Author Topic: Ron Paul's 2008 and 2012 Primary/Caucus Performance (Read 4114 times)

Dos Equis · « **on:** September 08, 2011, 10:55:39 AM »

To put Ron Paul's chances in 2012 in perspective, along with the online polls showing him winning every debate, leading his challengers, etc., you should take a look at his 2008 performance. Keep in mind that during the 2008 season, there were similar online polls showing Ron Paul blowing out the competition in debates, etc. What really matters is what happens on election day.

Here is how he performed in 2008 in some of the key states. I believe he stayed in the race after everyone else had dropped out, so some of these numbers, as bad as they are, might even be inflated.

Texas (his home state)

McCain: 697,767 votes
Huck: 518,002 votes
Paul: 66,360

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=TX

California

McCain - 1,238,988, 42%
Romney - 1,013,471, 35%
Huckabee - 340,669, 12%
Paul - 125,365, 4%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=CA

New York

McCain- 333,001, 52%
Romney - 178,043, 28%
Huckabee - 68,477, 11%
Paul - 40,113, 6%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=NY

Florida

McCain - 701,761, 36%
Romney - 604,932, 31%
Giuliani - 286,089, 15%
Huckabee - 262,681, 14%
Paul - 62,887- 3%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=FL

South Carolina

McCain - 147,686, 33%
Huckabee - 132,943, 30%
Thompson - 69,651, 16%
Romney - 68,142, 15%
Paul - 16,154, 4%
Giuliani - 9,557, 2%
Hunter - 1,051, 0%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=SC

New Hampshire

McCain - 88,713, 37%
Romney - 75,675, 32%
Huckabee - 26,916, 11%
Giuliani - 20,344, 8%
Paul - 18,346, 8%
Thompson - 2,955, 1%
Hunter - 1,192, 1%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=NH

Do you believe 2012 will be much different? Also, how can he win the nomination if he's unable to win his home state of Texas?

Dos Equis · « **Reply #1 on:** September 08, 2011, 02:16:37 PM »

Michigan

Romney - 338,316, 39%
McCain - 257,985, 30%
Huckabee - 139,764, 16%
Paul - 54,475, 6%
Thompson - 32,159, 4%
Giuliani - 24,725, 3%
Uncommitted - 18,118, 2%
Hunter - 2,819, 0%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=MI

Ohio

McCain - 656,687, 60%
Huckabee, 335,356, 31%
Paul - 50,964, 5%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=OH

Virginia

McCain - 244,829, 50%
Huckabee - 199,003, 41%
Paul - 21,999, 4%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=VA

Skip8282 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 08, 2011, 02:26:26 PM »

I just finished watching all his answers from the debate and he looked really bad. And still wins the on-line polls. Go figure

Dos Equis · « **Reply #3 on:** September 08, 2011, 02:30:52 PM »

Quote from: Skip8282 on September 08, 2011, 02:26:26 PM

I just finished watching all his answers from the debate and he looked really bad. And still wins the on-line polls. Go figure

Not his best performance. Pretty clear the online polls are unreliable. I mentioned this in another thread, but some of his fans are as bad as the Obama-bots from the 2008 election.

I'd still like to hear how anyone thinks he can win if he cannot carry Texas (and most other big states).

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #4 on:** September 08, 2011, 02:31:11 PM »

Quote from: Skip8282 on September 08, 2011, 02:26:26 PM

I just finished watching all his answers from the debate and he looked really bad. And still wins the on-line polls. Go figure

He ended his bid last night. Worst performance I have seen in a long time. Its amazing how he seems incapable of being direct and attacking Obama.

Does he even really want to win this?

Skip8282 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 08, 2011, 02:49:57 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on September 08, 2011, 02:30:52 PM

Not his best performance. Pretty clear the online polls are unreliable. I mentioned this in another thread, but some of his fans are as bad as the Obama-bots from the 2008 election.

I'd still like to hear how anyone thinks he can win if he cannot carry Texas (and most other big states).

Yeah, they seem to think we're declaring an on-line conspiracy. I don't think it's a conspiracy at all. I just think his supporters tend to be young, internet-savvy people who make their voices heard. And for a candidate who is largely ignored by the media (and his own party, lol), that's a good thing for him.

Regardless of whether he wins or not, I think he will have an impact on this election.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #6 on:** September 08, 2011, 03:05:03 PM »

Quote from: Skip8282 on September 08, 2011, 02:49:57 PM

Yeah, they seem to think we're declaring an on-line conspiracy. I don't think it's a conspiracy at all. I just think his supporters tend to be young, internet-savvy people who make their voices heard. And for a candidate who is largely ignored by the media (and his own party, lol), that's a good thing for him.

Regardless of whether he wins or not, I think he will have an impact on this election.

Agree. I actually think he's good for the race.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #7 on:** September 15, 2011, 04:23:44 PM »

Washington

McCain - 262,304, 50%
Huckabee - 127,657, 24%
Paul - 40,539, 8%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=WA

Dos Equis · « **Reply #8 on:** September 25, 2011, 02:15:49 PM »

Now compare his actual performance on election day with online polls in 2008 showing him blowing out the competition:

Ron Paul Demolishes Other Republicans In Online Polls

The mismatch between ”Post-ABC News poll, those more tuned into the ‘08 race” and the post-Republican Candidate debate online polls of ABC and MSNBC goes well beyond normal disparities between “scientific” polling and online polling. Ron Paul leads all other candidates by a more than comfortable margin in the online polls and is hardly even considered a “dark horse” candidate by the offline “scientific” polls. This is made even more interesting if, as has been reported here the MSNBC online poll prior to the debates had Ron Paul with only about 9% vs its present 34%.

Glib explanations that “Ron Paul’s supporters are internet addicts...”, as have been advanced on neocon sites such as Freerepublic.com, while very unsatisfying, are at least better than the utter silence regarding the glaring disparity from the mainstream media whose own online polls so drastically depart from their “scientific” polls.

Moreover, at present it appears that FOX News is excluding Ron Paul from the upcoming South Carolina debate because:

“the public is better served when serious candidates speak on the issues”

One can’t help but entertain the possibility that perhaps some of the disparity is due to Ron Paul’s consistent opposition to Neocon “invade the world, invite the world” policy that has taken hold of the mainstream media… that plus the fact that—rare among self-described “libertarians”—he doesn’t seem very hypocritical when it comes to recognizing the asset known as national citizenship. (His immigration report card is an astounding B+.)

A quantitative estimate of approximately how far off we can expect these online polls to be is called for…

MSNBC’s online poll as of 4:30PM:

ABC’s online poll as of 4:30PM:

Washington Post/ABC’s offline “scientific” poll conducted prior to the debates:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ron_paul_demolishes_other_republicans_in_online_polls/

We see the same thing this cycle, with Ron Paul dominating online polls after every debate.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2011, 12:06:12 PM »

DC

McCain - 4,198, 68%
Huckabee - 1,020, 16%
Paul - 494, 8%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=DC

Maryland

McCain - 176,046, 55%
Huckabee - 91,608, 29%
Paul - 19,196, 6%

240 is Back · « **Reply #10 on:** October 09, 2011, 01:33:36 PM »

sounds like the lady doth protest too much

Dos Equis · « **Reply #11 on:** January 11, 2012, 07:53:53 AM »

2012

Iowa:

Romney - 30,015, 25%
Santorum - 30,007, 25%
Paul - 26,219, 21%
Gingrich - 16,251, 13%
Perry - 12,604, 10%
Bachmann - 6,073, 5%
Huntsman - 745, 1%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/state/ia

New Hampshire:

Romney - 96,773, 39%
Paul - 56,223, 23%
Huntsman - 41,509, 17%
Gingrich - 23,213, 10%
Santorum - 23,070, 9%
Perry - 1,744, 1%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/state/nh

Dos Equis · « **Reply #12 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:13:04 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on September 08, 2011, 10:55:39 AM

South Carolina

McCain - 147,686, 33%
Huckabee - 132,943, 30%
Thompson - 69,651, 16%
Romney - 68,142, 15%
Paul - 16,154, 4%
Giuliani - 9,557, 2%
Hunter - 1,051, 0%

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=SC

More votes this time around (likely due to increased overall turnout), but didn't improve his overall performance:

Gingrich - 243,153, 40%
Romney - 167,279, 28%
Santorum - 102,055, 17%
Paul - 77,993, 13%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/state/sc?hpt=hp_pc1

Dos Equis · « **Reply #13 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:15:53 PM »

Not much traction from veterans in this military-friendly state. Here is how veterans in SC voted in 2012:

Gingrich - 39%
Romney - 32%
Santorum - 16%
Paul - 12%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/epolls/sc

howardroark · « **Reply #14 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:23:00 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 10:13:04 PM

More votes this time around (likely due to increased overall turnout), but didn't improve his overall performance:

Gingrich - 243,153, 40%
Romney - 167,279, 28%
Santorum - 102,055, 17%
Paul - 77,993, 13%

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/state/sc?hpt=hp_pc1

What are you talking about?

In terms of percentage points, his support tripled. In terms of number of votes, his support more than quadrupled. He placed last, but at least he's going somewhere.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #15 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:31:49 PM »

Quote from: howardroark on January 21, 2012, 10:23:00 PM

What are you talking about?

In terms of percentage points, his support tripled. In terms of number of votes, his support more than quadrupled. He placed last, but at least he's going somewhere.

He finished last 5th out of 7th in 08 and last in 2012. That's not an improvement. And his support didn't really increase much. Voter turnout across the board increased. Check the numbers from 2008, including those for Romney.

And how is he going somewhere? His best chances were Iowa and NH. He'll probably do even worse in FL.

howardroark · « **Reply #16 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:43:23 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 10:31:49 PM

He finished last 5th out of 7th in 08 and last in 2012. That's not an improvement. And his support didn't really increase much. Voter turnout across the board increased. Check the numbers from 2008, including those for Romney.

And how is he going somewhere? His best chances were Iowa and NH. He'll probably do even worse in FL.

FL is a winner-take-all state that RP has stated he'll avoid. He's focusing on other states where he can pick up delegates.

And how is tripling support in terms of percentage points and more than quadrupling support in terms of number of votes not a SIGNIFICANT improvement for someone who is a movement candidate and not just another replaceable establishment Big-R Republican?

Dos Equis · « **Reply #17 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:50:39 PM »

Quote from: howardroark on January 21, 2012, 10:43:23 PM

FL is a winner-take-all state that RP has stated he'll avoid. He's focusing on other states where he can pick up delegates.

And how is tripling support in terms of percentage points and more than quadrupling support in terms of number of votes not a SIGNIFICANT improvement for someone who is a movement candidate and not just another replaceable establishment Big-R Republican?

He's probably avoiding FL because he came in last in 08 with 3% of the vote.

His improvement in SC sounds good, but it is largely a product of increased overall voter turnout. There were 213,438 more voters in 2012.

I wouldn't even consider Romney's performance a significant improvement over 08. He went from 15 to 28% and an increase of 68,142 to 167,279 votes. Fewer candidates and more voters, plus a ton of money should have resulted in a win for him.

howardroark · « **Reply #18 on:** January 21, 2012, 10:57:11 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 10:50:39 PM

He's probably avoiding FL because he came in last in 08 with 3% of the vote.

No shit Sherlock, why would you campaign in a winner-take-all state when your chances of winning the state are slim?

Quote

His improvement in SC sounds good, but it is largely a product of increased overall voter turnout. There were 213,438 more voters in 2012.

You could *feasibly* make that case using just the number of votes cast for Ron Paul, but looking at the percentage increase tells us something else - going from 4% in '08 to 13% in 2012 is a significant improvement by any measure.

Quote

I wouldn't even consider Romney's performance a significant improvement over 08. He went from 15 to 28% and an increase of 68,142 to 167,279 votes. Fewer candidates and more voters, plus a ton of money should have resulted in a win for him.

Are Romney and RP even comparable? Romney is a replaceable establishment Big Government RINO. Ron Paul is a movement candidate. An increase in support for Romney doesn't mean much; whereas an increase in support for Ron Paul does.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #19 on:** January 21, 2012, 11:17:20 PM »

Quote from: howardroark on January 21, 2012, 10:57:11 PM

No shit Sherlock, why would you campaign in a winner-take-all state when your chances of winning the state are slim?

You could *feasibly* make that case using just the number of votes cast for Ron Paul, but looking at the percentage increase tells us something else - going from 4% in '08 to 13% in 2012 is a significant improvement by any measure.

Are Romney and RP even comparable? Romney is a replaceable establishment Big Government RINO. Ron Paul is a movement candidate. An increase in support for Romney doesn't mean much; whereas an increase in support for Ron Paul does.

If you're a serious, legitimate candidate for president, you don't skip states that play a pivotal role in whether or not you win the nomination. He's at 9% in FL right now, but in last place.

The percentage increase in SC has to be considered in light of the increased voter turnout and the fact there were fewer candidates. Not going to quibble over an "improvement" vs. "significant improvement." Big deal. It's an improvement, but I'm not impressive at all, especially when he came in last.

I mentioned Romney only to illustrate that he got a lot more votes and increased percentage this time around too, but it's not impressive when put in context.

Ron Paul is a "movement candidate"? How you figure? He has definitely improved his performance, but he isn't really having an impact. He is saying the right things about the economy, but that's about it. We'll have to see what happens at the convention and beyond to evaluate what his true impact will be.

Skip8282 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 22, 2012, 05:42:12 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 11:17:20 PM

If you're a serious, legitimate candidate for president, you don't skip states that play a pivotal role in whether or not you win the nomination. He's at 9% in FL right now, but in last place.

The percentage increase in SC has to be considered in light of the increased voter turnout and the fact there were fewer candidates. Not going to quibble over an "improvement" vs. "significant improvement." Big deal. It's an improvement, but I'm not impressive at all, especially when he came in last.

I mentioned Romney only to illustrate that he got a lot more votes and increased percentage this time around too, but it's not impressive when put in context.

Ron Paul is a "movement candidate"? How you figure? He has definitely improved his performance, but he isn't really having an impact. He is saying the right things about the economy, but that's about it. We'll have to see what happens at the convention and beyond to evaluate what his true impact will be.

Yeah, tough call for any candidate. However, SC and Florida only have half the delegates they had in 2008 so it's still difficult to measure what a victory in either state will mean.

Still, even with half, Florida is a powerhouse.

Tough balance, tough call - glad I'm not his campaign manager, lol.

Bindare_Dundat · « **Reply #21 on:** January 22, 2012, 06:28:02 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 11:17:20 PM

If you're a serious, legitimate candidate for president, you don't skip states that play a pivotal role in whether or not you win the nomination. He's at 9% in FL right now, but in last place.

The percentage increase in SC has to be considered in light of the increased voter turnout and the fact there were fewer candidates. Not going to quibble over an "improvement" vs. "significant improvement." Big deal. It's an improvement, but I'm not impressive at all, especially when he came in last.

I mentioned Romney only to illustrate that he got a lot more votes and increased percentage this time around too, but it's not impressive when put in context.

Ron Paul is a "movement candidate"? How you figure? He has definitely improved his performance, but he isn't really having an impact. He is saying the right things about the economy, but that's about it. We'll have to see what happens at the convention and beyond to evaluate what his true impact will be.

You don't even have all the facts but state things as if you did. you wanna talk about serious candidates? why don't you mention which candidates are missing out on a shit load of delegates because they aren't even on some of the ballots? There are also other idsues that leave a total of 500 delegates shared between only Paul and Romney. Newt would need to get 75% of the rest if the states to win.

howardroark · « **Reply #22 on:** January 22, 2012, 07:44:31 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 21, 2012, 11:17:20 PM

If you're a serious, legitimate candidate for president, you don't skip states that play a pivotal role in whether or not you win the nomination. He's at 9% in FL right now, but in last place.

If you're a serious, legitimate candidate, you skip states that are winner-take-all when you know you'll win them or you know you'll lose them. There's a reason why Presidential candidates don't even campaign in 3/4 of states.

Quote

The percentage increase in SC has to be considered in light of the increased voter turnout and the fact there were fewer candidates. Not going to quibble over an "improvement" vs. "significant improvement." Big deal. It's an improvement, but I'm not impressive at all, especially when he came in last.

Do you really think that Ron Paul picked up support from McCain and Giuliani supporters?

Quote

I mentioned Romney only to illustrate that he got a lot more votes and increased percentage this time around too, but it's not impressive when put in context.

It's not impressive when put in the context of someone who is easily interchangeable with McCain, Giuliani, Huckabee, and the rest of the '08 field. It is impressive for a candidate who is unique and stands apart from the rest of the field.

Quote

Ron Paul is a "movement candidate"? How you figure?

Because he is literally building a movement. It's called the Campaign for Liberty, look it up. He started building it in '08 and is using these elections to build it up now. It'll serve as a launching pad for his son's bid for President. Ron Paul's strong third place finish in Iowa, with 50% of the youth vote happened because of activists from the Campaign for Liberty. His strong second place finish in New Hampshire with almost 50% of the youth vote happened because of activists from the Campaign for Liberty.

Quote

He has definitely improved his performance, but he isn't really having an impact. He is saying the right things about the economy, but that's about it. We'll have to see what happens at the convention and beyond to evaluate what his true impact will be.

I guess bringing in thousands of young voters into the GOP is not having an impact.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #23 on:** January 22, 2012, 10:02:16 PM »

Quote from: Skip8282 on January 22, 2012, 05:42:12 AM

Yeah, tough call for any candidate. However, SC and Florida only have half the delegates they had in 2008 so it's still difficult to measure what a victory in either state will mean.

Still, even with half, Florida is a powerhouse.

Tough balance, tough call - glad I'm not his campaign manager, lol.

I wouldn't want to be his campaign manager either. Wouldn't want to deal with some of his groupies.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #24 on:** January 22, 2012, 10:06:16 PM »

Quote from: Bindare_Dundat on January 22, 2012, 06:28:02 AM

You don't even have all the facts but state things as if you did. you wanna talk about serious candidates? why don't you mention which candidates are missing out on a shit load of delegates because they aren't even on some of the ballots? There are also other idsues that leave a total of 500 delegates shared between only Paul and Romney. Newt would need to get 75% of the rest if the states to win.

All I've done is post the facts in this thread: votes on election day. That's all that matters. Not online polls. Not pictures of crowds attending Ron Paul speaking events. Not media conspiracies. Just votes. Delegates are determined by votes.