Ron Paul Campaign Predicted in 1982—Now: Blind Poll Canvassing

Posted by James Bowery on Friday, 23 November 2007 19:59.

(Click here for the audio reading of this story.)

Now Is the Time

From 1982 (when “videotext network” was used to describe the mass-availability of computer networking):

“...the prophecies of a despotic, “cashless-society” are quite likely to become a reality.  My opinion is that this nightmare will eventually be realized but not before the American pioneers have had a chance to reach each other and organize.  I base this hope on the fact that the first people to participate in the videotex network will represent some of the most pioneering of Americans, since videotex is a new “territory”.”

Now is the time.

If my ability in 1982, to predict the Internet-based Ron Paul phenomenon, counts for anything today, then let it count for this:

Blind Poll Canvassing

The Ron Paul campaign must focus on a strategy of “blind poll canvassing” to efficiently utilize its greatest strength:  dedicated volunteers.

This can be accomplished in 3 steps:

  1. Construct a scientifically unbiased and efficient political questionnaire.  (See “Construction of Scientifically Unbiased Efficient Political Survey” below)
  2. Put the candidates through the questionnaire.
  3. Ask Ron Paul volunteers to canvass the general voting public with the questionnaire, informing potential Ron Paul supporters—thereby identified—why they are likely Ron Paul supporters and offering to help them vote in the primary.

The Rationale for Blind Poll Canvassing
The news that in Zogby’s “blind poll” Ron Paul won with general voters but lost with “likely Republican voters” points the way to a new strategy to get the nomination:

Blind Poll Canvassing

What this means is construct a scientifically unbiased blind poll (see below) and use it to conduct phone canvassing of general voters to see which of them would be likely to vote Republican if they knew the positions of the candidates. This combines a scientific blind poll with phone canvassing to “get out the vote”.

Let’s first note a point about the Zogby poll for how not to do a blind poll:

Since likely Republican voters are known by pollsters to care more about immigration than the war, Zogby’s omission of immigration from the candidates’ positions must be taken to mean Zogby doesn’t have the first idea about constructing unbiased blind polls.

Moreover, the astounding performance of Ron Paul among general voters isn’t at all surprising to those who follow the prediction markets like intrade.com where people put their money where their mouths are.

Ron Paul has been leading the entire GOP pack in the likelihood of being elected president, if nominated, according to the professional gamblers.

How can we construct an unbiased blind poll which, with as few questions as practical so as to efficiently use volunteer and voter phone time, identifies voters likely to vote for Ron Paul in the primary if they were fully informed, and use it to turn potential votes for Ron Paul in the general election into actual votes for Ron Paul in the primary?

Construction of Scientifically Unbiased Efficient Political Survey

The two requirements of the blind poll questionnaire are that it be “scientifically unbiased” and “efficient” so that phone time is minimized.  What this means is that the questionnaire must contain few questions that get right to the heart of the political zeitgeist.  With all the money invested in social and political science research, we are entitled to expect that such a questionnaire already exists.  The problem is that, like most “entitlements” these days, they seem to have fallen into the wrong hands.

So we have to achieve, in days, what social and political scientists with the power of Western Civilization’s academe failed to do in decades.

It is possible by setting up a tournament with a nonrefundable entry fee of $X, awarding a first prize of $Y*8, second prize of $Y*4, third prize of $Y*2, and fourth prize of $Y, where X is sufficient to deter casual players from participating and Y is sufficient to motivate most serious “experts”.  The daily elimination rounds are conducted as follows:

  1. Each contestant submits a new questionnaire of 5 multiple choice questions they think are most informative.
  2. Judges disqualify contestants who submit frivolous or abusive questions, along with their questionnaires.
  3. The questionnaires are made available to the contestants.
  4. A phone survey is run using canvassing volunteers during which each questionnaire, along with 5 questions selected at random from among the other questionnaires,  is asked of at least one potential voter.
  5. Each contestant receives the responses to their questionnaires and the additional questions, but not the responses to those questions.
  6. Each contestant then tries to guess the responses they were not given, scoring one point for each response they get correct.
  7. The contestants scoring in the upper half return for the next round and all are provided all questions and responses given by all potential voters.

Since the questionnaire is provably unbiased, it can be paid for through a 501c3 non-profit which can, unlike the political campaign, receive unlimited contributions from around the world, including donations of time from Ron Paul volunteers who would perform phone surveys, as well as money from the Ron Paul campaign itself, which would spend money much more wisely on this strategy than an equivalent investment in mass media advertising.

Since the pruning is exponential, decreasing contestants by 1/2 every day, there can be a large number of contestants and a large number of questions winnowed down in days.

Tags:



Comments:


1

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 23 Nov 2007 21:52 | #

“Zogby’s omission of immigration from the candidates’ positions must be taken to mean Zogby doesn’t have the first idea about constructing unbiased blind polls.”  (—from the log entry)

Or he’s bought, and whoever commissioned this poll wanted ... (how to put this? ...) “wanted a particular result,” so to speak? ... And Ron Paul wasn’t the “result” they wanted? ... (did I say that right? ...).

Yes I know some years ago ByZOG had a reputation for being honest and accurate, but ... well ... times have changed and “everyone has his price,” or so they say.

The rest of the entry:  brilliant.


2

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 24 Nov 2007 09:24 | #

Well I’ve just been informed that John Zogby is a Lebanese Catholic which goes a long way toward explaining his desire to keep immigration out of his questionnaires.


3

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 24 Nov 2007 16:08 | #


Ron Paul:  just what the doctor ordered for the moribund U.S. Constitution!

(Hat tip)


4

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 24 Nov 2007 19:35 | #

For any who may have missed it last time.


5

Posted by Marge on Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:18 | #

See this for more comments on polling and Ron Paul:

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/17/ron-paul’s-“money-bomb”/


Regarding the blind polling described above, I’m unclear as to whether it would be Ron Paul people who would construct the blind poll, and if so, why the other candidates would be interested in participating, since its purpose is to give RP a fairer polling experience.

The idea of a scientific polling instrument appeals to me a lot; I spent several hours doing phoning in my state campaign office and didn’t go back on subsequent days specifically because I felt the calls weren’t worth the effort—on the day I was there, the calls were not for advocating but for feeling out potential Ron Paul supporters.


6

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:25 | #

I’m unclear as to whether it would be Ron Paul people who would construct the blind poll

It would not.

The contest for creating the blind poll is rigorously unbiased and incisive.

if so, why the other candidates would be interested in participating, since its purpose is to give RP a fairer polling experience.

Short answer:  Self-deception.

Long answer: The purpose is to give a fairer electoral experience for all candidates via get out the vote canvassing using a new, more powerful and more rigorously unbiased and incisive tool.  The other campaigns might not participate directly, but their supporters would since the vast majority of them believe their candidate would win if given a fair chance.  Moreover, professional political scientists would virtually have to participate in the contest and support its outcome lest they be perceived as the equivalent of intellectual cowards.


7

Posted by stock market on Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:30 | #

I wish Ron Paul won, he was the only one discussing monetary reform and that is what caused this entire mess.


8

Posted by jessica on Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:05 | #

What a delight to hear from you and to see those precious pictures.I am very much interested in reading science related articles.My heartfelt Thanks ... this is all really enormously useful stuff.
http://www.shadesofsplendor.com


9

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:55 | #

You know your blog’s readership must be pretty big when spammers for window treatment businesses start using it for publicity.  That’s Martha Stewart stuff — we must be reaching a broader audience than even our wildest optimists suspected.


10

Posted by Rusty Mason on Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:17 | #

Na, they spammed my puny little blog, too.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: A gift from Xenia
Previous entry: The death of a multi-racialist

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sun, 22 Dec 2024 01:03. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:14. (View)

anonymous commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:11. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 21:35. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 20:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:49. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:47. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 23:29. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:01. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:52. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:17. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:23. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 08 Dec 2024 14:19. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 20:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 01:08. (View)

James Marr commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 04 Dec 2024 19:00. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Mon, 02 Dec 2024 23:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 21:20. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 17:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 13:34. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 04:44. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 29 Nov 2024 01:45. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 23:49. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 01:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:02. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch wins Tory leadership election' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 04:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Tue, 26 Nov 2024 02:10. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:05. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:28. (View)

affection-tone