This article was lost during the server switch. It is re-posted below, as it was, with the original comments included below the article.
IPR conducted a poll with SurveyMonkey from May 20–23 asking readers to select their preferences for the Libertarian Party’s 2016 presidential and vice presidential nominations. 303 individuals participated in the poll.
President
For President, participants were asked to select from the Libertarian Party presidential candidates who finished in the top six places in IPR’s Second 2016 Libertarian Party presidential preference poll and NOTA (none of the above). Overall, Johnson and Petersen tied for first with 33.66%. Among the 83 Libertarian National Convention Delegates who participated, Johnson led Petersen 31.33% to 30.12%. Voting anomalies appear to have contributed to Petersen’s rise from the 12.14% overall (and 8.51% among delegates) he received in last week’s IPR poll.
First 100 Respondents
Results from the first 100 respondents (shown below) were largely consistent with the results from last week’s poll. 43% of the first 100 had previously commented at IPR, compared to the 41.62% from last week’s poll. Johnson finished first with 49% overall, but fell to 30.77% among delegates with John McAfee and Darryl Perry close behind.
Candidate | Overall votes | Overall % | Delegate votes | Delegate % |
Gary Johnson | 49 | 49.00% | 8 | 30.77% |
John McAfee | 14 | 14.00% | 6 | 23.08% |
Darryl Perry | 14 | 14.00% | 5 | 19.23% |
Austin Petersen | 13 | 13.00% | 3 | 11.54% |
NOTA | 5 | 5.00% | 2 | 7.69% |
Kevin McCormick | 3 | 3.00% | 1 | 3.85% |
Marc Feldman | 2 | 2.00% | 1 | 3.85% |
Next 100 Respondents
The next 100 respondents (shown below) had significantly different results. Only 5% had previously commented at IPR. Petersen received 72% overall and 65.52% of the delegates. Nobody else came close.
Candidate | Overall votes | Overall % | Delegate votes | Delegate % |
Austin Petersen | 72 | 72.00% | 19 | 65.52% |
Gary Johnson | 20 | 20.00% | 7 | 24.14% |
John McAfee | 4 | 4.00% | 2 | 6.90% |
Darryl Perry | 2 | 2.00% | 1 | 3.45% |
Marc Feldman | 1 | 1.00% | 0 | 0% |
Kevin McCormick | 1 | 1.00% | 0 | 0% |
NOTA | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
Last 103 Respondents
After seeing what was going on, I notified all of the campaigns and encouraged them to inform their supporters about the poll. As a result, in the last 103 results (shown below) the anomalies appeared to dissipate, even though only 8.74% of voters had previously commented at IPR. Gary Johnson placed first at 32.04%. Among delegates, Johnson led with 39.29%, over Darryl Perry’s 28.57%.
Candidate | Overall votes | Overall % | Delegate votes | Delegate % |
Gary Johnson | 33 | 32.04% | 11 | 39.29% |
Darryl Perry | 19 | 18.45% | 8 | 28.57% |
Austin Petersen | 17 | 16.50% | 3 | 10.71% |
John McAfee | 15 | 14.56% | 3 | 10.71% |
Kevin McCormick | 15 | 14.56% | 1 | 3.57% |
Marc Feldman | 3 | 2.91% | 1 | 3.57% |
NOTA | 1 | 0.97% | 1 | 3.57% |
Overall results
Candidate | Overall votes | Overall % | Delegate votes | Delegate % |
Gary Johnson | 102 | 33.66% | 26 | 31.33% |
Austin Petersen | 102 | 33.66% | 25 | 30.12% |
Darryl Perry | 35 | 11.55% | 14 | 16.87% |
John McAfee | 33 | 10.89% | 11 | 13.25% |
Kevin McCormick | 19 | 6.27% | 2 | 2.41% |
Marc Feldman | 6 | 1.98% | 2 | 2.41% |
NOTA | 6 | 1.98% | 3 | 3.61% |
Delegate runoff
First ballot
Johnson – 26 (31.33%)
Petersen – 25 (30.12%)
Perry – 14 (16.87%)
McAfee – 11 (13.25%)
NOTA – 3 (3.61%)
McCormick – 2 (2.41%) (eliminated)
Feldman – 2 (2.41%) (eliminated)
Second ballot
Johnson – 26 (31.33%)
Petersen – 26 (31.33%)
Perry – 16 (19.28%)
McAfee – 12 (14.46%) (eliminated)
NOTA – 3 (3.61%)
Third ballot
Petersen – 31 (37.35%)
Johnson – 28 (33.73%)
Perry – 21 (25.30%) (eliminated)
NOTA – 3 (3.61%)
Fourth ballot
Petersen – 33 (39.76%)
Johnson – 32 (38.55%) (eliminated)
NOTA – 18 (21.69%)
Fifth ballot
Petersen – 50 (60.24%) (winner)
NOTA – 33 (39.76%)
According to the results of IPR’s Third Libertarian Party Presidential Preference Poll, Austin Petersen wins the 2016 Libertarian Party presidential nomination on the Fifth ballot.
Vice President
For Vice President, respondents were asked to select among NOTA, the top four finishers from last week’s IPR poll, plus former Massachusetts governor William Weld, who was recently announced as Gary Johnson’s pick for the vice presidential nomination.
Overall results
Overall, voters favored Weld at 23.43% with NOTA a close second at 22.77%. However, delegates favored activist Will Coley at 27.71% with attorney Alicia Dearn trailing at 24.10%.
Candidate | Overall votes | Overall % | Delegate votes | Delegate % |
William Weld | 71 | 23.43% | 19 | 22.89% |
NOTA | 69 | 22.77% | 13 | 15.66% |
Alicia Dearn | 63 | 20.79% | 20 | 24.10% |
Will Coley | 50 | 16.50% | 23 | 27.71% |
Judd Weiss | 34 | 11.22% | 7 | 8.43% |
Kerry Bentivolio | 16 | 5.28% | 1 | 1.20% |
Delegate runoff
First ballot
Coley – 23 (27.71%)
Dearn – 20 (24.10%)
Weld – 19 (22.89%)
NOTA – 13 (15.66%)
Weiss – 7 (8.43%)
Bentivolio – 1 (1.20%) (eliminated)
Second ballot
Coley – 24 (28.92%)
Dearn – 20 (24.10%)
Weld – 19 (22.89%)
NOTA – 13 (15.66%)
Weiss – 7 (8.43%) (eliminated)
Third ballot
Coley – 25 (30.12%)
Dearn – 24 (28.92%)
Weld – 20 (24.10%) (eliminated)
NOTA – 14 (16.87%)
Fourth ballot
Dearn – 38 (45.78%)
Coley – 27 (32.53%) (eliminated)
NOTA – 18 (21.69%)
Fifth ballot
Dearn – 57 (68.67%) (winner)
NOTA – 26 (31.33%)
According to the results of IPR’s Third Libertarian Party Presidential Preference Poll, Alicia Dearn wins the 2016 Libertarian Party vice presidential nomination on the Fifth ballot.
Comments:
The actuality was that 1) some delegates (including me) received no invitation to participate and 2) a link to the survey got out via Facebook and so forth, allowing anyone to participate.
Nope. Not possible. BUT… Feldman doesn’t look so good, either!
Johnson / Weld 2016
My responses to the comments posted earlier:
Shivany: “Could you have found a worse picture for John? This clearly shows a teensy bit of bias”
I used the photo from his Wikipedia page. I actually had to track down the photo and secure it with a free license several months ago. Otherwise, McAfee would not even have a Wikipedia photo.
Stewart Flood: “According to what the author wrote, he did not like the results so he contacted campaigns to encourage their supporters to vote. The only “voting anomolies” are the ones caused by the interference by the “polster” himself!”
If you don’t see a 72% result over 100 answers, compared to 16.5% and 13% in similar stretches, as an anomaly, then you are simply denying reality. It is ideal when no candidates “flood” a poll. But when it becomes evident that one candidate is flooding the results, the only fair resolution is to allow all candidates to “flood” results.
Fauver: “Great job editorializing the headline for your own poll.”
I’m not sure how stating the fact that there were voting anomalies constitutes “editorializing.” It is not an opinion, it is a fact.
Let’s say that, for the sake of discussion, this poll is an accurate prediction. Five rounds for each office.
And how do we do this in the ONE HOUR in the agenda for each election? A single hour, less time than they have for awards and “entertainment”.
Think about it.
Doesn’t this indicate that whoever drafted the agenda believes Johnson will win on the first round? Are they that confident, or is the fix in?
Thankfullly, the longer the LP is around the more of us can say we’ve only been Libertarians. While I’ve never voted straight ticket, I’ve been a dues paying member since I was 18 and have never voted for a top ticket candidate who was not the Libertarian nominee. Similarly many of the more active members, at least in my current state of Michigan, are now second generation Libertarians. Their parents turned them on to the LP since very young.
We’re a movment. Its been over 40 years, and they haven’t killed us. Guess what, they won’t.
Why is Kerry Bentivolio not more popular? I don’t know who we should nominate but I know that Bill Weld shouldn’t even be considered & Bentivolio certainly should be considered. After receiving a bunch of medals for his heroism in the military, he went to Congress along with Justin Amash and Thomas Massie to add to the constitutionalist faction led by Ron Paul. In his two-year term, Bentivolio has sponsored 13 libertarian bills including a 6-month grace period for businesses facing penalties, a bill blocking the transfer of weapons to Egypt, a resolution to require the public release of every law before it is passed, a 15% pay cut for congress in the event of a budget deficit, a bill prohibiting the U.S Armed Forces from detaining citizens and lawful residents without charge, and a tax allowance for the expenses of attending a private school.
He looks the part of a vice president and he has a way with words. So, am I missing something that makes Kerry Bentivolio unappealing to Libertarians?
Petersen trolls hijacked that. I don’t see this result at all.
I conducted Hammer of Truth’s poll of Libertarian membership and we actually had scientific methodology to screen out possible spiking as is evident here. Even so, our poll had its own limitations (I would have preferred PIN restricted entry and understanding the demographics in advance in order to set quotas). I can tell you absolutely the most scientific method would be to randomly dial registered Libertarians across the country and harass all of you by phone.
Unfortunately that would be incredibly expensive and I don’t think any polling firm would do that without major funding from a news organization or institution, which brings back the question of bias.
I stand by my results as indicative of current dues-paying members and how they felt AT THAT TIME, which for Libertarians always turns out to be a purity test at the convention with floor speeches. What makes this election different is that Johnson has passed this test before, and it appears he will pass it again.
Personally, I’m a registered Republican looking for another option than Trump this year and was just curious who the LP’s nominee will be. I have the tools to find out and I am lucky enough to have worked for a major polling firm for the past 3 years (I have actual experience necessary to do this). The questions were asked without leading and we did our best to ensure the sample was as representative. I can’t say the same about most of these other openly accessible internet polls, so please don’t try to compare apples and oranges.