Ron Paul Takes Lead In Iowa

Tyler Durden's picture

When we learned on Saturday that the Des Moines Register, owned by Gannett - whose Chairman just happens to be a Private Equity firm head, and worked at Citigroup for most of her career, has endorsed Mitt Romney for president we said that this development "while likely set to provide a very short-term boost to Romney's chances, it is the baseless ongoing accusations against Ron Paul that will likely solidify the groundswell behind the Texan, with such desperate platitudes as "Ron Paul's libertarian ideology would lead to economic chaos and isolationism, neither of which this nation can afford." As it turns out, according to the latest Public Policy Polling data we can skip the kneejerk reaction and go straight to the after effect, because as of the latest polling, Ron Paul has finally taken the lead in Iowa. Granted this is just one of many polling organizations, and potentially it may be biased, but the bottom line is that often time reality (objective and subjective) is self-reinforcing. And when the US public realizes that the only candidate who deserves to be in the White House has a running chance, they will flock to him. Suddenly backing Ron Paul may just become the next cool thing. As for the Gingrich "honeymoon", it was over well before the nth divorce (pardon the pun). At this point we can only hope that the electoral game of reverse American Idol where the poll head is voted off in a week or so stops with Paul. However, with Perry, Bachmann, Romney and Gingrich already having been voted off, the only possible dark horse now remains Huntsman - does he have a running chance against Paul?

From the PPP:

Newt Gingrich's campaign is rapidly imploding, and Ron Paul has now taken the lead in Iowa.  He's at 23% to 20% for Mitt Romney, 14% for Gingrich, 10% each for Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry, 4% for Jon Huntsman, and 2% for Gary Johnson.

 

Gingrich has now seen a big drop in his Iowa standing two weeks in a row.  His share of the vote has gone from 27% to 22% to 14%.  And there's been a large drop in his personal favorability numbers as well from +31 (62/31) to +12 (52/40) to now -1 (46/47). Negative ads over the last few weeks have really chipped away at Gingrich's image as being a strong conservative- now only 36% of voters believe that he has 'strong principles,' while 43% think he does not.

 

Paul's ascendancy is a sign that perhaps campaigns do matter at least a little, in a year where there has been a lot of discussion about whether they still do in Iowa.  22% of voters think he's run the best campaign in the state compared to only 8% for Gingrich and 5% for Romney. The only other candidate to hit double digits on that question is Bachmann at 19%. Paul also leads Romney 26-5 (with Gingrich at 13%) with the 22% of voters who say it's 'very important' that a candidate spends a lot of time in Iowa.  Finally Paul leads Romney 29-19 among the 26% of likely voters who have seen one of the candidates in person.

 

Paul's base of support continues to rely on some unusual groups for a Republican contest.  Among voters under 45 he's at 33% to 16% for Romney and 11% for Gingrich.  He's really going to need that younger than normal electorate because with seniors Romney's blowing him out 31-15 with Gingrich coming in 2nd at 18%. Paul is also cleaning up 35-14 with the 24% of voters who identify as either Democrats or independents. Romney is actually ahead 22-19 with GOP voters.  Young people and non-Republicans are an unusual coalition to hang your hat on in Iowa, and it will be interesting to see if Paul can actually pull it off.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Potemkin Village Idiot's picture

+1000 internets to you for thinking outside the (ballot) box...

Optimusprime's picture

"I 'wrote in' Ron Paul back in 2008."

 

So did I.

Shadowsil's picture

I didnt know about Ron Paul in 2008. Just saw signs, heard a little words now and then..

I wasted my vote and didnt use it at all, I am one inclined to not vote for the lesser of 2 evils as this ruins my own mindset.

RP even if he doesnt win the GOP, will still have my vote as a put in.

 

sullymandias's picture

"I 'wrote in' Ron Paul back in 2008."

So did I.

me too

BigSkyBear's picture

"Umm... I 'wrote in' Ron Paul back in 2008"

 

Not many of us...+1

r101958's picture

"Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama" = Truth or Consequences (yikes!).

my puppy for prez's picture

I love your run-on yet lucid posts!  Got my fix....thanks!

midtowng's picture

Now all Ron Paul has to do is to flip-flop on his stands against the Federal Reserve and useless foreign wars and the establishment will endorse him.

John_Coltrane's picture

I wouldn't hold my breathe on it, but maybe you should.

FL_Conservative's picture

Changing back to republicanism one election at a time!  Go Ron!

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

I haven't voted for President for awhile.  I think I will vote for Paul, as long as his running mate is cool.

Ron Paul/Willie Nelson 2012

CharlieSDT's picture

Ron Paul/ J Billington Bullworth 2012!

Tsunami Wave's picture

Why is Gary Johnson such a bad choice? at least for VP he would be good.

richard in norway's picture

any chance of having elizabeth warren as his running mate, it might keep him alive! the only person that the TBTF fear more than ron

Hugh G Rection's picture

Paul/Ventura!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tsx500's picture

Ron Paul/Ann Barnhardt 2012 !

Abiotic Oil's picture

"rotating nut jobs"

Ron doesn't care what you do with your boyfriends in private.  Please keep it off the board here and limit discussion to Ron Paul winning the nomination.

MsCreant's picture

"Yes he can!!!!"

So does that mean your avatar is a hairy ass?

Lndmvr's picture

+1 for the laugh. Hope FL is doing fine cause I'm heading that way. OT  Banks here in Iowa went to maximum of $5000 per day without advanced notice.

MsCreant's picture

My bank needs advance notice too. The amount depends on the teller and if they have the cash on hand. One manager yelled at a teller who would not give me my money. Another one said that logistically, they need advance notice to insure that they have the cash on hand. They want you to "order" the money, even the denominations. Different days of the month and week matter as well.

Near as I can tell, FL is okay. Sounds like a holiday thang on your part???

 

Lndmvr's picture

Knowing you from St pete or have family near by. Looking to buy land in the panhandle/big bend to go off grid and wait out the next 2 years. Although we've had no cold weather here, all those we helped get to end of life have made it. Still trying to find out the state of the gulf since the oil spill. Biggest problem is having to have an address . The gov't from local to fed. base taxes and registrations on addresses. No PO boxs for anything. Try setting up trusts for assets, FM.

scam_MERS's picture

I still have family in St. Pete too. I'm Lakewood HS Class of '76, Bayway/Maximo Moorings area! Wish I could go back to the early 70's when I lived there, it was such a nice, quiet time compared to now.

Is there still land in the panhandle that is sparsely populated, and would you want to live there - since it seems to get slammed by hurricanes far more than Tampa/St Pete does?

(FWIW, you can tell when someone isn't from Tampa or St. Pete when they tell you someone or something is in/from "Tampa Bay". What, it was from the middle of the bay? Irritates me no end)

 

SheepleLOVEcheddarbaybiscuits's picture

why would anyone NOT like and support RON PAUL?  you have to be either brainwashed or insane not to....why do youi want the government completely controlling your life?

flattrader's picture

>>>why do youi want the government completely controlling your life?<<<

Not at all.  But, oddly Ron Paul seems to think control is a good idea.

He's apparently only a libertarian where men are concerned.

Ron Paul on Reproductive Rights

The sponsor of a bill to overturn Roe v. Wade, Ron Paul's libertarianism does not apply to women, though it does apply to zygotes. His is a no-exceptions anti-abortion position, essentially empowering a rapist to sire a child with a woman of his choosing. Although Paul attributes his stance on abortion to his background as an ob-gyn physician, it should be noted that most ob-gyns are pro-choice, and that Paul's draconian position tracks exactly with that of his Christian Reconstructionist friends.

ronin12's picture

FAIL.

Let the states deal with the abortion issue.

Reposted from TruthInSunshine:

 

"Until each American voter simply votes for the best person most representative of the core principles enshrined in an actual document that is the literal blueprint of how our government is supposed to run and that is also a constraint upon, and not a license for expansion of, governmental powers, we're all going to be getting the toxic manure byproduct of a false left-right paradigm, constructed to use marginally important social wedge issues to ramp emotions and divide and segment the voters, while the two party establishments that in reality really work for the exact same people/entities, as their both deeply captured in what is now our official Corpocratic Kleptocracy, continue to jointly push through a planned agenda filled with the truly critical issues that directly impact the lives of Americans on an everyday basis and in a highly significant way (and adverse to the overwhelming majority).

Republicans & Democrats throw issues like gay marriage and whether the pledge of allegiance must be recited in school out like red meat to their astroturfed bases, to keep the emotions charged, with neither of these or any other of the myriad of issues they fill their time jawboning about having much impact on 95% of the material lives of Americans, while they team up to vote together to give blank check powers to the Executive Branch (to start multi-trillion dollar wars or make de facto law by signing statements), give blank check ability of the Non-Federal Reserve Non-Bank to suck the blood of the taxpayer base and transfer said blood to the favored friends of its New York Branch, effectively picking winners and losers in the economy via central planning, and propping up a cancerous economic trend whereby Wall Street & Banking Parasites drain the nation to the edge of death, and pledge larger and larger share of national revenue to the MIC, so it can profit from taxpayers in the exact same fashion as Wall Street & the Banking Parasites, etc. etc. etc.

But hey, cnBSc, msnBSc, cBS, Faux News, aBSc and nBSc all say Ron Paul can't win, and only a crazy voter would cast a ballot for him, and in fact, he's worthy of being ignored, so we'll all just have to keep on sucking up the intense abuse and assault upon and erosion of our RIGHTS and social and economic interests, and accept the fundamental reality that we must accept the task of learning to make do with an Obama or RomGrinch, and the social wedge issues will guide us to who we prefer on those mostly hollow, meaningless issues."

flattrader's picture

Ron Paul will FAIL when young women "discover" he is vehemently anti-choice...and he's counting on the "young voter demographic."

By age 45 one out of three American women choose abortion at some point.

This will not go down well when the find out that his prohibition is under any circumstances.

So much for his bullshit brand of libertarianism.  What a fucking hypocrite.

lemonobrien's picture

Actually not, you don't understand the argument; when does life begin and that life have legal protection. Ole Ron is a doctor and delivers babies; so he believes in a more immediate/instant life theory. I've come to the conclusion too, and have regrets on forcing two abortions on women when I was a young man. They was asian and I didn't want an asian babies. But, hey, thats life. I got a white baby now with blue eyes now; to tell the truth, abortion is more about the man than the woman. We can just walk away ans ay, "fuck'n kill it. I don't want it, it's yours."

 

anyway. its hard to be responsible; people want to prolong childhood now as much as possible and it's sad to see the old retards pretending they're young and hip.

TruthInSunshine's picture

All these people who are clueless about Ron Paul's beliefs, which he's only advocated for 40+ years, consistently, spouting off like the little sock puppets sent in by almost organized effort, to spread their farts in the wind.

Ron Paul has always held that the same, moral, logical and, underlying it all, constitutionally adherent view on abortion. But why take it from me?

Surely any of you ignorant establishment sluts would have cited this, directly from Ron Paul's website, in an attempt to ensure you're speaking truthfully about Paul's position on abortion, RIGHT (/SARC/)?

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/

The heated debate about abortion is filled with emotional arguments that usually center on considerations such as sexual morality, religious beliefs, women’s rights, or purely on pragmatic reasons: if abortion were made illegal it would still take place – under unsanitary conditions that would endanger additional lives.

However, a rational evaluation of abortion must be built upon one single question: When exactly does human life begin? At conception, at birth or somewhere in between?

Not even the most radical feminist would find it okay to tear apart a recently-born baby just because it is not wanted by its mother. All other considerations aside, the only reason many individuals can support abortion with a good conscience is because they believe it’s not murder… and that unborn babies do not count as human beings.

Ron Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He believes that human life starts at conception, and that casual elimination of the unborn leads to a careless attitude towards all life.

Recalling his personal observation of a late-term abortion performed by one of his instructors during his medical residency, Ron Paul stated, “It was pretty dramatic for me to see a two-and-a-half-pound baby taken out crying and breathing and put in a bucket.”

In an Oct. 27, 1999 speech to Congress, Ron Paul said:

“I am strongly pro-life. I think one of the most disastrous rulings of this century was Roe versus Wade. I do believe in the slippery slope theory. I believe that if people are careless and casual about life at the beginning of life, we will be careless and casual about life at the end. Abortion leads to euthanasia. I believe that.”

During a May 15, 2007, appearance on the Fox News talk show Hannity and Colmes, Ron Paul argued that his pro-life position was consistent with his libertarian values, asking, “If you can’t protect life then how can you protect liberty?” Additionally, Ron Paul said that since he believes libertarians support non-aggression, libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is “an act of aggression” against a fetus.

At the GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate on Sep 17, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what he will do to restore legal protection to the unborn:

“As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there’s a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there’s an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it.”

At the GOP YouTube debate in St. Petersburg, Florida, on Nov 28, 2007, Ron Paul was asked what a woman would be charged with if abortion becomes illegal and she obtains an abortion anyway:

“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”

For many years, Ron Paul has been speaking up for babies’ rights. He passionately defends those who cannot speak for themselves because they haven’t been born yet.

In order to “offset the effects of Roe v. Wade”, Paul voted in favor of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He has described partial birth abortion as a “barbaric procedure”.

At the same time, Ron Paul believes that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. Instead, it is up to the individual states to prohibit abortion.

Many people feel very strongly about the issue of abortion, and once they make up their minds they rarely change their opinion. If you are undecided and/or open-minded, check out this page and this site for more information about abortion, including images and a description of medical procedures.

my puppy for prez's picture

Libertarians are for ALL people's rights to life, liberty, and happiness....pre-born babies are LIVING HUMAN BEINGS who have also have these rights, even though they reside beneath layers of flesh.

THAT is pure libertarianism!  It is TYRANNISTS who advocate legal killing of some and not others!

my puppy for prez's picture

oops...."tyrannists".....my brain got "fancy" there for a sec!

should read: "tyrants"

UGrev's picture

Uh, what you think and what you can make into law are two very different things. 

BLOTTO's picture

44 presidents = all links and descendants of the Merovingian Bloodline.

LEaders of the US are not elected - they are born

So, no - not nut jobs - but rather - Luciferian Sun-worshippers who think it is there divine right to rule over us.

Yes, it is way more serious than most people think

If ZH existed for another 300 years - it would still be the same people saying the same shit - of, its bad decisions, bad leaders, bad planning, bad system, bad thinking.

 

Vergeltung's picture

(Yoda voice):

"Hmmmm. The 'tard is strong in this one, hmm?"

BLOTTO's picture

You keep believing that its just bad planning, bad decisions, bad leadership, bad votes and bad choices and in 300 years if ZH is still around - we'll just keep hearing the same thing again and same fuckin excuses...

So when do you wake up and start thinking outside the box?...maybe when you are capable of independent thinking and not listening to your fucking 2 minute CNN or FOX news report than we can get to the bottom of things.

BTW, and as powerful Yoda was - the Emperor Palpatine chased him off and Yoda took off to the Dagoba like a scared little fag and hid in hiding until he died... Nice Jedi leader - take off in a remote swamp like a fuck.

'Hmmmm im a bitch'

lemonobrien's picture

yes, the tard is strong in this one.

 

Explain how a white-trash Kansas girl and a spade nigga trying to secure a visa had blood line ties to the alien race who bred us for slaves?

 

Or, how a PT boat captain, who was the son of a Irish boot-leg liqueur runner are linked through this linage?

Martial's picture

Ron Paul 2012 bitchez!!

GMadScientist's picture

Paul/Huntsman 2012

The Right Man, The Right Mormon

Freddie's picture

Huntsman is one of the worst in the bunch.  Gingrich is the worst one.  His voting record when he was in the house was as bad as Pelosi's.  Gingrich is a mega CFR/NWO stooge.

weinerdog43's picture

Thanks Rick Perry!  Always glad to have you!

MsCreant's picture

Be kind to Freddie. This is his first post where he is not just an anti-dem shill and the first post that does not dis "The Muslim" somehow. 

Freddie is showing signs of growth here, critiquing the Republicans too.

+3 Freddie.