Which GOP leads the polls? NONE OF THE ABOVE...

[exigent]

What is this, a Richard Pryor movie?


WASHINGTON (AP) -- And the leading Republican presidential candidate is ... none of the above.


Though Rudy Giuliani leads GOP candidates, more Republican poll respondents said they didn't favor any of the candidates.

The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that nearly a quarter of Republicans are unwilling to back top-tier hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain or Mitt Romney, and no one candidate has emerged as the clear front-runner among Christian evangelicals. Such dissatisfaction underscores the volatility of the 2008 GOP nomination fight.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/17/presidential.poll.none.ap/index.html

[lily]

I thought Thompson was going to be their salvation?

I'm telling you people......keep talking about impeachment and this will give them a viable candidate!

[Buck Laser]

I thought Thompson was going to be their salvation?

I'm telling you people......keep talking about impeachment and this will give them a viable candidate!


I thought Ol' Fred was gonna announce on July 4. Maybe he's holding out for a better deal.

[Dr. Debate]

Fred Thompson should win the Republican Nomination.

I see him getting a lot of Christian Votes, considering he hasn't divorced or anything like that (unlike McCain and Giuliani). He himself is a strong Prodestant, and his moral values show it. I see him as a likely candidate for winning the whole election.

[qedtanya]

The reason it's none of the above is because Ron Paul wasn't listed!

[Truth_and_Power]

Fred Thompson should win the Republican Nomination.

I see him getting a lot of Christian Votes, considering he hasn't divorced or anything like that (unlike McCain and Giuliani). He himself is a strong Prodestant, and his moral values show it. I see him as a likely candidate for winning the whole election.


haha

[Labrocca]

I don't see this as a bad thing. The GOP has choices while the Dems have 2. Once the primaries are over and a clear candidate is chosen...whoever that person is will automatically imho poll better than Obama or Hillary. There are some great choices in the GOP running. Most aren't perfect but some have great leadership skills. Something neither Hillary or Obama have.

[exigent]

I don't see this as a bad thing. The GOP has choices while the Dems have 2.


Dams have 2 front runners and several scrambling for a top tier spot...and this can be seen as a bad thing for Reps because it show those polled are not comfortable with the choices. With similiar Dem polls...those polled were confident enough to actually stand behind one of the candidates.

[lily]

Fred Thompson should win the Republican Nomination.

I see him getting a lot of Christian Votes, considering he hasn't divorced or anything like that (unlike McCain and Giuliani). He himself is a strong Prodestant, and his moral values show it. I see him as a likely candidate for winning the whole election.


Whether it is fair or not, he's going to be raked through the coals for having that trophy wife that's young enough to be his daughter.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Fred Thompson should win the Republican Nomination.

I see him getting a lot of Christian Votes, considering he hasn't divorced or anything like that (unlike McCain and Giuliani). He himself is a strong Prodestant, and his moral values show it. I see him as a likely candidate for winning the whole election.


haha


I'm sure he meant other than his first wife. If you don't count her then, no, he hasn't divorced. Everyone deserves a freebie, right? The right sets such high family values standards that you can't seriously expect them to meet their standards. It's not like any of the anti-family values democrats have been able to sustain a succesful marriage. Oh wait.......

[ECW]

It's not like any of the anti-family values democrats have been able to sustain a succesful marriage. Oh wait.......

http://ap.grolier.com/images/cache/039/news0363.jpg

http://chicagobusiness.com/images/society/20061113/society%2011%201.jpg

http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/news/070409/elizabeth_edwards.jpg

[DANG]

The reason it's none of the above is because Ron Paul wasn't listed!
You may have something there.

Check what the oddsmakers are saying:
Gambling 911 (http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-071807.html)

Ron Paul Factor: Polling Data Flawed
The web surfers love him more than any other 2008 Presidential candidate. Ron Paul is the most sought after candidate featured by Gambling911.com. The oddsmakers have responded by maintaining him at 15 to 1 odds of winning (slashed from 200 to 1). Ron Paul just happens to be the only candidate who supports legalizing online poker.

"When it comes to politics, the oddsmakers have been far more accurate than the polls," explains Gambling911.com Senior Editor, Payton O'Brien.

Ron Paul also has more campaign money in his coffers than John McCain.

Gambling911.com Special Contributor, Jennifer Reynolds, might know why. She has come out with fisticuffs flying against Pajamas Media (PM), which Ms. Reynolds says "cannot be a credible source of polling data".

"They claim that because the USA Today ran a poll of a mere 394 persons and Ron Paul did not receive support, that gives PM no choice but to not include Dr. Paul for the forthcoming period," Reynolds said.

Her article appears in its entirety below.

------

By Leaving Ron Paul Out as a Choice Pajamas Media Cannot be Credible Source of Polling Data.

Pajamas Media (PM) has been running a weekly Presidential Straw Poll on their website. Every week that Ron Paul has been listed he has come out on top. (Scroll through the weekly results to see the numbers.)

Last week, in fact, he was leading with 54.7% of the vote and Fred Thomson received 25.1%. This week PM decided not to include Ron Paul as a choice and surprise, surprise, Fred Thomson jumped all the way up to 54.7%. That sounds remarkable you say. Why would they do that? How can any result be credible if they don't include all of the candidates? Their response is nothing short of astounding. They claim that because the USA Today ran a poll of a mere 394 persons and Ron Paul did not receive support, that gives PM no choice but to not include Dr. Paul for the forthcoming period.

So, question for you, PM: Do you or do you not believe in your own straw polls? If so, then why would you leave out the candidate who has won your poll by a large margin every time you have listed him? If not, then why are you wasting everyone's time. You might as well just have announced that your own polls mean nothing at all and we should all stop reading your website and go to USA Today. Well, you just may find that a lot of Ron Paul supporters will stop reading both.

Even the USA Today admits that because their sample size is so tiny that they have a margin of error of +/-5 percentage points: Which could mean Ron Paul has FIVE percent of the vote. But that wouldn't give PM a reason to exclude Ron Paul.

Now that PM has removed the top candidate their polls cannot be considered scientific or have any kind of reliability. At this point their straw polls are no more useful than a blogger who puts a poll into a blog response.


To be fair, Pajamas Media also claimed to have dropped Jim Gilmore from their poll because he too did not reach one percent in the USA Today poll. However, Jim Gilmore has also dropped out of the Presidential race so it is hardly a fair comparison.

PM also had the unmitigated gall to claim that ....

More... (http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-071807.html)

Sportsbook has Ron Paul beating Fred Thompson:
Ron Paul 15 to 1 ::: Fred Thompson 20 to 1 (http://www.gambling911.com/Sportsbook.com-Online-Gambling.html) (Against all contenders (including dems))

As the above article points out: His (Ron Paul's) supporters keep getting in the way of our results!

[ECW]

Well, either the numbers lie or the pollsters lie. Which is it?

[DANG]

Well, either the numbers lie or the pollsters lie. Which is it?
You didnt quote any text...should I assume you were speaking to my article?
The Pollster (Pajama Media) lied, by not including Paul, who is still a viable candidate (in fact he is the TOP candidate) , this ficticiously gave undeserved support to Thompson.

So, the numbers lie BECAUSE the pollster lied by deleting a contender.

[preservanation]

Numbers don't lie, people do.

[qedtanya]

Numbers don't lie, people do.


Numbers lie if the people in charge of them manipulate them which is what pajamas media tend to do. So in this case, the numbers lied because the people told them to....oops there goes my tinfoil hat!