POLL BOMBSHELL: Ron Paul Is Close To A Win In Iowa

[tlkidd]

He has always polled well in Iowa.

 

[88GT]

Wait! I thought he was unelectable.

For president? So far he has proven to be exactly that.

 

[KG1]

Wait! I thought he was unelectable.

You don't get elected for anything just by doing well in one caucus poll. You do still have to win the nomination and then go on to win a general election.

 

[24Carat]

So . . . .This isn't a Republican polling machine, it isn't an independent polling machine, IT'S FREAKING DEMOCRATIC POLLING MACHINE !!!! This passes the smell test for you folks ????

 

[rambone]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quBqHSy4ZOA

 

[cqcn88]

I think it's clear that there is a much more substantial Ron Paul wave coming in. My worry is that it won't be quite enough. That been said, I have little doubt that a second term of Obama will be enough to make people realize we actually do need a real champion of civil liberties in the white house. But then who knows if Ron Paul will want to give it another run in 2016. Maybe his son will go for it.

 

[cqcn88]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quBqHSy4ZOA

Romney said something similar at the end of a recent debate. The candidates were all asked for one thing they had learned on the campaign against the other nominee candidates. Perry praised Ron Paul's knowledge of economics and specifically the fed. Romney commented on Paul's leadership as evidenced by his incredibly dedicated and enthusiastic supporters.

 

[HICKMAN]

and probably wished he had the support from those crazy active duty/veterans that Paul does.

 

[BillyT]

and probably wished he had the support from those crazy active duty/veterans that Paul does.

I believe the govt calls them terrorist. Something about the constitution. The libs call them paultards. Because American first policies are stoopid.

 

[williamsjr22]

He used to be considered to be a little crazy with some of his ideas. How things have changed. He is the most sane one out of the goons in the republican race.

 

[Zoub]

Romney commented on Paul's leadership as evidenced by his incredibly dedicated and enthusiastic supporters.

And so it begins, the Coalition of the Anti-Newt.

Mitt needs Paul's supporters and Paul needs Mitt's good looks. Now we see it, born of the vile puke and ashes of fallen comrades and failed campaigns. Romney/Paul 2012.

Interesting. And Paul is too old to run for President in 2020 so that would open the door for todays "new leaders" who will all be in their 40's by then.

Yeah, I will lay money on this one as the most likely scenario after January. So now that we here at INGO know what is coming, we can prepare accordingly.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

I like how the so called "conservative voter" gets a chance to vote for an actual supporter of the constitution (you remember the constitution, the thing we were sopposed to conserve) and instead votes for "insert neo-cons name here" to "block Obama from ruining the country". When you vote for someone supporting only some of the constitution over and over YOUR ruining the country. Ultimatley with that logic, the constitution will be wittled down to nothing, oh, wait it already is! If you really want the constitution back, you better start acting like it when you vote. Ron Paul will get my vote or I will write him in. Im not falling for mainstream media trying to scare me into voting for thier man (or woman). If you call yourself a conservative, you better know what your conserving and vote accordingly or else your just as fake as all the Romneys, Mcains, and Newts.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

And so it begins, the Coalition of the Anti-Newt.

Mitt needs Paul's supporters and Paul needs Mitt's good looks. Now we see it, born of the vile puke and ashes of fallen comrades and failed campaigns. Romney/Paul 2012.

Interesting. And Paul is too old to run for President in 2020 so that would open the door for todays "new leaders" who will all be in their 40's by then.

Yeah, I will lay money on this one as the most likely scenario after January. So now that we here at INGO know what is coming, we can prepare accordingly.

Ron Paul will not run as a VP. He has made that clear.

 

[KG1]

I like how the so called "conservative voter" gets a chance to vote for an actual supporter of the constitution (you remember the constitution, the thing we were sopposed to conserve) and instead votes for "insert neo-cons name here" to "block Obama from ruining the country". When you vote for someone supporting only some of the constitution over and over YOUR ruining the country. Ultimatley with that logic, the constitution will be wittled down to nothing, oh, wait it already is! If you really want the constitution back, you better start acting like it when you vote. Ron Paul will get my vote or I will write him in. Im not falling for mainstream media trying to scare me into voting for thier man (or woman). If you call yourself a conservative, you better know what your conserving and vote accordingly or else your just as fake as all the Romneys, Mcains, and Newts.

Oh i'm sure you'll get alot of people seeing things your way by chiding them like they're a bunch of little children or insinuating that they don't care about the Constitution if they don't vote for Ron Paul.

That's the problem and a big turn off when RP supporters do things like that. I think it's been said, not by me, that the biggest detriment to Paul's campaign sometimes is the way some of his supporters conduct themselves.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Oh i'm sure you'll get alot of people seeing things your way by chiding them like they're a bunch of little children or insinuating that they don't care about the Constitution if they don't vote for Ron Paul.

That's the problem and a big turn off when RP supporters do things like that. I think it's been said, not by me, that the biggest detriment to Paul's campaign sometimes is the way some of his supporters conduct themselves.

I am truly sorry, I didnt mean to come off as sounding like I was "chiding people like children". If someone calls themselves conservative, then by definition arent they sopposed to try to preserve the constitution? I would think that implies they would support the candidate most in-line with it. I am not a Ron Paul worshiper, he just happens to have the most constitutional view, and record. Which candidate do you think better represents the constitution?

 

[KG1]

I am truly sorry, I didnt mean to come off as sounding like I was "chiding people like children". If someone calls themselves conservative, then by definition arent they sopposed to try to preserve the constitution? I would think that implies they would support the candidate most in-line with it. I am not a Ron Paul worshiper, he just happens to have the most constitutional view, and record. Which candidate do you think better represents the constitution?

I'm not necessarily saying there is anyone better. It's just that different people vote for different reasons but that does'nt mean that if they don't vote for the strict constitutionalist candidate they don't care about the Constitution and as I pointed out some people take issue when others suggest that they don't.

No need for apologies. I can see you are passionate in what you believe in and I can find no fault in that.

 

[IndyBeerman]

Since 1972 the only people to win the Iowa Caucuses that was not opposed and go on to win the presidency are:

Republican
2000 George W. Bush

Democrats
2008 Barack Obama


So what does this mean that Ron Paul is now the leader to win the Iowa Caucuses.......


DIDLY SQUAT

To much is trying to be made of one states outcome, give me some numbers regarding the other 49 (or 56 according to Obama) and then this becomes something meaningful.

While I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, he does have some good points, but we as republicans have to start realizing that we need someone that can viably beat Obama.

The main goal that should be on the forefront of ANY Republican or Libertarian voters mind is to make sure that left leaning Democrats need to be voted out of office, PERIOD!

Until this is accomplished there can be no swing of leadership for an extended period of time to start creating a different mindset of the younger people growing up.

The current crop of most voters have been brainwashed and they need reprogrammed.

 

[KG1]

Des Moines Register endorses Romney.

"He stands out especially among candidates now in the top tier," the paper said of Romney in an endorsement published online Saturday. "Newt Gingrich is an undisciplined partisan who would alienate, not unite, if he reverts to mean-spirited attacks on display as House speaker. Ron Paul's libertarian ideology would lead to economic chaos and isolationism, neither of which this nation can afford."

Des Moines Register backs Mitt Romney for GOP nomination

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Des Moines Register endorses Romney.

Des Moines Register backs Mitt Romney for GOP nomination

Thats not an endorsment of Romney. An opinionated slander of the other candidates isnt an endorsement.

 

[sur+rifle]

I was listening to the Fox "News" channel on SiriusXM and it was hilarious. A couple days before they were talking about how important the Iowa caucus was historically and for the election this year. They were saying that it would solidify either Romney or Gingrich as the true front runner (and they had Rasmussen on saying that Romney is going to win).

Then, when the other polls started coming out showing the Ron Paul surge, everything changed. Now neither Iowa nor New Hampshire mean anything. They historically have no value in the process. It is an outdated system and if Ron Paul wins Iowa it will prove that the Iowa caucus has no credibility. Florida is really the first state on any real importance in the election cycle. And then finally, even if Romney comes in third or fourth in all of these states, he should still be viewed as the main front runner going into the Republican convention.

Thanks for the great coverage, Fox!