Posted on 08/13/2011 4:03:48 PM PDT by DRey
Bachman bests Paul. Pawlenty third. Romney fourth. Works for me!
Palin is not running. Her job is simply to inspire people to actually get off their behinds and vote.
It’s a way for the state party to gauge the feelings of the voters. Nothing more. Voters have to pay to vote. So it adds $ to the party coffers as well. As for the candidates, it can be a way to gauge their acceptance, but with their egos it’s questionable the losers would heed the warning.
I dont like Romney at all but I will vote for him if my only other choice is Obama. I mean really 4 more years of Obama? Man....
With all due respect, it shows that while she is a strong contender, she also spent a TON of money to get the support at the straw poll...this is why this particular straw poll is bogus. Same with Paul...the each spent massive amounts of money for turnout...and they still couldn’t muster the votes of all of the tickets they handed out. If for example, they each purchased 6000 tickets and gave them out to people at the fair, yet only garnered 4000 plus votes, there were still 2000 tickets each outstanding...presumably, their votes went elsewhere. Now, for Cain and Santorum, who spent little on advertising and nothing on recruitment/busing people in, they did a GREAT job with far less support. This for me is a key indicator.
Paid political operatives? Dang! When do I get my check. I was there and voted, but never heard anything about getting paid for it. LOL!
Bachmann has always been known as a great fundraisr in her re elections as well as this Presidential bid.
Wow, I am reading your posts throughout this Bachmann thread and you are desperately trying to bash Bachmann to promote someone who is not even running.
The annual CPAC straw poll gets a fair amount of press coverage. It is also swayed by candidates paying for students (cheap tickets) to attend and sway the vote in their favor. Ron Paul and Mitt Romney have been doing this for several years.
Telephone surveys/polls may or may not be paid by special interest groups and/or candidates. The special interest slant can often be detected by the phrasing of questions and/or response choices. Known liberal pollsters can also skew results by heavily populating the sample with known liberal respondents.
As for Ron Paul, he blames the U.S. for September 11, 2001. That pretty well cancels anything else he has to say.
The only public foreclosure that Bachmann released on her fundraising, since OFFICIALLY getting in the race, showed she only took in 2 million dollars.
She also moved close to another 2 million from a older account to her presidential account, much of that 2 million Gov Sarah Palin was responsible for from MB re election campaign.
When Gov Palin gets in she will probably top 10 million on the first day she announces, in fact would not surprise me if she was to bring in 25+ million in the first week alone after officially announcing. I am probably under estimating!
You can say what you like about Bachmann and me also, but it is only opinion.
It is NOT opinion that she has not raised hardly any money since she officially announced, this is FACT, and it should be disturbing for Bachmann supporters.
To me it just points out that much of her support is simply fabricated.
B U M P
I know the difference : )
As for your suggested metric of how efficient a campaign was at rallying its supporters for the straw poll, it favors candidates with a small but intense base of support and ignores the more consequential consideration of whether a campaign is able to grow that base. Bachman has done just that and it is to her credit.
Thank you both for the clearest explanantions. Really I never knew any of this about the straw polls.
The only advantage I can see behind them is that the party “coffers” get filled. As far as any significance to us as far as a true gauge about a candidate, there is none because I can see where the results can be heavily skewed. Are the tickets candidate specific or generalized?
NN have you participated in a straw poll? You seem to be more familiar with the inner workings.
Thanks again for the lesson regarding straw polls.
Here’s a handy reference for the 2012 primaries.
2012 Primary Schedule
Note: Some of these dates are tentative as some states are will messing with their primary dates to jockey for a superior position.
Monday, January 16, 2012: Iowa caucuses
Tuesday, January 24: New Hampshire
Saturday, January 28: Nevada caucuses, South Carolina
Tuesday, January 31: Florida
Tuesday, February 7 (Super Tuesday): Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Missouri, Montana Republican caucuses, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah
Saturday, February 11: Louisiana
Tuesday, February 14: Maryland
Tuesday, February 21: Hawaii Republican caucuses, Wisconsin
Tuesday, February 28: Arizona, Michigan
Tuesday, March 6: Minnesota caucuses, Massachusetts, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia
Tuesday, March 13: Mississippi
Tuesday, March 20: Colorado caucuses, Illinois
Tuesday, April 24: Pennsylvania
Tuesday, May 8: Indiana, North Carolina and West Virginia
Tuesday, May 15: Nebraska, Oregon
Tuesday, May 22: Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky
Tuesday, June 5: Montana, New Mexico and South Dakota
More information on the 2012 Republican Primary schedule and the changes which will happen to the 2012 schedule:
KANSAS CITY, MO. ? The Republican National Committee adopted a new schedule for the 2012 presidential primaries Friday, agreeing to a plan worked out in concert with Democrats and designed to delay the start of the campaign season.
The proposal, drafted by a special RNC panel, gained approval from more than the necessary two-thirds of the committee’s 168 members.
Party leaders hailed the vote as a historic change in the presidential selection process, one that would avoid the development of a single national primary in which states choose to hold their nominating contests on the same day.
The new schedule is designed to make it difficult for a candidate to rack up an insurmountable number of delegates early in the process, forcing candidates to campaign across the country.
Under the new schedule, no state would hold a primary or caucus before the first Tuesday in February 2012, in attempt to avoid a repetition of 2008, when the Iowa caucuses were held Jan. 3.
Iowa and New Hampshire would retain their status as the nation’s first contests, held in February, joined by South Carolina and Nevada.
Other contests would generally be held in April or later, although states would have the option of holding votes in March, provided convention delegates chosen at those elections were awarded to candidates in proportion to the percentage of the vote they received, rather than in a winner-take-all system.
Thank you so much. I’m saving this so I can follow things more closely this season. What is your opinion of the ‘rule change’. Anytime I read that something was a joint effort with the democrats i.e. “...agreeing to a plan worked out in concert with Democrats...” it makes my skin crawl. Is the election over before it began?
How are participants chosen for a caucus?
Good one!
Yes, I have participated in several CPAC straw polls as an adult. We pretty much know which candidate will win the poll when dozen upon dozens of screaming youth charge into the grand ballroom waving signs for their candidates. Of course, we always take the results with a grain of salt.
I will be participating in the Florida GOP straw poll in September, as a delegate of the RPOF Presidency V in Orlando. Delegates are chosen by lottery in each county and by ability to pay a fairly hefty admission fee for the event spanning three days, including a televised debate (Sept. 22). Candidates pay for receptions, booth space and talk time. I haven't heard that candidates comp attendees for admission fees or lodging, but I suppose it is possible for them to do so.
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.