Quote Originally Posted by Fencewalker
I tend to side with the folks that say the polls are pretty inaccurate. For instance, traditional phone polling only call those that are (let's take the republicans) "likely republican voters" and their definition seems to be those that were registered republican and voted in the last election.

I have seen folks say that amounts to about 4-6% of republicans in 2006, most of whom voted for Bush, which is a pretty small pool to be choosing out of and would not be Paul fans anyway.

Paul's demographics seem to draw from young voters (never voted before and use cell phones more than land lines), disenfranchised voters (didn't vote in the last election) and Independents and Democrats that registered as Republicans solely to be able to vote for Dr. Paul this time around. The polls would not reflect those demographics.

As you say though, we will know shortly, won't we?
Good points. You have just outlined why I think that the phone polls underestimate RP's support in Iowa (not as much in NH).

Check out what I bolded above. That is a lot of shit to do just to vote for RP! Did some people do it? Yes, certainly. Did enough do it to make him likely to contend for a Republican nomination? I don't think so. Voting tends to be habitual -- people that have never voted are notoriously unreliable as far as turnout goes.

The big question: is RP's young, inexperienced based MOTIVATED enough to overcome all expectations? If so, if RP manages to even get 2nd, or even 3rd in Iowa, then we might actually have a RP revolution!

See, I didn't even need to insult anybody or be belligerent to get my point across. Amazing how that works Nailhead, huh?
I'm not going there anymore. But thanks for talking to me in a civil way. I like to think that people that disagree can have a civil discussion.