IA PrimR: Public Policy Polling: Ron Paul almost 1st

[xavier110]

Even if Paul wins Iowa, Gingrich could still easily take South Carolina and Florida.

Yeah, this could actually be devastating for Romney. An ascendant Paul could capture NH, with Gingrich taking SC and FL, making it a very strange Paul vs. Gingrich race.

[memphis]

How was the polling in Iowa in '08? I vaguely remember being surprised that Huckabee won, but maybe I just hadn't been paying all that much attention.

[RBH]

How was the polling in Iowa in '08? I vaguely remember being surprised that Huckabee won, but maybe I just hadn't been paying all that much attention.

of the 20 polls released from Iowa from the period of Dec 13 to Caucus Day in 2008, Huckabee led in 15 polls and Romney led in 5 polls.

The last Selzer poll nailed everybody's percentage within 2% except for Thompson.

Ron Paul v. Mitt Romney is our equivalent to when the Republican primary came down to Bob Dole and Pat Buchanan in 1996.

[realisticidealist]

How was the polling in Iowa in '08? I vaguely remember being surprised that Huckabee won, but maybe I just hadn't been paying all that much attention.

http://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008R/polls.php?fips=19

[Pacific Councillor Big Wiggly Style]

Prepare for a blizzard of Paultards if he winds. A Paulzard, if you will.

[redcommander]

Lol. This Republican primary circus is too funny.

[TheGlobalizer]

If Paul wins in IA/NH, SC and FL voters have to take him seriously.  He's a poor fit for FL (he does worst among seniors) but he could be competitive in SC with the IA/NH bumps.  If he places in those two states, I think it's a two-person horserace, him and the SC/FL winner (likely to be the same person - guessing Romney, expecting a Gingrich fade due to the ethics/infidelity/lobbyist attacks).

That Paul is in the ballgame in IA is pretty telling, as his libertarian politics are not generally a great fit for the state.  (He's a better fit for coastal Republicans and the mountain west generally.)  He's built a great ground game in IA, and it looks like he's prepping for the long haul in other states (he's opening offices all over the place).

Also, a couple of fine print notes:

1.  Paul is +8 among strong commits.
2.  Paul wins among voters who are most concerned about foreign policy and national security.
3.  Paul's weakest scores are on electability.  That may change as his polling puts him in the horserace.  Could create significant momentum.

Yeah, this scenario might rile up the Paultards, but they might be right.

[M]

If Paul wins in IA/NH, SC and FL voters have to take him seriously.  He's a poor fit for FL (he does worst among seniors) but he could be competitive in SC with the IA/NH bumps.  If he places in those two states, I think it's a two-person horserace, him and the SC/FL winner (likely to be the same person - guessing Romney, expecting a Gingrich fade due to the ethics/infidelity/lobbyist attacks).

That Paul is in the ballgame in IA is pretty telling, as his libertarian politics are not generally a great fit for the state.  (He's a better fit for coastal Republicans and the mountain west generally.)  He's built a great ground game in IA, and it looks like he's prepping for the long haul in other states (he's opening offices all over the place).

Also, a couple of fine print notes:

1.  Paul is +8 among strong commits.
2.  Paul wins among voters who are most concerned about foreign policy and national security.
3.  Paul's weakest scores are on electability.  That may change as his polling puts him in the horserace.  Could create significant momentum.

Yeah, this scenario might rile up the Paultards, but they might be right.

Where in SC do you see Paul catching on? The socially-conservative, evangelical upcountry? OR the national-security industry dominated, hawkish lowcountry?

[A-Bob]

Paul has skipped out on SC and FL. If he wins Iowa, he must win New Hampshire or he's probably done, unless he can go back to the bottom of the back and come back up to win Nevada. He won't/can't gain traction in SC and FL with all the seniors and social conservatives and he has left both states untouched.

[Zarn]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Next year will be fun.

[xavier110]

Paul has no shot at SC, even if he wins IA/NH. Gingrich would stay in especially if he still managed respectable numbers in IA/NH and would win SC and maybe FL. It would be a strange, strange race. Romney would just stick it and hope the two burn out.

[RBH]

Pat Buchanan got 29% in South Carolina and 23% in Iowa.

So, are we supposed to be stunned that Paul could top 20% in Iowa after campaigning there for 4 years?

But the field is Perry/Gingrich/Romney/Paul after IA and NH, and probably Gingrich/Romney/Paul in FL.

[Likely Voter]

I think Paul's anti-Newt ads may be working. But Perry's "God Hates Fags" ads aren't

[Free Palestine]

That'd be f-cking amazing if Paul won Iowa.

[memphis]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

Yes, I'm sure all the people in the military are thrilled with the notion of losing their jobs.

[President Marokai]

Hilarious.

[asexual trans victimologist]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

Yes, I'm sure all the people in the military are thrilled with the notion of losing their jobs.

Paul is apparently strong among service members for reasons that I don't really understand.

[Free Palestine]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

Yes, I'm sure all the people in the military are thrilled with the notion of losing their jobs.

Um...Paul has received more donations from those in the military than any other GOP candidate.  That was in '08, anyways.

Paul is apparently strong among service members for reasons that I don't really understand.

Probably because the military has a lower proportion of armchair chickenhawks than the general populace.

[cavalcade]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

# of active duty military in SC <<< # of people in SC whose checks are signed by the Pentagon

[TheGlobalizer]

If Paul wins in IA/NH, SC and FL voters have to take him seriously.  He's a poor fit for FL (he does worst among seniors) but he could be competitive in SC with the IA/NH bumps.  If he places in those two states, I think it's a two-person horserace, him and the SC/FL winner (likely to be the same person - guessing Romney, expecting a Gingrich fade due to the ethics/infidelity/lobbyist attacks).

That Paul is in the ballgame in IA is pretty telling, as his libertarian politics are not generally a great fit for the state.  (He's a better fit for coastal Republicans and the mountain west generally.)  He's built a great ground game in IA, and it looks like he's prepping for the long haul in other states (he's opening offices all over the place).

Also, a couple of fine print notes:

1.  Paul is +8 among strong commits.
2.  Paul wins among voters who are most concerned about foreign policy and national security.
3.  Paul's weakest scores are on electability.  That may change as his polling puts him in the horserace.  Could create significant momentum.

Yeah, this scenario might rile up the Paultards, but they might be right.

Where in SC do you see Paul catching on? The socially-conservative, evangelical upcountry? OR the national-security industry dominated, hawkish lowcountry?

Of those two, more the evangelicals.  They have no non-laughable candidate, and while Paul is quirky he's not a total douchebag like the other options.  I'm not saying he dominates in either place, but I think he's hitting a sweet spot that other candidates can't quite find.

If you read what I said, the subtext is that SC and FL are not good for him.  I just think that SC is softer than FL, where I would consider the most mainstream candidate to be the prohibitive favorite.  Remember, the right-wingers are willing to go unconventional, and with no untarnished option available among the usual suspects, Paul could be the "well, I haven't heard really nasty sh** about him" candidate.

[ilikeverin]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

Yes, I'm sure all the people in the military are thrilled with the notion of losing their jobs.

Paul is apparently strong among service members for reasons that I don't really understand.

I've heard this often said, but I don't know what evidence people have for it (besides the fact that, surprise, people who get involved in the American political process, who are a part of a group which can basically only get involved in the American political process if they use the Internet a lot, tend to donate money to the candidate who is preferred by many people who use the Internet a lot).

[RBH]

I think Paul's anti-Newt ads may be working. But Perry's "God Hates Fags" ads aren't

Rick Perry's problem isn't his message, it's his total lack of credibility.

[Korwinist]

Doesn't SC have a strong military presence? That would benefit Paul.

Yes, I'm sure all the people in the military are thrilled with the notion of losing their jobs.

I'm sure all the people in the military prefer being stationed in a base wasting taxpayer dollars far from home on the presumption that Putin's gonna start up the T-74s when the Americans leave, or being shot at by people they don't know in a country they have no stake in and with no end in sight.

[True Federalist]

Where in SC do you see Paul catching on? The socially-conservative, evangelical upcountry? OR the national-security industry dominated, hawkish lowcountry?

Some of Paul's best areas in 2008 were in the upcountry.  He did okay in the Charleston tri-county area, but tanked elsewhere in the lowcountry.