What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What's with Palin being included in most Republican Primary polls?

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
She's not even a candidate, and she's the only one included that isn't.

She's averaging 11% that could be going to the other candidates actually running. Why waste 11% of poll response? It's counter productive to an otherwise important function of politics and makes zero sense.
 

Valerie

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
31,521
Reaction score
7,386
Points
1,170
Probably she is going to use her leverage and throw that support behind one of the other candidates... :dunno:
 

9thIDdoc

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
7,361
Reaction score
2,640
Points
325
if she's pulling 11% she should run She'd likely get my vote.
 
OP
Paulie

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
Probably she is going to use her leverage and throw that support behind one of the other candidates... :dunno:

Yeah but that shouldn't have anything to do with conducting polls. Polls aren't to be used for gathering leverage to utilize elsewhere, they're for the candidates in the race to use for their campaigns against each other. Until she enters the race, she has no campaign and no reason to be getting any 'leverage'.
 
OP
Paulie

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
Probably she is going to use her leverage and throw that support behind one of the other candidates... :dunno:

You know damn well there will be sheep out of that 11% who mindlessly transfer their support to whoever she potentially endorses, when they could otherwise be choosing someone else independently instead.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,303
Reaction score
16,119
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Probably she is going to use her leverage and throw that support behind one of the other candidates... :dunno:

Yeah but that shouldn't have anything to do with conducting polls. Polls aren't to be used for gathering leverage to utilize elsewhere, they're for the candidates in the race to use for their campaigns against each other. Until she enters the race, she has no campaign and no reason to be getting any 'leverage'.

Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,912
Points
48
Location
My Shack
We should also inclue Jon Stewart into the polls. He is not running either.
 
OP
Paulie

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
Probably she is going to use her leverage and throw that support behind one of the other candidates... :dunno:

Yeah but that shouldn't have anything to do with conducting polls. Polls aren't to be used for gathering leverage to utilize elsewhere, they're for the candidates in the race to use for their campaigns against each other. Until she enters the race, she has no campaign and no reason to be getting any 'leverage'.

Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.
 

RadiomanATL

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
24,942
Reaction score
4,134
Points
48
Location
Not here
Yeah but that shouldn't have anything to do with conducting polls. Polls aren't to be used for gathering leverage to utilize elsewhere, they're for the candidates in the race to use for their campaigns against each other. Until she enters the race, she has no campaign and no reason to be getting any 'leverage'.

Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.

I'd vote for you Paulie.

So now you're polling at .001%
 
OP
Paulie

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.

I'd vote for you Paulie.

So now you're polling at .001%

Fuck what my advisers and handlers say, I'm rocking a blowout on the campaign trail and I'm the only candidate advocating the fist pump be added in to official military movement drill.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,303
Reaction score
16,119
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Yeah but that shouldn't have anything to do with conducting polls. Polls aren't to be used for gathering leverage to utilize elsewhere, they're for the candidates in the race to use for their campaigns against each other. Until she enters the race, she has no campaign and no reason to be getting any 'leverage'.

Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.

Well, except those guys have 1) Said they are definitively not running (I mean Christie and Ryan. I still haven't checked with "Fuck Anyone".) and 2) don't have the stature of perviously having been on a Presidential Ticket.
 

BluesMistress

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
678
Reaction score
799
Points
1,963
Location
The land of the free and home of the brave

RadiomanATL

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
24,942
Reaction score
4,134
Points
48
Location
Not here
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.

I'd vote for you Paulie.

So now you're polling at .001%

Fuck what my advisers and handlers say, I'm rocking a blowout on the campaign trail and I'm the only candidate advocating the fist pump be added in to official military movement drill.
fistpump1.png
 
OP
Paulie

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,679
Reaction score
6,300
Points
1,830
Until she absolutely says she isn't a candidate, or the filing deadlines have expired, she's still a viable candidate.

Incidently, not all polls include her and when they don't, Perry does better.

So the person who would benefit the most from a Palin Entry would be Romney, and it's no secret that Palin and Romney don't like each other.
What makes her a viable candidate? Because the media says so?

Anyone who meets the legal requirements for POTUS is a viable candidate. It's ridiculous to list official poll choices based on who hasn't said they aren't a candidate. With that logic, we might as well include Christie, Ryan, and fuck, ANYONE.

Well, except those guys have 1) Said they are definitively not running (I mean Christie and Ryan. I still haven't checked with "Fuck Anyone".) and 2) don't have the stature of perviously having been on a Presidential Ticket.
I admittedly haven't checked the status of Christie and Ryan on their decision to enter or not, but that's semantics because they were just examples, and in fact they were at one time in consideration to enter and were never included in any past polls.

And again your logic is flawed. Since when does previously being on a presidential ticket have to do with poll inclusion? That logic removes everyone from the list of choices except her.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,303
Reaction score
16,119
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Well, except those guys have 1) Said they are definitively not running (I mean Christie and Ryan. I still haven't checked with "Fuck Anyone".) and 2) don't have the stature of perviously having been on a Presidential Ticket.
I admittedly haven't checked the status of Christie and Ryan on their decision to enter or not, but that's semantics because they were just examples, and in fact they were at one time in consideration to enter and were never included in any past polls.

And again your logic is flawed. Since when does previously being on a presidential ticket have to do with poll inclusion? That logic removes everyone from the list of choices except her.

Well, it isn't semantics because the fact they've eliminated themselves from contention means there's no point in asking. Mitch Daniels was included before he decided not to run. So was Mike Huckabee. In fact, Huckabee was leading many polls. Donald Trump was included for those few weeks he decided to pull everyone's chain.

Guiliani was included until quite recently. I'm not sure why they stopped including him, even though he hasn't declared one way or the other as far as I know.

So inclusion I think is a factor of

1) Have you declared definitively if you are not running.
2) Do you have major name recognition due to being on a previous ticket, ran previously, or have the resources to run an effective campaign. So, yeah, Palin is a bigger threat than Gary Johnson or that McCotter guy, who are "declared" candidates no one pays attention to.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top