Friday, July 8, 2011

Attention: PPP. Gallup, Zogby, Marist, al

Here's a novel idea, let's start polling DECLARED REPUBLICAN candidates only. Or at least, have one question with ONLY their names included.

Declared GOP candidates are:

Michele Bachmann
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich
Jon Huntsman
Gary Johnson
Fred Karger
Thaddeus McCotter
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty
Mitt Romney
Rick Santorum

It seems that most polling companies are into wishful thinking and musical chairs rather than the actual field of candidates. I have no problem including as many names as you want, AS LONG as at least one set are the DECLARED CANDIDATES ONLY!

As an example, the other day in NH, PPP had 3 sets of various names interchanged in their polling for the GOP nomination. NONE of which were the actual declared candidates alone. There were always someone missing and some non-candidates added. To add insult to injury, you couldn't even compare these results from their previous poll, because additional names were added while others were taken out.

Maybe I'm being picky, but I know I'm tired of seeing Giuliani, Christie, Perry, Palin, Ryan......included in these surveys. It would be nice if declared candidates and their supporters could see how things REALLY ARE between the REAL candidates!

Now I realize there is interest in non-declared candidates and that is why they are included. However, why not have ONE set with ONLY the declared candidates included EACH TIME there is a poll taken?.

What do you think?

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.


hamaca said...

I like the polls that list everyone, then start subtracting them one by one, e.g. without Palin, then without Perry, then without Giuliani, etc.

terry said...

I agree 110%.

It's so hard to follow these polls from week to week.

If polling companies had at least one standard set of data, it would make sense.

Ron Paul 2012 said...

Finally a Rombot who actually makes sense.

ConMan said...

I agree Bos!

It's so hard to fine any continuity from poll to poll. One poll they poll with one set of names the next time some others. And this is the same polling co.

Hey, why not throw in Derek jeeter or maybe Clint Eastwood.

Maybe they could find some guy in NH named Ritt Momney. Put him in the poll. He could peel the Dyslexia vote away from Romney.

There needs to be a constant between one poll to the next.

Ohio JOE said...

Well on the one hand, you have a good point, but on the other hand, we do not know who the actually candidates will be. Even if you assume (which I do not) that every potential candidate has a 50% chance of getting in, the odds are that somebody will get in. I guess you have to give Dr. Paul credit. At least most companies poll him last time they did not and this time they are not polling Mr. Charger and Mr. McCotter.

Of course they other thing that is fishy, is that PPP say that candidate X is winning all these states by huge margins, but Candidate Y is one point ahead nationally or vice versa. Haha, I guess in fairness to the polling companies, they do not know how many people will vote in each state, but still.

Ohio JOE said...

"Hey, why not throw in Derek jeeter or maybe Clint Eastwood." PPP has essentially done this long ago.

carlo said...

It sound like you and Doug were on the same page today.

Revolution 2012 said...




You're exactly right Bos. That's why I refuse to post results from previous polls.

How is it relevant to post numbers for candidates when(ex. Romney) one month you have Giuliani, and Perry in the mix, and the following poll, you have them missing and someone else added.

You need a constant for any real value.

Your suggestion would solve the problem.

kelly said...

Your suggestion makes a lot of sense.

That's probably the problem.

BOSMAN said...


As long as in the end, ONLY DECLARED CANDIDATES are on ONE CONTEST!

Because that would be the constant one that could be used from one poll to the next.

BOSMAN said...

Ron Paul 2012,

I wish I could say the same about a Paulbot!

BOSMAN said...


I have to confess, I got the idea from your last PPP NH GOP post.

I probably should have given you a H/T

Anonymous said...

Bosman, agreed. This is getting silly. It renders the results nearly meaningless.


larry said...

Excellent points Bosman.

Let's hope they listen.