The Results are in!

Thursday, June 11, 2009, 17:38
Iowa
711 views
15 comments

Bob Vander Plaats: 52.4%

Chris Rants: 25.6%

Paul McKinley: 18%

Jeff Lamberti: 4%

559 total votes

About the Author

Craig Robinson has written 700 stories on this site.

Craig Robinson serves as the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheIowaRepublican.com. Prior to founding Iowa's largest conservative news site, Robinson served as the Political Director of the Republican Party of Iowa during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses. In that capacity, Robinson planned and organized the largest political event in 2007, the Iowa Straw Poll, in Ames, Iowa. Robinson also organized the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa, and was later dispatched to Nevada to help with the caucuses there. Robinson cut his teeth in Iowa politics during the 2000 caucus campaign of businessman Steve Forbes and has been involved with most major campaigns in the state since then. His extensive political background and rolodex give him a unique perspective from which to monitor the political pulse of Iowa.

15 Comments on “The Results are in!”

Madison wrote on 11 June, 2009, 17:49
Some important observations about this bogus poll and the results:

I learned, and correct me if I’m wrong, but the rules were changed midway through the voting! BOGUS. I thought the only way to vote was going to be text messaging and then suddenly people can just vote on the air or send an e-mail? TERRIBLE.

Lets be honest, the credibility was shot from the git go as soon as Craig Robinson ties in DemocratDeace but then the rules change mid-game.

Secondly, How in the world did Vander Plaats not get 80 or higher percent of the vote!? That is his audience! He clearly underperformed while Rants and McKinley did pretty well, it looks like considering.

559 votes? 50,000 watts? 6 hours to vote? Snoooze. You would have thought with the ego that DemocratDeace has, there should have been 5590 votes or more. WHO wastes 3 hours on this guy. Sad.

Not to mention, the exclusion of Behn and Roberts was disturbing. I would have put those two on there over McKinley and Lamberti. What a sham.
Deace voted for Obama wrote on 11 June, 2009, 17:58
I didn’t vote because I didn’t care. Did they take call-in votes? Could the same people call in over and over? Who else listens to Deace besides the Deace/Huck/VP crowd?
Madison wrote on 11 June, 2009, 18:04
Exactly,

Vander Plaats badly underperformed on this and the poll was bogus anyway since the method of voting was erratic. With such inconsistencies, I think it is safe to assume there was plenty of fraud which shouldn’t come as a surprise given that a Democrat was involved in the execution of this bogus poll.

Where was Roberts and Behn? Still no answer on that. Ridiculous.
Deace voted for Obama wrote on 11 June, 2009, 18:13
So you’re saying the same people could vote multiple times? If that is the case, this poll was a dismal failure.
Madison wrote on 11 June, 2009, 18:17
I’m saying that I know of 1 person, a good Vander Plaats supporter, who voted twice from using two e-mail accounts using two phone numbers. So yes, after I learned that the methods of voting changed mid-way through…you knew it was a joke. Sham. Bogus. Misleading. Not worth taking seriously.

Overall, there was Fraud occurring. None of us should be surprised by this given that a Democrat executed this – Steve Deace.
Deace voted for Obama wrote on 11 June, 2009, 18:23
Too bad a good man, Craig Robinson, got sucked in by this goof ball. I just couldn’t take this whole thing seriously and that was before I knew you could vote multiple times.

BTW, any of them are good men. I have no problem with that. It’s just that this thing is so far from settled and it seemed rigged for a certain outcome so it wasn’t worth the effort. I’ll wait.
Timmy wrote on 11 June, 2009, 18:39
It’s too bad that this kinda crap happens because it ruins the credibilty of all polls. It would’ve been nice to have had a professional poll, but that gets really expensive to do properly. A better way would have had a neutral organization run it. I can’t fault Craig for the effort, but rightly or not it will always carry the taint of deace along with it.
That having been said, the BVP first place was predictable, but the 2nd place for Rants and 3rd for McKinley is interesting. There probably should have been a spot for “some other candidate”, I think there are others out there that weren’t included that this would have at least offered a choice other than these 4. All in all, I applaud Craig’s effort, nobody else has stepped up to the plate.
HawkCR1 wrote on 12 June, 2009, 2:41
If BVP or Deace try using this “poll” to brag about how much support there is for a BVP candidacy…they’d be making a serious mistake.

Craig, I’d love to know why you allowed Deace to count votes that were emailed in and “call-in”
votes to his show. When this was rolled out…text messaging was stated as the only way of voting…then all of sudden…the rules get changed.

Who wants to bet tomorrow that Deace will be shouting from the rooftops how BVP is the “front-runner” for the nomination…how the other candidates should just give up now and give BVP the nomination……
anonymous wrote on 12 June, 2009, 5:28
While we need to compliment Mr. Robinson for his creativity in developing this poll, there is at least one aspect of it that is really troubling. If the Iowa Republican was supposed to be truly representative of all, gosh, all Iowa Republicans, why was Steve Deace’s the only commentary allowed? We read ad nauseum on this website about the divide between the ficons and the socons, yet when it comes to this polling, only the most extreme of the socons are allowed to have a voice. Next time, have a couple of commenters, Craig, if you want an effort to have marginal credibility.
Deace voted for Obama wrote on 12 June, 2009, 6:06
Deace isn’t even a Republican. Why not get the opinion of a—REPUBLICAN!!!
Deace voted for Obama wrote on 12 June, 2009, 6:07
I’m a proud Republican. I’ll do it and my opinion is just as valuable as Deace’s–even more so because I want to improve the Republican party–Deace wants to destroy it.
Christine Danielson wrote on 12 June, 2009, 7:12
What a shame that this poll wasn’t legitimate. I voted for Christopher Rants.
Lydia wrote on 12 June, 2009, 8:28
Anon,

If you remember, all the candidates were given the opportunity to to write an op-ed, but only Rants did that. Further, he whole point of having a comments section is that is acts as a letter tot he editor. So, essentially, any reader can be a “commenter.”

It seem to me a lot of people have sour grapes because their guy didn’t win. Frankly, I don’t understand why Rants didn’t do better. I’m sure he has an extensive email list which he very easily could have used to send out instructions on how to text message a vote.
Moderation in Everything wrote on 12 June, 2009, 12:16
I listened to Deace the other night. Salier was his guest. Talk about spooky stuff. Sounds like we have some Branch Davidians on the loose. Looks like some of them voted in the straw poll also.
bgunzy wrote on 12 June, 2009, 17:55
Folks – Get out of this freakin’ echo chamber and breath the fresh air! It’s just a poll – an early test of the winds, so to speak. It was Deace’s idea, and he has every right to run it as he sees fit. You can take it or leave it…sounds like most of you would rather moan and complain. You have a better idea? Do your own poll and include the candidates you want. Bwaah, Jerry Behn wasn’t on the list! Bwaah, I stubbed my toe and it’s all Steve Deace’s fault! Craig, make it all better or, or, or I’ll post more seething entries here anonymously!