retard scientist ostrowski
anyone who hasn’t yet figured out that LRC has degraded into an avalanche of statist kangaroo droppings, behold:
What do the numbers mean?
Posted by James Ostrowski at August 19, 2007 02:03 PM
Ron Paul has done well in various straw polls. I think you have to judge the straw polls against Ron’s “scientific” poll national number of 2-3 percent.
Iowa–9%
Alabama–81%
NH–73%
Illinois–19%
SC–18%
Average–40%These polls measure a factor that will be very important in early primaries and caucuses which have traditionally low turnouts: intensity of support. Polls don’t measure that and are therefore not scientific.
Thus, as I’ve said before, the MSM should base their degree of coverage on objective, scientific factors such as contributions, crowds and straw polls.
Not that they will!
this is interesting and funny, because BS marketer ostrowski’s attempting to sell the hugest flaw of his baloney parade as a virtue. no, ron paul fanatics, the straw polls are not flawed because they’re orgasms of self-selection by the rabid; they’re superior because they’re orgasms of self-selection by the rabid (i.e., intense support)! got it? standard national telephone polls are not scientific, but straw polls, contributions, and crowds are “scientific factors”.
anybody with half an ear to the 2008 US crime boss campaign want to claim that the following results are “scientific factors” beyond freak show study?
[...] They announced the vote totals.Sam Brownback with 2 votes.
Giuliani with 7 votes.
Huckabee 6.
Hunter 10.
McCain 2. [I remember hearing chuckling at this point]
We’ll skip this candidate for a minute. (Obviously, we all knew who and why).
Romney 14.
Tancredo 0.
Thompson 9.
Ron Paul with 216 votes. [...]
that’s the poll dumbass ostrowski called “Alabama–81%”.
national phone polls are hardly predictors, but this is worse. why does the embarrassingly stupid fuck tout this result and similar jokes as “scientific”? because it’s a lie he finds comforting. typical LRC drivel. in the rush to point out, accurately, that looking at an artificial segment’s near worthless in isolation, ostrowski screws the pooch (again) and claims that what should be looked at in isolation are the segments he chooses.
there is no scientific measurement indicating 2008 election results. but if you want to know where ron paul stands right now, just go talk to regular people. most of them — when they’ve even heard of him and have a picture in their heads that doesn’t translate roughly to “curmudgeonly quack sideshow” — couldn’t give a fuck less about him. this, because it obviously doesn’t measure “intensity of support” among a self selected group, ostrowski proclaims unscientific. what he means is that it doesn’t measure things most favorable to his achingly misguided and wrong support of ron paul, career criminal.
sure, intensity of support is worthwhile, but honing in on that’s even worse than the supposedly random national phone polls. anyone who talks about ron paul’s “chances” in the 2008 campaign w/o engaging the real problem of american socialism is talking trash. i explained this months ago, and nothing’s changed except the increasing tendency of LRC writers to toss principles they pretended to hold dear. for what? something less than nothing.
the only thing worse than ron paul not becoming the next US crime boss is ron paul becoming the next US crime boss.
August 19th, 2007 at 15:27
I took LRC and the LRC blog off my Google Reader subscription list today. I went away on vacation for a week, came back and the blog had “100+” posts on it (closer to 200) and I got through about 50 of them and realized they were all about Ron Paul, polls (WHO… GIVES… A… FUCK) and communazism so I said fuck it and just unsubscribed.
I’m glad I found your site through that “Civil War” death toll video that was posted back awhile ago, but honestly there hasn’t been anything interesting posted since then and I’d rather risk missing out on the next link to another Saltypig than saturate my eyes with more RP garbage.
August 19th, 2007 at 15:38
if i hadn’t written at LRC and didn’t know lew and many of the other writers, i’d have tuned out long ago. now, it’s like being presented daily with a seemingly intractable puzzle. WTF happened to these people? i know some of them were full of shit to start with, but lew wasn’t. much of the RP lunacy comes from new additions, but they’re following the obvious lead of the guy in charge.
i guess the simple answer’s that LRC’s always had a large traditional “conservative” bent — infatuated from an early age with horse race politics. this is their moment to “reclaim the republic” — fuck everything they learned since leaving the republic. but i guess they never left it.
August 19th, 2007 at 17:46
sure the LRC blog has become a propaganda machine for the RP campaign. frankly, that’s why I stop by a couple times a day. Lew’s been pretty upfront about that, going so far as changing the legal status of the site so donations are no longer tax deductible.
the RP phenomenon has legs, and as an anti-statist I’m going to milk it for all its worth. I can absolutely respect any libertarian minded intellectuals not jumping on the bandwagon, but for me at least the temptation was too great. plus I’m having a ball so far.
as for Ostrowski’s analysis just consider it spin. it’s part of politics. we didn’t invent it, we’re just the aufhebung.
but a more honest analysis wouldn’t have just taken the simple average of the percentages of the straw polls, but rather taken consideration also of the number of total votes at each event. for example IA would be weighted much higher than all the others.
August 19th, 2007 at 18:10
just consider it spin
okay, consider it spin. LRC and all those intending to adhere to the principles of liberty must not participate in such filth.
August 19th, 2007 at 20:02
“LRC and all those intending to adhere to the principles of liberty must not participate in such filth.”
okay, I’d agree that it can be done without. or at least done to a higher standard than the others. so in a sense I appreciate what you and some others are doing to keep ‘em honest, though the tone of some of it seems a little counter productive.
and to follow up on my suggestion to weight the straw poll results by percentage of the total turn out we get this:
15774 votes at last four events. 1903 votes for RP. ~12% of vote. seems pretty good to me, considering practically no-one Knows who Paul is. the campaign is progressing nicely in my opinion.
also I notice a lot more negative pieces on the net recently. an excellent sign that the campaign’s on the up.
August 19th, 2007 at 22:28
though the tone of some of it seems a little counter productive.
counterproductive? there could hardly be a more destructive approach than for a large percentage of the liberty movement to embrace the state as they have. ron paul is a career criminal. how do you get around that? you can’t.
an excellent sign that the campaign’s on the up.
i don’t approach the ron paul disaster from horse race politics wanking. whether he “loses” or “wins”, it’s a damned bad sign. i don’t doubt the people in this country are stupid enough to elect ron paul. as i’ve said before, i hope he does get elected, for i’ll be proven right in a tangible way that his mere campaign can’t demonstrate. it will also hasten the destruction of the US, which seems to be the only realistic way out.
August 20th, 2007 at 20:02
“it’s a damned bad sign”
bad sign or good sign, it’s certainly a sign of the times..
“Thus a time of drastic change is likely to become a time of wild dreams, extravagant fairy tales, gigantic masquerades, preposterous pretensions, marching multitudes with banners waving and drums beating, messiahs bringing glad tidings, and mass migrations to promised lands.” — Eric Hoffer
August 21st, 2007 at 06:45
In a recent (Tuesday) article about Paul, someone did refer to George Stephanopoulis as a Greek leprechaun, so something good did come of this after all; I had a nice chuckle at Mr. Stephanopoulis’ expense. Nothing else good has come of this to my mind.