Florida Romney 2 Point Lead Disappears When Libertarian Is Included In the Poll!

[mascale]

One of my old friends is no longer--since last July--but he had been on the original Board of Directors of the Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party Presidential candidate, a former Governor, actually appears to be well-liked, and in abundance, and even in The South!

CNN Poll: Romney 50% – Obama 49% in Florida – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

On the Democratic Party side, Ralph Nader seems to be sitting this one out. Even Al Gore is sitting this one out. The Third Party alternatives to the major two parties all seem to be working against Romney-Ryan. In fact, even in the link: Anyone has to read down fairly far into the article to find the actual poll results of all included candidates.

The oft-cited National Polling--Gallup or Rasmussen--never seem to bring the alternative names to any kind of mention in their polling.

Surpise! Surprise! Surprise! There actually are real ballots with other people's names already on them!

In fact! They're Everywhere!!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(White Eyes Speaking Less With Tongue Like Snake: And More like Hollywood Low-Budget Flick(?)! (of Hydra Story of Cosmos of The Greeks!) After Two Billions dollars, It Does Come Down To That!)

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I think the GOP made a real mistake not reaching out to the Ron Paul camp. I know a lot of folks in Louisiana that are planning to go third party after supporting Paul in the primaries. Their vote won't change the outcome in our state, but in the swing states where the vote may be within a few percentage points you could see things get decided by the Paul supporters who walked away from the GOP in disgust.

 

[Leweman]

No other polls would take that into consideration? How bout that. I wonder what that other means then.

 

[AceRothstein]

No other polls would take that into consideration? How bout that. I wonder what that other means then.

They should list the other candidates instead of listing "Other" as a choice.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Can't be. I've been assured that libertarians are "irrelevant."

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Can't be. I've been assured that libertarians are "irrelevant."

Most of their votes are.

 

[Leweman]

No other polls would take that into consideration? How bout that. I wonder what that other means then.

They should list the other candidates instead of listing "Other" as a choice.

What difference does it make? You are either for Obama, Romney or someone else.

 

[AceRothstein]

No other polls would take that into consideration? How bout that. I wonder what that other means then.

They should list the other candidates instead of listing "Other" as a choice.

What difference does it make? You are either for Obama, Romney or someone else.

Because they have actual names and aren't listed as Other on the ballot?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Can't be. I've been assured that libertarians are "irrelevant."

Most of their votes are.

Guess we'll see.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Can't be. I've been assured that libertarians are "irrelevant."

Most of their votes are.

Guess we'll see.

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

 

[Leweman]

They should list the other candidates instead of listing "Other" as a choice.

What difference does it make? You are either for Obama, Romney or someone else.

Because they have actual names and aren't listed as Other on the ballot?

Soooo they don't realize that their candidate isn't Obama or Romney unless they mention that candidate by name? Odd

 

[mascale]

Gallup is Actually fairly blunt about it, just this year:
______________________________________________________

"Gallup periodically asks a vote preference question during presidential election years, in which interviewers read the names of all candidates who will appear on the ballot in a large number of states, as one way of measuring third-party support. These findings reflect Gallup's first such measurement in 2012. The resulting data suggest 5% of U.S. voters could vote for a third-party candidate this year, which could rise if Paul changes course and runs as an independent."

"The standard presidential preference question included in Gallup Daily tracking mentions only Obama and Romney by name and finds a consistent 1% volunteering the name of some other candidate as their choice for president. The 1% is in line with the vote for third-party candidates in recent presidential elections when no high-profile third-party candidate (like Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996, and Ralph Nader in 2000) ran."

"Prominent third-party candidates have tended to receive significantly higher support in polls taken earlier in election years than they wind up getting on Election Day. This is based on a comparison of registered voter preferences in June with the final election vote share in years when higher-profile third-party candidates were included in Gallup's presidential preference questions. In general, the candidates wound up getting a fraction of their June estimated support -- in most cases, less than half."
____________________________________

This is the famous year when Gallup decided on "Like Voter" responses polling. Anyone has to notice that "Likely Voter" responses may not be getting taken into account in the new Gallup Method!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Obama Masks reportedly doing better than Romney masks, however! Results for Super-Heroes not reported! Hmmm!)

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Most of their votes are.

Guess we'll see.

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

Well that's true of everybody, not just libertarians.

 

[Avorysuds]

Can't be. I've been assured that libertarians are "irrelevant."

Most of their votes are.

It's very possible that very soon all you Republicans find your vote is irrelevant if you go two elections without being about to win the Presidency.

Libertarian party = growing
Republican party = shrinking.

Almost no polls include GJ, when they do Mitt loses. I personally don't care about polls though.

 

[Avorysuds]

Most of their votes are.

Guess we'll see.

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

Ohio had GJ at 10% of the vote...

 

[Avorysuds]

Guess we'll see.

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

Well that's true of everybody, not just libertarians.

It's possible Gramps might catch on to that one of these days... But for the moment he wants to bitch.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Guess we'll see.

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

Ohio had GJ at 10% of the vote...

To be fair, most third party candidates poll higher the further we are away from the election. I doubt Johnson is going to get anywhere near 10% of the Ohio vote.

 

[Avorysuds]

Don't have to wait to see. If they don't live in one of the few swing states they might as well vote for Snoopy cause it won't matter.

Ohio had GJ at 10% of the vote...

To be fair, most third party candidates poll higher the further we are away from the election. I doubt Johnson is going to get anywhere near 10% of the Ohio vote.

Sure, but even 1-3% would cost Mitt that state at this point.