Predictions for Feb 1st - IA Caucus

[limequat]

This was done already, just not in a poll format ..
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ion-for-Rand-in-Iowa-do-you-have-a-prediction

Actually, it was before THAT

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?488250-Predict-Rand-s-Iowa-Percentage

 

[dancjm]

4th. The campaign said so

No they didn't. They said 4th place should not be excluded from the ABC debate. The part about the rules being "likely to exclude him" is from the article not from the campaign. I think the campaign are expecting things to be close though, and they are making that case about the rules based on principle. As someone else said, if 4th place is 10 votes behind 3rd place it would be crazy to have 3rd place on the stage for the debate and not 4th place.

Nowhere did they say they expect to come in 4th. I do think they are expecting it to be tight though, probably amongst 4 of the candidates, Trump, Cruz, Rubio and Paul. Could Paul come 4th? Sure. But recently I've been feeling that Cruz & Rubio are waning the more they are tested on the issues, and I have a feeling that Trump's support is largely superficial. I think we have a great chance to get top 2. I have a feeling there will be a lot of Trump people sitting at home watching the TV waiting to watch what they think is the inevitable happen on TV. Even those Trump people who do go out to caucus for him may have trouble a) holding their attention/patience for long enough to stick around and b) understanding and being willing to take part in the process.

I think it's possible we could have what would effectively be a four way tie. But it depends how committed and ready the other candidates supporters are, I think it's going to be their job to try to match Rand's ground game if they can, but I can't see any of them meaningfully beating it.

 

[EBounding]

If I were betting money, I would say 4th, but he needs at least second. Anything less than 2nd place will just be written off as a strange curiosity, especially if Tronald wins Iowa big.

Rubio's deference to Rand last night was interesting--his internal polling must be telling him something that isn't public.

 

[CaptUSA]

What I think the results would mean:

• 7th: Not going to happen
• 6th: Ditto
• 5th: This would mean a complete breakdown of the youth vote and the campaign. Time to pack it up.
• 4th: This would be enough to keep him going for a little while, but the path would be almost impossible. He could still grab delegates along the way for the convention, though. If no one secures the nomination, he could play an interesting role.
• 3rd: This would ensure his campaign as a viable alternative and the path forward is way easier, though still tenuous. The money would come in and his message would get louder.
• 2nd: This would mean he'd remain in the top 3 throughout the process and could very well end up with the nomination. It would be a Trump/Paul/Establishment 3-way battle with each taking states along the way. Paul's momentum would continue to build, though, while the others would have already peaked.
• 1st: President Paul. It would demonstrate to people that the polls have been faulty and he would start to coalesce the establishment fearful of Trump/Cruz, as well as the anti-establishment fearful of Bush/Rubio.

Which do you want? This is why Iowa is so damned important.

 

[Fivezeroes]

What I think the results would mean:

• 7th: Not going to happen
• 6th: Ditto
• 5th: This would mean a complete breakdown of the youth vote and the campaign. Time to pack it up.
• 4th: This would be enough to keep him going for a little while, but the path would be almost impossible. He could still grab delegates along the way for the convention, though. If no one secures the nomination, he could play an interesting role.
• 3rd: This would ensure his campaign as a viable alternative and the path forward is way easier, though still tenuous. The money would come in and his message would get louder.
• 2nd: This would mean he'd remain in the top 3 throughout the process and could very well end up with the nomination. It would be a Trump/Paul/Establishment 3-way battle with each taking states along the way. Paul's momentum would continue to build, though, while the others would have already peaked.
• 1st: President Paul. It would demonstrate to people that the polls have been faulty and he would start to coalesce the establishment fearful of Trump/Cruz, as well as the anti-establishment fearful of Bush/Rubio.

Which do you want? This is why Iowa is so damned important.

I want 1st, but I'm going to be realistic and say 3rd.

 

[otherone]

What I think the results would mean:

[*]2nd: This would mean he'd remain in the top 3 throughout the process and could very well end up with the nomination. It would be a Trump/Paul/Establishment 3-way battle with each taking states along the way. Paul's momentum would continue to build, though, while the others would have already peaked.
[*]1st: President Paul. It would demonstrate to people that the polls have been faulty and he would start to coalesce the establishment fearful of Trump/Cruz, as well as the anti-establishment fearful of Bush/Rubio.
[/LIST]

dunno.
First might be regarded as a weird millennial anomaly and written off.
Second may be better. A real alternative to the cartoon front-runner and an opportunity for Rand and Trump to go at it.

 

[Snowball]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with 4th in Iowa at this stage in the game.
If he finishes ahead of Carson, Bush, Kasich, Christie, and the others, that is
a positive development.

 

[Uriah]

dunno.
First might be regarded as a weird millennial anomaly and written off.
Second may be better. A real alternative to the cartoon front-runner and an opportunity for Rand and Trump to go at it.

Second is better than first? I suppose the multiverse is real.

 

[65fastback2+2]

i feel a firm 2nd is coming monday night. something like 22-25%

 

[hells_unicorn]

I'm guessing it'll be 2nd just because I think Rand may be peaking a little bit late (last time Ron peaked a little early insofar as the popular straw vote, which shaped the perception of the electorate even though he ended up winning the state), though I wouldn't be disappointed if the millennial vote pulled out a massive upset for us. I'm guessing that either Cruz maintains his lead or that his lead collapses and they all flock to Rubio.

Granted, all of this assumes that Trump's support isn't real, which I don't think it is. If it is, we're in a lot of trouble.

 

[Todd]

If I were betting money, I would say 4th, but he needs at least second. Anything less than 2nd place will just be written off as a strange curiosity, especially if Tronald wins Iowa big.

Rubio's deference to Rand last night was interesting--his internal polling must be telling him something that isn't public.

Someone here know anything about Rands internal polling?

 

[otherone]

Granted, all of this assumes that Trump's support isn't real, which I don't think it is. If it is, we're in a lot of trouble.

It's definitely real. I have friends and family members who defend him....and I'm not far from where you live.

 

[SilentBull]

There's another thread here with percentage predictions for each candidate: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?488411-2016-IOWA-Caucus-prediction-amp-discussion-thread

 

[otherone]

Second is better than first? I suppose the multiverse is real.

Huckabee won Iowa in 2008. Santorum (kinda) in 2012. Iowa doesn't translate to New Hampshire.

 

[CPUd]

Someone here know anything about Rands internal polling?

Iowa = Rand Land

It's definitely real. I have friends and family members who defend him....and I'm not far from where you live.

In a primary, some of that support will translate to votes. In Iowa, not even the Trump "campaign" knows how many people will caucus for him. They are cold calling registered GOP in the 2 largest counties starting today, asking them to caucus for Trump. On Monday they are going to GOTV a massive amount of undecideds from the populated areas and hope that most of those will caucus for Trump.

 

[erowe1]

[*]2nd: This would mean he'd remain in the top 3 throughout the process and could very well end up with the nomination. It would be a Trump/Paul/Establishment 3-way battle with each taking states along the way. Paul's momentum would continue to build, though, while the others would have already peaked.

I don't see Cruz collapsing that easily. In fact, if Rand did get 2nd in Iowa, I can just as much picture Cruz being the one who gets the top spot as Trump.

But the good news is that the establishment would put up a fight all the way to the convention against either of them.

 

[hells_unicorn]

It's definitely real. I have friends and family members who defend him....and I'm not far from where you live.

Defending him in a conversation and showing up to vote for him are not the same thing. My father and my older brother both like Trump, and they've never voted in a primary election in their lives despite the fact that I'm a judge of elections and I always tell them to get off their butts so they can get a better candidate for general elections. In the past 8 years I've been a poll worker I've worked 8 primary elections, 2 of them presidential, and the turnout is NEVER higher than 20%. I also spoke with my predecessor who was a judge of elections going back to the early 90s and he said the exact same thing was true going back to 1992.

Trump's polling numbers are predicated on the idea that 45%-55% of Iowa Republicans are going to show up for the caucus, which is about as possible as Gandalf the Grey showing up to rescue me from a Balrog this coming Monday.

 

[CPUd]

I don't see Cruz collapsing that easily. In fact, if Rand did get 2nd in Iowa, I can just as much picture Cruz being the one who gets the top spot as Trump.

But the good news is that the establishment would put up a fight all the way to the convention against either of them.

I agree, in a caucus setting, Paul and Cruz will easily beat Trump (and Rubio too).

 

[laissez faire]

Hoping for 12% and 4th place, concerned it will be slightly lower.

 

[Patrick Henry]

I don't see Cruz collapsing that easily.

I don't either, but this is interesting if true. The only thing is that this is coming from a Trumpeteer.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com...rings-glenn-beck-back-to-iowa-for-final-days/

Coffee update on Don Fairly (resig. Cruz camp.) - this morning. "impossible to work with. Keeps changing positions on policy to suit voters"

Fairly: "7 folks resigned in last 10 days from Cruz campaign. Cruz slapped them with legal notices to shut up. These folks are good people"