Presidential Poll

« UK Physics Investment Decimated Change the Incentive Structure »

Sean at 12:50 pm, December 12th, 2007

Just curious about how easy it is to set up a poll. Why not find out toward whom the CV readership is leaning these days? We promise your answers are not binding.

Updates: We are a famous physics blog!

And Ron Paul supporters have perfected a special brand of annoying.

And polls on the internet are useless.

None of which really qualifies as startling new information, I guess.

Cosmic Variance, Politics
[digg] | [reddit] | [stumbleupon] | [slashdot] | [del.icio.us]

72 Comments on “Presidential Poll” rss feed

Michael T on Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Like most of the mainstream press you omitted Dennis Kucinich. He is after all one of the Presidential candidates.
brad on Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pm

hey, what about Ron Paul? I will be voting for him. thanks.
capitalistimperialistpig on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:09 pm

Well,

It’s early, but I think we can already see who has the lefty, hippie, atheist geek vote sewed up. But who voted for Thompson?
Sean on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:12 pm

The grumpy libertarian demographic is well-represented among CV’s readership.
Ross on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:17 pm

Um, where’s Ron Paul?… I hope digg doesn’t get a whiff of this ‘poll’…
Jason Adams on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:28 pm

One more here for Kucinich. I’m guessing you had limited space on the poll.
Sean on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:29 pm

I was interested in people who actually have a chance of winning a nomination, not vanity candidates with less than 5% support. Sorry, deeply committed people of the internet!
did on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:34 pm

I thought I’d read that Obama proposed a big cut in NASA’s budget to pay for education, though I can’t quickly find a reference to that. He kinda lost me on that one.

did
Count Iblis on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:48 pm

Why not make all of these candidates president? People can then choose which of the candidates will be their president. This amounts to splitting the US up in different sovereign parts (but not geographically).
Brian on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:49 pm

I vote for Ron Paul.

One of the so called “vanity” candidates has more votes in these comments than some of the candidates do in the poll…

Something to think about.
Jared on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:56 pm

I vote for Ron Paul. He isn’t on there, but I’ll write him in.
Rien on Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:58 pm

I don’t get why people get all excited about Ron Paul. He’s a real republican conservative. Don’t try to pretend anything else. He’s also a lunatic.
Jason M. Hendler on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:07 pm

I didn’t see a libertarian candidate, so I will go with Giulianni.
carey on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:16 pm

Voting Ron Paul. Interesting that those who support the Constitution are labeled “lunatic” in any context.
tyler on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:19 pm

I vote for Kucinich anytime I can do so without affecting realpolitik - meaning in a close primary where my vote would really be important, I would go with my “best of those that might actually win” candidate. But generally, Oregon primaries are utterly irrelevant to the nominating process, so I like to throw all the weight I can behind the Gnome Of Justice.

Curious as to why ppl like Ron Paul. Is it just straight Libertarian stuff, he wants to do away with big parts of the Federal government, you like that idea? Or is it the anti-choice stealth-attack on Roe? The anti-torture bill is a good idea, and it includes limits on Presidential signing statements, which is great, is that it? He does seem to have an independent notion of foreign policy (against unlimited war powers, against Iraq war, for Afghan war, all of which I think is correct). Or what? He seems like a real contradictory figure, which usually either means Authentic Independent or Crazy Wingnut.

I am *not* being snarky here. I’d really like to know exactly what supporters do and do not like about him.

Oooh, pro-jury nullification. That’s a great position. Obscure and politically irrelevant, but I love it.
ollie on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:36 pm

In all seriousness, can someone explain why they would admit to voting for Mike “The Creationist” Huckabee?

(disclosure: I am an Obama supporter, but I know that there are science lovers who are political conservatives; THAT I can understand. But a friggin CREATIONIST???)
ben on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

Some of those other votes are Kucinich or Paul. One for Biden here.
Brock on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:44 pm

I only have 3 candidates I would vote for President. I will not vote for anyone else as I don’t believe in contributing on the idea of the “lesser evil” notion.
None of these was represented in this poll…
Ron Paul
Dennis Kucinich
Mike Gravel

For a physics site, you’re pretty ignorant of how things work.
1 - People hear about a candidate
2 - People learn about a candidate
3 - People choose a candidate
Without #1, we can’t have a #2 or #3. That is why Ron Paul is only polling below 5% (except on the internet). No one knows about him. There is VERY limited opportunities for Presidential candidates if the 6 people that control our media don’t like them. Think about it… you control this site, you don’t like Ron Paul, so you omit him from your poll. Don’t you think Rupert Murdoch is doing the same thing?

Where is the science in this physics site? Is this poll anything close to scientific when you leave out most of the candidates?

As for WHY I support Ron Paul. Part of the answer is that I want to see 2 candidates to choose from (Rep and Dem) that I can live with. I can’t live with any other Rep than Paul because of his foreign policy stance. The rest of them may as well be neocons. So, if in the general election, it came down to Ron Paul vs Dennis Kucinich, then I would do some real thinking on all of the issues.

For me FOREIGN POLICY is our #1 issue, not abortion, not gay rights, FOREIGN POLICY… change that and you’ll fix many of our issues.
Yvette on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:46 pm

I’m not voting for any of ‘em because I don’t like any of the candidates and can’t vote in primaries as a registered independent anyway in my state. Hmm…

I would like Ron Paul except for his abortion stance which sort of nullifies the rest of the pro-libertarian platform in my mind. The reason I suspect he has such a big following (on the Internets at least) is because Ron Paul is for the small government that Republicans are supposed to be for when they’re not getting all hissy about things that are none of the business. That’s what I figure at least.
lt.milo on Dec 12th, 2007 at 2:53 pm

Sorry Ron Paul supporters are annoying! I personally think he is the only good candidate. I’m not just some random guy, I have been reading CV for years. Its not that I love the guy, it’s just that all the other candidates are terrible. Please don’t dislike him because of annoying supporters.
John on Dec 12th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

Are you really sure that you want to vote for Ron Paul? He is totally against the right of a woman to control her own reproductive system. That alone is a show stopper for me. The government should stay the hell out of anything to do with the medical choices of individuals. That’s between them and their physicians.

And I suspect that as a libertarian, Paul would take a dim view of federally supported research at our universities. But I cannot really find anything he’s written or said on that subject.
Brock on Dec 12th, 2007 at 3:34 pm

Re: “He [Ron Paul] is totally against the right of a woman to control her own reproductive system.”

I believe his stance on abortion (that IS what you are referring to, right) is that it should not be a FEDERAL issue but a STATE issue. He believes that some states would vote to make abortion illegal while others would vote to make it legal. Or, which ever way the voting public feels it should be (instead of the federal gov’t voting for what they think the people want).
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/

Personally, he is pro-life, but I believe professionally, he will leave the decision up to the states. So, move if you don’t like the community you are living in.
onymous on Dec 12th, 2007 at 3:51 pm

OK, after reading this thread I’m officially terrified.
spyder on Dec 12th, 2007 at 4:07 pm

Interesting that so many on a thread by a physicist, who has written extensively on his atheism, advocate for a man deeply committed to, and passionate about, his quite alarming xTian fundamentalism (Ron Paul). And the suggestion that a variant/mutant form of interpretive readings of the US Constitution would allow some states to completely ignore the US Constitution and the XIVth Amendment seem beyond the pale. But then again, given the arguments above, it seems all sorts of people are in favor of Balkanizing the US in order to enact their personal and selfish agendas. I guess not much is different really between that and Bushco, except perhaps the various groups of people for whom the benefits of empowering personal agendas are manifest.
Matt on Dec 12th, 2007 at 4:18 pm

I’m kinda surprised that John McCain isn’t getting more support here. At least compared to the other repubs. I’m not voting republican, but if I were forced to, he seems like the only half-way moderate, thinking man’s candidate.
Jason M. Hendler on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:00 pm

Ron Paul didn’t seem so crazy in today’s debate in Iowa, probably because things are running much better in Iraq, so he has dispensed with the hysterics.

Sadly, I am not hearing any initiatives from any candidates that are likely to get done. Venture capitalists are the ones that will provide leadership from now on. Great public works projects in the past - Panama canal, Hoover Dam, continental railroad, interstate highway - were either lead by the federal government, or supported / subsidized by the federal government. I just don’t see the federal government doing that anymore, but companies like Nanosolar, Tesla Motors and others are making the major leaps forward without any initial support from government.

The only issues that the federal government should spend time on are those to which they are assigned - immigration, security, trade, etc., and leave the rest to true visionaries.
Z on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:01 pm

Sean, look what you’ve done! Ron Paul zealots have invaded CV.

Personally, I would have included Ron Paul in the “poll”, but rigged it so that the votes for him would randomly go to any candidate BUT Ron Paul. Just imagine how infuriating it would have been for the Ron Paul supporters who came here to stack the poll.
Luke on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:10 pm

did,

The last paragraph of Obama’s statement on education says

IX. A COMMITMENT TO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
Barack Obama’s early education and K-12 plan package costs about $18 billion per year. He will maintain fiscal responsibility and prevent any increase in the deficit by offsetting cuts and revenue sources in other parts of the government. The early education plan will be paid for by delaying the NASA Constellation Program for five years, using purchase cards and the negotiating power of the government to reduce costs of standardized procurement, auctioning surplus federal property, and reducing the erroneous payments identified by the Government Accountability Office, and closing the CEO pay deductibility loophole. The rest of the plan will be funded using a small portion of the savings associated with fighting the war in Iraq.

Constellation is the NASA program to invent new vehicles for manned spcaeflight after the Shuttle is retired.
Charles Morrison on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:18 pm

Current betting odds to win the 2008 US Presidential Election
from http://www.bodoglife.com/sports-betting/political-props.jsp

Hillary Clinton 3/1
John Edwards 14/1
Rudy Giulani 5/1
Mike Huckabee 9/1
John McCain 16/1
Barack Obama 6/1
Mitt Romney 9/1
Fred Thompson 100/1

Ron Paul 6/1
Jason M. Hendler on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Luke,

If Constellation gets killed, then there will be no more manned space flights by NASA, unless they intend to fly the shuttle until the next disaster. Fortunately, NASA has been doing some great work in autonavigation and ion propulsion, so unmanned flights should remain interesting.
Dr William Dyer on Dec 12th, 2007 at 5:33 pm

I see in the comments your 5% rule to qualify. I was kinda wondering if Stephen Colbert was not currently striking; might he have the needed 5% for your poll?
Jim on Dec 12th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

This is so difficult to decide. On the one hand you have states like California who allow marijuana to be sold to those who have a prescription for it and the federal government who wants to step all over the rights of the states and inviolate that right - which I completely disagree that the federal government has the right to do … but on the other hand we have the states which would, at least where I’m from, would forbid abortion in a moments notice and make it illegal which I have to give my thanks to the federal government in preventing from happening. The principle is that the government doesn’t have the right to dictate what we do with our own body. I’m still debating between Paul and Kucinich.

Lastly, Paul might come off like a crackpot but you have to consider that a lot of his ideas, though rash, can be reeled in and modified to the point where they don’t come off so badly while still remaining principled. That’s what I would expect Congress and the Senate to do.
lylebot on Dec 12th, 2007 at 7:18 pm

lot of his ideas, though rash, can be reeled in and modified to the point where they don’t come off so badly while still remaining principled. That’s what I would expect Congress and the Senate to do.

Right. The U.S. Congress has a fantastic track record of turning crazy but principled ideas into workable, principled laws.
tyler on Dec 12th, 2007 at 7:33 pm

Those betting odds are way out of line with polling data, which is interesting. Now, I think the polls are even more bunk than usual this year, but those are some really weird numbers.

I have always viewed politics thru the “Campaign Trail ‘72″ betting-odds lens, largely to protect the fragile remnants of my idealism by distancing myself from the process. I think it’s time to take a break from the cynical view this year, though…
RockHoward on Dec 12th, 2007 at 7:47 pm

I have a physics and astronomy degree from caltech (although I write software form a living.) I am an atheist. I have read this blog for over a year and have generally thought fairly highly of it.

Meanwhile I am also an active libertarian who thinks that ron paul is the best thing on wheels this election cycle. I don’t agree with absolutely everything he is about, but the important stuff including his stands on foreign policy, civil liberties, sound money and limited federal government all sound correct to me. No one else really comes close.

What baffles me is why anyone who actually uses the internet these days would not understand that ron paul has had an amazingly diverse, powerful and out of control adhoc social network spring up around his campaign. Therefore any internet poll with or without ron paul and any blog entry that mentions him in any way is going to get examined by a lot of eyeballs right away. Anything that is particularly pleasing or displeasing to paulites is going to get spread around the network like the clap.

Then again, one of the memes passed around the network today was a video of some cable TV pundits discussing why the ron paul campaign is choosing to spend so much time and effort on making youtube videos. What a hoot!

Anyway enjoy all that attention. You earned it!
Alex on Dec 12th, 2007 at 7:56 pm

What baffles me is why anyone would think that “acting like jerks on the internet” is a good way to drum up support for their favorite candidate. No wonder the guy’s poll numbers never reached the high single digits.
Marc on Dec 12th, 2007 at 8:16 pm

Ron Paul is a racist. See
this site for details. After reading that, how many Paul supporters on this blog would still vote for him?
Eugene on Dec 12th, 2007 at 8:17 pm

Can we vote on this blog if we are not US citizens?
Pingback from More December politcs « blueollie on Dec 12th, 2007 at 9:16 pm

[...] C. V. Poll: Who is currently your favorite candidate for the 2008 Presidential elections? Selection Votes Hillary Clinton (D) 13% 89 John Edwards (D) 10% 69 Rudy Giuliani (R) 2% 16 Mike Huckabee (R) 2% 11 John McCain (R) 1% 8 Barack Obama (D) 40% 268 Mitt Romney (R) 1% 7 Fred Thompson (R) 1% 7 Other 29% 198 [...]
Adam on Dec 12th, 2007 at 9:20 pm

Sean,

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I’d like to see a Ron Paul option.

For me it’s between Ron Paul and Obama, we’ll see what happens.

Thanks for the arrow of time FAQ.
glob on Dec 12th, 2007 at 9:25 pm

… a famous WHAT?! blog!
John on Dec 12th, 2007 at 10:13 pm

Abortion should neither be a state issue nor a federal issue. It should not be a matter for the government to decide AT ALL.

Anyway, Sean, why the heck not put Kucinich and Paul on the poll?
Jesse M. on Dec 12th, 2007 at 10:22 pm

This long post by “Starshark” in a message board debate about Ron Paul gives a pretty good summary of everything I find crazy and scary about his belief system. Just to pick one example, do his supporters here know about his ‘We The People’ act which would make it illegal for the supreme court to interfere if a state decided to abolish the separation of church and state (suggesting his loyalty to the Constitution is fairly selective), and which also panders to anti-homosexual sentiments by specifically forbidding the supreme court from telling states they must accept same-sex marriage? (even though the likelihood of the supreme court doing such a thing any time soon is virtually nil). And Marc’s point about Ron Paul’s racism is also worth highlighting–do you really want a president who, in his 1990s newsletter, was writing things like this?

Regardless of what the media tell us, most white Americans are not going to believe that they are at fault for what blacks have done to cities across America. The professional blacks may have cowed the elites, but good sense survives at the grass roots. Many more are going to have difficultly avoiding the belief that our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists — and they can be identified by the color of their skin. This conclusion may not be entirely fair, but it is, for many, entirely unavoidable.

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action…. Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the “criminal justice system,” I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

There’s also some good info on the affinities between many of Paul’s political positions and those of white supremacist groups and “New World Order” conspiracy theorists (the two groups overlap considerably, since anti-semites often posit that the Jews are behind the ‘New World Order’) in this post from the Orcinus blog. And as pointed out in an earlier post from Orcinus, Paul has a history of being influenced by these types and repeating their rhetoric on a number of subjects (more the conspiracy nuts than the out-and-out racists, but his phony statistics about black crime quoted above were taken from the writings of “pseudo-academic racist” Jared Taylor).
Jesse M. on Dec 12th, 2007 at 10:44 pm

Incidentally, I see that aside from the two posts above, the Orcinus blog has actually done a whole series of posts on Paul’s links with right-wing extremist groups and ideology…scroll to the bottom of this post for a list.
Andy Feldman on Dec 12th, 2007 at 11:41 pm

“Current betting odds to win the 2008 US Presidential Election”

I don’t know about that site’s odds… Ron Paul seems way too high, for example. I trust the methodology of the Intrade Prediction Markets a little better to give me an accurate probability. It doesn’t have volume limits and they publish actual bid/ask spreads, with contracts designed so you can easily read the percentages from the price. It is are similar to the Iowa Electronic Markets, except those also have a limit.

For example, the bid/ask on Ron Paul to be the Republican nominee is 5.8/5.9. That means you can buy a contract for $5.9 (the “asking” price) that will pay off $100 if he is nominated. On the other hand, someone is offering (”bidding”) to buy that contract for $5.8, so if you want to take the other side for $94.2, it will will pay $100 is he is NOT nominated.

The market “thinks” the chances he will be nominated are between 5.8% and 5.9%. If you disagree then you have a bet available which should pay off on average. (The key word being “average.” Don’t bet your savings on one contract.) All contracts are made with another user taking the other side, so your two contributions add up to $100 (or whatever volume you actually buy… they are in increments of $1). Intrade has no interest in any of the contracts aside from the small amount they take off the top.

It’s a great concept, and the site is popular enough that the volume is high and the spreads are low on the major events (like the presidential race). This gives a narrow range of predicted probabilities which updates quickly in response to news.

I have no affiliation with the site aside from being impressed. They even have nice historical graphs. Trying to match news events that you remember to spikes in a candidate’s graph is good times.
Ijon Tichy on Dec 12th, 2007 at 11:47 pm

Kucinich is tops for me on policy and character. As a betting man, though, I’m thinking John Edwards will be the next president, assuming Al Gore doesn’t enter at the last minute (or is it too late for him?)
charly on Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:15 am

wanna see physicists turn irrational?

exclude a no-chance candidate from a dumb poll
Hiram on Dec 13th, 2007 at 4:09 am

Being a dutchman, I don’t even have a marginal, symbolical say in this, even though the person occupying the White House influences our situation here in Europe far, far too much, but if I could vote, I’d vote for Kucinich, the only pacifist candidate.
Lee Sawyer on Dec 13th, 2007 at 9:40 am

Gov. Bill Richardson.

Definitely has the best CV of any candidate, and those of us in HEP know he did a pretty good job at DoE after the disasters of the Hazel O’Leary years.

So I am supporting Bill Richardson for president, but then again I am also a Cubs fan and lifelong follower of the New Orleans Saints….
TomC on Dec 13th, 2007 at 10:31 am

Full text of Ron Paul Report on the Los Angeles riots here.
Paul has reportedly denied writing or even vetting this, but even if that’s true, the ffact that it was distributed under his name with his knowledge is enough for me to ashcan him immediately and permanently.
NoJoy on Dec 13th, 2007 at 10:43 am

You say internet polls are useless, but perhaps a group’s ability to freep says something about their organization? By this measure, the Obama camp seems to be on the ball. Go Edwards.
Neil B. on Dec 13th, 2007 at 11:23 am

I voted for Obama, and see that I’m in the majority here! Apparently being a “cocktail party physics”-muttering amateur irritant didn’t detract from my political judgment, which being in accord with such distinguished company is probably right (whatever that means in this arena), true? (Remember of course, that when physicists talk about politics, economics, law, society, theology, etc., it is “cocktail party” politics, economics, … , or do they get to be experts on everyone else’s turf too, but not vice versa? ;-P
William on Dec 13th, 2007 at 11:28 am

Dennis Kucinich. He’s not only quite liberal, he’s a vegan too.
tyler on Dec 13th, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Thank you for the Ron Paul links. The racism is disgusting and inexcusable. He is clearly a vile and deranged personality.

That second betting site is much more interesting and thought provoking, thanks for that too.

Why would Al Gore want to be president now? Things started going well for him as soon as he got out of politics. He’s won every award known to humanity, other than a Tony, or perhaps Super Bowl MVP…more seriously, I have heard (and it makes sense) that, like Mike Bloomberg in NY, he is unwilling to go down in history as the male WASP spoiler that kept the first nonwhite and/or nonmale major presidential candidate from being elected.

Bill Richardson will make someone a phenomenal VP candidate. Are there betting odds on *that*? You could make some serious money that way I think.

Some folks in my family know Edwards well and say he is a very genuine, caring and intelligent man despite the ridiculous Southern-lawyer haircut. However, we will find final, convincing proof of the Flat Earth theory before he sits in the Oval Office.

(back to votegopher etc for continued, boring-but-necessary research into actual candidate positions…)
Nick Ernst on Dec 13th, 2007 at 3:52 pm

So, Ron Paul supporters, how do you feel about Global Warming? The man is opposed to international cooperation on the subject. There are many things that each state should be left to, but where you can throw your fist ends where another’s face begins - if you take the issue of climate change seriously, don’t take Ron Paul seriously.

Also he opposes student loans. Imagine if states had to provide loans for students - the richer states might be able to do it, for their population, but the poorer states would suffer, and thousands more students would try to flock into the increasingly impacted colleges, while the poorer states would loose more and more youth. (This is an extreme and simplified picture, but we get a lot done assuming cows to be perfectly spherical).

On the issue of Obama’s NASA cuts, that’s upsetting, but then again who are we going to send to space if elementary science education continues its descent? Jason M. Hendler had the best point, that NASA has been doing great work in autonavigation - for most space missions it would make economical sense to send an automated system.
Jeff on Dec 13th, 2007 at 4:11 pm

Ron Paul is my homeboy
sharon on Dec 13th, 2007 at 5:06 pm

I voted for Huckabee, because I heart the film. But I’d definitely vote for Ru Paul if you’d given us the option.

Lucky for you I won’t be voting for any of them, what with being in the UK, eh? Still, at least I’m not this stupid:

I thought I’d read that Obama proposed a big cut in NASA’s budget to pay for education, though I can’t quickly find a reference to that. He kinda lost me on that one.

Good one: choose your candidate based on something you think you read somewhere but can’t find it now and don’t know exactly what it was about anyway. No wonder America is screwed.
Cameron on Dec 13th, 2007 at 7:32 pm

Ron Paul would get rid of the federal income tax but doesn’t explain how he would make up that 1.2 trillion shortfall. Truly a man of vision.
Diocletian on Dec 13th, 2007 at 8:46 pm

“I was interested in people who actually have a chance of winning a nomination, not vanity candidates with less than 5% support. Sorry, deeply committed people of the internet!”

Not so fast there, Slick. You offer exclusively War Party candidates, each of them declaring a willingness to strike Iran with nuclear bombs, and dismiss all others as unelectable. That may be true, but to present such a restricted choice, as if it were copied from a TV screen, is politically irresponsible for someone as influential as you are. You’ve strayed too far from your bailiwick here, Sir. Please try to consider the importance of the issues of war, peace, 1.2 million dead Iraqis, torture …a contempt for truth and the deliberate undermining of science..the enormity of the crimes that are openly committed as we watch.

Consider too, please, that your statement, coming from a superbly talented physicist, constitutes a blunder in the appraisal of cause and effect. Kucinich is a lagging candidate because television ignores him, not vice versa.

Your usual sparkling incisiveness and elegance of presentation, both in print and on radio, vanish in this dispiriting political naivete. Please do some more reading and come back to this topic. Kucinich and the progressive movement, or the peace movement, or whatever you want to call us, could use some help and some insight from a guy as smart as you are.

I’m reading your paper on Cosmology (or maybe it is a chapter that I downloaded) along with Weinberg’s 1988 review paper. I had trouble following both of them until I stepped back and read most of Liddle’s undergraduate book - a book with a few small flaws, but a really wonderful introduction. Now I can read all the papers with pleasure and profit. Trust me, a hoary old hippy who has been protesting for more than a century, physics is a lot more rewarding than politics.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
J.R. "Bob" Dobbs on Dec 13th, 2007 at 9:06 pm

On the Dem side, I’d be OK with Hillary or Obama, with a preference for Hillary. On the GOP side, I’d probably be OK with Rudy or McCain.

I doubt any one of those 4 could conceivably be significantly worse than what we have now (and I voted for Bush in 2000 - didn’t vote at all in 2004). I wouldn’t vote for any of the other GOP contenders for junior high Student Council, never mind President of the United States.
Bob on Dec 13th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

More evidence that the academic universe is liberal.

So utterly disappointing.
capitalistimperialistpig on Dec 13th, 2007 at 11:45 pm

Sean,
I’m sure it was an oversight, but you seem to have left out Alan Keyes.
Sean on Dec 14th, 2007 at 12:07 am

Diocletian– It’s always a pleasure to be accused of political naivete by a Kucinich supporter.

Bob– We use the same screening process on this blog that keeps David Horowitz and other qualified conservatives from landing plum academic positions.

CIP– You’re right! I’m just afraid of the truth. Or is that the Truth?
Aaron Bergman on Dec 14th, 2007 at 12:15 am

I believe the proper spelling is TRVTH!
Mark on Dec 14th, 2007 at 11:32 am

WTF NO RON PAUL. THIS IS RIDICULOUS
fooltomery on Dec 14th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

An inexperienced suit with a resonant speaking voice is currently #1; an indeterminate Other is currently #2; a character-assassinating, power-hungry harridan is currently #3; and a mansion-dwelling, populist demagogue pretty-boy is currently #4.

Just damn!

Love of physics and love of country are not incompatible, but this poll–as it currently stands–couldn’t be used to prove that proposition.
Pingback from Holy Crap | Cosmic Variance on Dec 14th, 2007 at 1:02 pm

[...] promise I didn’t rig our informal poll, but I won’t pretend that I didn’t like the results. I would have guessed ahead of time [...]
Michael R on Dec 23rd, 2007 at 1:20 pm

Dennis Kucinich all the way! The most courageous defender of the constitution of all the candidates. He will change our country for the better, and we will all “just get along” better after his administration takes charge. I agree that Paul and Gravel should be on the polls. The reason people have not heard of some of the candidates, especially Kucinich is due to deliberate exclusion by the consolidated media. I’ts time for the people to tell them what democracy means!
Cleveland on Dec 26th, 2007 at 6:00 pm

I can’t figure out how, in my lifetime, how the notion of exclusion, ignorance, and censorship, is considered by a good many to be the new American way. The monopolistic corporate media already does a fine job at only spotlighting the candidates they have chosen for us as viable, while ignoring the others.

Even in their debate forums, Dennis Kucinich resorts to raising his hand or saying,”I’m here” to try to get the moderator to direct a question to him. How bogus is this kind of carnival display?

It isn’t enough that we have this absurd system by which “legitimate” candidates qualify. A selection determined by how much money can be collected doesn’t reflect the populist desire for solid Presidential timber.

Now, in the (as of now) bastion of freedom that is cyberspace, those who have the chance to test to boundless reaches of liberty and truth, would design a poll that
only fits their view of what is best for all of us and considers that if an otherwise, legitimate candidate does not fit (his) profile as a “winner”, then that candidate is not worthy of being listed on his poll.

Indeed, many people need a civics lesson to remind them of how Democracy should work and what country they are lining in.

Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are bona fide candidates for President of the United States - certainly as much as dead weight like Fred Thompson.
Matt Dixon on Jan 7th, 2008 at 10:56 am

Wow this is about the most unfair web site I have seen, not including Ron Paul, it’s a very bias view. just another fine example of controlled media, sorry but I will not take part in any media that is bias, Do I like Ron Paul sure, will I vote for him, probable, but so far I am undecided, I like many Americans want to hear what all te candidates have to say not just what this web site or our mainstream media want us to hear, it is our right, all candidates are viable and therefore should be included in all debates.

As soon as a source takes that right away already makes it unfair regardless of who they are excluding and their reasons, this site is a prime example of of the distrust of media.

How about we all stop dreaming and stop being bias so we can all have a true vote, it’s always interesting to me and yet it confuses me to no end that almost every straw vote I see mentions Ron Paul as the winner but yet mainstream media and many websites like this one talks as if Ron Paul is not even running and these mainstream polls are often and too many times very skewed, but yet you scream democracy hummm…. I beg to differ in your views. it makes me sick to know people are not honest in these elections, the American people deserve and demand better but yet this web site offers nothing but lies and skewed events. shame on you, this is my country as well as yours, do not dare take my right to vote based on your own agenda.
The Almighty Bob on Jan 7th, 2008 at 11:38 am

Do I like Ron Paul sure, will I vote for him, probable, but so far I am undecided

Please check the definiton of “undecided”. It may surprise you.

Other than that, this isn’t a newspaper or news show. Sean never made any kind of claim not to be biased. Those who control the site are perfectly within their rights to be biased, so long as it’s stated up front. If it bothers you, do like the free market tells you, and go into competition: start your own site.
Pingback from Maybe Obama should learn how to dumb himself down. « blueollie on Jan 17th, 2008 at 9:57 am

[...] You know, there are many out there who actually like that. Perhaps that is why Obama does well among the intellectually interested crowd; see for example, the poll results from this physics blog. [...]

« UK Physics Investment Decimated Change the Incentive Structure »

Trackback URL for this post: http://cosmicvariance.com/2007/12/12/presidential-poll/trackback/

Presidential Poll

72 Comments on “Presidential Poll” rss feed

Leave a Reply

Search

Contributors

Alumni and Guests

Recent Comments:

Recent Posts

Links

Meta

Who is currently your favorite candidate for the 2008 Presidential elections?
	Hillary Clinton (D)
	John Edwards (D)
	Rudy Giuliani (R)
	Mike Huckabee (R)
	John McCain (R)
	Barack Obama (D)
	Mitt Romney (R)
	Fred Thompson (R)
	Other

Free polls from Pollhost.com