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.
We'd call that fraud in my neck of the woods.
Huck is not my guy.
I think Huck is a conman, and disagree with most of his policies, and hate his record on fiscal issues.
However, unless he starts playing the “I am personally opposed to abortion, but...” or I see evidence that his prolife position is a lie,...
Yes, I will hold my nose and vote for a prolifer over a baby-killer. Absolutely.
A baby-killer can’t be trusted to uphold any part of the constitution.
A baby-killer will have no trouble lying, stealing, or committing any other crime against humanity.
Besides, using your own logic, we are supposed to vote for the Republican nominee, whether we agree with him on all the issues or not.
“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.
We’d call that fraud in my neck of the woods.”
I agree, and I would love to see him sue.
Every candidate in every country on Earth represents some degree of socialism. Are Hunter and Thompson campaigning on a promise to eliminate Social Security, Medicare and the Interstate Highway System?
Your first two contact are for the South Carolina Republican Party.
The parties choose their candidates, as I posted. Or didn't you get that far?
I got my ballot yesterday (mail in) so I had the privilege of voting for Duncan Hunter!
I just ignore all the talk, excluding him, and have even turned the tv off FNC. (nothing to gain by leaving it on Fox).
It's so disappointing to see how all the convervative things I relied on have now become Republican (without the conservatism) *sigh*
Some of what you write sounds real pretty but I’m sorry there is just no daylight inbetween a candidate like McCain and Hillary!. Plus, he’s rather crazy so there no way I can vote for that “R”!
” 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.”
Ummm, don’t you think you are exaggerating a bit.
If republicans elect a moderate instead of a conservative WTH do you expect us to do? Sit it out, and let a true blue liberal/socialist win???
The GOP polling was fine. It was the Hillary-stolen election results that differed from polling. You would have a better argument if you were talking about a Democrat candidate, not Hunter.
Yep.
Sitting the sideline is tantamount to saying like a child, “I didn’t get my way, so I don’t want to play”
Grow a set people...jesus.
You guys are starting to sound like the Paulistinians in other threads.
“Sorry, Jim, but I think the stakes are too high this time to afford daliances with third parties or sitting out the election. We help elect a Republican president and then hold him accountable. It just might save the Republic.”
Exactly how do you hold a GOP president accountable if your position is support the GOP regardless. Isn’t that a pretty toothless position. The same “The Survival Of The Republic” chant goes up every election cycle. In 2006 one of the bits of wisdom that was floating around was that if the Dems. took back congress they would immediately surrender in Iraq....the last time I checked even Murtha was admitting that the surge was working, so that didn’t really come to pass. The stakes in a national election are always high, but IMO complaining loudly that the GOP is going too far to the left, and then voting for the GOP right or wrong doesn’t exactly send a strong message....Reminds me of that old cliche about dad telling his bickering kids in the back seat that if they don’t quiet down he’ll turn this car around right now and go back home. Sorry, but that won’t work, or I should say it hasn’t worked yet, and at this point I’m not optimistic.
I'm not sitting on the sidelines, I just voted for my candidate!
Grow a set people...jesus.
I'm not Jesus but I figure I basically do have a set as I just voted my conscience and NOT who Sean Hannity told me to vote for!
You guys are starting to sound like the Paulistinians in other threads.
WOW! So we don't vote who YOU want us to vote for so you call us Ron Paul supporters?
Grow up and quit the name calling. You're the one pitchin' a fit and calling names because we're not voting for your guy.
“I’m not sitting on the sidelines, I just voted for my candidate!”
I was speaking of the general election.
“I’m not Jesus but I figure I basically do have a set as I just voted my conscience and NOT who Sean Hannity told me to vote for!”
Wow, and you were griping about my insults...who the hell is Hannity’s candidate anyway, Guiliani?
” WOW! So we don’t vote who YOU want us to vote for so you call us Ron Paul supporters?
Grow up and quit the name calling. You’re the one pitchin’ a fit and calling names because we’re not voting for your guy.”
Did I tell you who do vote for????? Vote for whoever the hell you want to vote for. Just don’t sit out the general, because you didn’t get your way.
Six candidates to participate in historic 2008 S.C. GOP
To leave out ANY candidate when the primaries are only beginning is an abomination. If the S.C. GOP were worth a damn, they would withdraw their sponsorship from this love fest the way the N.H. GOP did Sunday night.
Actually, if ANY of these vaunted republican candidates had a spine, THEY would withdraw from participating unless they were ALL included. None of them, to my knowledge, have made a peep in regard to this outrage, save DENNIS KUCINICH. Now that is pathetic!
What would happen if they would all simply refuse to attend unless they were all included? It could be used as an example of their desire to UNITE not DIVIDE the party. Instead, they are perfectly happy to be in the limelight, for however long it lasts and to hell with the party, a fair election process or the country.
Fact of the matter is, every republican candidate should have been making noise about these phony debates all along, especially after the CNN debacle.
I don’t see how anyone can defend this action when it affects a conservative.
Nor can I!
This is a conservative forum, not a GOP one.
No comment.....
Everyone on FR, anyone that calls themselves a conservative or an American should be outraged.
The lack thereof is most telling!
Yes, it is great that every faction, from the socialist to the most conservative is represented, but it is not leading to a "healthy debate" when the most conservative candidate is left out.
The primary objective in this election, I believe, is to keep the radical wing of the Democrat Party ... from gaining control of the White House and doing harm to our country through their social and economic experimentation.
But it is perfectly acceptable to allow the radical wing of the republican party to do harm to our country through their social and economic experimentation?
If we refuse to vote for any candidate who does not meet our conservative litmus test then we should get out and either reregister as an Independent or form a “Conservative Party”.
***Did you even read the part about how this is a conservative website and not a GOP one?
If Fred Thompson, for instance, would be nominated would we conservatives appreciate it if the moderate and liberal wing would sit out the election because their candidate didn’t win?
***Why should I address your hypotheticals if you do not address mine?
Every faction of the party is represented which leads to healthy debate
***The MOST CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE has been shut out of HEALTHY DEBATE! Didn’t you even read what I posted?
The primary objective in this election, I believe, is to keep the radical wing of the Democrat Party (is there any other?) from gaining control of the White House
***This is a conservative website, so our primary objective is to support the most conservative candidate. If there’s an objective to an election, that means there’s process in place, and that process is BROKEN if it IGNORES VOTES in favor of POLLS that were PROVEN WRONG in the FIRST PASS.
and doing harm to our country through their social and economic experimentation. To do this we must support and vote for the candidate chosen by our party no matter whether we are 100% behind them or 30%.
***You are so far off, I wonder why you’re even posting here on Free Republic.
It is dangerous and even fool-hardy to do otherwise.
***Spout your garbage on some GOP website. This is a conservative website.
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.