America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

How Ron Paul could win nomination - By David Rothschild

Ron Paul has a 7.5 percent likelihood of winning the Republican nomination, based on data from prediction markets. That puts him in 3rd place, behind Mitt Romney at 47.7 percent and Newt Gingrich at 33.7 percent, but ahead of Jon Huntsman at 5.4 percent.

Real Clear Politics has Paul at 9.3 percentage points in its latest aggregated poll trend for the Republican primary. Among active candidates, that puts him 3rd behind Gingrich at 33.3 percentage points and Romney at 22.0 percentage points. The prediction markets and polls paint a picture of the race for the Republican nomination that contrasts with many indicators talked about on the internet.


Ron Paul is by far the most popular candidate in The Signal's comment section. In every article we post there are streams of comments on Ron Paul. First, thank you for commenting! We appreciate that you are reading the articles and taking the time to comment on them. Yet, the readership of The Signal is not a representative sample of the relevant electorate and the subset of The Signal's readers that choose to post comments are an even less representative subset of the relevant electorate. Thus, being the most popular among those people who comment on this website is not a powerful indicator of the election outcome. What matters is the popularity among those people that will participate in the Republican primary contests.

Ron Paul is leading or in second place in many straw polls, but again, these are not representative samples of the relevant electorate. Straw polls are conducted among a self-selected group of highly motivated members of the electorate. They indicate strong and dedicated support, an important attribute in elections. But, elections are decided across a much larger electorate that does not resemble this smaller subgroup.

Similarly, Paul dominates positive tweets in an atmosphere that is incredibly negative. But, tweets originate from an unrepresentative segment of the electorate who can "vote" many, many times.

Prediction markets are the most efficient predictor of election results and they give Paul a non-negligible, but small likelihood of winning the Republican nomination. A prediction market allows political handicappers to back up their convictions with real money. The price is an aggregate reflection of how much people are willing to pay for contracts that expire at $1 if Paul wins the nomination and $0 if he does not. Users from around the world act based on any information they have, including well-known central signals of upcoming events like polls and past results, as well as less obvious, more disaggregated indicators.

Even if Ron Paul wins Iowa, where he is currently trailing only Gingrich, he faces a very difficult struggle to win the Republican nomination. A loss to Paul would greatly diminish Gingrich's position as the anyone-but-Romney candidate. There is a high likelihood that Paul would become the anyone-but-Romney candidate, but that is not guaranteed. So, if Paul is 28.8 percent likely to win Iowa, that mean he has at most a 28.8 percent likelihood of becoming the anyone-but-Romney candidate as a result of the Iowa Caucus.

Even if Paul becomes the anyone-but-Romney candidate, Romney would still be favored to win the nomination; Ron Paul is a very principled and disciplined libertarian, which does not put him near the mainstream Republican platform. As a libertarian, Paul has been very consistent in his belief in small government; he advocates little interference in domestic social policy, domestic economic policy, and foreign policy. Many of the leading Republican politicians have advocated a hands-off approach to the economy, but their record runs the spectrum from true libertarians to heavy influence on the side of certain business. Yet, the Republican party has at best mixed platform on government influence on social domestic policy and foreign policy, and very little interesting in trimming military spending.

Iowa is Paul's best hope of an early victory; a loss there would be devastating to his nomination hopes.

When I predict the outcome of the Republican primary, I am predicting what the data tells me what will happen, not what I wish would happen. I applaud Paul's strength of conviction, both when I agree and disagree with him. Paul's main path to victory is winning Iowa, becoming the anyone-but-Romney candidate and then beating Romney. Accomplishing all three is an unlikely, but possible task and that is why the prediction markets have Paul at 7.4 percent to the gain the nomination.

So, I pose the question to you, what do you think Paul's path to the nomination looks like? Follow along on PredictWise for real-time likelihoods of the Republican nomination and the individual Republican primaries.



http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/signal/ron-paul-could-win-105810338.html

And ObamaKs fans are all douchebags......what's your point?

Damn pesky constitution....

His point is that he hates the principals that founded this nation. He buys the lies that he's a racist because he can't argue with the guy on any intelligent level. Name-calling is all he has.

He's in favor of a socialistic sloth cradle to grave government that wakes him up, brushes his teeth, gives him a job, puts food on his table and tucks him in at night.

He despises anyone that dares adheres to the Constitution or libertarian principals.

Therefore, he hates Dr. Paul, what he stands for and what this nation could be under his leadership.

A total audit of the Federal Reserve and the dismantling of it, the restoration of personal freedoms and a balanced budget are his groundwork.

The Kenyan King is the polar opposite and as we've seen is disasterous with the sheeple and Capitalism crumbling. His ineffective leadership is the same stylings of Mittens or Newt. Progressives suck open ass and have killed this nation.

If he doesn't win the nomination, I will be writing in his name.

lol

I wish I could be as righteous as you n stuff. As if you wouldn't mention it if a Democratic candidate bought ads on a racist web site.

So your position is that the founding fathers were libertarian? Nice revisionism.

If it had been proven wrong it wouldn't be a blip on my radar. However; you KNOW it's a lie and perpetuate it. You and Wheels are the only ones here that make the claim he's a racist.

If our Founding Fathers weren't libertarian what were they? They pulled squirrel rifles off their mantels to take on the mightiest army at that time and won. They knew what tyranny was and lived under it. Their grand experiment has been prostituted with progressives and the entire "interpretations" of the word of Law. No, there's no revising history there. You just don't know, nor do you care to learn the very history that made this nation the greatest in the world.

Who proved what wrong? The ad wasn't on stormfront's site?

So again, you think the founding fathers were libertarian?

Sigh...he never bought ads on Stormfront. Just because a lot of neo nazis support him doesn't make your "guilt by association" claim stick. The KKK endorsed McCain in 2008. Does that make McCain a racist?

Did you also buy into Obama's "guilt by association" with regard to Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright?

So Ron Paul = Obama x 3 ?

That doesn't sound good at all.

He just needs a little more time...

I'm betting that Dr. Paul wouldn't need the teleprompter...bow to foreign leaders...have a plan that would actually work and the fortitude to get it done and allow Capitalism to thrive instead of picking winners and installing unions.

3 times better is a good thing.

Ad that appeared on Stormfront.

http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/stormfront2.jpg
http://www.israellycool.com/2007/10/05/really-really-stupid-people/

Paul keeps donation from white supremacist
12/19/2007 4:44:27 PM ET

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

White separatist ran as Ron Paul delegate in Tennessee
March 12, 2008
By ERIK SCHELZIG
Associated Press Writer

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A self-described white nationalist earned nearly 12,000 votes in Tennessee as a failed candidate to represent Ron Paul at the Republican National Convention.

Will Williams, who told The Associated Press he's "pro-white" and is against interracial marriages "because they can't make white babies," was an early organizer for the Texas congressman's campaign in northeast Tennessee.

"I have a world view that's ethnocentric, I believe my people are worth preserving," Williams said. "I think we need to have our living space, our breathing space. We need to protect our gene pool."

Williams, 60, of Mountain City, said he had no direct contact with Paul about his views before the campaign approved him to join the slate of 21 statewide candidates to be convention delegates.

"He didn't endorse me, he signed off on the list of volunteer delegates," Williams said.

Paul's signature is on the list of delegate candidates that Tennessee election officials used to draw up the ballot, but spokesman Jesse Benton said Wednesday that the campaign was unaware of Williams' views.

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t849303-6/

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_N7kXk1D1GmU/R4i9P6ZPj0I/AAAAAAAAAGc/JyvFQpPyF_s/s1600/ron_paul_antiracist.jpg



Stormfront Radio endorses Ron Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBz_7yrJKq0

An LGF reader emailed this photograph, showing Ron Paul at the Values Voters Presidential Debate in Fort Lauderdale on September 17, 2007. Immediately to Paul’s left: Don Black, the owner of neo-Nazi hate site Stormfront. The guy on the right is Black's son.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20071220RonPaulDonBlack.jpg[/quote]






lol, nope. But the conservatives here still bring it up so using the same logic. . . .

I didn't say Paul was a racist either. I'm saying the campaign had ads on the site.

I think the government numbers already do that. No need for the media to twist it.

I never said the founding fathers didn't have some principles that the libertarian party has today. I agree with several of the statement of principles the Libertarian party has on their platform, especially the social issues.

Now the founding fathers started with a set of principles that were and are the best we have had so far in history, but that doesn't mean they were sent from heaven and everything they said or thought is scripture. It's not a productive pursuit to speak to the founding father's 'thoughts' as a lot of what people attribute to the founding fathers now is based on their view of the world today forcing those ideas on the FF's. Truth is they based their ideas on the situation over 200 years ago and knew they couldn't forsee it all so they added the ammendment process to the constitution. Having said that, no I didn't say that I think we should get rid of the constitution, and yes I do think that the FF's principles were sound and should not be dismissed.

And no party does or holds the 'true' founder's vision as the definition of 'true' is based on your perspective. The only proof of this required is when those on the right who say they are the protectors of the constitution while offering ammendment after ammendment to fit their world view now with regards to marriage, abortion, citizenship etc.

Sorry if you think that's too nuanced, but it's just the way it is.

Yet you really feel that Owedumba is closer aligned to the FF's and the documents they wrote than Dr. Paul?

Thank God we all have you watching FoxNews for us...You Report...We'll decide.

Where are you seeing these things you think I'm saying?

^Look at the fricking math major!

Trick question. She always gets the stuffed spud skins. And deep fried cheese sticks.

Well, then I guess the stuff I read 4 years ago was wrong. I remembered reading it on several sites and if they are wrong, so be it. There are also pictures of meetings with the Stormfront guys. I guess people made the connection when they saw the ad link to donate to Ron Paul.

I also said that I don't buy the guilt by association things like Obama to Ayers, or Paul is a racist because racists like him, but that "the conservatives here still bring it (Ayers) up so using the same logic". . . . Be consistant. If the Ayers thing means Obama 'pals around with terrorists' as Palin said, then Paul 'pals around with nazis'.

Moore did the following:

"The rabble-rousing Moore had great on-camera fun writing checks for 80 cents ("The first hours wage for a Mexican worker") that he tried—along with a Downsizer of the Year Award – to present to Johnson Products of Milwaukee. He also sent a $100 check for Pat Buchanan's presidential campaign from Abortionists for Buchanan and checks from Satan Worshippers for Dole, Pedophiles for Free Trade (Perot), and Hemp Growers for Clinton – all of which were hilariously cashed."

Now if someone was running on your ticket and they have views that he is 'unaware' of, then that's also a problem don't you think?

"Paul's signature is on the list of delegate candidates that Tennessee election officials used to draw up the ballot, but spokesman Jesse Benton said Wednesday that the campaign was unaware of Williams' views."

Was Obama's association with Bill Ayers perhaps a little more involved than this Ron Paul association we're talking about?

Both supported each candidate and were at meetings where they both were, Paul even had pics, and I don't remember an Ayers donation but I'm pretty sure Obama wouldn't have taken it considering the attacks being made on him at the time.

So no, not really.

Here's an attack from the right against Paul for his 'connections'. A conservative magazine and they got real harsh on Paul.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html

Despite Corky McSnickerdoodles best attempt to derail a thread with smear after smear who running for POTUSA right now do you think is more aligned with:



Restoring personal freedoms?



Reaching across the aisle to get matters resolved?



Restore American pride here and abroad?



Solve the budget mess?



Expose the enemy within that has been killing wealth for centuries?


Sorry, but everyone else is bought and paid for.

Holding your nose while you choose the Newt Romney candidate is what gave us the bad run of leadership that's put us where we are. The rest of the pack is really just trying out for the VP position. I'd consider Santorum but I'm more aligned to Dr. Paul and his beliefs than any johnnie come lately or candidate du jour. I want someone that can get things done like a balanced budget. It's something that millions of Americans have to wrestle with every paycheck. Our current leadership can't even WRITE out one to pass!

So? Who twirls your beeney up on the stage right now.