Limbaugh: Ron Paul’s Supporters Spamming Polls

Conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh told his audience yesterday that he has the power to choose the Republican presidential nominee, and also went on to say that Ron Paul doesn’t have a “snowball’s chance” at getting the nomination. He then chided Ron Paul’s campaign and supporters for “spamming” opinion polls in the congressman’s favor.

The story is available here.

Paul was in the limelight during last night’s debate as he was confronted by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who objected to Paul’s suggestion that prolonged U.S. presence in the Middle East was a contributing factor to the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“They attack us because we’ve been over there. We’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. ... We’ve been in the Middle East,” Paul, an opponent of the Iraq war, explained. “Right now, we’re building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting.

“They are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, ‘I’m glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.’ They have already now since that time they’ve killed 3,400 of our men and I don’t think it was necessary,” he continued.

30 Responses to “Limbaugh: Ron Paul’s Supporters Spamming Polls”

  1. Richard Winger Says:

    Ron Paul also mentioned that the U.S. maneuvered to dump Iran’s Premier Mossadegh in 1953 and replace him with the dictatorial Shah, and that this was the root of so much hostility toward the U.S. that bit us in 1979. I agree with his point and wish the press had mentioned that point.

  2. granny miller Says:

    Rush is a has been and doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    I don’t belive for a moment that Ron Paul’s campaign or his supporters (like me) are “spamming” opinion polls.

    The view from here is that the GOP is scared….and they should be.

    I’m voting for Ron Paul if I have to write him in. He’s the only one out there that represents me.

  3. Michael Says:

    While I am willing to give Ron Paul’s people the benefit of doubt and say they are not spamming the polls, I have to say to G.M. that Rush is not a has been. (Paragraph) 550 radio stations. No one else comes close to that total. Rush doesn’t sound like a has been to me!

  4. Tom Bryant Says:

    A good way to see if Ron Paul’s supporters are spamming internet polls is to compare them with scientific polls conducted (if there are any). I would guess that Paul’s supporters are spamming internet polls, and that scientific polls would show Paul’s support is really low.

    If I’m wrong, and Paul has that support, then we should see a massive amount of contributions in his next filing from all those individuals who support him.

    If not, then the media shouldn’t care. Having a lot of supporters that don’t put their money where their mouth is not newsworthy.

  5. SovereignMN Says:

    I’m inclined to agree with you Tom. Paul supporters need to put their money where their mouth is donate. I gave a little last week and will probably do so again in a few months.

    Of course these on-line polls aren’t scientific. Paul isn’t that popular. But I’m also leery of accusing him (or his supporters) or rigging the polls. Could it be that ALL of these polls from the dozens of sites have been rigged? If so, then they all need to get new software! I have been voting for Paul in many on-line polls but not as any part of a conspiracy or coordinated effort. I imagine Paul’s supporters are just more enthusiastic about their candidate.

    I recorded the debate last night but haven’t watched it yet. I’ve certainly read about what happened but I can’t wait to see it for myself.

  6. rj Says:

    I’m thinking one of Paul’s opponents is going to grandstand and try to get him excommunicated from the party. We need to stand by him people. Last night’s debate, his questioning from Fox News and the post show was not an attack on Ron Paul, it was an attack on libertarianism. How many times was he asked “are you running for President of the wrong party?”

    Did anyone else watch the post-show. Sean Hannity came across as a 12-year-old last night every 5 minutes deriding Paul. (It’s your employer’s stupid poll dumbass, and you told us to call!) I reserve my worst contempt for Michael Steele. Isn’t this guy the head of the RNC? He said last night “Ron Paul is done for me.” First, he never started for you, does not represent you, never has, and never will. The Republican establishment is only represented by 3 of the guys on that stage last night, and incase you haven’t noticed, that’s why people have a low opinion of the Democratic and Republican Party Leaderships!

    Since when is it anti-American to say neoconservatism is a dumbass philosophy the equivalent of Napoleon going into the Russian winter?

  7. globalist_elitist Says:

    It is very obvious: Democrats and liberals support Ron Paul in online polls when they have no Democratic choice. Duh. How do people not realize this?

    Regardless: Ron Paul should know that facts have no place in a Republican debate. All he needs to know is that “we” have never done anything wrong, ever, and that the terrorists hate us because we are so free. The Patriot Act, etc., makes them hate us less.

    Did anyone see Fuckface Hannity actually trying to tell Ron Paul that Congress DID declare war on Iraq?

  8. ElfNinosMom Says:

    The only thing this proves is that Rush Limbaugh really is a big fat idiot. LOL

  9. [email protected] Says:

    Let’s assume, for a moment, that Ron Paul’s supporters are spamming the polls. That would be a pretty big job, given the sheer traffic levels of the venues that he’s done well on (MSNBC, Faux “News,” etc.), but okay, fine, he’s doing it.

    Does anyone believe that supporters of the OTHER candidates aren’t doing the same thing? That’s one reason why these polls aren’t scientific and why their results often diverge from the results of properly conducted real polls (i.e. random sample, no leading questions, etc.).

    If this is all a matter of poll spamming, then an important question to ask is why guys like Romney, Giuliani and McCain, who apparently can’t even put together a posse of fans who are sufficiently dedicated and competent to out-spam Ron Paul, think they can put together administrations which would be sufficiently dedicated and competent to operate the federal government.

  10. Jay Matthews Says:

    Pawn Hannity is a disgrace to broadcast journalism. You can set your watch by how quickly he interrupts guests he dislikes. He makes O’Reilly seem like a pacificist. I’m not a fan but at least he gives others the last word. Hannity wants all the words: the question, the answer, the rebuttal, and the rebuttal to the rebuttal. And yes, if a Pawn favorite was leading in the polls it would have suddenly been credible. You can cut Paul’s percentage in half, he still came in third.

    Ron Paul could run circles around Giuliani, Hannity, and anyone else who thinks decades of middle east interference has nothing to do with hostilities toward the America. How could Giuliani POSSIBLY take issue with that stance? It’s mind-boggling until you realize he’s largely a one-trick pony candidate and had he not been the mayor during 9/11 there’s a good chance the media would be talking about the eight second-tier candidates.

    Giuliani and the media that support him seem to think showing up after the fact wearing a hardhat and standing around rubble makes him a national security expert when it makes him if anything a clean-up expert. Security means something is free from danger. Danger wasn’t averted on 9/11.

    It’s unfortunate that while Paul’s response was well thought out and sensible, he could have slam-dunked Giuliani.

    And is it me or did many responses from other candidates sound more Ron Paul-esque during this debate? Also, it seemed Fox spent more time addressing Romney, McCain, and Giuliani than MSNBC did.

  11. George Phillies Says:

    For those of you who are actually interested, there really are a lot of scientific polls out there, both on ‘who do you support for the R*** nomination’ and ‘who do you think won the debate’? (Actually, I have only seen polls on debate 1.)

    http://www.pollster.com collects them fairly efficiently.

    Most readers will find them educational.

    If supporters of a candidates are doing organized poll spamming, evidence should be easy to locate. The amount of pro-Paul spamming I get from the allegedly nonpartisan free state project via porcupine yahoogroup lists certainly shows one path for getting to this objective.

  12. Brian Says:

    Let me apologize up front for the language but after I seen Rudy Giuliani pull the stunt he did, only one word came to my mind: cocksucker. Serious - I agree with the rest. I think it’s disgusting that he uses a tragedy like 9/11 as a platform to be President and flashes it every time he’s on stage.

  13. Austin Cassidy Says:

    Ditto to what g_e said… it’s less spamming and more just Democrats voting in a Republican poll.

    I would bet lots of Republicans vote for Dennis Kucinich and stuff in Democratic polls, just to mess with them. Plus, Paul is anti-war… so he’s naturally the choice of most Dems if they had to vote in a GOP primary. But they don’t… so it’s not going to translate to money or votes for Paul in the primaries.

  14. Gene Berkman Says:

    Spamming is probably the wrong word. The poll software prevents multiple entries from the same computer, so the numbers really do show that alot of computer literate people support Ron Paul and other Libertarian candidates.

    The only other candidate getting significant support in online polls in Mitt Romney, but nobody is accusing Mormons of spamming the polls.

    Still, one of the more establishment candidates will be the Republican nominee. We should do all we can to back Ron Paul now - he is representing the Libertarian viewpoint right now - and then work on Libertarian campaigns for Congress next year. We have to change the political culure at the local level before we can see a change in national politics.

  15. globalist_elitist Says:

    Austin - I don’t think that Democrats are voting for Ron Paul to “mess with” the polls. I think they are voting for him because of his anti-war stance. Dennis Kucinich is not a good corolary. If Joe Lieberman were running, I bet he would be “winning” Democratic debates the same way Paul is winning the GOP contests.

  16. George Whitfield Says:

    I was really impressed by Congressman Paul’s courage, knowledge and wisdom. I am so glad I contributed to his campaign and wish him the best!

  17. Devious David Says:

    After all the hooah, it’s obvious that this is a good thing for Ron Paul, and the GOPers are in apoplexy, which means he’s seen as a threat. One thing has been made clear and indisputable. There is no place for libertarians within the GOP. It couldn’t be made any more clear. You are just as welcome there as a case of vd is in a whorehouse. Until election time of course, then it’s all good, so long as you donate, volunteer and vote. Fuck the GOP and it’s disciples. Once and for all, people.

    Otherwise, it would have been better for them to ignore him. Actually, it would have been better for them to ignore him.

    GE, Joe Lieberman did run and he won anyway.

  18. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Tom K: Actually, no, the larger candidates DON’T organize their people to vote in online opt-in polls. They don’t need to; they have the statistically ACCURATE polls on their side.

    Opt-in polls do not reflect the electorate- ever. Voting in them is a waste of time second only to claiming them as proof of overwhelming support- as the Paul campaign is claiming.

    Slamming opt-in polls isn’t a sign of strength- it’s a sign of desperation.

  19. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Oh- and about Limbaugh, yes, he’s arrogant to the point of psychosis… but it’s little wonder he doesn’t like Ron Paul.

  20. Brandon H. Says:

    The Michigan State GOP Chairman is trying to get Paul removed from future debates.

    Yes, I saw Hack-ity trying to claim that Congress declared war. Even he would shut up and listen, he might learn something. Given how much he knows now, there is a lot of potential there.

    I think Ron Paul supporters are voting in every poll they can while Rudy McRomney supporters are that concerned in voting in these polls. And I am wondering if Fox rigged the poll at the end to make sure Paul didn’t win.

  21. Haggs Says:

    Where does Limbaugh think he gets the authority to choose the Republican nominee? He’s proved that he’s just a cold, hearless sociopath that likes to make fun of sick people. He’s lost all respect… if he ever had any.

  22. Robert Milnes Says:

    Devious David, agreed. NEVER AGAIN vote republican.

  23. Tom Gellhaus Says:

    Here is how I view the usefulness of opinion polls, take it for how you will:

    Polls like this ARE useful. They measure the PASSION candidates generate among their admirers. If you assume that the polltakers could have done nothing to prevent “spamming” (an assertion I have seen refuted in several places online), it STILL doesn’t address the question of what is preventing any OTHER candidates’ base of support from doing the SAME thing !

    Obviously, regardless of actual numbers, Ron Paul supporters are passionate about their choice, while the other candidates’ supporters are not. That passion is shown by the willingness to bother responding to polls such as these.

  24. [email protected] Says:

    Kris,

    You write:

    “Tom K: Actually, no, the larger candidates DON’T organize their people to vote in online opt-in polls. ... Slamming opt-in polls isn’t a sign of strength- it’s a sign of desperation.”

    I see you haven’t attended the first day of that remedial reading course I offered a small subsidy toward yet. I wish you’d hurry up and get after that.

    Where and when did I say that any candidates “organized their people” to vote in online polls? I said no such thing, and I was fairly obviously referring (“posse of fans”) to unorganized, at least by the campaigns, pollspamming.

    A candidate who attracts avid supporters is going to have polls “spammed” on his behalf by some of those supporters. If Romney, McCain and Giuliani don’t have people so dedicated to them that they’ll engage in that kind of basic, easy activity, why would we expect that they have people so dedicated to them that they’ll be willing to take four years off from the private sector to live in a cubicle in DC as part of their administrations?

    The answer, of course, is that there are Romney, McCain and Giuliani “poll-spamming” clubs, “digg” clubs, etc. all over the place. They DO have dedicated supporters at the grass roots and on the Internet. And I seriously doubt that the informal similar operations on behalf of Ron Paul are bigger or more effective than those of the Big Dogs. QED, “Ron Paul’s people are spamming the polls” is not the answer to the question “why is Ron Paul doing so well in online polls?”

    What are the answers to that question? Here are a few likely ones:

    1) The kind of people who tend to support “alternative candidates” like Ron Paul are Internet users in higher proportion than the people who support more “mainstream” candidates. “Early adopter” and “tends to think outside the mainstream” go together like peas and carrots. That phenomenon is becoming less pronounced as more Americans take up regular use of the Internet (i.e. as it becomes increasingly less “new”), but it hasn’t washed out completely by any means. Libertarians in particular are still at a proportional advantage on the Net, but not off of it.

    2) The kind of people who support “alternative candidates” tend to spend more time thinking about politics and doing stuff about politics—including on the Internet, and including chasing, and voting in, online polls. We wouldn’t support “alternative candidates” if we didn’t spend more time thinking and doing about politics, because we would never have known about those alternative candidates if the only attention we paid to politics was 10 minutes a day on CNN Headline News or at the New York Times web site.

    3) The kind of people who support “alternative candidates” tend to hang out in higher concentrations/fewer sites online, which makes them easier to reach by people asking them to, for example, go vote for Ron Paul in an online poll. So, Ron’s fans don’t have to be as organized as Rudy’s to have a bigger impact.

  25. Yosemite1967 Says:

    Rush’s assignment has always been to herd true conservatives into neo-conservatism (thereby eliminating opposition to the globalists), just like back in the days when Bush Sr. was calling for the “New World Order” and Rush was defending him by calling anyone who complained about it a “kook”. Typical Rush.

  26. Trent Hill Says:

    “And I seriously doubt that the informal similar operations on behalf of Ron Paul are bigger or more effective than those of the Big Dogs.And I seriously doubt that the informal similar operations on behalf of Ron Paul are bigger or more effective than those of the Big Dogs.”

    Uhh, clearly you havent been WATCHING the polls, or the internet at all. All political blogs are lit up with Paul support. All Polls are in favor of Paul. You’re wrong here. Although Guliani, McCain, and Romney do HAVE avid supporters—they are NO where near as numerous or effective as Ron Paul’s (at least online, since that was the topic).

  27. Paul Arnold Says:

    It’s so obvious that Limbaugh, an entertainer, knows on which side his bread is buttered. He panders to corporate and militaristic interests because that is how he garnered his success from the beginning. Ron Paul is a great threat to Limbaugh’s and the elitist neo-cons’ neat little hugely profitable sycophant rice-bowl. I do listen to Limbaugh at times, and I’ve never heard him take a courageous independent stand on any issue which would be at odds with his corporate mentors. Americans have had enough of these psychos ruining all that is good about our country and trying to turn it into the revived Roman Empire. Ron Paul tells the hard truth, and he has a great chance of being elected BY THE PEOPLE, unless the election is stolen by corporate thugs.

  28. Jay Matthews Says:

    Paul, speaking of stolen elections, if you haven’t seen the HBO documentary “Hacking Democracy” you should. It’s sickening, and well worth watching.

  29. steven orrange Says:

    Ron Paul spoke in Austin, TX Saturday night at the Texas History Museum, to a STANDING ROOM ONLY crowd. The spontaneous cheering and applause was overwhelming, lasting at times for over a minute. The people in attendance were hungry for freedom and DEVOURED his message! The man is humble and filled with the wisdom of the founders ….this is the beginning of the RON PAUL REVOLUTION and the only hope I see for our great country AMERICA! - Steven Orrange, Georgetown, TX

  30. Mike Says:

    Ron Paul has the second most financial donors in New Hampshire and if the “scientific” that are done offline are really scientific then submit it to the journal Science or stfu. Zogby/Gallup has a financial gain in their research and that would never get published in a scientific journal.

Leave a Reply