Does the GOP Need to Nominate Paul to Win POTUS?

#1

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
88,315
Likes
53,253
#1
Interesting poll shows Paul edging Obama in Iowa. Since the "electable" candidates are nothing to be excited about, I feel like Obama is likely to win re-election. A Republican probably won't win without substantial support from independents/democrats/3rd partyers. None of the current candidates would get even close to as much support as Paul would, IMO.

Paul is probably the Republican that would most likely unseat Obama. Ironic that he is the one considered to be unelectable.

Ron Paul | Iowa | Poll | The Daily Caller
 
#4
#4
And if you don't want to open the article, the NBC poll shows:

Newt = 26%
Romney = 18%
Paul = 16%

And projections reflecting where Cain's supporters will go:

Newt = 28%
Paul = 18%
Romney = 18%

Paul attracts 15% of Iowa's democratic voters and edges Obama with regard to independents 42% to 35%.
 
#8
#8
#9
#9
I typically vote Dem, voted for Obama over McCain (and don't regret the choice). That being said, my list of candidates goes Johnson, Paul, Huntsman, Romney, Gingrich. I don't agree with Paul on everything, but there's a trust issue with both mainstream parties.

edit: Also Paul supporters are tired of the status quo. It's going to be hard to stop them from voting Paul regardless. The first cround of primaries should let us know how strong that percentage really is (I believe higher than predicted). (And Obama is now probably tied with the Romney and Gingrich crowd).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
So Obama no matter what?

Also, this only has data on 3 polls for Paul. I'm wondering what it would look like if it were more comprehensive. If you take out 2 of Newt's outliers, he's doing worse than Paul.


I don't think it's Obama no matter what because he rarely hits 50% in any of the polls - historically that is the most telling number for these early stage polls.

The Paul problem is that he is below 40% - I just don't see him drawing anyone that isn't conservative or libertarian. Moderate Dems and I's don't have much to like - he's too radical for them.

The latest Rasmussen is interesting for Gingrich since it is timed with his ascension. He may be more electable than I thought a month ago. I still think Romney has the best shot at bringing I's and D's fed up with Obama but his challenge will be voter turnout on the R side.
 
#11
#11
I typically vote Dem, voted for Obama over McCain (and don't regret the choice). That being said, my list of candidates goes Johnson, Paul, Huntsman, Romney, Gingrich. I don't agree with Paul on everything, but there's a trust issue with both mainstream parties.

edit: Also Paul supporters are tired of the status quo. It's going to be hard to stop them from voting Paul regardless. The first cround of primaries should let us know how strong that percentage really is (I believe higher than predicted).

That's a great point. A lot of Romney or Newt supporters would migrate to Paul if he were to win the nomination....a lot of Paul's supporters (16% in Iowa) are lost if anybody other than Johnson or Paul wins the nomination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
And if you don't want to open the article, the NBC poll shows:

Newt = 26%
Romney = 18%
Paul = 16%

And projections reflecting where Cain's supporters will go:

Newt = 28%
Paul = 18%
Romney = 18%

Paul attracts 15% of Iowa's democratic voters and edges Obama with regard to independents 42% to 35%.


And remember, Paul is still relative unknown by I's and D's. If he were the nominee and suddenly on the spot about some of his really more bizarre ideas, he'd get crushed by anyone mainstream.
 
#13
#13
And remember, Paul is still relative unknown by I's and D's. If he were the nominee and suddenly on the spot about some of his really more bizarre ideas, he'd get crushed by anyone mainstream.

When will America realize mainstream will get your ass in the poor house?
 
#14
#14
And remember, Paul is still relative unknown by I's and D's. If he were the nominee and suddenly on the spot about some of his really more bizarre ideas, he'd get crushed by anyone mainstream.

I thought you were on a self-imposed hiatus?
 
#17
#17
And remember, Paul is still relative unknown by I's and D's. If he were the nominee and suddenly on the spot about some of his really more bizarre ideas, he'd get crushed by anyone mainstream.

People talk about Paul going 3rd party, but if he got the nomination, I think it would swing the door wide open for somebody like Michael Bloomberg.
 
#19
#19
Iowa is full of idiots. I wouldn't be surprised to see Bachmann or Perry win Iowa.
 
#20
#20
This election cycle is different than 2008. Many Paul supporters held their nose and voted for McCain. This election cycle, the Paul supporters I know are voting their principles and will not vote for the "lesser of two evils."

The saying goes "No one but Paul."
 
#21
#21
Still not buying that Ron Paul can finish any better than 3rd or 4th, but we'll see.
 
#22
#22
I won't vote for him in the primaries but wouldn't have an issue doing it if he was nominated
 
#24
#24
Still not buying that Ron Paul can finish any better than 3rd or 4th, but we'll see.

Well, nobody ever bought that he could finish 3rd, and I feel like he's got that spot locked up easily right now. So we shall see, indeed.
 
#25
#25
Well, nobody ever bought that he could finish 3rd, and I feel like he's got that spot locked up easily right now. So we shall see, indeed.
I'm not going to pretend to have the first clue at this point. The Iowa Caucus is screwy anyway and This is easily the most wide open race I can remember. Gingrich is polling well, but it remains to be seen whether he's got the organization to get people to the caucus.
 

VN Store



Back
Top