Posted on 01/10/2008 1:11:53 AM PST by Kevmo
What value were polls other than anti-democratic?
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.
From the front page of Free Republic:
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.
chances on intrade -- snapshot http://www.intrade.com
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.
Understandable angst.
But speaking personally, the points I make ARE designed to promote conservatism in America, even though some on FR virulently reject my advocacy of Mitt Romney.
Guess it comes down to one's definition of conservative promotion. It's all a matter of degree.
Last I checked, Romney (and others) ARE openly and willingly promoting conservative values in which I believe .... freedom of worship without ridicule, low taxes, strong military/American presence in defending our nation, good wholesome family issues.
I also focus on getting results... of being pragmatic.
Would much rather get 80% of what is good for America (thru Romney's conservative promotion) than 0% if we get smooshed in the election.
I am not a believer in holding on to the deck of the Titanic as it sinks six miles thru icy cold waters to the bottom of the Atlantic.
At some point, we as conservatives must be alive to continue the good fight.
I believe that some leaders are truly repentant of things they've said, of decisions they've made, in the past.
I know I am repentant of dumb things I once believed.
And thus we should at least be willing to give them the benefit of their conversion.... not just outright nasty rejection.
Anyway, that's my two-cent cup-of-coffee thought for the morning.
Please explain how voting for the Liberal Republican's candidate will help defeat Liberalism within the Republican party?
Why take all the fun out of letting them expose themselves?
LLS
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
We as conservatives MUST remain alive to continue the good fight.
It does no one any good to just get mad and pout if our (your) preferred perfect candidate is not selected.
To quote that overused cliche, Rome wasn't built in a day.
We have to be willing to accept what's GOOD in a particular candidate, while we continue to fight against what is NOT GOOD in that candidate.
“Either we are the ones who will leave in defeat or stay and fight to regain control of our party.”
IMO, the fat lady will sing very soon. Time to pack your bags. Our RINO brother/sisters outnumber us and have a defective Liberty and Freedom gene in their DNA.
It’s Social issues which drive their conscience, not Liberty.
Thanks for the advice, Grima.
Interesting. BTTT.
LOL . . . sad, but LOL nevertheless.
Sorry.
Under no circumstance will I vote for a baby-killer.
If the”moderates” choose a baby-killer, I will not vote for him.
My soul’s more important than your party.
Can't locate the list at this moment, but I remember passing around the list of solid accomplishments of the GWB folks the first four years of his administration.
Tax cuts, rejection of Kyoto, two fabulous Supreme Court Judges, kick-butt success in Iraq and Afghan, Great free-market economy, near elimination of estate tax, etc.
Have there been some letdowns? You bet.
But GWB has done some good things that we should not dismiss out of hand.
Well, I’m sure the founders also intended the press to remain free. But no one’s forcing us to consume their twaddle.
In other words, my "vote R regardless" was in the context of this current race. I'd pick any of the Republican candidates over Hillary or Obama, the only two likely Democrat candidates.
Honestly, I suspect you would too.
And to those who say they'd stay home or vote third party or write in "Bozo the Clown", I ask this:
Yes, for the primary, we should each back the one we prefer. But in the general, sometimes one's highest priority must be voting against the Marxist lying treasonous murdering stealing felonious b**atch.
If nothing else, the prospect of two more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs should be enough to steel anyone's spine.
You have touched on what I think has been going on and will get worse. Many people - especially of the lib class - do not want to be seen as racists or sexist. Consequently they lie about their position so as not to be seen a certain way. INHO this is one of the things that causes them to be completely confused and incoherent on a position. Remember Jesse Jackson’s initial success as a presidential candidate? I think that was because many did not want to “appear” to be racist. In this race those simpletons are faced with sexism or racism and I bet it is tearing their pea brains apart. My current worst nightmare is Hillary and Obama get on the same ticket. These people will than vote for that so they can “feel” good about it.
So you would vote for Huckabee or do you have another litmus test for him?
For the record I REJECT Romney, not your support.
I would stress that the NH GOP withdrew their support from the FOX debate because they locked out Hunter and Paul.
NH GOP makes the SC GOP look like a bunch of spineless jellyfish, or pansies-take your pick.
Now I hear they won’t even give Hunter the debate tickets they promised, and he paid for by paying his money to get on the ballot.
Duncan Hunter paid $35,000.00, I am told, to get on the ballot, and yes, he is on it.
Who's "they?" The parties? They've "gotten away with" choosing their candidates for over two centuries.
Duncan Lee Hunter, who would stomp any
democrat in a free election, is hidden
from view by the DRNC and Their MSM buddies.
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.