> According to the LA Times. people self identify themselves as a...
> Republican 35% of the time > Independent 15% of the time > Democrat 35% of the time.
And the other 15%?
> But now I will make a few assumptions. I am going to assume that of the people that disagree with the job that Bush is doing in Iraq,
According to your above premise, that would be 400 of 1,000 Republicans...
> that at least half (50%) of the Republicans would favor Ron Paul,
Huge assumption aside, that would be 200 of the 400, or 20% in a Republican primary.
> at least 30% of the independents, and at least 10% of the Democrats. I think these are fairly safe assumptions.
I don't, but I'm focusing on the miscalculation.
> Now to make things easier to understand... Lets pretend there are 1000 voters nationwide. Taking the numbers from the polls and the assumptions I made, you end up with 255 people that would vote for Ron Paul.
I don't get how this was derived.
As you see above, I've clearly demonstrated that, using the polls you cite, Paul would only get 20% (I'd sign up for that right now) in a Republican primary, yet you somehow have him at 50%. Please explain.
Thanks, Gary
> Now you are probably saying... 255, that is only about 25%. But you have to figure around half the people are going to be voting in the Democrat primary so that 255 is out of only 500 people. So now we are talking about almost 50%. In a race with 10 candidates, 50% is a huge number!
> So what can you gather from all this? The numbers DO SUPPORT RON PAUL's campaign. All that is needed is for people to become aware of his candidacy. Hopefully now that I have eliminated one of the mainstream medias excuses, he will start being referred to as a serious candidate rather than a fringe candidate from now on!
1 comment:
I don't understand your calculations/analysis. It's not presented clearly.
> According to a recent poll by CBS/NY Times when asked the question...
> "Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"
> Republicans disapproved 40%
> Independents disapproved 77%
> Democrats disapproved 93%
> According to the LA Times. people self identify themselves as a...
> Republican 35% of the time
> Independent 15% of the time
> Democrat 35% of the time.
And the other 15%?
> But now I will make a few assumptions. I am going to assume that of the people that disagree with the job that Bush is doing in Iraq,
According to your above premise, that would be 400 of 1,000 Republicans...
> that at least half (50%) of the Republicans would favor Ron Paul,
Huge assumption aside, that would be 200 of the 400, or 20% in a Republican primary.
> at least 30% of the independents, and at least 10% of the Democrats. I think these are fairly safe assumptions.
I don't, but I'm focusing on the miscalculation.
> Now to make things easier to understand... Lets pretend there are 1000 voters nationwide. Taking the numbers from the polls and the assumptions I made, you end up with 255 people that would vote for Ron Paul.
I don't get how this was derived.
As you see above, I've clearly demonstrated that, using the polls you cite, Paul would only get 20% (I'd sign up for that right now) in a Republican primary, yet you somehow have him at 50%. Please explain.
Thanks,
Gary
> Now you are probably saying... 255, that is only about 25%. But you have to figure around half the people are going to be voting in the Democrat primary so that 255 is out of only 500 people. So now we are talking about almost 50%. In a race with 10 candidates, 50% is a huge number!
> So what can you gather from all this? The numbers DO SUPPORT RON PAUL's campaign. All that is needed is for people to become aware of his candidacy. Hopefully now that I have eliminated one of the mainstream medias excuses, he will start being referred to as a serious candidate rather than a fringe candidate from now on!
Post a Comment