CNN poll: Rand at 5% in Iowa, tied with Bush and Rubio

[alucard13mm]

Rand should say hes the only candidate who has a plan to save their precious socisl security and medicare and so our children and grandchildren doesnt have to pay for it with literally their lives.

 

[kbs021]

Not sure about the amount of independents included in the poll either.. Last time around 25 percent of the vote were independent. Rand took about half of those votes as well.

 

[MarcusI]

LOL

I am actually amazed how delusional the members of this forum are each election cycle. It is kind of sad actually. The polls have Rand WAYYYYYY down now and continuing to drop.

Actually that poll was much better than the last three polls in Iowa. Take a deep breath.

 

[Jan2017]

LOL

Rand will probably not be on that stage. . . .

Rand will easily be on the main stage in Simi Valley at the CNN/Reagan Foundation debate on September 16.

Too much Cali support for Rand to miss this . . .

 

[Feelgood]

^Will be called a paid Trump supporter and racist in 3,2,1.

Although true anything can happen between now and December.

I hope not! Can't stand Trump. I would love to see POTUS Rand Paul, but reality tends to kick you in the nuts. I just think last 2 elections cycles, so many here got bent out of shape about how they thought the polls were skewed and could not possibly be accurate. In the end they turned out to be pretty spot on. So when I see Rand taking a nose dive in the polls, it tends to worry me a bit.

 

[CPUd]

I hope not! Can't stand Trump. I would love to see POTUS Rand Paul, but reality tends to kick you in the nuts. I just think last 2 elections cycles, so many here got bent out of shape about how they thought the polls were skewed and could not possibly be accurate. In the end they turned out to be pretty spot on. So when I see Rand taking a nose dive in the polls, it tends to worry me a bit.

The only real nose dive in Iowa is Walker, another week or so, may be Bush, too:

 

[MarcusI]

I just think last 2 elections cycles, so many here got bent out of shape about how they thought the polls were skewed and could not possibly be accurate. In the end they turned out to be pretty spot on.

Well in general I tend to think the same, but its damn early still, nothing lost. From May to End July 2012 Ron Paul polled between 3 and 8% in Iowa, only in August numbers got up, Bachmann won that earlier polls by far. And the field wasnt as big by far (basically 6-7 candidates above or at 1%).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...owa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html

(And some polls are huge outliers, like Insider Advantage poll 18 Dec 2012 = Santorum 3%, result 2 weeks (!) later 24.6%. RCP average was 16.3 at the caucus day)

But yes, polls should start to rise now, slowly but steady, in order to make Rand a viable candidate.

Thing is, Rand will lose some "hardcore" libertarians and maybe some youth voters (not to any other candidate, but to nonvoters), but on the other hands it will be easier to motivate average GOP caucus-goers to vote for Rand - like in his senate run.

 

[RDM]

The Rand Paul campaign needs to run one simple ad in Iowa with this simple message.

Donald Trump: Reagan Was A Con Man Who Couldn’t ‘Deliver The Goods’

In his bestselling book, Art of the Deal, published at the conclusion of the Reagan presidency, Trump cited Reagan as an example of someone who could “con people” but couldn’t “deliver the goods.” Trump said Reagan was “so smooth” that he “won over the American people.” But at the conclusion of his presidency, “people are beginning to question whether there is anything beneath that smile,” Trump writes. Above, is a page 60 from Art of the Deal.

Then Rand needs to say at the end, his FP is modeled after Ronald Reagan.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Rand should work whatever early voting system there is in Iowa and other initial primary states to the max, to secure the absentee votes of younger supporters, since we know from previous cycles that their turn out for the actual primary or caucus will only be about 12%.

 

[randomname]

so now that Bush and Rubio are tied with Rand any time a pundit mentions their name they'll make sure to add their poll numbers are floundering, like with Rand, "who is struggling in the polls"?

 

[WeTheVigilant]

That Bush is even doing as good as he is makes me sick, he is an establishment candidate through and through who is no different than Obama or Hillary. In short, he's a joke. Rand is in an okay position for now, its still too early for him to peak - and I think his campaign is starting to gain momentum.

 

[acptulsa]

LOL

I am actually amazed how delusional the members of this forum are each election cycle. It is kind of sad actually. The polls have Rand WAYYYYYY down now and continuing to drop. I would not doubt if they change the rules for the debate to only have the opt 8 in the next debate, to help narrow the field a bit and start to weed out. If that is the case, Rand will probably not be on that stage. At best now, his positioning on the stage will have him on the far left or right.

Bottom line, like it or not, Trump has truly taken the wind out of the sails for Rand Paul. Go ahead and preach how the polls are skewed, or incorrect, or can't possibly be accurate. Thing is the polls were pretty much spot on for Ron when he ran. It may suck to accept this, but unless things take a drastic 180 degree change, Rand is pretty much done. Even Sean Hannity is begging him to come on his show anymore.

I really hate the stupidity of the American people.

LOL yourself.

Which polls were accurate? The ones from this stage of the thing, on which he barely registered as a blip? Or the ones two weeks before the actual caucuses, when the pollsters knew their accuracy was about to be tested with the actual results, and which showed him damned near to winning?

The stupidity of the American people includes their inability to see that polls are used to drive the dynamic, or kill the dynamic, when the numbers the pollsters generate are not about to be tested by an actual election. They only care about accuracy when their accuracy is about to be tested.

 

[Feelgood]

LOL yourself.

Which polls were accurate? The ones from this stage of the thing, on which he barely registered as a blip? Or the ones two weeks before the actual caucuses, when the pollsters knew their accuracy was about to be tested with the actual results, and which showed him damned near to winning?

Ummm pretty much ALL of them that showed him in the single and low single digits the entire campaign. The users of this forum were all floating on air thinking "wow Ron might actually win this thing". When Ron raised over 6 million dollars in a single day, and everyone was blown away thinking this might just be it! In the end he did not get the nomination the last 2 attempts and turned out to barely register as a blip.

The current polls that have Rand Paul registering around 4-5% and dropping are the ones I am looking and and concerned by. If his numbers continue to plummet, stick a fork in him. Even Rand admitted he only took jabs at Trump to try to get into the news again. What does that tell you? Fiorina, Carson and Cruz ALL polling better than Rand? Seriously? Doesnt matter if polls are used to skew the dynamics and direction of an election cycle, perception is a HUGE part of this.

 

[twomp]

In 2012, Republicans who claimed to hate Obamacare nominated Roney who is the architect for Obamacare. I thought then that Republicans could not get any dumber. They have found a way to surprise me yet again. Moral of the story: Republicans are stupid.

 

[acptulsa]

The current polls that have Rand Paul registering around 4-5% and dropping are the ones I am looking and and concerned by. If his numbers continue to plummet, stick a fork in him. Even Rand admitted he only took jabs at Trump to try to get into the news again. What does that tell you? Fiorina, Carson and Cruz ALL polling better than Rand? Seriously? Doesnt matter if polls are used to skew the dynamics and direction of an election cycle, perception is a HUGE part of this.

Those numbers are entirely reasonable in a seventeen candidate race. His numbers can't drop; he's the only libertarian in the race, and a certain small percentage of the population stands on principle. Fiorina is the Fox Candidate of the Month Club Selection, and is swimming in free positive publicity. Carson is getting some of that too, because the powers that be obviously want a woman and a person of African descent in this race. Perception is exactly why Rand is jabbing at Trump, though it is also arguably a public service. Iowa is more than five months away and we're basically the only people in the universe who are already taking this thing seriously. And so long as the only thing we have to fear is fear itself, which is certainly the case this early, then our biggest enemies are the fearmongers.

So don't be one.

In 2012, Republicans who claimed to hate Obamacare nominated Romney who is the architect for Obamacare. I thought then that Republicans could not get any dumber. They have found a way to surprise me yet again. Moral of the story: Republicans are stupid.

[VIDEO=youtube;Q1qVJ8bTwuw]https://youtube.com/watch?v=[/VIDEO]