Posted on 10/23/2015 6:55:55 PM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
Does this count for purposes of declaring that there’s no hard proof of a Carson lead in Iowa until a third poll detects it? Because this would be the third poll, after Quinnipiac and the Des Moines Register, to find him ahead there in the past few days.
In theory an internal poll conducted for a Super PAC that’s competing in the state is untrustworthy because the group that commissioned it obviously has a strong rooting interest. But in that case, if this is little more than propaganda with cooked numbers, why does the data so closely resemble what Quinnipiac and the DMR found?
For maximum news buzz, you’d expect there to be some sort of striking outlier — Carson with 35 percent of the vote, say, or Trump crashing into third place in the low teens or, of course, Bobby Jindal surging into double digits. Instead this poll exactly matches what Quinnipiac found for Carson and Trump and is within a point of what the DMR found. And the pollsters who conducted it are speaking on the record in defense of their work.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
What is the margin of error?
I wouldn’t worry about it too much. If you’re going to ‘surge’, 3 months before the votes are cast isn’t the time to do it .
Lions, Tigers and Bears ohhh my, Donald Trump’s numbers slipping in Iowa, what will this world do?
Are the questions as tailored to Carson as Quinn were?
You know:
1. What candidate is so low key
2. What candidate is an outsider
3. What candidate loves operating on people
4. What candidate blah blah blah
LOL
After whatJindal said about Trump, this could have been put out to add to a narrative. Yougov poll for IA due Sunday. From a distance, none of these large movement polls make sense because national numbers are stable.
Round and round we go. Jindal's poll could be close to others to try and diminish Trump who has eclipsed all other campaigns. If they don't stop Trump, no hope and these Iowa polls are the closest they've come to putting a dent in his numbers.
The main question here is how did a candidate who took two weeks off for book signings suddenly race to the top? While he was away signing books he raced to the top. I'm not one to think all polls are fixed but I think many are guided. And now that they think they've cracked Trump's lead I think we're going to see more of the same.
That’s right!
Carson is a joke. This is contrived and manufactured!! He makes bush, on low energy, look like a trampoline champion!!
Trump’s numbers didn’t slip.
These are the first Iowa polls taken after Walker dropped out. Carson picked up all the Walker supporters.
Cruz needs to campaign more in Iowa to split that vote.
Never trust The Ministry of Propaganda
I’m no big fan of Carson, but many find him very likeable, and he’s got many evangelicals. I believe Trump will take Iowa, but the way that state works, it really wouldn’t surprise me if Carson won.
It makes sense because Walker was polling in the double digits in Iowa before his campaign went bankrupt. His supporters went to Carson.
Carson really hasn’t done or said anything to go up in the polls over the last several weeks. It is all part of an agenda to help derail Trump’s campaign.
Carson dissed the Muslims and fought back over it.
Carson dissed the Muslims and fought back over it.
You’re right about that. I’ll give him credit for that.
People call CARSON a conservative Christian, but his own statements say otherwise. CARSON’s stand on social issues is disturbing.
BEN CARSON - ON SOCIAL ISSUES
Carson has expressed support for same-sex civil unions, and following the Supreme Court’s ruling legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states, he conceded the fight was over by declaring the ruling the “law of the land.” (Newsmax)
Despite maintaining a strong pro-life record, in a 1992 interview, Dr. Carson said that while he does not perform abortions, he personally referred women seeking abortions to other doctors. In the same interview, he said that he “would never advocate it’s illegal for a person to get an abortion.” (Baltimore Sun)
Dr. Carson co-authored a medical research paper in 1992 where he outlined his support for the use of aborted baby organs for research purposes. Carson defended his past statements, saying, “To not use the tissue that is in a tissue bank, regardless of where it comes from, would be foolish. Why would anybody not do that?”
Numerous conservatives have expressed that by providing the demand that abortion providers will supply the market and that participating in this practice is being complicit. (Life Site News)
As revelations came to light about Dr. Carson referring the mothers of unborn children with potential birth defects to abortionists, his campaign defended the practice. A campaign spokesman said, “he [Carson] believes in quality medical care, No. 1, and secondly, he believes in people making their own decisions based on facts and information.” Pressed on whether Carson stands by his decision to do so, the same spokesman said yes. The statement is particularly troubling given that pro-abortion proponents use similar language regarding a decision between the patient and their doctor, but not mentioning the life of the child. (Politico)
Since news surfaced of a 1992 research paper co-authored by Dr. Carson that included the use of fetal tissue, Caron’s stance on abortion has come under immense scrutiny and his defense of his previous medical decisions has been troubling to many in the pro-life movement. When asked if Carson stands by his past decision to refer patients to abortion doctors, Carson’s Communications Director said “He believes in quality medical care, No. 1, and secondly, he believes in people making their own decisions based on facts and information.”Additionally, the spokesman went on to say that Carson believes that you can’t stop abortion by making it illegal. The spokesman told Politico, “he [Carson] has always believed that the battle over abortion had to be waged in the hearts and minds of Americans, that you cannot legislate morality. But he also believes we’re winning the debate.” (Politico)
In the 1990s, Carson was a board member of the Baltimore Charitable Foundation which gave $200,000 in grants to Planned Parenthood. When confronted with this fact, and asked if Carson knew about the grants a spokesman said, “it doesn’t really matter.” (Politico)
When asked if he would support abortion in the case of incest or rape, Dr. Carson said, “I would hope that they would very quickly avail themselves of the emergency room, and in the emergency room, they have the ability to administer RU-486 and other possibilities before you have a developing fetus.” RU-486 is an abortifacient that kills a fertilized egg by artificially denying it the ability to attach to the uterine wall. Using Dr. Carson’s own standard of life beginning at conception, this would then constitute murder. (Politico)
During the campaign Dr. Carson has struggled to define when he believes life begins. He told ABC News that life begins “when the heart starts beating” but later clarified that he meant conception. (Politico)
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates/candidates/ben-carson#article-11
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.