CNN TV
SCHEDULE ANCHORS & REPORTERS CONTACT US HEADLINE NEWS



December 17, 2007
Posted: 01:51 PM ET

ALT TEXT

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

“Ron Paul becomes the $6 million man.”

That’s the headline on The Politico about the Republican presidential candidate’s astounding fund-raising accomplishment yesterday.

Paul did it again — raising more than $6 million online in a single day. That follows a fund-raiser last month that brought in about $4.2 million in a single day. The campaign says it’s raised more than $18 million this quarter. This could very well mean Paul will outraise his Republican rivals for the 4th quarter and be able to fund a presence in a lot of the states voting on February 5th.

Ron Paul has the kind of grass roots organization politicians dream about. In addition to his phenomenal fund-raising abilities, mostly among small individual campaign contributors, he has a devoted following that in any given moment can almost overpower the Internet.

Any time we mention Ron Paul’s name on the Situation Room, his supporters immediately begin writing into us in droves. They’re fanatic in their devotion to him and very appreciative of any mentions we have ever given him. It’s a phenomenon unique to Dr. Paul. We talk about all the candidates all the time but we never get a response to any of the rest of them like we get to Ron Paul.

Nevertheless, most consider him a distant long-shot and he’s stuck in the single digits in most national polls.

Here’s my question to you: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million in one day, how come he’s not higher in the polls?

To see The Cafferty file Video click here

Interested to know which ones made it on air:

Doug from Sierra Madre, California writes:
Not higher in the polls? It’s because Ron Paul doesn’t appeal to most “right wingers”. Mr. Paul makes sense and tells the truth, and that just annoys most Republicans.

Carlos writes:
Because he’s not getting exposure in the mainstream media. The rise of Huckabee is a testament to this. As soon as his name started being mentioned every five seconds, his poll numbers rose. Just because Ron Paul is low in the polls doesn’t mean he shouldn’t get news coverage. Those who get to hear his message absolutely fall in love with him.

John from Keystone Heights, Florida writes:
Ron Paul isn’t near the top of the polls for one good reason: his message sucks.

Doug from Sacramento, California writes:
As a liberal Democrat, I have watched Ron Paul over the last year. I don’t understand why the media doesn’t get that he represents a very disaffected segment of the Republican Party that hasn’t had a real voice since Pat Buchanan in 1992… The Republicans operate like a massive corporation. And Ron Paul represents a shareholders’ revolt.

Lynnda writes:
I think the reason Ron Paul is no higher in the polls is because few Americans understand what Libertarianism is. It is much more in line with what our forefathers believed was important, but as a nation we have deviated so far from that original structure that today’s Americans don’t understand what it means.

J. writes:
He is not higher in polls because he is not supported by the Republican Party management — the wealthy, corporate types, the defense, oil and gas industries, etc. He seems to represent the common man who feels without a voice in the usual DC political circus.

Walter from Toledo, Ohio writes:
The reason we love Ron Paul is because he loves this country more than he loves himself.

Maybe Jack will read yours tomorrow.

To see The Cafferty File video click here

Filed under: Elections • Ron Paul


John from Carlsbad, CA   December 17th, 2007 2:00 pm ET

He is proving it takes more than money to be a presidential candidate. In order to get the nomination from either party, you need to pander to the base. He is not doing that. He is also not a good communicator. In the debates and in his campaign he comes across as the “crazy old uncle” nobody listens to. If he gets a new campaign staff that can teach him tone of voice, body language and presentation skills he might have a chance as an independent. Both parties are too entrenched to nominate anyone from the middle. Sad but true.

Bobby Dennis   December 17th, 2007 2:05 pm ET

He may be low in the polls due to every time reluctant news stations report on Dr. Paul’s success they preface the good news with “He Can’t Win”. Is it just me or does it seem like the rest of the news anchors read that every time they mention him.

Cafferty you are the exception. You must have kept your freedom when you signed your contract with CNN.

Did I mention they also like to ask if he will run as a 3rd party; I don’t know if Wolf can ask that question any more than he does? Seems like another way to discredit him.

Nick W.   December 17th, 2007 2:07 pm ET

Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls because pollsters call likely primary voters. Many of the Ron Paul supporters I know have been apathetic to politics and have never voted in a primary before. In addition, Paul has more support from younger voters than the other Republican candidates and many of these people only use mobile phones; the pollsters only call land lines. Come election time, people will be in for a shock…

Lissa Nix   December 17th, 2007 2:08 pm ET

Because many times, Dr. Paul’s name is not included on the polls.

Jeff K.   December 17th, 2007 2:09 pm ET

Because most people polled are registered Dems and Republicans. The place where a Ron Paul’s strength lies is with Independents and the “American Underground Voters” (the ones that don’t tell anyone what they are truly thinking but always end up creating the questions at the end of an election among the media-icons like “Why do you think it turned out the way it did? None of the polls showed this happening”) . Americans as a whole are just genuinely tired of all the garbage that has become the political process in this country and all the trash that is given us after the election that we have to wade through just to get to the next election. Ron Paul seems like someone who will tell it like it is whether you like it or not and that’s what we need. We have had enough of the “hide and seek” style administrations, the present one being the epitomy of hide and seek.

James   December 17th, 2007 2:09 pm ET

Because the polls are the last buffer between perception and reality. Paul has a lot of money and ranks low in the polls, he gets no media attention. Huckabee has no money, ranks high in the polls, and turns the news into the Huckabee show. The polls are a way to control reality by controlling perception. I thought everybody knew this.

Alec Yeager   December 17th, 2007 2:10 pm ET

Ron Paul attracts many younger voters who have either switched party affiliation to vote for him in this election (like myself) or who have never voted before. Pollsters typically call only registered Republicans who have voted in previous primary races, and they typically do not call cell phones which leaves out a lot of people under 30 who use cell phones exclusively. Ron Paul’s support is being drastically underrated.

Kyle   December 17th, 2007 2:13 pm ET

The “polls” aren’t as indicative as people like to believe. A donation, or “putting of money where the mouth is” is far more likely to indicate voting support. Look at the numbers of donors (100,000+) and the average donation amount: $50.00. The people across the nation are supporting this guy, not the corporations. The media needs to stop all the hype on the “polls”. They weren’t too accurate during the 2004 election cycle’s primaries, and they probably aren’t now.

Brian Jones   December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET

If the polls were updated to reflect the fact that a LOT of voters use cell phones and not landlines they would come out different.

I dare you to put a poll up on your website and see who comees out the winner.

nick piccard   December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET

Answer: Who says he won’t be? In fact, I am absolutely positive he will have significantly higher poll numbers. The more they try to suppress the voice of liberty and patriotism, the louder we will shout. And we will be heard across the world.

Jeff   December 17th, 2007 2:14 pm ET

Why? He is getting no real media coverage equivalent to his base. Scientific polls often don’t reach students and others who may be first time voters - or those who have never voted Republican. He also doesn’t get much “love” in the media, who continue to add backhanded comments in every report, ex. “He has no chance”. If Romney, Obama, etc. had raised this amount of money, it would be front page news.

Oliver Reis   December 17th, 2007 2:15 pm ET

Hello Mr. Cafferty,

being a German citizen, I have the strong impression that
the Media pretty much ignores Ron Paul and the successes
he and the Grassroots achieve. His name is not out there on
a level that other candidates WITHOUT any significant Grass-
roots have.

So let me thank you for your fair coverage about Ron Paul, it’s
a very delighting experience to see that some parts of the US-
Media care about the People rather than the editing room Memos,
thank you very much for that.

Sincerely,
Oliver Reis, Germany

John   December 17th, 2007 2:16 pm ET

The mainstream media continually tries to discredit and marginalize the only candidate that truely represents THE PEOPLE. It is not in the interest of the current administration’s agenda to support a candidate that would truely change the status quo. Ron Paul is one of the only candidates that would REALLY end the War in Iraq. Instead, the media continues to promote candidates like Giuliani and Clinton, who will continue the war and corruption, in the name of Corporate America.

The reason Ron Paul is such a powerful force on the internet, is because the internet isn’t controlled and censored, like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and other mainstream media outlets are.

falseflagop   December 17th, 2007 2:16 pm ET

Fact of the matter, Jack, he is polling way higher than the so-called (independent polls). Someone recently got a call to vote in a GOP poll, and guess what RON PAUL’S name was not even included (He was excluded from the poll question). I think I see a problem arising, don’t you Jack?

Brian   December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET

He set the single day record for primary campaign fundraising, besting the mark set by John Kerry AFTER he won the Democratic nomination and you are asking us why your polling methods don’t register the support he has?

You are the journalist, do some work and figure it out. You know like reporting.

Michael   December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET

You must not mean straw polls or text polls, Ron Paul always places well in those polls. Nobody has called me to be part of a poll. Just who are they calling in these polls?

The Answer:
They call people who voted republican last election. They are polling those most likely to NOT vote for Paul. Like many Ron Paul supporters I have never voted for a candidate and never contributed to a campaign. The polls are flawed in many ways.

Chris Rhoades   December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET

In many polls the requirements for selection is being a likely Republican voter with a landline. It is defined as someone who voted Republican (Bush) in the 2004 election. I am a Republican but voted 3rd party on principle last election and I only have a cell phone so I wouldn’t get polled.

Donors are also people who have been disaffected from politics, young first-time voters, Constitution Party, Libertarian, Independent, and yes disgruntled Democrats who realize that he would end the war.

The big story on the fundraising is that is averages out to around $100 per donor. In other words, the numbers are corporate, lobbyist, bundlers but average American patriots.

Time will tell if the polls are right. Looking forward to January!

Rick   December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET

If Dr. Paul had one half of the free media coverage of the “usual suspects”, he’d already be running away with this thing. By every other objective measure Ron Paul is king.

Most Straw Poll wins - check
Most candidate signs - check
Most meetup groups/members - check
Most online poll wins - check
Most attendance at rally - check
Most money - check that one today

I have never been one of those conspiracy minded folks, but I may have to reevaluate that after this election cycle. The Republican machine should be trumpeting this huge news of beating Kerry (D)’s fundraising record - especially considering how broke the GOP is.

karpodiem   December 17th, 2007 2:17 pm ET

Answer: Who says he won’t have higher numbers? The media’s prejudice against Ron Paul today is outrageous. The more you try to silence the liberty and patriotism we promote, the louder we will shout. All of America will hear us very soon, and we are beginning to outnumber you.

Matt Myers   December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET

The answer to your question…..

Why isn’t Ron Paul higher in the polls?

Because there is a concerted conspiracy by the special interests and powerful, wealthy people who think they alone can decide who will be the next president of the USA.

60% of Americans don’t trust the polls apparently………….and I’m certainly among that 60% who do not trust the mainstream media or the people conducting the polling to run a fair and honest election. They will do everything in their power to prevent Ron Paul getting the attention he so justly deserves.

Jeremy   December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET

Ron Paul is not showing well in the polls because the polls are conducted by land-line telephone, and only with people who have voted republican in the past. The vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are younger independents who have never shown an interest in politics until now. Also most of the younger people who support him do not have land-line phone, as most people these days just have a cellular phone line. How can the mainstream media keep ignoring a candidate that can pull in $6 Million dollars in a single day without even organizing it with his own campaign? I hope you aren’t the only journalist who digs deeper into this story, because sadly that is likely what will happen.

Thomas M.   December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET

Because the polls don’t include him in the polling. Show us one that does and he will win it guarantee. And we will all only vote once.

Jake Beischlag   December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET

Hello Jack:

You can almost feel the winds of change stirring for this upcoming election. I have never seen or heard of such a strong grassroots support for any Presidential candidate in history. Ron Paul will turn the political system in America upside down with his message of Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity. The reason Dr. Paul is not higher in the polls is simple: the media itself is damaging the democratic process, the mainstream media’s bias is overwhelming and is becoming so blatant to many. America is waking up, the sleeping giant, the voting public, has been stirred - the final result will be the election of Ron Paul for President in 2008.

Jason Del Wraa   December 17th, 2007 2:18 pm ET

These polls only take into account republicans who were registered in 2004, while completely overlooking disenfranchised republicans and democrats, independents, libertarians and those who’ve never voted before.

Voter turnout in the primaries is typically around 10-15% of registered voters.
I’m quite confident that the Ron Paul Revolution will set a record for turnout in the primaries, just as it has continued to set and beat fundraising records.

Troy   December 17th, 2007 2:19 pm ET

Because the polls are no good. The polls are biased against. There is evidence of this. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself why Huckabee has surged in the polls and hasn’t raised anywhere remotely close to the money that Ron Paul has.Then ask yourself which is a better measure of support, random people answering a phone poll or cold hard cash.

Cafferty for VP.

Michael   December 17th, 2007 2:19 pm ET

It’s quite simple Jack,
Anyone with a brain knows the Mainstream media ignores him.
A better question would be; How did Ron Paul receive 6 million dollars in cold hard cash in a single day, and over 18 million dollars so far this quarter from ordinary people, with so little mainstream media attention?

falseflagop   December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET

If he is polling so low why are local pundits in New Hampshire asking is RON PAUL is a a bigtime realtor ? I guess all those signs acroos the whole state would make even me wonder.

Rafik Mikhael   December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET

Polls are a scientific tool to reach an unscientific result.

The deception begins when you assume (mistakenly) that the expectation of people to actually take the trouble and go on a winter day to vote for their favorite candidate is equal among all campaigns. With this assumption it make sense that surveying people’s opionions would give an indicator as to the expected result of the actual vote. But the fact is, supporters are not equally enthusiast about their candidates. Many supporters poll for a candidate cause he is the one they see everyday on TV, not because they are truly enthusiast about his message. Come voting day, you probably wouldn’t take the trouble to wake up and head for the booth unless you really really believe in someone’s message, no matter how many times you see him on TV.

You want a more scientific way to count the votes apriori? find a way to measure not only the size of the support, but the depth of it!!

Eric Gerhardt   December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET

Jack I have 4 calls in the last 2 months from the telephone pollers, not one has included Ron Paul in their Poll. The polls just arent accurate! Not only that, one of the automated polls that called me told me to “press 6 for other.” When i pressed 6 it told me “You will no longer recieve calls from this polling agency.”

The polls just arent Accurate!

Brett   December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET

Jack,

Why? How about the fact that our Mainstream Media trys its best to dictate the “best” choice of candidates for America by neglecting the others. Call me naive but I thought the media was supposed to protect their countrymen from this klnd of manipulation……. and if that doesnt do it for you then it at least shows how far we have strayed from the intentions of our founding fathers. *hint* Ron Paul is a strict Constitutionalist…

nick piccard   December 17th, 2007 2:20 pm ET

One thing is for sure, it isn’t lack of support. Perhaps the better question is: Why don’t polls properly reflect real-life support.

Mike Kaniut   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Simply a matter of polling techniques. Polls ask “likely” voters who they will vote for. Ron Paul has a very strong following is the normally no-show voters. This includes college aged voters, and the 40-50 percent that historically haven’t been voting as a result of becoming apathetic to politics. Ron Paul has energized these lost pieces of the democratic process, and will be reaping the benefits come the primaries. I believe he has a very legitimate chance at unseating several of the candidates and getting a respectable 2nd place or winning the nomination. But all is speculation until January.

ALLEN   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Because the polls are rigged!

Terry O'Flaherty   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Jack
I dont believe Ron Paul has surrounded himself with the right advisors that can get him the exposure he so desperately needs. If you ask 10 people who Ron Paul is maybe you will get one who knows. At this point you have to ask is the money he has raised being spent in the right places ?

Dan Teesdale   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Jack, polls should mean very little to us. The key to the primaries is to vote for who you feel matches your beliefs the most. I believe it is very, very dangerous when we begin to rely and vote based on poll results. These poll results have been proven to be easily manipulated, and when we rely on them we are giving up our democracy. Despite this manipulation, I feel Ron Paul will have great turnouts in Iowa and New Hampshire. Then, Jack, we will see the rEVOLution!

mariahussain   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Ron Paul is relying on a viral marketing campaign which takes time to become effective. Not everyone is tuned into google. Many people haven’t heard of Ron Paul or have been influenced by the media smear campaign. The combination of media smears and media blackouts, and the way he was treated in the debates, give the impression that he is the unwanted guest and does not help him come across well to the audience. On the other hand, the passive participation of the poll-takers may not result in votes. Ron Paul advocates will definitely vote. It will be interesting to see how far Ron Paul can get without any help from America’s thought police, the Israel Lobby and its media arms.

Robert Nash   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

Come on Jack… Do you really have to ask?

Ron Paul is not polling higher for the same reason the NAU is “non-existent”.

BTW, Ron Paul Supporters really like you! Please keep up the good work!

Kent   December 17th, 2007 2:21 pm ET

That’s easy. He’s been censored. To this day, he’s often simply not even listed as an option in polls. Which is understandable considering he’s a true threat to the established political order in Washington.

Think about it… he had over 58,000 people contribute hard earned money to him on just ONE day. Nobody’s ever gotten that kind of numbers before. Does anyone really believe he gets all those people to send him money, and none of them is going to vote him?

Be prepared to see stunning numbers in the Iowa and New Hampshire votes. Finally, Dr. Paul’s true support will be witnessed in a way that no one can supress.
BTW, Welcome to The Revolution.

Eric Gerhardt   December 17th, 2007 2:22 pm ET

Mr. Cafferty, I got engaged on December 16th to coincide with Dr. Pauls Tea Party Bomb and im wondering if it was a good idea now.

The Boston Tea Party stood for freedom, and I just gave that right up!

Jesse   December 17th, 2007 2:22 pm ET

He has done extremely well in many of the straw polls taken around the country. Where he has struggled so far is in the “traditional” polls, many times made up of registered Republicans who voted in a previous primary. I would not expect him to do well in that forum, because that is not his base.

Up until this past weekend, the Paul campaign has not had the money to go on the offensive and attempt to reach the mainstream voter. They do now, however, so I anticipate a full out media blitz in IA and NH leading up to the primaries. Double digit results in those primaries is a great goal.

Mr. Walker   December 17th, 2007 2:24 pm ET

Maybe if the polls showed more people who would actually vote in the primaries instead of 500 “random” people, he would actually be leading. Most supporters have never voted before or they switched parties to Republican.

Craig Royce   December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET

What do you mean jack? he’s won almost all the straw polls. If you’re asking why he doesnt win telephone polls of likely republican voters the answer is quite simple. His message has created NEW likely republican voters and nobody is calling us. when they do call a paul supporter he’s in the “other” category. Add that to the virtual media blackout and rise of cell only phone users and you have highly inaccurate telephone polls.

Bob Rooks   December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET

No one’s asked me. The polls I’ve read about either leave him out, lump him with “other,” or produce the results that the pollster was paid to achieve. The “polls” seem designed not to ASK what we believe, but to TELL us what we should believe.

Marc Lysne   December 17th, 2007 2:25 pm ET

Most of the mainstream media is attempting to ignore Ron Paul. We have these ‘celebrity’ candidates that people seem to identify with, until that is, they hear what Dr. Paul has to say, and what he believes in.

Give it time and Mr. Paul will be very high in the polls. All the other candidates have too much baggage to even compete with the man.

Diana Nickel   December 17th, 2007 2:26 pm ET

I believe part of it is because he will not carry forward the agenda of the North American Union and will actually work to return ownership of the country to the people. Since we aren’t allowed to acknowledge the end of American sovereignty in the MSM, how on earth could we expect the MSM to give fair air time to a man that would not only talk about it but fight to reverse it? He is left out of polls and marginalized to an unbelieveably obvious degree by the MSM. It’s almost as if each organization has received a script and marching orders. If Ron Paul got the attention that he has earned, (like the attention Huckabee gets that hasn’t been earned)I’d bet you 6.2 million dollars he’d be sitting on top of the polls.

Jonathan   December 17th, 2007 2:26 pm ET

The national polls target likely primary goers. However, likely primary goers are considered to be those who went to the primaries in the last election cycle. This excludes at least two-thirds of all Ron Paul supporters.

If you want to see who is going to be at the primaries and how they will vote, look at the straw polls.

Ron Paul supporters will drive from one side of their state to the other side of their state to vote for Ron Paul in a straw poll, and the results are obvious. Ron Paul has won, that’s first place, over 50% of all straw polls nation wide.

This fact alone dismisses the idea that Ron Paul supporters are only on the internet, and really it makes supporters of other candidates look lazy in comparison.

Johnathan Stromboli   December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET

Dr. Paul has a very active support base, with many of his followers believing in the campaign ‘An American Hope” to such an extent that they donate the maximum amount allowed for an individual. The least amount of supporters he can have is roughly 18 million divided by the max (being 2300) donation. We get roughly 7826.5, which makes sense, because his average follower is 1.5 the weight of an average American.

Erin Moore   December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET

The people who are polled are “likely” republican primary voters. Many of his Quarter 4 donors have never voted in a primary election, and therefore will not be contacted for polling purposes. Also, many of us have only cell phones as 24% of Americans do now. These lines are not called for polling purposes. Hundrens of thousands have donated. We are passionate and we will vote. Call us.

Terry   December 17th, 2007 2:28 pm ET

Depends on which poll you are talking about. Do you mean the so-called scientific polls where the GOP party refuses to even name Ron Paul as a choice of candidates on the poll? Do you mean the poll that doesn’t name Ron Paul as a choice but his numbers and his supporter’s are forced to either choose “other” or “undecided” for lack of other options? Or do you mean a poll that only polls Republicans that voted Republican in 2004 which is a very poor reflection of his support? As a person who is very familiar with who is supporting Ron Paul, the real numbers are reflected in a cross section of Americans who are changing parties just for him. Independants, Democrats, Libertarians, Republicans, people who have never even voted before, and everything else you can imagine. A poll of card carrying Republicans, rarely even given the choice of Ron Paul as an option, is a pathetic reflection of his support. The polls are not a reflection of someone’s popularity, it’s just another tool of the neocons to manipulate people to tell them who to vote for.

Don’t believe me? Feel free to request the recording one Ron Paul supporter made while being polled a few weeks back. No Ron Paul option and when the person choose “other”, the recording said thanks and told them they would be removed from the calling list. In other words they aren’t interested in polling people who choose Ron Paul. And there are many reports from Ron Paul supporter’s of similar shenangians.

Joshua Workman   December 17th, 2007 2:29 pm ET

These “polls” that show Dr. Paul as barely registering are among likely caucus go’ers, who voted in the Republican Primary last time and have land line telephones. Most pollsters neglect to even mention Dr. Paul as an option. They do not take into account cell phone users or first time Republican voters.

Mr. Cafferty, I believe a better, more honest, question would be: How is a man who raised $6 million in one day, has his own blimp(payed for by grassroots), and thousands of UNPAID supports and volunteers that have “rain, sleet, or snow” dedication, still considered a long-shot, fringe candidate by the media?

The bias that many of the media outlets have gone through to suppress Dr. Paul’s success can be seen just by a simple YouTube search. Are we to believe that when the 4th Quarter Campaign Finance Reports come out the headlines will read “Romney finishes 2nd in fundraising” as opposed to “Ron Paul blows all other GOP Candidates out of the water with a $20 million 4th Quarter!”

Scott   December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET

ron paul is common folk, the one person that washington didn’t change. that just isn’t news worthy, no profit in giveing equal time the canadates. besides he looks too much like jack cafferty, and one sex symbol is all cnn can handle at a time.
scott

Greg Dunbar   December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET

The answer is a simple one. The polls are polling only individuals that voted republican in the last election. That makes up a very small minority of real voters in this upcoming election, since after Bush, many jumped ship.

Ron Paul draws a lot of his support not only from Republicans but also from Independants and Democrats who switched over from their parties and have never voted Republican before. Those voters are not included in the polls.

Does Ron Paul have a chance though? Well, history often repeats itself. At this time in 2003, John Kerry was actually polling slightly LESS than what Ron Paul is polling now - but he still went on to win the nomination. That right there, is pretty much proof that the polls cannot be taken seriously this early into the game.

Justin Stout   December 17th, 2007 2:30 pm ET

Hi Jack,
First of all, Ron Paul’s straw poll numbers and online poll numbers are higher than any other candidate. Secondly, the national polls are almost always proven wrong on primary election day. Ron Paul is receiving more support from college students than any other candidate, and they are not contacted for these polls. Ron Paul is also receiving more support from Independents, Libertarians, and Democrats than any other Republican candidate, but those individuals are also not contacted for the phone polls. Ron Paul is receiving more support from people who have never voted before, and those people are also not called for these phone surveys.
Hopefully enough people will wake up and not let these “national polls” decide for them who should be our next president.

Jonathon Cohen   December 17th, 2007 2:31 pm ET

http://thecaseforronpaul.com/default.aspx

#1 in majority of straw polls,
#1 in debate polls,
#1 in web traffic,

The polls conducted by main stream media are of usually less than a 1000 people and are of voters who already voted in the last primary and Ron Paul’s audience is mainly of new Republican voters. The polls conducted online have a majority win for Ron Paul. He has the most meet-up groups.

Now that he has more money, and is willing to spend that money on advertising on major networks, it is surprising that the main stream media still does not recognize Ron Paul as a leading candidate.

The main stream polls were not relative to the winnings of the Democratic primary in Iowa for John Kerry and John Edwards. I would think that the main stream media would have learned by now that these polls are not absolute. You need other data to really see that Ron Paul is going to win this primary.

Luis Gomez   December 17th, 2007 2:31 pm ET

Simple. Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because he has never received a fair shake from the media.

The vermin that call themselves “journalists” and “reporters” have been attempting to marginalize him from day one, always going out of their way to label him a fringe candidate, a nut, an extremist, a long-shot, etc… It has become blatantly obvious that the mainstream media has no interest in informing the public. Rather, their interest lies in skewing public opinion to favor those candidates they annoint as being ‘viable.’ A more interesting poll would be: How many Americans actually agree with any of the garbage spewing from the vile fountain of the media???

Thanks Jack, and keep up the good work!

paulforronpaul   December 17th, 2007 2:32 pm ET

Some of the reasons why Ron Paul doesn’t do better in the polls is because they are doing landline polls of “likely primary voters.” These numbers are taken from those who voted in the last republican primary. In the last Republican primary George Bush ran unopposed, resulting in a voter turnout of about 6%. Among that 6% voter turnout, every single one of them voted for George Bush, and these are the people being polled. Since Paul’s views on virtually everything are diametrically opposed to Bush’s, it’s no surprise he doesn’t do well in this demographic. But in 48 Republican straw polls where people must actually physically appear and pay money for the privilege of casting their vote, Ron Paul has placed first, second, or third in 41 across the nation. Excluded from land line polls are people who do not have land lines, disgruntled Democrats who have crossed over to Paul, college students who make up a large percentage of his support base but have never voted before, and folks who did not vote in the last primary because there was no choice, what with Bush running unopposed. Additionally, he was virtually every single poll following a debate be it online or via cell phone text message. Note that those who text message would not be included in the landline polls.

Ed   December 17th, 2007 2:32 pm ET

The same reason why Ron Paul has won 50% of national straw polls and the National Presidential Caucus (http://www.nationalcaucus.com/results) for both Republican and Open voters. Or outside of each debate how Ron Paul supporters dwarf everyone else’s. The Polling system is flawed when you have people like Frank Luntz asking questions and skewing the votes towards their pre-chosen candidate. The main stream media has already chosen it’s candidates, they’ve already decided who you should vote for.

James   December 17th, 2007 2:33 pm ET

There are many reasons. For one, to be able to vote on someone in a poll their name has to actually show up in the poll as an option. In many phone polls his name just isn’t present.

Another reason is the fact that the polling system is flawed in that it doesn’t consider first time voters, voters that have changed parties, and voters that didn’t participate in the Bush elections (and how can anyone blame them for that). This is where Ron Paul’s votes will come from and they aren’t even being asked.

Finally, the polling system is showing its age by relying on land line based phones in a time where people have internet-based and cell phones.

Jon Searles   December 17th, 2007 2:33 pm ET

It’s simple Jack. Millions of supporters can go online whenever they want and make their voices heard by donating. On the other hand, I don’t know a single fellow Ron Paul supporter who has ever had the opportunity to participate in these so called scientific polls.

I think Pollster Frank Luntz explains why Ron Paul is not polling higher very clearly in these excerpts from an interview made famous by Penn and Teller.

“The key in survey research is to ask questions that people care about the answers and to ask the question in a way that you get the right answer…”

“…What you will find is that virtually the same question just a single change of wording you’ll get a very different reaction in terms of how they think and how they feel.”

In short Jack, the polls tell us what the sponsor wants us to hear. It has always been that way and will always be that way. I can only hope that one day the news outlets who report these polls will grow a conscience and restore some credibility to the word “news”.

Tim   December 17th, 2007 2:34 pm ET

Jack,
Like many others, the real question is why the polls fail to produce reliable numbers. It isn’t just Dr Paul’s numbers that are so off. How can the media’s chosen candidates have such varied numbers in the same days if the polls are ‘accurate’. Why is this the first election cycle in my 35 year memory that I can not remember the straw polls being important and covered? Instead, it is the polls that pick who they call, can’t tilt question to elicit specific responses, and then produce the results they want. There are specific polls that have put the media darlings as options 1-5. Option 6 is supposed to be for Other and Option 7 is to remove yourself. Answering 6…Removes you from the list. They appear to have their results before they get started and create the questions to ‘prove’ it.

Timothy Helms   December 17th, 2007 2:34 pm ET

Three reasons:

1. Voters aren’t concerned with educating themselves on the issues. They’re content with gut reactions and scared off by big, misconstrued statements like “Ron Paul wants to abolish the Department of Education.” I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard this translated back to me as “Ron Paul wants to remove public education.”

2. Big media caters to American laze. The point of these ‘money-bombs’ is to garner support, to get people interested. While you do report the total earnings, you further say “He can’t win.” It’s time CNN, FOX, and the big three realized how much control their opinions have over the mindless masses. Please, stick to the facts.

3. Polls only account for registered republicans. Ron Paul’s appeal is much, much broader than this. He will outvote McCain, Thompson and Giuliani will place top 3 in Iowa. Hell, he may even win if the weather is bad.

Dave A.   December 17th, 2007 2:35 pm ET

Perhaps the question should be: If Dr. Paul is so low in the “polls”, how can he raise more than $6 million in one day?

Joseph Swenson   December 17th, 2007 2:36 pm ET

Telephone polling is an antiquated technology that died with era of the cellphone. I think 2008 will prove this at the ballot box.

Christopher F. Dillard   December 17th, 2007 2:36 pm ET

Whether its biased polling techniques that exclude his name, registers of republican voters from the last presidential primary where George Bush ran unopposed, or the marginalization of Ron Paul’s campaign by the mainstream media, the real reasons for the low polling numbers become evident with some research. Check out the straw poll results at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/ to see for yourself how widespread the support really is. The message of Freedom and Liberty is an inclusive one, and it’s time to send the message, that “We, the People” want our Republic back. Quite frankly, there is no other candidate that I would trust at the helm to steer us back onto a Constitutional path.

Anthony   December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET

Its very hard to move up in the polls if your name is not on the list. When I was polled Ron Paul was not even on the list to chose from. Here in Tennessee all I’ve seen is Ron Paul signs! “EVERYWHERE” The people are getting their news from the internet now! You are losing your control!!! Oh just thought you should know I’m 48 not 17!

Monika Holbein   December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET

The reason why Ron Paul’s support is not displayed accurately in the Polls is that he has a lot of young supporters and also supporters that have not voted in recent years due to frustration with the current system.
It is also very difficult for a candidate to gain mainstream momentum if the mainstream media does not report on him. There is no way that the people of the US can make an informed decision if the media does not present them with all of their options equally.

Jeff Scott   December 17th, 2007 2:37 pm ET

I know this will never make the air but it’s because I speak the truth and I can’t say anything other than the truth. There have been straw polls cancelled because of the amount of people who show up to support Ron Paul in cities (shame on the GOP). There are many polls that don’t even list Ron Paul. There are many polls that are taken as gospel, but were taken of around 500 people who are ‘likely voters’. We’re told that straw polls don’t matter anymore. We’re told that money raised doesn’t matter anymore. We’re told that momentum doesn’t matter anymore. We’re even told that the size of a campaign doesn’t matter anymore. What are we left with? We’re left to depend on polls hich are generated by bias media and pollsters with an agenda. The fact is Ron Paul stands against the power structure which both parties thrive and neither the media or the political system are giving him a fair shake.

Jason   December 17th, 2007 2:38 pm ET

It’s kind of hard to get higher in the polls when you are not included in the poll! The mainstream media is backfiring, they keep ignoring Ron Paul and more Americans are realizing it. It’s just firing up more people to push for change. Who gets more money from the military? Who wins most of the straw polls? Who has more public support? Who has a blimp? I’ll let you take a guess…

RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008!

Mark Weatherley   December 17th, 2007 2:38 pm ET

1.) The “mainstream” media practically ignores him. The reasons for this are plenty but pretty much boil down to the fact Ron Paul will upset the Status Quo.

2.) The lack of name recognition due to the media blackout

And to top it all off..

3.) Most of the polls don’t even mention him as a choice.

A true travesty for freedom loving America. The media has alot to answer for!

M. Weatherley
Concerned (conservative) citizen.

Derek   December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET

I believe it could be because the media has already chosen the frontrunners. Although they have some legitimate support I feel we sometimes don’t fully support democracy in this country. Ron Paul has had some coverage but he clearly deserves more. Also if you check you will see that Ron Paul gained a significant amount of the money from NH residents which shows he might have some new numbers during the New Hampshire Primary.

Henry   December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET

Jack,

He needs to be in all the polls to show up higher in the polls, far too often his name is not even mentioned as a choice, but rather as “other”. That coupled with the fact that in these day’s the media chooses our leaders.

Thank you,
Henry
Jacksonville, FL

Jess Fields   December 17th, 2007 2:39 pm ET

Ron Paul is the wildcard in this race for a good reason. He is the only Republican candidate bringing new voters into the party. His appeal among America’s youth and the third-party voters simply cannot be tested in conventional polls. The only sure test of his support will come on January 3rd. Then, we’ll see if Dr. Paul’s Revolution is for real or not. I’m certainly along for the ride.

Steve Duff   December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET

Several reasons. Some polls don’t mention Ron Paul’s name, and if the respondent (such as happened to a local Paul supporter I know) chooses “Other”, they are told they are being removed from the call list. Also, pollsters are calling voting participants of prior Republican primaries. Much of Paul’s support comes from first time voters, disenfranchised voters who haven’t cast a vote in years, and people changing their voter registration from Democrat. So the Paul supporters are not being called. There are many other reasons which demonstrate the un-scientific nature of polls. You can rig a poll to show a Ham Sandwich in the lead if you ask the right questions. Thanks Jack for your unbiased reporting of Dr. Paul’s campaign. Keep up the good work!

john   December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET

Two reasons he’s not higher in the polls; first many Ron Paul supporters do not get called. They don’t have traditional telephones, when they communicate it’s on cell phones or through internet social networks. Second, when supporters do get called Ron Paul’s non-traditional message may cause false negative responses very much like the false positive responses motivated by a political correctness decorum when voters are queried about the gender, race or religion of a candidate.

Daniel Frazier   December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET

It’s simple, Jack. Most Ron Paul supporters are getting involved politically for the first time and and weren’t previously registered with any party. Notice how the polls usually say something along the lines of “In a poll of likely Republican voters…”? The answer to your question is that Ron Paul’s supporters aren’t being asked to participate in the offline polls. Online is a different story, as I’m sure you’ve noticed.

Cyrus Etemadi   December 17th, 2007 2:40 pm ET

Because a huge majority of the American citizens get their information from a Media that ignores Ron Paul’s rEVOLution to this day, thus they are unaware of the movement. So I hope you, Mr. Jack Cafferty, have an answer to this question: If Ron Paul can raise more than $6 million via an “uncontrolled” news resource such as the Internet, how come your corporation never treats him and his supporters with the respect that they deserve? We funded a Ron Paul Blimp so that he gets recognition because we have lost faith in the Media.

Suhayb   December 17th, 2007 2:41 pm ET

Jack,
I think you realize that the polls severely underestimate the support Paul has. Ron Paul has raised as much, if not more, than the “frontrunners” have in the past fundraising quarters. It should also be noted that these millions come from thousands of small donations. If the media continues to ignore the Paul campaign and put it aside in the quirky and odd news section, so be it. I wonder what they will be saying when Ron Paul is suddenly the Republican nominee. The media needs to wake up, and I’m glad that you are leading the way Jack.

Kevin   December 17th, 2007 2:42 pm ET

Jack, Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because respondents to voter polls are more mainstreamed and consistent Republican voters. Paul, with his message of freedom and liberty, has attracted a wide array of Americans who in the past have been disenfranchised by politics. This honest and humble man haa given people something to chear about: a better future. Now, it has turned into a movement, a Revolution. And Just because it hasn’t reached these “scientific polls” doesn’t mean it won’t reach the voting booths.

Sophie Laurence   December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET

It depends on what poll you’re referring to, Jack. If you’re referring to polls which involve random calls to past primary voters who have landline phones and time to answer a structured phone survey which only until recently included Ron Paul among the options, then yes, Ron Paul isn’t higher in the polls. If you’re referring to straw polls and post-debate polls, then you’re mistaken. He’s won more straw polls around the country than any other candidate and has finished in the top three in the vast majority of them. He’s won text polls, radio polls, web polls — you name it. Only when the polls have been conducted in an open and fair manner has Ron Paul garnered higher percentages.

Christopher Deal   December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET

Well Jack it can be sumed up in one phrase “Human Error”

Now let me elaborate, Polling companies have stated that when polling they are calling republicans that voted in the last primary. That was four years ago and alot of people have since turned 18 who they are not polling. Second they only call landlines which being in the automotive sales industry I know not alot of people have/answer landlines especially with the invention of caller id. These polls also do not include independats or 3rd parties or democrats like myself that registered republican just for the good Dr Money Bags.

The worst reason which really pains me to know is the fact that Ron Paul isn’t even a choice. If you go on youtube and do a search for republican phone polling you will find a video with audio of a poller calling and the only choices you have are the Media elected(ie Mitt Romney, “Tax Hike” Mike Huckaby, Rudy “9/11″ Ghouliani, and John McCain/Thompson) And then you get the option of OTHER

I didn’t know John Other was running?!?

Sadly our process for choosing a president has been reduced to a popularuty contest similar to that at a Home Coming Prom to choose the Homecoming King/Queen.

Aside from the fact that the Mainstream media promises that Dr Paul is a kook, fringe, longshot, no chance, waste of vote, 3rd party and any other disparraging titles that they want to give him.

I’m deeply discouraged in the American Way. We now disregard policy and position and in place judge a candidate based on some of the “characters” that may support his policies and positions.

What has America Become?? That should be the question of the hour.

Thank you for considering my comments
A concerned Patriot
Christopher Deal

PS- Jack I have to thank you personally as I feel you have been one of the most fair and unbiased journalists to discuss Dr. Paul on your program

Nicholas W.   December 17th, 2007 2:43 pm ET

“The polls don’t mean anything at this point. In November and December of 2003, Kerry was polling around the same percentage as Al Sharpton.

Check if you don’t believe me…”

Brian   December 17th, 2007 2:45 pm ET

Congressman Paul clearly has serious support from those who know of him. The problem is he doesnt get the same coverage other candidates do. Perhaps the media is to blame for Dr. Pauls relatively low numbers. The supporters of Pauls campaign are doing 90% of the legwork without much help from the mainstream media. One can only wonder if that will now change…

Jason Beasley   December 17th, 2007 2:46 pm ET

It is a shame when the opinions of less than one thousand neo-conservatives are allowed to deceive the freedom loving people of this once great nation. It is even more shameful that we accept these polls without question. It is this small minority, and only this minority that will be shocked come primaries. Watch his words spread hope like fire.

Wesley   December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET

Dear Mr. Cafferty,

The only polls that show Ron Paul unfavorably are those flawed and outdated ones. The internet has risen to become the new standard by which political support are defined in this generation and Ron Paul leads on all online polls. It is just another plain and simple case that politics has not yet caught up with technology.

Wesley
Concord, NH

Eric   December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET

Many of Ron Paul’s supporters are under the age of 40 and only have cell phones, while polls are based on landline phones. Also, about 40% of his supporters are Independents or Democrats, so they aren’t included in the “likely Republican voter” category. Also, the turnout rate for his passionate supporters is sure to be much higher than other “typical” Republicans, meaning Ron Paul may have a real shot at winning some primaries.

Mark Olsen   December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET

Which polls are you talking about Jack? The ones bought and paid for by the military industial complex and reported by the very media outlets they own??Or the ones on the internet that are owned by no-one,Ron Paul continually wins hands down over and over again.
The days of the media picking our president for us are numbered.
What a joke it has been.

Mark Hipshire   December 17th, 2007 2:48 pm ET

Respectfully sir, I cannot explain it, and I don’t need to have to try to either. Having been a lifelong advocate of liberty, the best I can say is that _finally_, more people are awakening to the fundamental understandings that Ron Paul is so eloquently illustrating to us. We may not win this particular “battle” Sir; but the battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. More of us than ever before are now vigilant, active, and brave, and that is something that no amount of money will ever be able to stop. Beware would-be oppressors, the revolution is at hand; the revolution will not be televised.

Sandra   December 17th, 2007 2:49 pm ET

Jack, If Ron Paul won the presidency, it would pose a threat to every pork barrel project the federal government has created in the form of know nothing government agencies and their do nothing services. Pollsters are hand in hand with the pork, hired to promote the need for thier existence to masses. Do you think for a minute that they are going to promote Ron Paul at the expense of their masters?

Yep, Jack, YEE HAA!! It’s time for a pork barrel BBQ compliments of Ron Paul - Texas style!

P.S. Pollsters will need extra garlic salt.

Scott Johnsson   December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET

A peculiar disconnect indeed. Perhaps 10 second soundbytes promoted by quick and easy political coverage fail to cover the depth and breadth of Ron Paul’s deeply rooted principles. Perhaps those on the internet, indulged in healthy discourse and near unlimited information have unearthed the long forgotten cornerstone of this great republic. Perhaps, Jack, the truth may just really set you free.

Andrew Krzynowek   December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET

The polls being considered do not account for the vast amount of Paul’s supporters. Many of them have never voted for a candidate, many of them have switched parties to vote for Ron Paul.

Take a look at his straw poll wins at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/

These are the polls that people actually have to get out of their house for, this is a somewhat better representation of where his support lies.

Dan   December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET

Jack,

Besides Lou Dobbs and you, I don’t have a lot of faith in the mainstream media these days; I was at the Ron Paul Boston Tea Party yesterday in the winter storm. Oh I drove up from Pennsylvanian, anyway, the energy and passion I saw yesterday for a Constitutional candidate was absolutely amazing.

Cleaner44   December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET

Let’s examine the anomaly of the national polls. The only area that Ron Paul scores low in are the national polls. This begs the question, how are these polls being conducted?

Telephone calls are placed to Republican voters, at home, on landlines. The voters being called are previous Republican voters from the last election cycle. These calls do not engage the voters who have registered as Republican in 2007 because of Ron Paul. These calls are to traditional Republican voters, which are only one part of the party that will be voting in the primaries.

Let’s look closer at the group of traditional Republican voters that receive polling calls. Only those that are home regularly and answer such calls will be able to give their opinions. The views of regular Republican voters who are active outside the home, whether at work, at volunteer activities or children’s events when called by pollsters, will not be included. The poll will also not include disaffected registered republicans who have not voted in recent elections.

Ron Paul has been creating many new Republican voters that were previously Independents, Libertarians and Democrats. These new Republicans are an undefined factor as of yet, but there are many indications that they are in fact quite a large group. Many of these undefined voters are also young and do not have home landlines.

The bottom line is that the national polls are very limited in the sample of opinion that they gather. They simply are not a valid indication of the wide variety of voters that will be making their voices heard loud and clear at the Republican Presidential primaries.

Pedro   December 17th, 2007 2:50 pm ET

Those polls are nothing more than a tool to control the voters.

Ron Paul’s name is left out of a lot of those polls. Why doesn’t the media talk about the straw polls that Ron Paul has dominated?

National polls mean nothing. No other candidate has the support that Ron Paul has and no other Republican candidate has raised the money that Ron Paul has this quarter. If you ask me, Ron Paul is the only front runner.

pat   December 17th, 2007 2:51 pm ET

the people are smarter then they are portrayed. call it last minute or call it an upset the party will reel over for decades. the people nominate the candidate not cohorts.

Ron   December 17th, 2007 2:52 pm ET

Clearly Ron Paul is among the frontrunners in this Republican race. He leads in money, on the internet, in straw polls, and in debate victories. His showing in the polls clearly does not reflect his support, and it seems the better question to ask is ‘why don’t the polls accurately portray Ron Paul’s support?’

Daniel   December 17th, 2007 2:52 pm ET

Jack,

It’s pretty obvious to most of us who support Ron Paul that the traditional polls have lost a lot of credibility. Perhaps part of the reason he doesn’t make a better showing in the polls is because half of the time he’s not even included in the poll itself, only an option to choose “other”. Also, a large percentage of Ron Paul’s support comes from people who have not voted in recent years due to frustration with traditional politics. These people aren’t considered “likely Republican primary voters” by the pollsters, and therefore, aren’t polled.

The political system is in for a big shock. Ron Paul is waking TONS of people up. Will you be a part of it?

Daniel
Franklin, TN

Erik John, Varvir   December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET

Ron Paul has repeatedly stated that his name is not being included in the scientific phone polls and that he is winning almost every State GOP straw poll so you do the math?

Paul   December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET

Simple. People have gotten so used to being spoon feed news through sound bites via the main stream media filters. We simply except what we’re feed without asking the deeper questions but not all of us! That is why you see such high Ron Paul funding and low poll numbers. A few see the real picture and are passionate. Soon many will see it!

Taylor Buchanan   December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET

Jack it seems blatantly obvious that the methodology of “modern” polling needs a re-vamp. From every indication all people see are Ron Paul signs, Ron Paul supporters at rallies and Ron Paul moneybombs. How on earth could he possibly be so low in the polls you ask? Maybe a better question is how are these polls being conducted. Try to get 1200 people at a rally on a Sunday for Hillary or Rudy. Good luck. And Huckabee seems to be a media creation. Kudos for asking the question!

Greg Gillette   December 17th, 2007 2:53 pm ET

The powers to be do not like Ron Pauls message of freedom and liberty and his message that our foreign policy and the military industrial complex are completely had of control and ruining our country. The truth is a hard thing to swallow for a lot of folks, especially those making money from untruths.

Doug Carkuff   December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET

No comments? Somehow I don’t believe that. Well, the reason why Dr. Paul’s real support (as indicated by his amazing ability to raise money - beating all records for a single day’s fund raising) and his polling is very obvious. The polls are biased - often times leaving Dr. Paul out as a choice altogether and designed specifically to reflect the agenda of the people who commissioned the polls and the pollsters themselves - and that agenda, by and large, is to marginalize and sabotage Dr. Paul’s campaign. Look, we all know this and we all know the media itself has made it its mission to marginalize Ron Paul, so what is the point of pretending about it. The big political news on MSNBC this morning was Lieberman’s endorsement of McCain - nevermind that Ron Paul just raised more money in 24 hours than any political candidate has ever raised in the history of the world. You might think that might be interesting and important news, but apparently not and apparently, no matter how much real support Ron Paul has, the media has decided he is “marginal” and treat him that way no matter what - thereby marginalizing not merely Dr. Paul, but his views on liberty and the Constitution and all the many millions all over the world who see in Dr. Paul the first real hope for a better future for us all. The shamelessness and deceit of the media apparently knows no bounds.

Ralph   December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET

The polls are obviously biased, skewed or incorrect. The sheer number of donates should mean something and to suggest that anyone who donated or contributes to the campaign won’t vote in the primaries is just fullish. Also, let us not forget John Kerry who before the Iowa caucus was polling at 3%, but went on to win the Democrat nomination.

sig   December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET

How can Ron Paul raise 6 million dollars and receive so little coverage compared to the rest of the candidates the media is obviously pushing. Dr.Paul has the most youtube subscribers, More meetup groups then all the other candidates combined, has won the most strawpolls, most myspace fans,won all the after debate polls but one where he came in second, the most blimps,the most chat rooms,the most internet radio stations,the most UNder-reported candidate. Investigate how the “Polls” are conducted and who they are polling and you will have your answer….you’re supposed to be investigative journalists…do your jobs.
Jack, Paul supporters love you.

Albert   December 17th, 2007 2:55 pm ET

The Internet is a gold mine which magnifies the impact of small, widely dispersed minorities. If you can sell little razors to trim nose hairs for ten times what they’re really worth on the Internet, surely you can sell Ron Paul.

Christopher   December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET

Ron Paul in not higher in the polls because people do not fully understand his message. I know I did not understand how he could make all of the things he talks about work until I heard him speak fully about them. Ron Paul has a plan and though you might not agree with all of what he says, it is in the country and the media’s best interest to at least listen to what he says because he speaks more truth than any candidate I have ever heard in my lifetime. Truth is medicine and while medicine never tastes good, sometimes you have to take it to get better, right now Dr. Paul has the medicine this country needs.

Matthew Niemerg   December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET

This is a simple matter of understanding how the polls work. First off, these polls are only going after ‘likely’ primary voters, or those who have voted in past primaries for the GOP. If you look at the voter turnout in ‘04, for the primaries, it was around 6%. These are the people that are being called. In addition, the polls are all done via landlines. The pollsters, through no fault of their own, are ignoring the demographic that Paul’s message has hit with: the youth, the 70% of Americans who want to end the war, independents, and many people who have previously been apathetic to politics. They aren’t being asked the questions, so they aren’t being included in the polls. Hence the low poll numbers. It’s not a conspiracy or anything, just bad data acquisition. There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics.

Steven   December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET

Your network uses flawed polling methodology. They only contact previous Republican voters, most of which Ron Paul supporters are not. Also, only landline phones are used, and because Ron Paul has a larger youth following, and statistically the 18-30 age group mostly only uses a cell phone and not a landline, they are never contacted.

It’s alright though, we know your polls are meaningless, and they don’t discourage us one bit.

theproducer1776   December 17th, 2007 2:56 pm ET

Jack,

How many times do we have to scream at the main stream media the answers to this question?! There are a few very simple answers to why he is not polling higher. Let me list them off so you can read them on air and finally get the truth out.
First those polls are likely voters from the last primaries that were historically low in attendance and very pro Bush, and pro war. Second, most Ron Paul supporters do not own land lines and use Cell phones only, so they aren’t polled. And third, the most important of all. They don’t even list his name on a lot of the polls! This country is in a Revolution Jack, our Money Bombs will go down in history as the next “Shots heard round the world.”

Austin Petersen

Frank Dupone   December 17th, 2007 2:57 pm ET

Most of the polls are simply about name recognition. Being in the business world myself, I’ve always paid attention to the “Money” at the end of the day - as that is the biggest indication of real support, not media hype. Ron Paul’s biggest hurdle is name recognition, but with this new Fundraising Record & the Blimp - the people are about to hear. What is most suprising is that this $18+ Million hasn’t come from corporations, but from individuals wanting to change the course of politics.

Ann   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

Jack,
Dr. Ron Paul has been and in some cases still is “NOT IN THE POLLS, NOT AN OPTION”. He obviously places high in the “who will you give your money and support to” catagory”.

Mark Neumann   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

85% of Ron Paul supporters are outside the mainstream polling demographic of Republicans who voted in the last primary. Romney and Giuliani will get very few primary votes from outside this demographic.

Source:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=36574

Lawrence   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

1. The polls are inaccurate. 2. The media feeds us a steady stream of mistruths and propaganda. 3. Americans who have heard the message do select him. He has won a majority of all GOP straw polls. 4. The media has convinced many people that he cannot win and therefore apathy prevents many people from voting for him. 5. The media has been grossly unfair to this man and the bias shows quite clearly. 6. Many Americans are stupid and have been fooled by the leading candidates, recall that 74 million Americans voted for George Bush’s second term. 7. People who are educated by TV and many of our public schools are not going to develop the ability to think critically.

For more information on Why I Support Ron Paul., see the link below.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/lepard2.html

Best, Larry Lepard

Sandor Bors   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

Easy answer Jack. It is time to change the mainstream polls! They obviously do not coincide with what informed Americans think and they think enough of Ron Paul to donate money, donate their time, and donate their energy to support an idea whose time has come.

Scott Swingle   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

I believe the better question here is “Why are the polls not more accurately reflecting Ron Paul’s support?”
As more and more people drop their land lines in favor of cell phones, polling will be increasingly more inaccurate. The people of my generation (I am 26) use cell phones almost exclusively.
There are also reports of Dr. Paul being left off of the polls are not registering properly when he is included in the poll.

Travis Steward   December 17th, 2007 2:58 pm ET

It’s simple Jack: the polls are wrong.

Rain Anderson   December 17th, 2007 2:59 pm ET

Because the polls you’re referring to attempt to query folks who have voted Republican, and Ron Paul’s base draws heavily from those who have shied away from the party or were not previously politically active. I think you should take a look at straw polls and post-debate polls. But of course it doesn’t help that big media largely ignores him.

I’m a man from a country most Americans probably never heard of and I’m rooting for Ron Paul. And when he wins, hell, I might just move to the US. But for now, it’s painful to watch how the American big media attempts to control your presidential elections. What Ron Paul’s supporters did yesterday was history, pure and simple. They broke all records and most of the media barely even mentions it. If Rudy or Hillary were to raise even half of what Ron Paul’s supporters raised yesterday, it would be big news across your country for days. But not in the case of Ron Paul. No, we can’t have that now can we..

NickB   December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET

1) Who voted in the last primary? Think about the voters who voted for Bush in the last primary. These are the only people considered “likely voters” in most polls. Even if you supported Bush, like I did in 2000, the war kept many of us home. We had no enthusiasm for Bush. Today we have anger and distrust for the man, and we have found in Paul an honest sincere champion of the Constitution. He gives us a third choice… we don’t have to leave because of a false fear of Islamo-fascism or because we are losing, the third choice is that we didn’t follow the founding father’s advice–and we’re strong enough as a people to admit our mistake and come home!
2) I’m 46, a millionaire, and I have no land line phone. I’ve moved 4 times since 2000. The combination of cell phone homes and people moving (remember before the bust we had a real estate bubble) and changing their numbers makes the “likely voter” samples much less reliable.
3) It has been documented by recordings of actual polls that Ron Paul has actually been left off many polls! See digg.com for examples.
Thanks for being a voice who’s open to the message of Liberty and Ron Paul, Jack!

Jeff-Rhode Island   December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET

There are many reasons. The polls don’t reach most of the people who support Ron Paul. I am registered as “Unaffiliated”, my wife has never voted before, and many in my MeetUp group were registered Democrats before becoming Ron Paul supporters. As always, Ron Paul speaks the truth when he says “Freedom IS Popular!”

Chad Byrd   December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET

Ron Paul’s poll numbers are low because the polls don’t accurately measure his support. If the media use flawed poll numbers as the only metric for potential success on election day and ignore donation statistics of individuals, they’re forming their own foregone conclusion through reporting of those polls numbers. Just examine the disparity between Paul & McCain’s levels of media coverage to see that there are double- & triple-standards at play in the media when considering polls and donations. We haven’t heard a peep about Paul winning nearly half of the straw polls he’s been in, which account for people motivated to vote. That’s all fine, though — Paul’s low poll numbers give the competition false security. We’ll be out at 90% strength.

Ross Johnson   December 17th, 2007 3:00 pm ET

I think it’s fairly clear that our current polling system is simply out of date. Current pollsters seem to ignore the inevitable; Americans have become indoctrinated into an internet society. Internet savvy Americans are not only young college students, or 30 year old spammers living out of their Parent’s basement. But rather individuals of all ages and political affiliations have begun to rely on the internet for their daily news. However, a majority of the “reliable polling” is still performed over landlines. In an era of expanding technology a majority the American public have abandoned their landlines in favor of more practical means of technology, such as cell phones. Conversely, internet polling is labeled as unsubstantial and unreliable. Money talks in politics and Dr. Paul’s fundraising capabilities show that he is not only a viable candidate, but a top contender for the Republican nomination. Yet, sadly the main-stream media would rather focus on the meaningless endorsements of Sen. John McCain, than even acknowledge the clear will of the American people.

George   December 17th, 2007 3:01 pm ET

Jack,

Well he should be higher in polls if the polls are legitimate. 50 OR 60 percent of republicans are not sure who they are voting for. Also the media has a lot to do with why he’s not higher in polls. He raised that money from hard working american people not big corupt corperations that will do anything to get there pupits elected so they can pass any laws they want to make the slaves that we are right now.

Also because the media wants to talk about other candidates and will not mention how our country is adding $1.8 billion dollars a day on top of the $9.2 TRILLION dollars ( AND THAT’S TRILLON WITH A T ) that we owe. They are more concerened about what dirt they can find on the canidates then to figure out how this country can get out of the mess we are in.

Richard Shank   December 17th, 2007 3:02 pm ET

Perhaps the better question is, with all the excitement about Ron Paul and the record-breaking fund raising, why are the other candidate so high in the polls?

Ashley Jordan   December 17th, 2007 3:02 pm ET

Ron Paul is not higher in the polls because of the fact that the people that are polled are Republicans who voted for Bush in the last election. If Democrats, Independants, and Republicans were polled then he would be a lot higher. I am in a Ron Paul meetup group that has 600+ members and atleast half didn’t vote in the last election or are Democrat/Independant. Think about this though-all 600+ members of the group will vote for Ron Paul and will also campaign for him for FREE. His meetup groups equal 80,000+ people and that’s 80,000+ people working to tell others about Ron Paul and the message of freedom. Thanks!

Sam Johnson   December 17th, 2007 3:03 pm ET

Jack,

The reason why Ron Paul is not higher in the national polls is because they poll people who have land line telephones; these are the same people who are more likely to subscribe to the old media for their news: television networks, printed papers, etc. Ron Paul’s message of a principled conservatism: that of personal, financial, and national freedom and security has drawn support from unmeasurable segments of the population, including Democrats and previously apathetic citizens.

Brandon Yates   December 17th, 2007 3:04 pm ET

Ron Paul is not higher in polls because he is not a media appointed candidate. He is hardly mentioned in the media, and when he is, he is often painted as a fringe candidate who has no chance. Of course, your program, Jack, is one of the few exceptions.

Brandon

Harvey Russell   December 17th, 2007 3:04 pm ET

Two reasons. The MSM has basically determined Ron Paul can not win, and the Big Government Nanny Staters are deathly afraid of him.

A Ron Paul comes along possibly once in a lifetime. I’ve been blessed to have seen two; Barry Goldwater in ‘64 and Ron Paul this year.

Ogiar   December 17th, 2007 3:05 pm ET

Because the media has ignored him, laughed at him, and said “He can’t win!”. The good news is that frustration with media coverage for Paul directly transfers into money for his campaign and an intense viral grassroots effort. So it doesn’t really matter what th