Republican presidential candidates in 2016 (Reuters 5-Day Rolling poll)

[libertyplz]

Not sure how accurate the polling is, but 5.6% looks a lot better than the 3% he has been polling, so that's good news and I'll take it! Rand has been getting out and doing more interviews lately so maybe that has helped? Most of his televised interviews have been really good lately

 

[Brett85]

I hope that's good news, but it's most likely just statistical noise. Reuters/Ipsos has a tendency to jump around a lot. So don't be disappointed if this poll has Rand lower the next time it's released.

 

[hells_unicorn]

The thing that I find most curious about this poll is not how much higher Rand appears to be in it, but how much lower Carson and Rubio are compared to the CNN and Fox polls, and also how it reflects Trump not losing any support in contrast to most of the other polls that had him dropping 10 or so points. Either the sample of this poll is completely different than the other polls, or it's reflecting a very soft and superficial level of support for certain candidates, whereas Trump's celebrity factor is more strongly ingrained in peoples' minds than I would think at this juncture.

If I see multiple polls reflecting these numbers in the coming days, I'll treat it as being more serious, but the good news of Rand being a little higher in this poll is almost canceled out by Trump's continued dominance. I don't think Trump will get nominated, but before he goes down in a blaze of glory, he may end up making the GOP brand so poisonous that if Rand was able to pull this thing out he'd still have problems in the general election.

At this juncture, I don't see anything beneficial about having Trump in this race, and I think Rand is wise not to get too closely associated with him.

 

[chronicaust]

I don't think Trump will get nominated, but before he goes down in a blaze of glory, he may end up making the GOP brand so poisonous that if Rand was able to pull this thing out he'd still have problems in the general election.

At this juncture, I don't see anything beneficial about having Trump in this race, and I think Rand is wise not to get too closely associated with him.

This made me think, and I know this isn't a new suggestion, but maybe a third party run wouldn't be such a bad idea given what Trump is doing to the GOP as a whole. I mean what's the point of winning the nomination if you're ultimately going to lose the general anyway? Better to distance yourself from the nonsense imo.

Just thinking out loud.

Edit: But either way I think his strategy of being anti Trump is based on this assumption, and it's for the best for the exact same reasons (winning the general).

 

[hells_unicorn]

This made me think, and I know this isn't a new suggestion, but maybe a third party run wouldn't be such a bad idea given what Trump is doing to the GOP as a whole. I mean what's the point of winning the nomination if you're ultimately going to lose the general anyway? Better to distance yourself from the nonsense imo.

Just thinking out loud.

Edit: But either way I think his strategy of being anti Trump is based on this assumption, and it's for the best for the exact same reasons (winning the general).

The problem with this is I don't think a big enough defection from the GOP would occur to give a 3rd Party or Independent run a victory. More than likely, this would end up giving either Hilary Clinton or some other Democrat if she isn't nominated a win in the general election, which is what Trump's actual goal has been in my eyes from day one.

Trump tries to buy everybody, but buying the Clintons seemed to be more a pleasure for Trump than a mere necessity of business, and the people on this forum who can't shut up about Trump are being played (in the words of Danny Devito) "...like a harp from hell".

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

This is great news?

It's just funny because Trump lied on Twitter (what else is new?) on the same day this poll was released that Paul was at 1%. Also Paul is ahead of Cruz.

 

[cindy25]

it puts him at roughly the same level as Rubio and Cruz. not that bad a place. Carly and Carson will not even reach Iowa.

 

[Murray N Rothbard]

it puts him at roughly the same level as Rubio and Cruz. not that bad a place. Carly and Carson will not even reach Iowa.

Carson is right behind Trump in Iowa polling 17-25% lately.

Fiorina's latest polling there was at 13% and trending up.

Paul has been at 2-5% in Iowa since August and he held more events in Iowa than Carson and Trump combined.

Time to wake up guys...Rand isn't getting the nom.

But the sad part isn't just failing but that he did so not being himself....trying to appeal to the mainstream by ignoring or compromising on many of his libertarian based principles. It was just enough for his message not to be noticed.

 

[goldwater's ghost]

THIS IS REALLY GOOD NEWS.

 

[Paul4Prez]

All of the poll data is questionable at this point. Very few voters are paying attention yet, and fewer still have made up their minds. But this poll looks like an outlier -- Rand has been trending the wrong way. Even so, there's no reason to drop out. Let the other me-too candidates give up -- Rand has a distinct message and a good ground game.

 

[RabbitMan]

Keep running Rand!

 

[CPUd]

Carson is right behind Trump in Iowa polling 17-25% lately.

Fiorina's latest polling there was at 13% and trending up.

Paul has been at 2-5% in Iowa since August and he held more events in Iowa than Carson and Trump combined.

Time to wake up guys...Rand isn't getting the nom.

But the sad part isn't just failing but that he did so not being himself....trying to appeal to the mainstream by ignoring or compromising on many of his libertarian based principles. It was just enough for his message not to be noticed.

You are with Purple PAC?

 

[libertyplz]

The link Vincent Harris tweeted out showed that Reuters was most accurate in 2012, at least for the general election. As has already been pointed out, both good and bad news if this poll is accurate. Good that Rand is trending up, bad that Trump is still so high. Polls for Trump seem to be fluctuating between low 20's to low 30's, not sure why such a large discrepancy for him. Looking at the previous rolling polling data Rand through much of September was polling between 2 and 3% which is what most polls had him at, so Reuters trends seem to be pretty in line with most other polls, so looking at their past data, this increase in support I think is very much a real trend which is great news. If Rand can consistently stay above Cruz and Rubio that would be great and hopefully prevent the media from labeling Rand's campaign as dead (I know I know, wishful thinking)

 

[Rudeman]

It's nice to see but does it matter when Trump is citing online polls?

 

[Murray N Rothbard]

You are with Purple PAC?

Not sure what that even is, so no.

I just think enough is enough. He tried this experiment of trying to give libertarian views broad appeal without getting anyone to actually understand them. People were just bored and confused. I think it's just time to be straight forward and logical the way libertarian ideas are meant to be and let some people get offended or shocked if they're still too stupid to get it.

Honestly I don't think he ever had a real shot at POTUS...but he did have a chance to win over some new minds, introduce actual ideas that will resonate with a few people, grow the movement in the long run. So far that's all been wasted, no one has learned anything new, no one has even gotten on board either.

 

[eleganz]

Carson is right behind Trump in Iowa polling 17-25% lately.

Fiorina's latest polling there was at 13% and trending up.

Paul has been at 2-5% in Iowa since August and he held more events in Iowa than Carson and Trump combined.

Time to wake up guys...Rand isn't getting the nom.

But the sad part isn't just failing but that he did so not being himself....trying to appeal to the mainstream by ignoring or compromising on many of his libertarian based principles. It was just enough for his message not to be noticed.

Lol, its not even October yet. It was never easy for Rand to get the nomination to begin with, what made you think it was going to be easy??

 

[CPUd]

Not sure what that even is, so no.

I just think enough is enough. He tried this experiment of trying to give libertarian views broad appeal without getting anyone to actually understand them. People were just bored and confused. I think it's just time to be straight forward and logical the way libertarian ideas are meant to be and let some people get offended or shocked if they're still too stupid to get it.

Honestly I don't think he ever had a real shot at POTUS...but he did have a chance to win over some new minds, introduce actual ideas that will resonate with a few people, grow the movement in the long run. So far that's all been wasted, no one has learned anything new, no one has even gotten on board either.

Rand is not a libertarian, and he has said this multiple times over the past years. You keep trying to shoehorn him into your ideology and you will continue to be disappointed. Rand is running for POTUS, and the purpose of this forum is to support those efforts.

 

[Liberty74]

Rand should tweet that there are 9 candidates below him in the Reuters polling average and that Trump LIES about his 1%. Trump losing. Paul gaining.

 

[Liberty74]

Carson is right behind Trump in Iowa polling 17-25% lately.

Fiorina's latest polling there was at 13% and trending up.

Paul has been at 2-5% in Iowa since August and he held more events in Iowa than Carson and Trump combined.

Time to wake up guys...Rand isn't getting the nom.

But the sad part isn't just failing but that he did so not being himself....trying to appeal to the mainstream by ignoring or compromising on many of his libertarian based principles. It was just enough for his message not to be noticed.

You number analysis leaves out an important fact. Almost NO ONE in either Party who leads this far out in Iowa and NH ends up winning the nomination. It's always someone else. Even Karl Rove said so in a recent WSJ article the other week.

These races are always very fluid this far out with people coming and going and with the media leading that charge. Voters are always finding new homes. Hell, 65% of voters of each candidate said they could change their mind. Walker voters had to change their mind by default, hence maybe why Rand has see a slight uptick to 5.6%.

I'm sure Rand and his team knows these races are fluid. It's why they are building in all the early states to be prepared for whatever. It's why having money to sustain and stay in is important. Anything could happen from a Dean scream to a Cain not being able to answer a foreign policy question. Heck, Walker was the frontrunner back in April.

 

[65fastback2+2]

Carson is right behind Trump in Iowa polling 17-25% lately.

Fiorina's latest polling there was at 13% and trending up.

Paul has been at 2-5% in Iowa since August and he held more events in Iowa than Carson and Trump combined.

Time to wake up guys...Rand isn't getting the nom.

But the sad part isn't just failing but that he did so not being himself....trying to appeal to the mainstream by ignoring or compromising on many of his libertarian based principles. It was just enough for his message not to be noticed.

You were pulling for Perry in 2012 then huh? lol