On Poll Results and the End of Conservatism (Vanity)

The polls had it wrong over New Hampshire. And it was polls that were used to exclude Hunter from the New Hampshire debates, the same debates which proved that polls were wrong. But poll results are still valid for EXCLUDING candidates like Hunter, who actually had a DELEGATE that REAL VOTERs voted for, while Rudy had NONE, but look at his polls! Now the same travesty is happening in South Carolina.

For the Republican side, half right is more than half wrong when you’re relying on the data to exclude someone from the process of democracy. And if they were wrong, how do we know they were right on the republican side? The prevailing assumption should be that they need to PROVE their data is reliable, but by excluding a candidate that could have done well in that state if he had access to the media, they AFFECTED THE OUTCOME.

CONSERVATISM vs. REPUBLICANISM
I don’t see how anyone can defend this action when it affects a conservative. This is a conservative forum, not a GOP one. It’s not just the GOP that’s jumping the shark, they’re taking Free Republic with them. On the latest poll, "I’ll vote R regardless" is leading the pack. I call people who vote this way UIN republicans, because they’ll vote for anything with an R in front of it, regardless of what it means.

Free Republic’s (1/9) poll on Republican candidates’ liberal positions that would be deal killers
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=210;results=1

thread discussion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951136/posts

Free Republic used to be a gathering place for conservatives. Now it’s becoming a gathering place of republicans. Putting republicanism ahead of conservatism is the opposition to the aims of this website.

JimRob says, “We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.” Freepers who are defending the fact that Hunter was excluded from the debates are in direct opposition to this tenet.

Statement by the founder of Free Republic As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. .... We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. .... We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.

This is NOT a GOP website, it says so right there, we have no affiliation with any party... That often catches republicans by surprise.

CHANCES OF WINNING

For those who don’t think we defend the country by voting for people who have next to zero chance of winning , they need to realize that THIS IS COMPLETE BALONEY. Right NOW, on Intrade, the folks who make it their business to deal in “chance of winning” and make money helping others trade on those chances have Hunter and Thompson EQUAL in chance to win the president race.

2008.PRES.THOMPSON(F)
Fred Thompson to win 2008 US Presidential Election M 0.2 0.4 0.2 41936 -0.1

2008.PRES.FIELD
Field (any other candidate) to win 2008 US Presidential Election M 0.2 0.3 0.2 18051 +0.0

USING INTRADE RESULTS I know that many freepers do not view futures markets with as much confidence as I do. But many of those same freepers view Polls with confidence. The article below is but one example of how futures markets are more reliable than poll results.

The Efficacy Of Prediction Markets The Liberty Papers ^ |

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1922961/posts

Whenever I post results from Intrade, there’s often a back & forth about how this data isn’t reliable, it’s subject to manipulation, all that stuff. All of these items are discussed and explained on this thread.

Futures market data that has proven to be more reliable than polling data, which is why Rasmussen started using Intrade results on their website. Rasmussen is the first polling organization to start using and referencing futures market data. In particular, once you look at the data and the interface, you’ll realize that it’s just a frontpiece for Intrade.

“Our prediction market for Iowa turned out to be very accurate,” Rasmussen said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948537/posts?page=53#53

Rasmussen started using Intrade results.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1945852/posts

THE PRACTICAL RESULT

The practical result was a failure in our democracy and it DIRECTLY affected the most conservative man in the race for the GOP presidency. By defending the practice, such freepers are betraying that they are a republican first, conservative second. Usually, it’s because this travesty did not affect their candidate. That is not how conservatism is forwarded. But it IS how republicanism is forwarded.

Hunter, as a result of this cascaded failure of democratic process, is excluced from the South Carolina debate. Recall that Hunter had a statistical tie with Giuliani for the lead in the Spartanburg straw poll. But for the media, that doesn’t mean anything, poll results that they decide are important are the ones being used. Is this what the primary process was designed to do, this early in the game? NO!

Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP Presidential Candidates Debate (No Hunter)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1950953/posts

Everyone on FR, anyone that calls themselves a conservative or an American should be outraged. But Free Republic has changed. It looks more each day like a de facto branch of the GOP. There will not be this outrage that once characterized Freepers, because this travesty favors their guy. One more nail in the coffin for conservatism, delivered and gift wrapped by the GOP.

If Thompson drops out, will he most likely endorse his friend McCain? If he does endorse McCain, how will Thompson followers feel? Do most freepers feel that such an endorsement would be a good thing or a bad thing? If such a thing as the exclusion from debates happened to your candidate, what would you expect from the GOP, as well as from Freepers? When you see that not taking place, would that change the way you view Free Republic, as a bastion of conservatism? If Hunter drops out, he’ll most likely endorse Fred. If Hunter drops, then Fred drops, we will all be pissed if the first scenario comes true, and there is no conservative in the race.

There have to be inclusion standards, so that some guy from the Mongolian-Tree-Worshipping-Skinhead-Yoga Party can’t pay his entrance fee just to be able to babble on national television.

But a U.S. congressman ... long-time chairman/ranking member of the Armed Services Committee ... is NOT a frivolous candidate. And I for one do not want media-manipulated opinion polls deciding for me who the “real” candidates are.

You’re right. The correct spelling is “ishkabibble”, but it was used by the kids in my neighborhood as the secret password for a mighty tree fort. Do you know the game where one person whispers a word to someone else and that person whispers it to someone and down the line? The end result is that it’s never the original word. That is how a bunch of little boys came up with “ishabibble”. I am the first and only girl to crack the sacred code and was allowed to enter. It was a really junky tree fort and there were bugs and my brothers were very unhappy about the situation, so a hollow victory!

The polls were proven to be off by 7 to 15 points. There’s no way they can claim their margin of error was 2-3%. Their polling data was used to exclude Hunter from the debates prior to New Hampshire, and then Hunter did poorly. The MSM DIRECTLY affected the process rather than reported on it. It was a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If you add that to Hunter’s polls, he gets into the debate, wins it like he won the last one, and takes his momentum into Nevada (where he has the endorsement of Nevada GOP somthin-or-other) and smokes South Carolina where he basically tied tootyfruityrudy in the Spartanburg straw poll. But instead, we have the MSM excluding this candidate on the basis of polls that are conducted by the MSM and the polls are proven WRONG. But that doesn’t stop them, they proceed anyways, even though there are ACTUAL delegates to Hunter’s name at the time of New Hampshire and Tootyfruityrudy had NONE.

You can’t say that this part of the puddle is fine, that other part is the one that’s poisoned. Not in this republic. Not if you’re a conservative. But you can say it if you’re a partisan. Thanks for exposing your agenda.

***WE’RE NOT IN THE GENERAL YET.

Yup. But the question of whether to vote 'R' regardless obviously applies to the GENERAL. Only then does one have to choose which party to vote for; in the primaries one chooses which candidates within ones party to vote for.

Go peddle your garbage on some GOP website.

Sometimes, the conservative position is to vote against a party that has become a wholy owned subsidary of the marxists. And sometimes, posters to conservative sites speak with respect to other well mannered, conservative, posters.

Apparently not always ...

It is small tent, IMHO, because there used to be a rather diverse amount of conservatives here.
***The definition of conservative has not changed as far as I recall. That’s the tent. The folks who choose to come in are not the tent, and judging the tent by the number of folks who come here is the wrong approach. Since the definition never changed, the tent never changed.

The giant purge that occurred not only shaved a good amount of that off, it basically silenced a large amount of freepers who don’t 100% agree with JR’s opinion of what conservativism is.
***What giant purge? Are you talking about the bugzapper thread? Only ~30 freepers knocked out. They’re free to sign up under another name, so most of them are probably still with us. It’s JimRob’s right to define conservatism on his conservative website. The folks who come onto this website and try to convince JimRob that his definition is wrong are the ones who need to get a grip.

If that is what JR wants, basically everyone agreeing on his principals and no one else, heck, that’s his business. But it is definitely “small-tent”, and makes no sense to me.
***As I said, the definition of conservative hasn’t changed, so you can’t call it small-tent. See post #6 for the answer to this dilemma. The problem isn’t that non-conservatives have been coming, it’s that they’ve been hiding their liberal values and pretending to be conservative. Then, once these pseudoconservatives get found out, guys like you call the ensuing “purge” a form of small-tent mentality.

Sometimes, the conservative position is to vote against a party that has become a wholy owned subsidary of the marxists.
***That’s during the election. We’re in the Primaries now. The conservative position in primaries is to support the most conservative candidate in the race.

And sometimes, posters to conservative sites speak with respect to other well mannered, conservative, posters.
Apparently not always ...
***Being a poster to a conservative site does not make you a conservative. Defending an undemocratic process such as this is an indication that you are not a conservative. To expect conservatives to be well-mannered to non-conservatives on a conservative website when they lack conservatism credibility during such posting is expecting too much from me. We’re getting a lot of posters who claim to be conservative because of the credibility that affords them, but when we scratch the surface we find liberals and fascists and RINOs. The problem isn’t liberals and fascists and RINOs and others showing up; such posters are usually treated respectfully. The problem is that they pretend to be conservative. Such pretenders do not deserve good manners. Naturally, if I’m wrong and you really “are” a conservative who fits JimRob’s definition, then I should not be ill mannered. But then your answers would be different if the definition fit you, wouldn’t they?

As I said, the definition of conservative hasn’t changed, so you can’t call it small-tent. See post #6 for the answer to this dilemma. The problem isn’t that non-conservatives have been coming, it’s that they’ve been hiding their liberal values and pretending to be conservative. Then, once these pseudoconservatives get found out, guys like you call the ensuing “purge” a form of small-tent mentality.

"My way or the highway" wasn't always the mentality around here, and you know it. It's your "purge" mentality I call "small-tent". This used to be a place where a lot of different conservatives worked together. This is a good thing in my opinion.

“***This is a conservative website, not a GOP website. Go peddle your partisan bull shiite elsewhere. JimRob himself has said he wouldn’t vote for tootyfruityrudy if he gets nominated.”

I’m simply stating my opinion, dork. I am no GOP shill, but I am a realist...something you seem to have trouble grasping.

If sitting it out, and allowing our country to be screwed in the process is your strategy, count me out. That is all I am saying.

As for your opinion, do whatever the hell you want. If throwing a temper tantrum is what you want, have at it.

Hillary is smiling.

“Tell that to JimRob, the owner of this website, who says he’ll sit on the sideline if Rudy is nominated.”

That’s his choice. Obviously, I disagree with him.

“Free Republic really needs to get rid of RINOs like you. Go to some GOP website. This is a conservative website.”

No, freerepublic needs get rid of spazes like you. My candidate is Fred...he is no RINO. So, bite me.

You don’t compromise during the primaries, you compromise during the election.

Compromise is compromise.

It's like being a little pregnant. It can't be.

After all, why is it OK to compromise your principals during the general, but not OK during the primary?

Tell you what. I will promise to vote for Duncan Hunter in Pennsylvania if you promise to vote for Mitt Romney if Hunter has dropped out by time of the primary in your state.

So, can you name me three rock-ribbed "acceptable" conservatives you have voted for, either local, state, or federal?

But take heart, I think Romney may be suitable to these RINOs, so your candidate is probably safe.

Romney is the only remaining viable candidate who can defeat the Democrats.

Of that I am 90% certain.

I too am disheartened that the Republican base will accept the back-stabber McCain, or worst, Huckabee, who scares the pants off of me and almost all non evangelicals.

Although Fred is correct and a good conservative, he is simply an AWFUL boring candidate, and would get trounced by an energetic Obracko-Shrillary machine in the general election.

Rudy Guiliani is looking to be less and less and less likely, which is a good thing.

Which brings us back to the one candidate who, despite his flaws, stands the best chance of keeping conservatives in control of the US military, and in the White House.

The polls were proven to be off by 7 to 15 points. There’s no way they can claim their margin of error was 2-3%.

No, they weren't. I showed you how accurate the poll I cited was.

I don't care about the accuracy of polls of Democrats. That has nothing to do with the accuracy of polls of Republican voters. If you want to get reliable info about GOP candidates running for the nomination, then look at the poll released that I cited. They are reliable. The polls were completely accurate in predicting Hunter's performance on Election Day. Deal with it or stay in denial. I don't care.

The national political conversation will echo through FAU in January 2008. The University will host the Republican presidential candidates on Thursday, Jan. 24 and the Democratic presidential candidates on Sunday, Jan. 27 SPONSORS:in televised debates sponsored by Leadership Florida, the Florida Press Association and Florida Public Broadcasting Service, Inc.

Guv Crist will be there for the chance to be on natl tv. He's a camera hog but when disaster strikes like the big traffic pileup yesterday by Orlando, where's the emperor, I mean governor?

Vanbasten: “If it is the choice of whether to take one step back or five steps back from the conservative agenda, I’m going with one.”

Unfortunately, we keep one and two-stepping to the left. Even Reagan, God bless his soul, couldn’t reverse this country’s decline into socialism. Just 25 years ago we were talking about eliminating entire federal departments. Now, in our own ranks, are candidates who support mandatory health insurance, a nationwide smoking ban, and large-scale illegal alien amnesties.

You know, I probably wouldn’t care so much about the left except for the fact they won’t leave me and other citizens alone. They aren’t content to ruin just their own cities and states. They want to take the entire nation with them, and no one may decline to participate. And they once called this nation, “Land of the free, home of the brave!”

Liberal-lite is no better than pure liberal, since the end results are essentially the same. With candidates like McCain, it’s only going to take us a little bit longer to reach the same destination as Hillary. And, I think I can make a very good case that a RINO is actually worse than a leftist in that a RINO infiltrates and destroys conservative institutions from within.

What can we do? Don’t vote for RINOs!

“My way or the highway” wasn’t always the mentality around here, and you know it. It’s your “purge” mentality I call “small-tent”.
***You said it was JimRob’s approach that was small tent. And he purges those who pretend on conservatism. He doesn’t seem to purge those who are up front about their liberalism or whateverism. So your defense of pretenders to conservatism is as hallow as a burned out redwood tree.

This used to be a place where a lot of different conservatives worked together. This is a good thing in my opinion.
***It is a good thing that it used to be such a place but no longer is? Great writing. A decade of freeping and you can’t put 2 sentences together in a meaningful fashion. Why would someone spend a decade on a conservative website when they do not agree with its definition of conservatism?

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.