea of the choices available to them, [some party officials] are doing their best, I think, to make sure that articulation of the kind of conservatism that corresponds to what is on the heart and mind of most grassroots Republicans is not there."
In later comments, Keyes asked, "Why such an effort to assure that the so-called top-tier candidates don't have to face me? Do they fear me because they're not good enough for the job that needs to be done, or because they don't represent the conscience and heart of the Republican Party or of the American people?"
To register your opinion concerning Dr. Keyes' exclusion from this debate, call the Florida Republican Party and Chairman Jim Greer at 850-222-7920, send a fax to 850-681-2063, or email the party using the form at www.rpof.org/contact.php
You can learn more about Alan Keyes at www.AlanKeyes.com
The folks on this thread don’t have a clue what is actually going on. Their political process, their country, is being stolen and they don’t even know it, or much care.
The Soviet Union had elections, after all. Only thing is, the choices were predetermined by the elites. The field was winnowed by the Politburo, not by the people.
Here’s a fact, one that will come out in the days just ahead: The political director at NBC has more power over the Republican nominating process than any FReeper.
Mitt Romney’s money, and that of his moneyed clique, means more than the untiring efforts of a legion of grassroots citizens.
Much more to follow...
Even before I address your points ... I’ve got to say these are pretty weak justifications for calling Ron Paul a “frontrunner”. You disbelieve polling data ... but have brought no actual evidence that Ron Paul’s popularity rivals the true frontrunners.
>> (A) MSM polls purposefully excludes Paul’s name from most polling questionnaires.
Not according to the questionnaires I saw. He’s on there ... nobody’s choosing him.
>> (B) They are polling the same registered Republicans who voted in the 2004 elections...
Actually ... they call randomly and ask whether the person answering the phone is likely to vote in the 2008 primary. It has nothing to do with who voted in the 2004 elections. My father was polled by Rasmussen just a couple of weeks ago.
>> (C) Many of Paul’s supporters are newcomers in politics or they’re independents, so they’re not polled.
They’re polled to the extent that the (1) own a telephone, and (2) answer that they’re likely to vote in the 2008 Republican Primary.
>> (D) MSM still uses landline phones for polling - Most of Paul’s supporters have cellphones. Read what the Centers for Disease Control had to say about polls, they’re frustrated because everyone has cell phones and they have a hard time gathering polling data for their statistics because of it.
This is nothing more than a wild-ass-guess on your part. Ron Paul supporters wouldn’t be particularly more likely than non-Paul supporters to be phoneless. Everybody has a cellular phone these days ... Paul and non-Paul supporters alike. I’ve seen no evidence that this has had any effect on these polls.
>> (E) Who determines what makes a poll “scientific” anyway?
Statisticians. Statistics determine the reliablility of polling data. You may disbelieve polling data if you choose, though you’ve offered no partiuclar evidence outside of random guesses that these polls are inaccurate.
Additionally - you’ve got no actual evidence that Ron Paul’s support exceeds that which is suggested by the data. You merely surmise that since you sense imperfections in the polls, those imperfections MUST be hurting Paul’s numbers. Truthfully, however, if you are ENTIRELY right about the imperfections of the data ... it remains likely that Ron Paul’s support is virtually imperceptible.
>> So internet & text-message polls are not objective but the ones that call people during dinner with loaded questions are?
Yes. Unless you can actually show me loaded questions that are biasing responses against Paul - I’ve got no reason to disbelieve scientific polling and rely on unscientific polling (actually, I’d still have no reason to rely on unscientific polling).
>> Do you know that on Internet polls you can only vote once per ISP address, and that Paul has always been ahead in these polls?
Assuming you are correct (though I am unconvinced that you are), and multiple votes are not recorded in online polls ... you’ve still got a HUGE problem with sample randomness. Paul supporters can crash an online/text poll in enormous numbers, and still be statistically insignificant with regard to the overall electorate. Most voters don’t participate in online or text polls, and it appears that Paul supporters participate at a heavier pace than non-Paul supporters ... thus, Paul comes out WAY ahead when the poll isn’t randomized, but still remains at 2% when polls are truly random.
It seems odd that you believe online polling, but not actual statistically significant polling. A convenient position considering that your candidate of choice does well in unscientific polling, but HORRIBLY once the polling sample is randomized. That’s comparable to those that believed John Kerry’s exit poll numbers over the actual vote counts in 2004. Its wishful thinking, and entirely nonsensical.
H
Wow... I have been thinking the exact same thing... Everyone keeps talking about a 3rd party ala Perot stealing this election for Clinton.. but that was 1992 and we had a weak incumbent.
This whole thing feels like 1996 where we get to choose between liars and uninspiring old white guys. Sometimes I think we're just collectively stupid.
Based on their experience, their record, and their long adherence to the principles in the Republican platform?
Or based on Democrat Media acceptance, dollars, lying polls, and the approval of self-appointed gatekeepers?
What gives you the right to make such decisions on behalf of the American people?
Thanks for the info! I sent a fax and an email to the Florida Republican Party to thank them for excluding Dr. Keyes. I went a little further and let them know I would've been even more appreciative had they restricted the debate to only those candidates polling above 10%.
Crap, there goes Alan’s salary for six months.
Lest we forget this is the same Fl GOP that gave us gov light loafers, Sen mel no brain, was against Ms. Harris, and propped up Foley and others. They think the mayor will go over big with the condo commando’s but that won’t happen.
Please explain why Paul has won most straw polls and Internet polls but somehow continually places at the bottom in traditional polls? Also explain why there is always a large percentage that vote "undecided" in these polls. I don't know what polls you're looking at, but Paul's name (and the same for Hunter & Tancredo) isn't even on these polls.
Actually ... they call randomly and ask whether the person answering the phone is likely to vote in the 2008 primary. It has nothing to do with who voted in the 2004 elections. My father was polled by Rasmussen just a couple of weeks ago.
Actually....my ass. The big polling firms such as Gallup & the networks/newspapers only poll registered or likely voters. Since Paul's supporters are NOT registered and never voted, they're not going to get polled. Your father was a rare exception.
They’re polled to the extent that the (1) own a telephone, and (2) answer that they’re likely to vote in the 2008 Republican Primary.
They're not calling the cellphones there buddy. They are only calling landline phones and most people do not answer or use their landline phone. Paul's supporters are affluent yuppies and suburban types who only use their cellphones. So the poll results are flawed to the point of inaccuracy.
This is nothing more than a wild-ass-guess on your part.
POLLSTERS BEGINNING TO COUNT CELL PHONE USERS
CELLPHONES AND POLITICAL SURVEYS, PART I
Statisticians. Statistics determine the reliablility of polling data. You may disbelieve polling data if you choose, though you’ve offered no partiuclar evidence outside of random guesses that these polls are inaccurate.
Can statisticians determine why one set of polls wrong but the other is right? You would get a more accurate poll if more people participated in an open internet poll rather than a poll that calls people and half the time get hung up on or doesn't get an answer.
So that $5.3 million Paul raised last quarter? The volunteers donating their time and money to Paul? (The other GOP candidates do not have this type of grassroots support) So how is Paul staying in the race then?
Crap, there goes another voice for our Constitutional rights and civil liberties being silenced by the anointed gatekeepers.
those Barry Manilow Donations to Ron Paul really speak for Republican voters.
I would actually watch a debate if Keyes was in it.
Perhaps. He did not do anything in Illinois when he lived here long enough to loose an election ( admittedly an impossible one to win ).
He did though while loosing it destroy the respect I had for him and convince me he is a raving loon.
Thinking like that will only leave us with another “party candidate”.
Lets face it, this nation is in the mess it is because of only wanting someone to win a popularity contest and not someone that has a clue.
Democrats think fat Hillary is the savior, but she is only a mouth piece, we are stuck with Bush and probable will get another carbon copy of him for next year.
People are afraid of change and getting one of the others to create the balance we need is the change needed.
Exactly! No conservatives allowed. They muck up the GOP platform.
Sorry, but that's the system the Constitution gave us. It's a popularity contest.
Terrible. I really don’t know what to say other than it’s an awful decision that will deprive a lot of people from hearing his right on target rhetoric. They chickened out basically.
Hmmm, Alan Keyes is running for president? The guy who GAVE the seat in Illinois to OBAMA?? Mr. Keyes, I used to support you but I can’t FORGIVE you for that MORONIC move you did. You made a laughing stock out of the GOP in IL and you DAMAGED the party in the state.
Mr. Keyes, please stop making the GOP look like it is a JOKE! The Republican members of Congress is doing a fine job of it.
IN OTHER WORDS, Mr. Keyes, GET LOST!!!!
Nonsense. The Illinois race was already a disaster before he ever stepped foot there. If Illinois voters rejected Keyes, that’s a reflection on the voter’s stupidity and immorality.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.