New Iowa PPP poll: Rand at 3% with a 31% favorability rating

[LatinsforPaul]

The only Iowa Polls that count, are the ones that come out on Feb. 1, 2016.

 

[dannno]

Play it safe, be aggressive, be yourself, walk the tightrope- no one's ever going to be satisfied and few here are ever going to believe polls that don't put Paul in first place or near the top because those apparently don't count..

It has nothing to do with first place - it has to do with the fact that Ron Paul does better against Hillary than all other Republican candidates and is beating her in 5 purple states.

I would argue that is virtually impossible for him to be at the bottom of the heap of Republicans if he is doing that well in the national polls compared to the other candidates. Don't they still use landlines for these polls? I'm not saying Rand is in first place, I'm just saying it seems dumb to base our strategy off of polls that we know are inaccurate.

 

[rich34]

Those numbers are brutally bad. Even if they're polling the wrong demographics, 3% is really bad for any demographic. Anything can happen but being within the margin of error of 0% is pretty embarrassing

I know you joined in 2013, but if you go back and look at all the polling tricks and BS they used against Ron, just for him to surge from about 3% to 24% in Iowa in a time frame of about a month then you'd know these polls are BS. I think the pollsters let the Ron surge happen two weeks earlier than they could have for the sole purpose of giving the media enough time to knock him back down 5 points or so which was just enough to allow the establishment to win. I suspect the same will be done to Rand. He's the guy that is going to have to figure out how to combat this. I say this time, get an RV and live in Iowa two weeks leading up to the election talking to people everyday while the MSM tears him apart. And who are people going to believe the MSM or the guy that is showing up talking to them everyday?

 

[Lightweis]

Rand Paul within the margin of error of zero support. That's what happens when you do not support the Iranian deal, have a horrible debate performance and have people connected to the Paul's indicted. Who would have thought Ron Paul was 100 times better candidate than his son.

 

[lly4now]

As long as Rand can stay above the debate participation cut-off point, then we have time to rebound our poll %s.

 

[AuH20]

As long as Rand can stay above the debate participation cut-off point, then we have time to rebound our poll %s.

Voters typically don't come back to a candidate. Typically.

 

[LatinsforPaul]

Rand Paul within the margin of error of zero support. That's what happens when you do not support the Iranian deal, have a horrible debate performance and have people connected to the Paul's indicted. Who would have thought Ron Paul was 100 times better candidate than his son.

Remember those words, especially if Rand Paul wins the 2016 Iowa Caucus.

 

[thoughtomator]

Rand Paul within the margin of error of zero support. That's what happens when you do not support the Iranian deal, have a horrible debate performance and have people connected to the Paul's indicted. Who would have thought Ron Paul was 100 times better candidate than his son.

You're spending way too much time talking to Brian Schoeneman.

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

It has nothing to do with first place - it has to do with the fact that Ron Paul does better against Hillary than all other Republican candidates and is beating her in 5 purple states.

How he does against Clinton versus the other umpteenth candidates in his own party are two different things, especially when, in this poll, Clinton isn't even compared to any of the Republican candidates.

 

[Lightweis]

You're spending way too much time talking to Brian Schoeneman.

Nobody on here knows who that is lol

 

[Lightweis]

Remember those words, especially if Rand Paul wins the 2016 Iowa Caucus.

I do not see a path where that could happen right now. Maybe if he had Ted Cruz money.

 

[dannno]

How he does against Clinton versus the other umpteenth candidates in his own party are two different things, especially when, in this poll, Clinton isn't even compared to any of the Republican candidates.

I know they are two different things, but they are related. You have to literally be mentally insane to think these poll numbers are accurate based on everything we know.

 

[Jan2017]

Predebate Rand even said that his advisers told him to play it safe, but he overruled them.

Great call over-riding the advisors . . . quite often they are full of bull sheeeet imho

Ignoring these poll numbers and the talking heads on Fox is a better strategy-

Besides, the only poll that might matter now is CNN who will only have
the top ten at a (probably) foreign policy-themed debate at the Reagan Library September 16

Reagan Foundation combining with CNN for second time,
other GOP Reagan Library debate had different co-sponsor I recall.



.

 

[jkob]

Wow, Rand has the worst favorables in the field, Worse than Trump, worse than Christie.

Rand needs embrace his father's views now, you can't tell me he'd be doing worse than he is now in Iowa

For the longest time now people have been rationalizing that only Iowa and New Hampshire mattered not the national ones but now things are looking bad even on those, there needs to be a huge shift in strategy to turn this around

 

[rich34]

I do not see a path where that could happen right now. Maybe if he had Ted Cruz money.

You know the phone from home folks are actively contacting all the caucus goers for Ron Paul in 2012. The same group that nearly won Iowa for him and gave him 20% of the vote. And no these people do not have land lines, they're all using cell phones. If Team Rand can get almost all of these people willing to participate again, while adding the new 18-22 year old block of voters he's going to be in this thing right down to the wire regardless of money. Cruz does have a lot of money, but he's also got a lot of competition for that religious crowd that went to Santorum the last time and Huckabee in 2008. Then you have Ben Carson, competing for the same crowd. Rand on the other hand is going to cherry pick from each of these groups while hopefully hanging onto his more libertarian base. That's how he wins my friend!

 

[AuH20]

 

[Jan2017]

You know the phone from home folks are actively contacting all the caucus goers for Ron Paul in 2012. The same group that nearly won Iowa for him and gave him 20% of the vote. And no these people do not have land lines, they're all using cell phones. If Team Rand can get almost all of these people willing to participate again, while adding the new 18-22 year old block of voters he's going to be in this thing right down to the wire regardless of money. Cruz does have a lot of money, but he's also got a lot of competition for that religious crowd that went to Santorum the last time and Huckabee in 2008. Then you have Ben Carson, competing for the same crowd. Rand on the other hand is going to cherry pick from each of these groups while hopefully hanging onto his more libertarian base. That's how he wins my friend!

Well not having the August straw poll will hurt grassroots organizing -

Iowans hated McCain - yet he still won nomination - until the game changed . . . lol

 

[pacodever]

Rand Paul within the margin of error of zero support. That's what happens when you do not support the Iranian deal, have a horrible debate performance and have people connected to the Paul's indicted. Who would have thought Ron Paul was 100 times better candidate than his son.

- Rand was polling between 1% - 5% in the Iowa poll in July BEFORE the indictment and the debate performance.
- These polls all consist of several hundred to less than a thousand people with margins of error about 3.5 - 5+%
- Polling numbers largely based on landlines and previous election voters will not accurately reflect Rand's support
- Looking at polling history you'll see Rand's drop in the polls coincides directly with the rise of Trump's polling (which I believe has reached its maximum)
- Trump's numbers will fall with each debate
- Rand's support and numbers will rise
- Rand has 175 days until the Iowa Caucus

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html

 

[supermario21]

I want Rand to be more like his father...The truth is Ron benefitted from a much weaker field. There were very few candidates in 2012 trying to be TrueConTM...Unfortunately for Rand, there are like 5-6 of those if not more depending on who you ask. Ron's evangelical base is with Huckabee and Santorum. The Tea Partiers are with Cruz. I would argue for as much as Rand has tried to expand Ron's base, he is only polling at libertarian bloc levels right now...

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

I know. He should've just listened to his advisors. Hopefully Rand looks at these polls and gets things figured out.

The problem is, he tried to walk a middle ground. His answers were fine on both ISIS and Israel/foreign aid (though he could have been more direct and firm in his wording), but the Iran answer was his standard position he's been stating for the last few years.

I understand that he was probably nervous in his first presidential debate setting, so I'll give him a pass for reverting to his really annoying stump speech voice. But he does need to pick a strategy. Cater to the hawks, or cater to his base. He tried a little of the former, and more of the latter in the debate, which was a better ratio than he's exhibited in a long time, but he needs to go all the way in either direction. If you're going to commit to the position of ending foreign aid to Israel in a presidential debate that had record ratings, it's not sensible or logical to then try to blend in with the crowd on Iran.

He touched on a good strategy in his back and forth with Christie - he can oppose all intervention while tying the rest of the candidates with Obama. Pair that with the economic consequences of war and sanctions and tussle with the candidates using the language of free enterprise and trade rather than personality.