Illinois Straw Poll Results - 1) Romney 2) Fred Thompson 3) Ron Paul

[thomez]

CNN.com - CNN Political Ticker Mitt Romney wins Illinois straw poll «

Final results of Thursday's Illinois straw poll:

1. Mitt Romney – 40.35%

2. Fred Thompson – 19.96%

3. Ron Paul – 18.87%

4. Rudy Giuliani – 11.61%

5. John McCain – 4.12%

6. Mike Huckabee – 3.04%

7. Sam Brownback – 1.08%

8. Duncan Hunter - .65%

9. Tom Tancrado - .33%

I can't find how many voters this was, but the vote is held at the Illinois State Fair. Nice to see Paul above Giuliani and McCain after it was claimed in the Iowa poll that they would be sure front runners

[motivez]

Romney has that shit locked down

Good news for Paul, perhaps this will give him a big enough boost to make it to the top tier and be taken more seriously by the Republican establishment

lol @ McCain, man that guys campaign imploded

Surprised at Giuliani.. I guess in Iowa they aren't looking for a President of 9/11?

[David Octavius]

I still don't see how these "straw polls" really mean anything, can someone please direct me or post some history of how these polls affected the primaries (besides the lower tier candidates dropping). Has these polls allowed a no name to gain prominence over a candidate people thought was strongest?

This one may be different in that there were really no strong candidates in the first place, its a pretty open race so no names will have a better shot, but again, does these polls really mean anything in the bigger picture?

[motivez]

It's a momentum thing, leads to free press for the candidate, more name recognition, people getting interested in the campaign, etc.

[RobertEdwardJ25]

1. There are now only two candidates who were in the top five BOTH TIMES (IA and IL): Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
2. There are now only five candidates who were in the top three at least once, which includes not only Mitt and Ron but Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, and Fred Thompson. In case neither the MSM nor the non-internet polling services have noticed, none of those five people are named Giuliani or McCain.
3. Given that the three candidates who don't believe in evolution were in the top five in IA (Huckabee, Brownback and Tancredo), why does anyone care about the Midwestern equivalent of Pakistan?
4. Given that McCain and Giuliani actually allegedly dropped out of IA to concentrate on IL, and given that even with a pathetic showing of 922 total votes for all the GOP candidates in IL, that Rudy and McCain STILL couldn't place better than fourth and fifth respectively (McCain didn't even break into triple digits, and Rudy only barely so), WHEN, oh WHEN, will these two drop out so as to stop cluttering the stage? On a related note, is Duncan Hunter hoping to win the California Primary or something? What's HIS deal? Sort of a pro-war Kucinich or something? Going the distance? If this were Survivor he'd alredy be voted off the island.
5. David Octavius, the winner of the GOP Straw Poll in IA usually goes on to be the nominee. On the other hand, rich men smoke cigars but smoking cigars doesn't make you rich. In other words, if you have a guy like Mitt Romney who started so early that he was already going to Iowa fundraisers in late 2005, then it's no surprise he gets early good results, but it won't keep up forever. His behavior n the ABC debate showed how desperate he was. He interrupted Ron Paul TWICE with the idiotic remark about 9/11. Not very WASP/"Mo Mormon" but very much like a prize-fighter whose finally met his match and does a groin shot hoping not to be detected by the judges, yet everyone saw Mitt's rudeness on TV.
6. NH, which had the same growth rate as the nation as a whole (Iowa barely grew at all this decade), will be MUCH more a true bellwether state, and since its motto is Live Free or Die and is the Free State Project of the Libertarian Party, we all know who will win THAT contest!

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's a momentum thing, leads to free press for the candidate, more name recognition, people getting interested in the campaign, etc.

Right, but does all that free stuff actually result in anything more than being the flavor of the day? The way history seems to play, if your a no name before it, you got no shot to win it. The only ones that do is either if no candidates have a name (but not in a field this large) or too many candidates do thereby splitting the vote and allowing the no name to win.


I don't see how any of the second or third tier candidates here are going to be able to steal the bid for nomination

[Publius]

It looks like the Paul campaign is gaining steam. Is the rest of the press only going to mention who came in 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th this time?

[Scrum]

I didn't even know they did this here.

When I first read it I thought to myself "Shit. I should have gone and participated", but then I realized they did it down in Springfield at the state fair.

That's not really a good sample since so few people live down in central and southern illinois. There is a much larger voting base up here in the north.

[Thorgrim]

Ron Paul got 174 votes, less than Iowa, in the entire state of Illinois with 12,500,000 citizens, far bigger than Iowa, the total vote count didn't even break 1000

Vote not much to crow about -- chicagotribune.com

[motivez]

It's still a success, and one that will get him some free press

[Scrum]

Not even a thousand voted and I would bet a majority of those people are the "Jesus will elect the man to lead us against the muslims" types.


Not exactly a fair sample of the state or a fair gauge of Ron Paul's popularity here.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Scrum

Not even a thousand voted and I would bet a majority of those people are the "Jesus will elect the man to lead us against the muslims" types.

Based on what?

Originally Posted by Scrum

Not exactly a fair sample of the state or a fair gauge of Ron Paul's popularity here.

The primaries aren't a fair sample of the state either since it generally restricts voters to being registered for a specific party

Regardless of the number of people it's still a victory for Paul to get higher than some of the other folks, like Rudy.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's still a success, and one that will get him some free press

174 votes out 922 is a success? Man have we lowered the bar

Iowa was at least a large sample size and RP could not break 10% and came in 5th. This one is way too narrow to judge the fitness of his candidacy and the media will treat it as such...though I know the Ron Paulers out there will claim bias.

I should do a straw poll in my 8 person office and get press for it, heck if Ron Paul gets 2 votes thats 25%!

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by motivez

Based on what?

Location.

It's Jesusland down in central/southern Illinois and those are the people at the fair.

The area I live in now and west of here are pretty red, but not the angry brainwashed Foxnews viewer types like down there.

Originally Posted by motivez

The primaries aren't a fair sample of the state either since it generally restricts voters to being registered for a specific party

Regardless of the number of people it's still a victory for Paul to get higher than some of the other folks, like Rudy.

I agree, but we are talking about 1K people in a part of the state that does not accurately represent even the Republican voters in Illinois.


Sure it's a victory for Paul, but I think he would have done even better if this weren't done at the state fair.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

174 votes out 922 is a success? Man have we lowered the bar

A second or third tier candidate coming in 3rd place, ahead of one of the first tier candidates is of course a victory.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Scrum

I agree, but we are talking about 1K people in a part of the state that does not accurately represent even the Republican voters in Illinois.

And politics is about cold hard logic and truth, not the ability to spin victories to suit your campaign

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by motivez

And politics is about cold hard logic and truth, not the ability to spin victories to suit your campaign

I thought we were in the no spin zone.


I'm seriously not trying to take anything away from RP on this, it's just a worse indicator than the usual polls.

[Ardentfrost]

First, it's not a straw VOTE, it's a straw POLL. It may not have been a representative sample of all of IL, but most polls are biased in some way.

Second, you don't have to be a registered party member to vote in primaries in every state. You don't in GA.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

First, it's not a straw VOTE, it's a straw POLL. It may not have been a representative sample of all of IL, but most polls are biased in some way.

Second, you don't have to be a registered party member to vote in primaries in every state. You don't in GA.

You do in Texas. If I were to even sign a petition for a Republican or Democratic candidate I would be barred from running for office as a Libertarian or being officially involved in a Libertarian caucus.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Publius

You do in Texas. If I were to even sign a petition for a Republican or Democratic candidate I would be barred from running for office as a Libertarian or being officially involved in a Libertarian caucus.

Yeah, I think it's like that in a lot of states... I only recently found out about it in GA.