Ron Paul wins NY GOP straw poll, NY GOP fails to mention it

UDATED & CLARIFIED

The Caucus blog at the New York Times reports that Ron Paul won a straw poll conducted by the New York State Republican Party.

Clearly, after raking in a record amount of money the other day, Mr. Paul is on a roll. He seems to have out-organized his fellow Republicans — on Rudy Giuliani’s home turf.

The New York State straw poll was conducted Tuesday at the Metropolitan Republican Club in New York City.

The results: Mr. Paul, 26 votes; Mr. Giuliani, 21; Mitt Romney, 6; John McCain, 4; Mike Huckabee, 2; Duncan Hunter, 1; Tom Tancredo, 0.

It is not clear why no votes were measured for Fred Thompson.

This happened on Tuesday, November 6. However, you wouldn't know it to read the website of the New York State Republican Party. The "News" page at NYGOP.org includes the following items from November 6:

• Giuliani may boost GOP in Northeast races



• ‘Rudy’ scores points on New Hampshire tour



• Rudy at ease on campaign trail, eager to please

And on November 7, the "News" page contains a smattering of links to stories about state and local issues and races, with nothing about the 2008 presidential contest.

On the "Press Release" page, for the entire month of November so far, we find the following:

• NEW YORK REPUBLICANS ARE BACK



• Collins wins in a landslide

Neither of which makes any reference to the 2008 presidential race in general, or the November 6 straw poll in particular.

How strange is it that the candidate generating the most excitement among the party's primary voters doesn't even merit a press release when he wins?

Would it be too cynical to suggest that since Rudy! didn't win, the NY GOP is simply pretending that the straw poll never took place?

UPDATE

Commenter Jen Saunders points out that the straw poll in question was not conducted by the New York State Republicans, as The Caucus blog reported, but by the New York Young Republican Club.

The NYYRC published the results of the straw poll on its blog.

I am leaving this post in place, but its conclusions are clearly false, as they were based on a false premise due to inaccurate reporting by the New York Times.