http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...ttle_about_paul

 

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Advertisment

A recent Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey featuring a match-up between Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul highlights one of the perils that comes from overanalyzing poll results between candidates with different levels of name recognition.

 

In that survey, Clinton held a fairly modest 48% to 38% lead. But, a careful look at the results tells us a lot about the public’s opinion of Hillary Clinton and virtually nothing about their opinion of Ron Paul.

 

Why? First, because just about everyone in the United States has an opinion of Hillary Clinton. She has been a major player on the national and international state for 15 years. Half the country has a favorable opinion of her and half holds the opposite view, but all have an opinion. Our most recent survey results show that nearly 60% of voters have a strongly held opinion about the New York Senator and former First Lady.

 

As for Ron Paul, 42% don’t know enough about him to have an opinion one way or the other. He’s one of 435 Congressman whose life is way below the radar screen for most Americans. Still, his presence in the GOP Presidential Debates has raised his profile a bit--26% now offer a favorable opinion and 32% say the opposite. But, only 16% have a strongly held opinion about Paul (7% Very Favorable, 9% Very Unfavorable).

 

A look at the crosstabs demonstrates that it is attitudes towards Clinton that are driving the numbers in this polling match-up. Among all voters, Clinton attracts 48% support. Among the voters who have never heard of Ron Paul or don’t know enough to have an opinion, guess what. Clinton attracts the exact same total--48% of the vote. So whether or not people have heard of Ron Paul as the challenger, support for Clinton doesn’t change.

 

Among the 51% who have heard of Ron Paul but don’t have a Very Favorable opinion of him, Clinton attracts 49% of the vote.

 

The only noticeable difference to be found is among that very small slice of the electorate that has a Very Favorable opinion of Paul. Seven percent (7%) of the nation’s voters fit this description and they prefer the Texas Congressman over the Democratic frontrunner by a 70% to 27% margin.

 

So, outside of a small group of avid Ron Paul fans, support for Senator Clinton is unchanged whether or not the survey respondent has ever heard of Ron Paul.

And ultimately, this is why she will win - and so will Guiliani. They are the only two people people have heard of.

 

And ultimately, this is why she will win - and so will Guiliani. They are the only two people people have heard of.

God help us all.

God help us all.

Tell me about it.

Tell me about it.

 

IMNSHO Rudy is the biggest sleaze ball, slime bucket that has declared and Hillary isn't exactly oozing integrity.

IMNSHO Rudy is the biggest sleaze ball, slime bucket that has declared and Hillary isn't exactly oozing integrity.

And both IMNSHO () are the face of modern US politics today. Again,

IMNSHO Rudy is the biggest sleaze ball, slime bucket that has declared and Hillary isn't exactly oozing integrity.

 

na, Dodd or Edwards takes that honor.

 

but i'm biased, Giuliani 2008

I don't know why anyone would vote for someone who proposed extending their term in office for six months because of a tragedy that happened two months before an election.

I don't know why anyone would vote for someone who proposed extending their term in office for six months because of a tragedy that happened two months before an election.

 

lol, nice try. like it's a HUGE deal that he offered to remain in office for an extra 6 months to help the city deal with a major terrorist attack. if he doesn't do that then you would post "he ran like a coward a mere two months after 9-11". obviously you will vote dem either way, so it's a moot point.

lol, nice try. like it's a HUGE deal that he offered to remain in office for an extra 6 months to help the city deal with a major terrorist attack. if he doesn't do that then you would post "he ran like a coward a mere two months after 9-11". obviously you will vote dem either way, so it's a moot point.

Help the city deal? How exactly did he do that? With photo ops?

Help the city deal? How exactly did he do that? With photo ops?

 

you really think thats all he did?

 

well, he sure fooled everyone i guess

 

"With time, Giuliani's legacy will be based on more than just 9/11. He left a city immeasurably better off — safer, more prosperous, more confident — than the one he had inherited eight years earlier, even with the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center at its heart. Debates about his accomplishments will continue, but the significance of his mayoralty is hard to deny."

 

Edited October 29, 200718 yr by mr_genius

 

Aren't you one of the people that dismissed the Nobel Prize when Gore won it? Now Time magazine awards are what distinguishes the great minds? I see.

Edited October 29, 200718 yr by BigSqwert

you really think thats all he did?

 

well, he sure fooled everyone i guess

That award that year was one of the biggest cop-outs in Time Magazine's history, and was a great harbinger of what we were about to see from the media the next couple years.

Aren't you one of the people that dismissed the Nobel Prize when Gore won it? Now Time magazine awards are what distinguishes the great minds? I see.

 

Hey, I was just referencing a source you would respect

 

what, you want a link to Sean Hannity's page? would that change your mind

That award that year was one of the biggest cop-outs in Time Magazine's history, and was a great harbinger of what we were about to see from the media the next couple years.

 

na, Dodd or Edwards takes that honor.

 

but i'm biased, Giuliani 2008

Dodd?

 

you really think thats all he did?

 

well, he sure fooled everyone i guess

\

 

 

 

I guess the Firemen of NY would also have an opinion, perhaps as relevant as Time Magazine.

besides, these prestigious awards are just given out to make Bush look bad.

I don't know why anyone would vote for someone who proposed extending their term in office for six months because of a tragedy that happened two months before an election.

 

Or someone doing an endaround the consitution to get a 3rd term in the White House...

Dodd?

 

yea, this guy

 

 

He is running for president as a Dem. Granted, he is polling around 0%

\

I guess the Firemen of NY would also have an opinion, perhaps as relevant as Time Magazine.

 

 

The firefighters union is supporting a Dem over Giuliani? shocking

yea, this guy

 

 

He is running for president as a Dem. Granted, he is polling around 0%

LOL

 

Yes, I know who Chris Dodd is. I am wondering why you put him in a category with Giuliani and Edwards for slime. Seemed weird to me. I hadn't recalled hearing anything of that nature about him. What have you seen or heard about him along those lines?

 

 

LOL

 

Yes, I know who Chris Dodd is. I am wondering why you put him in a category with Giuliani and Edwards for slime. Seemed weird to me. I hadn't recalled hearing anything of that nature about him. What have you seen or heard about him along those lines?

 

He talks about how he's really out for the working class and against corporate greed , but was bribed by hedge funds (by far one of his largest donors) and always returns the favor with his voting records. Thats fine if he is for hedge funds and stuff, but spare us the "I'm really out for the little guy" bs. Also his record on the Iraq war is legendary in it's contradiction. He' a total bulls***ter basically.

 

Oh, I also just saw him on Meet the Press, and he really sucked. So thats probably the main reason I put him in that group

Edited October 30, 200718 yr by mr_genius

na, Dodd or Edwards takes that honor.

 

but i'm biased, Giuliani 2008

 

Lol, Dodd, what are you worried about Duncan Hunter too?

Lol, Dodd, what are you worried about Duncan Hunter too?

 

who isn't?

who isn't?

 

outside of his wife and kids?