Paul | 23 | 21 | 18 | 10 | 16 | 11 |
Romney | 20 | 16 | 16 | 22 | 19 | 26 |
Gingrich | 14 | 22 | 27 | 8 | 5 | 15 |
Bachmann | 10 | 11 | 13 | 8 | 18 | 14 |
Perry | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 22 | |
Santorum | 10 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 | |
Huntsman | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
Johnson | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Oh wow, it just gets worse and worse for the GOP establishment.Paul leads in Iowa - Public Policy Polling
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_IA_1218925.pdf
Iowa
12/16 - 12/18
597 likely caucus voters
+/-4.0%
Paul
23
21
18
10
16
11
Romney 20 16 16 22 19 26Gingrich 14 22 27 8 5 15Bachmann 10 11 13 8 18 14
Perry 10 9 9 9 22Santorum 10 8 6 5
5Huntsman 4 5 4 1 3 2
Johnson 2 1 1 1 0
First time in first for Paul in Iowa. Newt took a large drop. I believe i read a tweet of Newt dropping in NH. Poll coming out tomorrow I believe.
Two man race? Which supporters will show up in the Iowa caucus and will the winner carry over to NH?
Side note:
Congrats to Paul for reaching 4 mil in donations in this weekend money bomb.
Romney won Des Moise Register endorsement.
If you're interested in speech comparison then watch this video. Ron Paul vs Mitt Romney CPAC 2011 Speech Comparison - YouTube
Oh wow, it just gets worse and worse for the GOP establishment.
So Ron Paul has now climbed into the front car of the GOP roller-coaster. Realize the highest point in the coaster ride is right at the start.
We saw it with Perry, we saw with Bachmann, we saw it with Cain, why does everybody think that their favorite will be an exception?
Just curious.......Between Paul and Obama, who do you agree with concerning Indefinate detention?
The media blockade against Ron Paul needs to end. I wouldn't vote for him but enough people like him that he deserves a broader voice.
Before the Paul supporters get their panties wet, I'd just like to point out that Iowa is just one state.
There are 49 others
I absolutely do not agree with indefinite detention. I think it is, as its forefounder the Patriot Act, a criminal infringement on fundamental constitutional rights (which, before people try to draw a distinction about US citizens, our constitution extends in most cases to cover ALL persons, not citizens).... So, on this particular issue, as well as other issues of American Imperialism, I like Paul. However, as I stated before, I do not think he is presidential material, nor do I think of Libertarianism as a particularly sound political philosophy.
I am fundamentally a democrat and generally vote that way. I will vote for Obama. I generally like him, but I am a disappointed Obama supporter, I expect more/better (including on issues such as the Patriot Act/Gitmo). Though ever morning I see the one guy whose political philosophy I endorse wholeheartedly, I am not voting for myself (though I have written him in for congress two times when my congressman ran unopposed). I have voted for a Republican or two along the way (one time in a Senate race, I completely disagreed with our Democratic senator, voted for the Republican, the Democrat won and then changed parties within the year) and voted for independents, I really doubt I go any other way but Obama this time round. Yes, the guy has warts, but he is way better, IMHO, than the alternatives.
It is traditionally an important measuring stick for campaigns. Nobody is suggesting this means Paul is definitely going to win.
Iowa hasn't been an important measuring stick for at least two decades. You are correct however that Traditionally it HAD been a measuring stick.
You are both right and wrong. Too many other factors in play. Iowa was a big part of Obama winning last primary. Huckabee, it didn't help so much. Paul is not doing well in other state polls, will not do well post Iowa.
For fans of Paul. I'd say Iowa would hold some relevance if Paul was running for President of Iowa. Other than that...
Chris Wallace said if Ron Paul wins the Iowa Caucus, it'll discredit it.
Chris Wallace: If Ron Paul Wins the Iowa Caucus "It Won't Count" - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine
Now we see what he thinks of Iowans! If they don't vote how he wants, they're vote doesn't matter! Un freaking believable!
Would say that you are notably distorting what Chris Wallace said. His comments were in no way disparaging to the people of Iowa. Wallace was speculating that if Ron Paul does wins in Iowa, the "Republican Establishment" will simply disregard the Iowa results. Which I believe is completely accurate.
The Republicans leaders are not going to embrace Paul because he is not considered a long term viable candidate at the national level. Have no personal dislike of Ron Paul. But his loyal, fierce following is not going to be able to carry him (or fund him) to the nomination.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?