• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Republican Candidates in Four-Way Heat in Iowa

jasonxe

jasonxe

I support ██ ███
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Messages
1,405
Reaction score
355
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Republican Candidates in Four-Way Dead Heat - Bloomberg

Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are in a dead heat as the top choices for Iowans likely to attend the Jan. 3 Republican presidential caucuses.

A Bloomberg News poll shows Cain at 20 percent, Paul at 19 percent, Romney at 18 percent and Gingrich at 17 percent among the likely attendees with the caucuses that start the nominating contests seven weeks away.
Click to expand...

ekii1.png
 
OMIGOSH THIS RACE IS SO INTENSE - oh wait, all of those people suck. *goes back to sleep*
 
Interesting how this confirms the amazing crash and burn of Perry when just recently he was heralded as the Man Who Would Be Nominee in 2012.

I too think the numbers for Ron Paul are probably way too high. But it is telling that Romney simply cannot gain any traction to close the deal.
 
I really don't think Paul's got a significant chance, but I'll say this. If, and its a big if, IF somehow he managed to steal one in Iowa the first leg of this race is going to get very interesting. I think Paul, with momentum, could have an outside shot of taking New Hampshire as well. And if he managed the two early ones like that we could be looking at a WILD primary. Its an interesting, if unlikely, thought.

I've gone on record before saying I think Paul would get crushed by Obama in a general election, but could very well be the best thing long term for the Republican Party by essentially becoming this generations Goldwater.
 
Zyphlin said:
I really don't think Paul's got a significant chance, but I'll say this. If, and its a big if, IF somehow he managed to steal one in Iowa the first leg of this race is going to get very interesting. I think Paul, with momentum, could have an outside shot of taking New Hampshire as well. And if he managed the two early ones like that we could be looking at a WILD primary. Its an interesting, if unlikely, thought.

I've gone on record before saying I think Paul would get crushed by Obama in a general election, but could very well be the best thing long term for the Republican Party by essentially becoming this generations Goldwater.
Click to expand...

It is not a "big if" at all. Ron Paul has the best ground game in Iowa and this poll shows what most of us backing Ron Paul strongly suspected, that his chances of winning Iowa are really good. A win in Iowa would make New Hampshire Paul's race to lose, in my opinion. He probably has to win both since a win in Iowa is likely to be written off by the media as being about his devoted based of support or some other garbage excuse. They would still fight tooth and nail to keep him from being treated like a legitimate candidate, but it would be a lot harder to play the whole "he can't win" game.
 
Demon of Light said:
It is not a "big if" at all. Ron Paul has the best ground game in Iowa and this poll shows what most of us backing Ron Paul strongly suspected, that his chances of winning Iowa are really good. A win in Iowa would make New Hampshire Paul's race to lose, in my opinion. He probably has to win both since a win in Iowa is likely to be written off by the media as being about his devoted based of support or some other garbage excuse. They would still fight tooth and nail to keep him from being treated like a legitimate candidate, but it would be a lot harder to play the whole "he can't win" game.
Click to expand...

He can't win.

Unlike the other candidates, Ron Paul has an unbreakable ceiling to his support due to how drastically different his ideology is. Other candidates' support rises and falls based on their perceived leadership qualities, but by comparison, they're all basically mainstream Republicans. Ron Paul is not.

I'd be willing to bet every dollar I had that he won't win the nomination. I'd be extremely shocked if he even won a single state.
 
Demon of Light said:
It is not a "big if" at all. Ron Paul has the best ground game in Iowa and this poll shows what most of us backing Ron Paul strongly suspected, that his chances of winning Iowa are really good. A win in Iowa would make New Hampshire Paul's race to lose, in my opinion. He probably has to win both since a win in Iowa is likely to be written off by the media as being about his devoted based of support or some other garbage excuse. They would still fight tooth and nail to keep him from being treated like a legitimate candidate, but it would be a lot harder to play the whole "he can't win" game.
Click to expand...

Every other poll in Iowa has him 10 to 12 % just as always, including one actually taken at the same time as this poll. Paul is not going to win Iowa.
 
Dav said:
OMIGOSH THIS RACE IS SO INTENSE - oh wait, all of those people suck. *goes back to sleep*
Click to expand...
So who is the libertarian candidate this time? Who????
 
haymarket said:
Interesting how this confirms the amazing crash and burn of Perry when just recently he was heralded as the Man Who Would Be Nominee in 2012.
Click to expand...

I know, whatever happened? It's Fred Thompson all over again.
 
Dav said:
Ron Paul, for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...
If he's not running as one, then he isn't one....for all intents and purposes. So you give me the name of the libertarians candidate.
 
Zyphlin said:
I really don't think Paul's got a significant chance, but I'll say this. If, and its a big if, IF somehow he managed to steal one in Iowa the first leg of this race is going to get very interesting. I think Paul, with momentum, could have an outside shot of taking New Hampshire as well. And if he managed the two early ones like that we could be looking at a WILD primary. Its an interesting, if unlikely, thought.

I've gone on record before saying I think Paul would get crushed by Obama in a general election, but could very well be the best thing long term for the Republican Party by essentially becoming this generations Goldwater.
Click to expand...

Romney will win NH comfortably. He is regarded as a native son as former MA governor and has a home in the state...
 
Last edited:
Dav said:
He can't win.

Unlike the other candidates, Ron Paul has an unbreakable ceiling to his support due to how drastically different his ideology is. Other candidates' support rises and falls based on their perceived leadership qualities, but by comparison, they're all basically mainstream Republicans. Ron Paul is not.

I'd be willing to bet every dollar I had that he won't win the nomination. I'd be extremely shocked if he even won a single state.
Click to expand...

This talk of a ceiling of support is nonsense. If I concede the notion that he had a ceiling it would still have to be much higher than even these poll numbers. However, were there truly a ceiling to the support he can get from the public his figures in a match-up against Obama would be much lower. People make choices of candidates based off a lot of criteria. A major criteria is the perception that a candidate can win. For Ron Paul the media is actively seeking to manage perceptions of his ability to win for the precise purpose of limiting his support. Look at Cain's numbers before and after that Florida straw poll. It was not anything about the man that convinced people to start supporting him, but a perception that he was suddenly a viable candidate. Media have become adept at managing public perceptions in the way that best benefits the interests of the establishment.

Redress said:
Every other poll in Iowa has him 10 to 12 % just as always, including one actually taken at the same time as this poll. Paul is not going to win Iowa.
Click to expand...

Not all polls are created equal. What is significant about this poll is that it was the first in a while that sampled for anyone who would vote in the caucus and it had a stricter criteria for likely voters. Many of those other polls you refer to focus on self-identified Republicans or have likely voter criteria that is broader in scope. Also, the firm that did this poll has been one of the most reliable ones out there in terms of predicting the outcome of the Iowa caucuses.
 
Demon of Light said:
Not all polls are created equal. What is significant about this poll is that it was the first in a while that sampled for anyone who would vote in the caucus and it had a stricter criteria for likely voters. Many of those other polls you refer to focus on self-identified Republicans or have likely voter criteria that is broader in scope. Also, the firm that did this poll has been one of the most reliable ones out there in terms of predicting the outcome of the Iowa caucuses.
Click to expand...

Your information is wrong:

The Bloomberg News Poll, conducted Nov 10-12 for Bloomberg News by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, IA, is based on interviews with 2,677 registered Republican and independent voters in Iowa ages 18 or older, of which 503 said they would definitely or probably participate in the January 2012 Republican caucus.
Click to expand...

http://www.businessweek.com/pdf/poll11-15-11.pdf

That is actually looser criteria, since most polls use likely primary voters whereas the Bloomberg used registered voters. The Rasmussen poll which came out the same day: Election 2012: New Hampshire Republican Primary - Rasmussen Reports™

The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely GOP Primary voters shows Romney with 41% support. Georgia Businessman Herman Cain comes in a distant second with 17% of the vote while Texas Congressman Ron Paul picks up 11% support.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but Paul is going to fail as usual. America is too smart for him.
 
Redress said:
Your information is wrong:



http://www.businessweek.com/pdf/poll11-15-11.pdf

That is actually looser criteria, since most polls use likely primary voters whereas the Bloomberg used registered voters. The Rasmussen poll which came out the same day: Election 2012: New Hampshire Republican Primary - Rasmussen Reports™
Click to expand...

Read that again carefully:

The Bloomberg News Poll, conducted Nov 10-12 for Bloomberg News by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, IA, is based on interviews with 2,677 registered Republican and independent voters in Iowa ages 18 or older, of which 503 said they would definitely or probably participate in the January 2012 Republican caucus.
Click to expand...

Those 503 voters it mentions are the ones depicted in the poll results.

Sorry, but Paul is going to fail as usual. America is too smart for him.
Click to expand...

I think, given the above, if you are right about him failing it is because the reverse is true.
 
the Iowa Caucus functions more like a straw poll then it does a a typical election. It requires more of a time commitment, which certainly lends to Paul's strengths.

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if he pulled off the upset. but take my word with a grain of salt, I was only born and raised in the great Hawkeye State.
 
Demon of Light said:
Read that again carefully:



Those 503 voters it mentions are the ones depicted in the poll results.



I think, given the above, if you are right about him failing it is because the reverse is true.
Click to expand...

You are correct that it was the 503. My mistake. However, that means that they used the same methodology of the other polls that show Paul as being at about 10 %(likely voters). Bloomberg has Paul spiked in New Hampshire too. However, when one poll disagrees with all the other polls, including those done concurrently, it is likely to be an aberration. Paul is still too bat**** insane to get elected.
 
Redress said:
Paul is still too bat**** insane to get elected.
Click to expand...

This isn’t about getting elected, this is about the Iowa Caucus, known to hand the win to people that are outside American mainstream when it comes to electability.

I’m not even sure why I bother responding to you, I find you so intellectually dishonest, it’s disgusting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom