CNN: Gingrich & Romney tied

[Tender Branson]

28% Gingrich
28% Romney
14% Paul
  8% Bachmann
  7% Perry
  4% Santorum
  2% Huntsman

DEM Primary:

Do you think the Democratic party should renominate Barack Obama as the party's candidate for president in 2012, or do you think the Democratic party should nominate a different candidate for president in 2012?

81% Obama
18% Someone else

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/12/19/rel20a.pdf

[M]

Wow.

If other polls bear this result out, then for the first time the collapse of an ABR is accompanied by a Romney surge.

History may prove Mitt's strategy correct, after all.

[tmthforu94]

It's time.

[Eraserhead]

Ron Paul is also getting close to breaking what you would think would be his ceiling nationally.

[Averroës Nix]

Anyone else think that Paul might be experiencing a Flavor-style mini-bubble?

[TheGlobalizer]

Anyone else think that Paul might be experiencing a Flavor-style mini-bubble?

Arguably, though I wouldn't assume it's necessarily a bubble.  Paul's a bit of an acquired taste, and not a lot of surprises there to create remorse once you buy.  It's not like people are going to suddenly wake up in a month and say, "Well sh**, he's really crazy about that Constitution thing."

[Jacobtm]

Arguably, though I wouldn't assume it's necessarily a bubble.  Paul's a bit of an acquired taste, and not a lot of surprises there to create remorse once you buy.  It's not like people are going to suddenly wake up in a month and say, "Well sh**, he's really crazy about that Constitution thing."

Well, seeing how this whole sh**t has been a series of booms and busts for about every candidate except Santorum, I don't see why Paul couldn't boom then bust just as easily. His core was frequently estimated as 10% of the electorate, more or less, now he's polling higher than that. Surely some of those people are ones who don't fully know everything he stands for.

I've been asked lots of times by people, ''Ron Paul seems really honest and principled, I like that... But what would he actually DO as President?''

[TheGlobalizer]

Arguably, though I wouldn't assume it's necessarily a bubble.  Paul's a bit of an acquired taste, and not a lot of surprises there to create remorse once you buy.  It's not like people are going to suddenly wake up in a month and say, "Well sh**, he's really crazy about that Constitution thing."

Well, seeing how this whole sh**t has been a series of booms and busts for about every candidate except Santorum, I don't see why Paul couldn't boom then bust just as easily. His core was frequently estimated as 10% of the electorate, more or less, now he's polling higher than that. Surely some of those people are ones who don't fully know everything he stands for.

I've been asked lots of times by people, ''Ron Paul seems really honest and principled, I like that... But what would he actually DO as President?''

I agree - I'm just saying it's not as obviously a bubble as Newt/Bachmann/Cain were, it could be a big tent.  (I'll give Perry some cred here, he had tent potential, but he blew all sorts of holes in it.  And he's an idiot.)

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Arguably, though I wouldn't assume it's necessarily a bubble.  Paul's a bit of an acquired taste, and not a lot of surprises there to create remorse once you buy.  It's not like people are going to suddenly wake up in a month and say, "Well sh**, he's really crazy about that Constitution thing."

Well, seeing how this whole sh**t has been a series of booms and busts for about every candidate except Santorum, I don't see why Paul couldn't boom then bust just as easily. His core was frequently estimated as 10% of the electorate, more or less, now he's polling higher than that. Surely some of those people are ones who don't fully know everything he stands for.

I've been asked lots of times by people, ''Ron Paul seems really honest and principled, I like that... But what would he actually DO as President?''

The main difference is that Cain et al were all built up by the media to be "serious candidates" before getting destroyed, while Paul was portrayed as a sideshow without a chance of victory and is currently getting a mixture of the "he can't win" treatment alongside constant attacks. I doubt that many of those currently supporting him will be turned off by the basic attacks (Foreign policy especially obviously isn't working on him, since he's been open enough for his supporters to get used to it). I can think of a handful of issues to attack him on that he can't deflect or cause the voters to not care, and thus far his opponents haven't attacked him from the right angles yet.

[RodPresident]

Don't count Newt out. We should wait for Iowa...A top 3 with a advantage of 5% or more against 4th place means that he's favourite to get SC. Problem is that most probable thing is that Santorum or Bachmann can get over Newt. I think that Perry is game-overed...Without that gaffe, he could have come back over Cain's collapse.