We need to add "The Sanjaya Effect" to our dictionaries.
2007-10-22 03:44:28 · 4 answers · asked by Philip McCrevice 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
That's where a large group of people try to sway an honest election by purposefully voting for the most obvious loser in the group of candidates.
2007-10-22 03:45:22 · update #1
I think Huckabee said it best in the post debate "spin" room. He said, "Of course Paul is winning, he is the only libertarian on stage with all other republicans."
The vote gets diluted between all the "other" candidates, while Ron Paul stands ahead due to his unique perspective on almost every issue. He gets 100% of the votes for those that agree with his views, while everyone else has to share votes.
This type of response could very well carry into the nomination.
2007-10-22 04:07:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Actually Sanjaya was good and the preteens loved him. People were not voting for a loser. Some are just better at seeing who really is the best.
2007-10-22 03:58:26 · answer #2 · answered by Lou 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He won as he will in the real votes unless of course they change the outcome.
FOX needs to wake up and realize people want change. You can only vote once by the way, 1 vote=1 phone number.
Fox is retarded for saying their own poll is innaccurate after they discovered the results not to their liking. I bet if Guiliani had won they would be saying the polls are accurate and lets party. Screw guiliani/romney they are F***** up people.
RON PAUL REVOLUTION 2008!!!
2007-10-22 04:20:49 · answer #3 · answered by Mobus 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yeah, Sean Hannity was whining about it...wouldn't want one of the non-neocons to get any credit.
2007-10-22 03:47:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋