You are incorrect. --- off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gullible fool said Ron Paul is not known outside of > Iowa. > You will eat your workds. > As will Authfriend and Boo > > OffWorld > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > You made up a quote and attributed it to me. I did > not > > say that. > > > > --- off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > "Ron Paul is not known outside of Iowa " - > Gullible > > > fool > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/2lztdr > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible > fool > > > <fflmod@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I had never heard of Ron Paul before I read > about > > > him > > > > in FFL. I have not heard about him outside of > FFL > > > > since then. I have to ask how people outside > of > > > Iowa > > > > even know who he is, if the news does nto > cover > > > him. > > > > Perhaps fewer than are in the domes these > days. > > > > > > > > --- off_world_beings > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > "boo_lives" > > > > > <boo_lives@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > First I work with advanced statistics > every > > > day, > > > > > and in political > > > > > > polling or market research a sample of > 15,000 > > > is > > > > > much more > > > > > significant > > > > > > than a sample of 266. > > > > > National polls for the entire country > typically > > > > > > use only a sample size of a few thousand. > But > > > I'm > > > > > not talking some > > > > > > kind of theoretical math, I'm talking > common > > > sense > > > > > politics. The > > > > > > Iowa straw poll is the one in which the > > > > > politicians are actually in > > > > > > the state wanting to win and the media are > in > > > the > > > > > state giving it > > > > > > coverage. >> > > > > > > > > > > You're still not getting it: > > > > > > > > > > Romney: 4516 votes; Paul: 1305 votes > > > > > > > > > > Romney: > > > > > 4516/3,000,000 = x/100 > > > > > = 0.15% > > > > > (insignificant) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul: > > > > > 1305/3,000,000 = x/100 > > > > > = 0.4% > > > > > (insignificant) > > > > > > > > > > The straw poll in Iowa has no significance, > with > > > a > > > > > Romney and > > > > > millions spent win. No-one cares it is not > > > > > significant. He amy win > > > > > the nomination though, I am not saying that. > But > > > > > this is not a > > > > > predictor of it. However, a Ron Paul win, or > > > other > > > > > underdog win > > > > > there would have been a massive national > news > > > item. > > > > > > > > > > <This has historically always been the case. > > > > > > There's not > > > > > > some conspiracy against Paul because the > > > Alabama > > > > > straw poll wasn't > > > > > > covered by the media, it never is! >> > > > > > > > > > > Conceded. I never said it was. Stop making > > > things > > > > > up. > > > > > > > > > > << And the politicians know that so > > > > > > they don't care about it! Except Paul > > > apparently - > > > > > in Alabama Paul > > > > > got > > > > > > 216 out of 266 votes - you think this is > > > > > statistically > > > > > representative > > > > > > of anything?? It's an absurd result>> > > > > > > > > > > Agreed. And so is the Iowa straw poll. > > > > > > > > > > it's not even an outlier in the > > > > > > universe of political polls out there > right > > > now. > > > > > It's meaningless > > > > > to > > > > > > win a race, when you're the only one there > > > trying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The iowa straw poll is not a good > statistical > > > > > predictor of exactly > > > > > how > > > > > > Iowa will "vote" at the caucus next year > > > because > > > > > it was a > > > > > relatively > > > > > > small turnout and you have to travel to > Ames > > > to > > > > > vote and you had to > > > > > > pay to vote, >> > > > > > > > > > > You have just shot yourself in the foot. > 26,000 > > > > > people paid to vote, > > > > > and only 14,700 actaully voted. > > > > > > > > > > Why is that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PS -- Let's put our statistical knowledge > to > > > the > > > > > test - I'll bet > > > > > you > > > > > > $1000 that Paul will not win the Iowa > Caucus > > > next > > > > > year.>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never said he would win it. Stop making > things > > > up. > > > > > > > > > > Ron Paul will not win the Republican > nomination, > > > as > > > > > I have said all > > > > > along. He will then run as an independent > and > > > make a > > > > > HUGE impact on > > > > > American politics. > > > > > > > > > > Excpet for one thing. The Diebold machines > will > > > be > > > > > used to swing all > === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________ Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
