Posted by
John Ostrowski on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 9:26:45 PM
Conventional wisdom suggests he doesn't. In Ron Paul's recent interview with George Stephanopoulos, he was essentially told by the former partisan-turned-MSM-reporter that he had no chance. At all. George was smug, to say the least. Now,
Rasmussen has released the results of a poll that pitted Ron Paul against both Clinton and Obama. Here are the relevant results:
Overall, the numbers show Clinton getting 49% of the vote when matched
against Paul while the Republican hopeful picks up just 34%. Obama
leads Paul 50% to 30%.
This is, of course, supposed to be terrible news for Ron Paul. He's trailing the Democratic frontrunners by 20%. Furthermore,
Paul is viewed favorably by just 20% of likely voters nationwide.
Thirty-eight percent (38%) have an unfavorable view while 43% are Not
Sure what to think of him.
That's not particularly encouraging. A few things to realize, though. First, no Republican candidate, polls more than 43% when matched up against Clinton or more than 38% against Obama. It's not as if other Republicans are trouncing Democrats when going against them in polls.
Also, Only 58% of respondents know enough about Ron Paul to give an opinion about him (favorable or unfavorable). What of the other 43%? You can also see that about 20% of respondents to the hypothetical match-ups that Ron Paul was in did not choose a candidate. Who will they choose?
The front runners for both parties (but especially Clinton and Obama) have relatively high name recognition at this point. I wish there was more to the results of this poll so we could see exactly how much name recognition. As we know with incumbents in House/Senate elections, name recognition is huge. When faced with a familiar name and an unfamiliar name, many voters will simply go with the familiar name. So the question is, where will those who don't know Ron Paul settle when they find out who he is? Also, will there be changes among voters (e.g. Paul supporters defecting to Hillary or vice-versa)? Given Paul's low name recognition and Hillary/Obama's high recognition, I don't see many Paul supporters defecting to them, but I can see it happening the other way.
Also, one last thing to note: Rasmussen's disgusting treatment of Ron Paul's beliefs.
He is perhaps the most radical of any congressional maverick, never
hesitating to cast a lone vote in opposition to legislation he believes
to be unauthorized by the Constitution.
So now you're a "radical" and a "congressional maverick" if you believe legislators should follow the Constitution.