« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Uh, Rand Paul Didn’t ‘Win’ The CPAC Straw Poll

By: Matt Vespa (Diary)  |  March 18th, 2013 at 06:36 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) has won the CPAC 2013 straw poll.  Hooray! However, it’s not true. Contrary to what the Huffington Post, the Washington Post, the Washington Times (who conducted the poll), CBS, and CNN, have reported Sen. Paul tied with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida), which places him in a good position for 2016.

Aaron Blake for the Post wrote:

Paul won 25 percent of the vote in a field of potential 2016 GOP presidential contenders, clearing the support level of second-place finisher Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who took 23 percent. Former senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) took 8 percent, while New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), who was not invited to CPAC, took 7 percent.

Yes, the CPAC straw poll isn’t a good indicator for 2016.  Case in point, Rep. Ron Paul won the 2011 poll.  However, in polling, a difference of 2 percentage points is a tie, and we should consider it as such.

Here are the full results.

Tags: , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • midwestconservative

    I don’t know why Ben Carson was on this, find him a Senate seat to run for, but don’t start saying he should be a Presidential Candidate

    • http://llphsecondrevolution.wordpress.com/ spoasteph97

      I somewhat agree. But he does live in Maryland and the chances of him winning a senate seat there is close to 0.

      • midwestconservative

        He was born in Detroit, and he announced he was retiring from John Hopkins Hospital, its about two more years to the midterm, Ben has stated he plans on educating the youth, then who knows he could always move to Michigan, they have an open senate seat, and it wouldn’t look like a carpet bagger, or he could travel a few miles south and run in Virginia, if Bob McDonnell decides to make himself even more useless and refuse to challenge Warner, in hopes he won’t lose and thereby stay viable for 2016

      • midwestconservative

        Ofcourse the establisment seems prepped to back Scott Romney up in Michigan, all I can say is I hope he is a better campaigner than his brother elsewise we aren’t even trying

        • PowerToThePeople

          Who is this establishment you are talking about. Could you give me some names or is it just a word you like to use that really has no meaning? And considering who has been the reps in MI, let me also know what problem you have with Scott working to replace them. That is unless those bastard “establishment” people will not let you expose them and speak ill of Scott.

          • midwestconservative

            sorry new info, Scott Romney declined to run, a couple of GOP reps are possible candidates, Justin Amash and Mike Rogers are the biggest names, and I don’t have any problem with a Romney running, only that he might prove to be a lousy campaigner, the GOP needs a rough and ready candidate up there, either way it doesn’t matter now

        • adair

          I believe he is 70+ years old. Is he running for a Senate seat? Age hasn’t deterred Senators like, say McCain; he holds fast to his solid conservative core beliefs year after year after … oh wait ….

          • midwestconservative

            Ben Carson I think is late 50′s or early 60s, anyway was that the guy you were talking about?

  • Bill S

    Straw polls are a joke, period. Anyone who takes them seriously needs to seek professional help.

  • Frederick

    This was not a scientific poll. Therefore, there is no statistical margin of error. Even if it were scientific, a sample of this size significantly decreases that margin (in this case, with a sample of 2900 and a population of 311 million, 1.82% at 95% confidence interval).

    But it’s not scientific. It’s a straw poll and there are only winners and losers. Rand Paul won, Rubio was in second, and neither one is likely to be the 2016 Presidential candidate based on these results.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    This isn’t a ‘poll’ in the sense you’re thinking. This is a straw poll,w hich is an actual counting of votes.

    Rand Paul won the straw poll. It’s meaningless in an entirely DIFFERENT way.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Why would you assume it’s just one person?

    • bobmark

      Didn’t, that’s why I said “only big name”. If you can think of who all “other” might be referring to please help me out. I kinda figured “none of the above” fell into the “undecided” category, maybe that’s who “Other:” is.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        Other is every other person who got votes.

  • keepcoolwithcoolidge

    Just add Paul, Rubio, and Cruz together. 52% want a candidate with a more or less identical voting record in the Senate. Throw in Walker and we get 57% of CPAC attendees. Not bad considering Romney won it last year.