Thread: Analyzing the Ron Paul Numbers in Iowa

There are a number of reasons to be encouraged by Ron Paul's showing in Iowa.

The morning after Ron Paul's stronger-than-expected 10% showing in Iowa was no surprise to Paul supporters (and probably disappointing to some), but it had to come as a bit of a surprise to most of the pollsters. Over the past week, most pollsters had Paul in the 5-8% range. So 10% pushes the limit on "margin of error" and suggests that Paul supporters have been right all along. His support is underrepresented in the polls.

Paul wasn't the only candidate the pollsters were wrong about. Rudy Giuliani was consistently polling in mid-teen double-digits up until about a week ago, but he ended up at 4%. He had fallen to the 5-8% range within the past few days, but 4% has to be considered a monumental drop for him. Mike Huckabee's poll numbers were consistently 5 points lower than what he actually got. The other candidates were pretty much in line with what the pollsters thought they would get.

It's not a surprise that Huckabee picked up extra points the night of the caucus. People love to vote for the likely "winner," which is probably where his extra 5% comes from, but the Giuliani and Paul numbers should give pollsters pause to reconsider. Essentially, it looks like Giuliani lost the lion's share of his support to Paul and Huckabee.

CNN entrance polls are even more interesting when you look at them up close.

For instance (and not surprisingly) when asked to rate their feelings about the Bush administration, Paul supporters represented 54% of those said they were "angry" at Bush out of all "angry" voters. These represented only 5% of the overall totals, which is also not surprising given that most Republican activists are Bush supporters, but it's very helpful in terms of understanding how much pull Paul could have among the overall electorate who tend to hold our current King George in relatively low esteem.

Paul was also the clear winner among Republican caucus goers who view themselves as being "independent" rather than identifying with the Republican party, with 29% of that group's support (well ahead of Romney at 19%). Independents accounted for 13% of overall Republican caucus goers.

Paul's support is stronger among lower-income Americans. He tied for third with John McCain with 14% of people making less than $50,000 a year, and scored a high of 18% (second place) among those making $15,000 to $30,000 annually.

He also finished a strong third among young Iowans. Voters in the 18-29 age range picked Paul 21% of the time, just one tick behind Romney who was in second place.

One thing I couldn't find was any reference to what the results were among cell phone users. We may have to wait awhile before this information comes out, but it would be very interesting to see how much of Paul's extra support came from voters who have cell phones but not land lines.

Margin of error is usually +/- 3% or in some cases 4.5%. Pew is 5%. Zogby had Paul at 10% in Iowa. Guiliani was polling at a 6% avg going in, so, it was pretty accurate (definitely within moe.) Huckabee got 34% and was polling around 29%. He was the only one not within the margin of error.

well he beat Giuliani. That's good enough for me. And that second choice thing might be muting the actual votes he got. And raising Mike Huckabee's.

Originally Posted by Blueneck

well he beat Giuliani. That's good enough for me. And that second choice thing might be muting the actual votes he got. And raising Mike Huckabee's.

Guilliani didnt even campaign in Iowa?...That shouldnt be good enough for you.

Originally Posted by Pansit

Guilliani didnt even campaign in Iowa?...That shouldnt be good enough for you.

Not according to this map: Election Guide 2008 - Presidential Election - Politics

Truth is, most everyone has campaigned everywhere more than Paul. I'm not entirely sure why. Perhaps because he's still employed in the house and still does his job, perhaps he just didn't have the money until recently. Either way, Giuliani campaigned just as much as Paul, despite what he says. He probably doesn't think he campaigned much there because of all the campaigning elsewhere he has done while unemployed.