Granted, it's not scientific.

But at least when I post a poll on Topix, it gets responses (unlike here). Here is the result of my latest poll there.

P.S. You can vote in the NEXT poll here.

Why the disparity?

Multiblogger Kevin wonders over at Ten Second News why the disparity exists between Ron Paul's Internet popularity and real-world poll numbers, and partially explains it.

A couple of other reasons I can think of include the undeniable fact that many of the "real-world" polls don't even include Ron Paul. They artificially limit your choices in the primary to Romney, Giuliani, sometimes McCain and/or Thompson, and once in awhile Huckabee. Dr. Paul can't have a very high poll showing if he's not included in the polls, now can he? The "real-world" polls don't seem to be any realer than the virtual polls.

Another reason is that many of Ron Paul's supporters are technogeeks who don't have landlines. Surveys don't call cellphones, so it's not surprising that candidates with less technosavvy supporters are over-represented.

We here at Arkanssouri loves us some Ron Paul supporters.

I've created an online poll that actually encourages input from Ron Paul's supporters. Take a look over in the left-hand column, about halfway down. And vote (once per person, please).

You may have missed it . . .

. . . but hidden inside CNBC's decision to take down their poll because the Ron Paul network is good at, um, networking is this little admission that CNBC's polls are illegitimate:

So there was our after-debate poll. The numbers grew ... 7,000-plus votes after a couple of hours ... and Ron Paul was at 75%.

Now Paul is a fine gentleman with some substantial backing and, by the way, was a dynamic presence throughout the debate , but I haven't seen him pull those kind of numbers in any "legit" poll.

So, yours is not a "legit" poll, eh?

Tell me, CNBC -- if we can't believe your polling, why should we believe anything else you do?

One more thing, Flat-earther Rog...

. . . about that poll in the upper left of your site today...

Yes, I agree that the Chargers did hire Norv Turner.