Shocker! Gary Johnson hits 19% support in nationwide poll

Of course, as Wes Benedict explains, the poll left out Mitt Romney's name.

This is good enough to quote in its entirety from the Libertarian Action SuperPAC:

Dear Libertarian:

Please donate now so LASPAC can conduct another poll.

We just conducted a nationwide telephone poll of registered voters. Here's what the poll sounded like.

The results:

Barack Obama 56%

Gary Johnson 19%

Undecided/neither 25%

You may be thinking, "Why does that matter, since it doesn't include the Republican?"

Here's why it matters:

Gallup has been conducting presidential polls just like this.

Note the wording of their question:

"Suppose the presidential election were held today. If Barack Obama were the Democratic Party's candidate and Mitt Romney were the Republican Party's candidate, who would you vote for, Barack Obama, the Democrat or Mitt Romney, the Republican?"

It includes the incumbent, Obama, plus one selected challenger, Romney -- and no one else.

Now here's our question:

"Suppose the presidential election were held today. If Barack Obama were the Democratic Party's candidate and Gary Johnson were the Libertarian Party's candidate, who would you vote for, Barack Obama, the Democrat or Gary Johnson, the Libertarian?"

It's exactly the same question, except we picked a different challenger.

The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) wants candidates to get at least 15% in nationwide polls. But most of those polls only include Obama and Romney. So, if those polls count, then our poll counts too.

We did this poll cheaply (but scientifically) using a less-known robocall firm. Now we want to do it again, on a bigger scale, using a well-known polling organization like Public Policy Polling, SurveyUSA, or Gallup. If we ask the question the same way (just like Gallup), Gary Johnson has a very good chance of getting more than 15%.

Let's show that to the Commission on Presidential Debates! They can't have it both ways -- they can't include biased polls that only name Obama and Romney, and then ignore polls like ours.

We'd love to push the CPD into a corner. If they have to accept polls like this, then Gary Johnson has a great chance of getting into the debates. At worst, they'll have to start demanding that all their polling organizations include Gary Johnson -- and that would be a good thing too.

Please donate today. (When you make your donation, type "poll" in the comment box.) We estimate the larger poll will cost about $3,000. If we can raise just $1,500 for this poll, LASPAC will kick in the rest to run the poll.

Also please forward this message to your Libertarian friends and post it on Facebook. Send people to this address: http://bit.ly/PoAPhE

We'll keep you posted on how much we've raised periodically on the LASPAC homepage.

If we don't raise enough to run the poll, we'll return your contributions designated for the poll.

Please donate now!

Thanks!

Wes Benedict

President, Libertarian Action Super PAC

http://laspac.org/

512-659-8896

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog