0 votes

Pajamas Media Drops Ron Paul (Again)

Here's Pajamas Media explanation of why they dropped Ron Paul from their polling: (Thanks Patrick.)

Following the established rules of the Pajamas Media Straw Poll, Ron Paul, winner of the twenty-fifth week among the Republican candidates, has been dropped from the poll for the forthcoming period. Paul did not make the required minimum number of one percent on the most recent USA Today/Gallup Poll.

Despite heavy support from Internet groups for some time, the Texas Congressman continues not to make a dent on national polls. While our evidence is only anecdotal (many email complaints), Pajamas Media editors suspect that targeted voting by Paul supporters on this and other open polls may even be hurting their candidate because the public is turned off by his supporters’ behavior.

Interesting. What it looks like to me is that we have a showdown between old and new media. Comments anyone?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

PJ Media's bias

I've been watching this online poll since it was mentioned on LRC Blog a while back. Dr. Paul did well, so that make the 1% rule to exclude him. Dr. Paul exceeds the 1% threshold and he wins again. Now enter the criticism. For weeks now, when Dr. Paul wins the straw poll they belittle the win, by calling into question his support in their own straw poll by contrasting with scientific poll results. And now this week, he's not even in the poll (who cares, I say) and they still belittle his candidacy. Nary a word on the winner on the Republican side!

And yet again (this is a weekly occurrence) they've given Bill Richardson a pass: "Bill Richardson continues to lead on the Democratic side." Nary a word on how Bill Richardson has the same 'problem' as Dr. Paul. That is, no scientific poll support, but winning the online straw poll.

PJ Media, biased? Was there any doubt?

no group for antilibertarian media bias.

Good point. I wonder how that's happening? And the problem with this kind of media bias is that there's no specific group dedicated to fighting it like Newsbusters for the right or Mediamatters for the left, so even when people point out obvious bias as in this case, it gets ignored. Or at least, it used-to...

I run a few different web

I run a few different web browsers at once, so presumably it would be easy for me to get around cookie restrictions and vote more than once in these polls. I don't. I never have. I just vote for Dr. Paul ONCE. And if we're all just a few 'spammers,' how come we won that Fox News poll that required phone-texting instead of computers. Just how excellent are "our" alleged hackers supposed to be, anyway? Can phone text messages effectively be spoofed/duplicated at all? How??

I think what we're seeing is a case of massive media bias against Dr. Paul. At least one "conservative" media bias group -- "Newsbusters.org" -- is biased against him to the point that their masthead has not posted ONCE about the Paul campaign except in derisive, immature, and snarky "editor's picks," but I still mess with 'em, and I'm not the only Paul supporter over there, by any means. What I want to know is how Howard Dean's campaign avoided the "spammer" allegations? How does one disprove them, or prevent other campaigns from undertaking them (maybe Rudy has 'leet haxors?) and why are we the only ones accused. Anyway, my presence on that forum prevents serious BS from going unchallenged there, and thanks for this site, which I use extensively to refute stuff.

Polls are bogus

In the three phone polls I've answered (and I'm a long time registered republican who has voted in every primary and general for 20 years at least) not one has offered me the choice to vote for Dr Paul. It's always "other".

And that is not counted separately. So they could have 'other' and he could be 30% but you would not know it.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Is There Legal Recourse, Jane

...I mean if we could somehow request and be granted the poll takers questions on the major polls, ie. to see if "other" is offered and no possibility of answering Ron Paul .

Sure would clear some confusion, translate into great article content to spread and provide information to tell potential voters. They hear 1% and ask why. What you said above is a great answer.

I know the polls are "purchased" by someone; however, since the results clearly impact perception and can make or ruin someone's chances ....perhaps there is legal precedence. After all we aren't questioning who they call or how they are selected, we are only asking for the questions in order to learn if there is any real opportunity to say Ron Paul.

Also, when people are called...if other names are spoken and Ron's is not, that leaves the person being polled with the impression he is not a viable candidate and that is sure not fair.


Way to go, Jim!

Also, I read on the site that Jim Gilmore has dropped out of the race. This is great news, and can only lend legitimacy to Ron Paul's campaign, because he'll be less and less drowned out by the minor candidates.

Jim Gilmore

Jim is actually a nice fellow and had emergency eye surgery. I wish him best of luck and a speedy recovery.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers


This isn't important, not even remotely :)
Anyway, what's the purpose of having polls if you're simply going to base the choices on the results of OTHER POLLS? If you place so much authority on them, why even hold your own?

Pajamas...? Who?

I don't know who these people are, but it seems as though they are mighty impressed with themselves. How can anybody take them seriously? They appear to be a gathering of egos who want to make themselves important.

One thing about Dr. Paul, which few have acknowledged: he is about as egoless a politician as I have yet seen. This, to me, is highly desirable and intelligent, because the alternative is ego and arrogance. We have all seen plenty of ego from Rudy, Fred Thompson, McCain, Hillary, Obama, John Edwards and many of the others. These people are tipping their hands to display spiritual bankruptcy. But Dr. Paul is a modest man, with no other agenda than to save the Republic. I don't hear anybody else saying that or even discussing it. So stick that in your pajamas.

Droped their poll from my site

Notice how they conveniently left all the other candidates up on the poll but dropped out Paul? Its this corporate media bias that I am fed up with so I already removed their voting widget from my site and I doubt I will be going to their site again. I only went there every now and then to vote in that poll, pretty much no reason to go there now.

Agreed, the Iowa Straw Poll

Agreed, the Iowa Straw Poll is the only poll with any meaning at this point. As for pajamasmedia, they're cherry picking polls to eliminate Ron Paul. Though he showed up at less than 1% in the USA Today poll, he's regularly hitting 2-3% in other scientific polls. In fact, in most polls these days he's trailing Huckabee at the top of the second tier.

More important matters . . .

These online straw polls are meaningless. They are a waste of time. Look, the Iowa straw poll is coming up fast. The Ron Paul message needs to reach Iowa and quickly.

We should just shut up about Dr. Paul....(kidding)

"......Pajamas Media editors suspect that targeted voting by Paul supporters on this and other open polls may even be hurting their candidate because the public is turned off by his supporters’ behavior....."

Since when is showing support for a candidate bad behavior?

Ohhhhhhh, it's his MESSAGE they they don't like.

I suspect Pajamas Media's mailbox will soon be overflowing with love.

- - Patrick




Yeah, that little snarkey note they added to it is very arrogant. We know now that Paul support is very real. (we can look at dollars not clicks).

I wouldn't worry about what some internet site does. He doesn't need them anymore to show supporters.

Actually, what I would like to see is some hit statistics from dailypaul.com

MSM Polls are Meaningless

My comment is USA Today/Gallup polls are part of the MSM propaganda machine and are, therefore, useless as sources of meaningful information.