Are Pollsters Censoring Ron Paul from State Polls?

USA Election Polls ^ | May 18, 2007

[ksen]

There have been 27 republican primary polls taken this calendar year WITHOUT referencing Ron Paul. And only 5 polls with Ron Paul.

[mnehring]

I'm sure you'll love this one too:

Don't be fooled.. Paul is no Conservative. Votes speak louder than rhetoric.

Ron Paul's 2006 American Conservative Union rating: 76% Lifetime Rating: 82.3%

Ron Paul's Voting Record (ya, ya, I know, there is an excuse for all of these, state's rights are more important than stopping abortion and fixing the border, Ronnie is making a statement, or everyone else was voting against it and he was just playing the game, yadda, yadda, yadda)

Here are some more ‘Conservative(sic)’ votes by Paul:

Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes.

Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research.

Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion.

Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons.

Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime.

Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.

Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools.

Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.

Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy.

Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.

Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects.

Voted NO on reforming the UN by restricting US funding.

Voted NO on requiring lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations.

Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits about obesity against food providers.

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.

Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Voted YES on more immigrant visas for skilled workers.

Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers.

Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients.

Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks.

Let's also not forget Paul's Pork Projects (that he voted for before he voted against when he calls them unconstitutional but he is just playing the game when he submits them because everyone else does it.. yadda yadda yadda..)

Paul also supported the NAU superhighway by funding the TransTexas Corridor

[George W. Bush]

Gee, what happened to the old line that Ron Paul switched to the Republican Party because his wife asked him to?

I dunno. This is the first time I've ever heard it. I suspect you're just making it up because I've been on all these threads or have garbled something you read again.

His wife did get his promise not to run third-party again (and people are already thinking about how to persuade her to release Ron from his promise and urge him to run, no matter what). Other than that, she's a very private person but seems to be enjoying the campaign, the crowds, the excitement, the response of the young people.

[mnehring]

I will give you that, it may be the third party run I was thinking of.

[mnehring]

...and people are already thinking about how to persuade her to release Ron from his promise and urge him to run, no matter what...

So he may run third party after all, if they can get his wife's permission?

[KDD]

You’ll love this one:

I like the second posted response to to that tirade.

Scott, you are entittled to your oppinion, as is everyone in this constitutional republic. I however see how the business as usual politicians have steadily destroyed our liberties and freedoms, and totally ignored the constition, that they've sworn to uphold and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. If one of the mainstream candidates gets elected it won't change anything, and our republic will continue to go downhill. I for one am tired of the same old, same old,and think that we need to try something completely different, someone who actually takes his sworn oath seriously, RON PAUL.
Ken at 7:22PM on Jun 8th 2007

[jmc813]

So he may run third party after all, if they can get his wife's permission?

If it's Rudy vs. Hillary, I'd love to see Paul jump in. Can you imagine how fun FR would become?

[mnehring]

I bet you would..

[mnehring]

Let me guess, that was your response?

[jmc813]

I bet you would..

Damned straight I would. If you prefer a pro-abortion gun-grabber, by all means, go ahead and waste your vote on Rudy. It's not like he's going to win.

[George W. Bush]

So he may run third party after all, if they can get his wife's permission?

He says no. But if he genuinely believed he had enough money to campaign and have a real chance...well the LP and CP have both been holding the door open to him, begging him to become the candidate of both parties at once. That coalition would include the remains of the old Perot people too.

I think that if Bloomberg declines to run, it may be the GOP leaders who are begging him to run to split the Dim vote and defeat Hitlery. And I'm not so sure RP is that interested in saving their bacon. They'd probably have to deliver $40M-$50M in cash for him to even consider it. Better yet, bullion.

You see, we've spoiled Ron with all this cash. He's gotten used to it. He's no longer that impressed with a few puny millions. LOL.

If we're expected squeaker elections in key states like Ohio and Florida, a Ron Paul siphoning the hardcore antiwar Dims might be the only thing to save the GOP's bacon. Again, good luck talking Ron Paul into it.

I think he only runs third-party if we talk his wife into releasing him and it's clear that the GOP will fully fund a good nationwide campaign for him. Even then, I don't think he'd do it. Not unless he saw a way to win the White House for himself or accomplish some significant political goal in changing the party's future course and returning to constitutional conservative principle.

As to how to persuade Mrs. Paul, talk is ranging from a candlelight vigil of 100,000 people outside their house to delivering flowers by the truckload, public demonstrations, etc. Basically, to camp at his house or just beg until she gives in to the people's will. You know, she's a great old gal, deeply conservative, always believed in Ron and his message and in the Reagans and Goldwaters. We might persuade her.

Of course, it's not a serious discussion yet since we fully intend to win the nomination and defeat the Xlintons.

[Ohioan]

Yea, that darn degree in economics really is blinding me.

If you and I each had a nickel for every economics professor in America who has bought the Keynesian delusions, without realizing the errors which should have been obvious, we would never have to work again.

But the essential point is that Governmental debt, once monetized, cheapens the value of the currency. Whether or not it has a dramatic effect, of course, depends upon the extent of the debt, and a variety of other factors, which may or may not overwhelm the normal human propensity to seek cost and price stability, etc.. Washington, in the bipartisan irresponsibility, has handed others a terribly effective mechanism to limit our capacity; but even without deliberate outside mischief, the threat could be triggered internally.

One suspects, but admittedly cannot prove--it involves too many subjective individual considerations--that the fiscal irresponsibility of our politicians has encouraged the personal irresponsibility on both sides of the Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis.

[Ohioan]

I will admit that I do not know, one way or the other, whether the long list of votes you cite is accurate, either as to what the issue actually was, or as to Paul's vote. I will therefore only respond to the inclusion of votes which implied a Federal role in imposing centralized social values on the States. Paul, as the Founding Fathers, certainly does oppose that. (On some other matters, I would, admittedly, disagree with the stand you have attributed to my candidate. That in no way diminishes him as clearly the "best of breed" in the present race.)

But you will search the Constitution, in vain, for any indication of a Federal role in altering the social values in any of the States. It would never have been ratified if New England thought that the South, or New York and Pennsylvania might be able to alter New England norms; nor would the South, New York or Pennsylvania have ratified, had there been any possiblility that they might have to adopt New England norms. Respect for our differences goes to the heart of a healthy Federal system.

William Flax

[mnehring]

lol, tell us what you really think.

[lormand]

I think the question to Prawn and his supporters is,

How can Ron Paul 08' do to State Polls, what they do to online polls?

[ksen]

Amazing . . . you registered today just to say that?

[lormand]

"Amazing . . . you registered today just to say that?"

riverroad - Welcome to Freerepublic

Currently, there are a few Al Qaeda dupes who are still infesting this great Forum with Pro-Prawn Paul spew, much to the delight of our enemies.

Many of us have vows not to allow (and it pains me to say this) Freepers for Ron Paul get a favorable foothold here on this Conservative Forum.

Take scorn from Al Qaeda's useful idiots as a badge of honor.

[DesScorp]

The clinically insane SHOULD be excluded from polls and elections alike.

[ejonesie22]

Amen...