1 vote

Iowa poll: Newt 27% Romney 20% Paul 16% 11% undecided

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/primary/rep/ia/

We are in striking distance. Lets get the supervoterbomb going! Strike while the iron is hot!



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Lies

All lies,I believe he is in first place there all alone

How many supporters do we think Ron has in iowa

So 700,000 republicans and 820000 Dems plus I dependents etc. How many total supporters do we think Paul has in Iowa? 100k? 50k? 20k?

sorry to dissapoint you all

but religion was invented for control

ron paul 2012

I know too many people who are actually waiting

to see who the frontrunner is so they can vote for him or her. We call the politicians "puppets," and the talking heads are "puppets," too. Are voters like that third generation puppets?

Sample Size 600

530 Republicans
70 Independents

All telephoned, from Nov. 17th thru Nov. 23rd. Mostly prior to the CNN debate.

The perfect sample for the neocons.

Hardly a representative sampling of potential caucus participants.

Iowa math ... If we're at 16%

Iowa math ... If we're at 16% then we're at 25% in my opinion which may be good enough to win outright with a splintered field. The caucus is ALL about turnout once you've reached a certain level of support. That is our challenge and strength. Phone from home, support the Super Voter Bomb, these things make a difference in identifying support and getting our voters to the polls. We can win this!

My Iowa Math

From what i have seen about 100,000 iowans attend the caucuses out of about 3.5 million citizens. Let's assume for a second that 1 million are republicans. Let's also assume that Ron Paul has support of 10% of all iowa republicans. That's 100,000 hard core activist supporters Ron Paul.

Finally let's assume Zero of the typical caucus goers support Paul.
And 80% of all Paul supporters show up on Jan 3.

That's 100,000 caucus goers divided by 7 other candidates
And 80,000 dedicated to Paul.

Now I could be wrong but I think we are going to dominate this thing.

caucus states

Caucus states can be our strength if we have the registered R voters show up for the caucus.

Every RP supporter and daily paul reader who lives in a caucus state MUST show up at their local caucus and vote themselves or their friends to the next level.
Take vacation from work that evening. Just get there!

here is my calculations.. In

here is my calculations..

In 2008 there was about 1.5millon voters in Iowa.
677,000 voted republican
818,000 voted democrat.

In 2008 120,000 Iowans voted in the republican primary, which is less than 18% of people voted in the general election.
In 2000 90,000 Iowans voted in the republican primary, which is less than 14% of people voted in the general election.

Assuming in 2012, 16% of the republican voted in primaries. That is 108,000

Assuming the same percentage of people voted for the democratic primary
16% * 818,000 = 130,000 voters for the primary.

Assuming 20% of the democrats/independents caucus goers decided to vote in the republican primaries.
That is 26,000 votes

If Ron Paul can get one third of the former democrats voters to vote for him
26,000 *0.33 = 8,600

Total votes in Iowa caucus = 134,000 votes.

If Ron Paul has the support of 16% of the republican caucus goers
108,000 * 0.16 = 17,250
That will give him a total vote of 25,860 votes. = 19.3%

If Ron Paul has the support of 20% of the republican caucus goers
108,000 * 0.20 = 21,600
That will give him a total vote of 30,200 votes. = 22.5%

If Ron Paul has the support of 25% of the republican caucus goers
108,000 * 0.25 = 27,000
That will give him a total vote of 35,600 votes. = 26.6%

get clear

Let's get clear on what is a primary and what is a caucus.

Iowa is a caucus state so it is not about a primary with voting at a voting booth. It is about going to your local caucus (as an R registered voter, so you can attend) and choosing you or your friends to go to the next level.

The numbers are much

The numbers are much different than that, I'll try to find the link. Ron had something like 11,000 votes last time and I estimated that doubling that guarantees him over 20% and a top 3 finish.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

preference poll

At the caucus they have speeches, a non-binding preference poll, then you meet with people in your precinct and decide who from your precinct gets to the next level.

The preference poll is for show.
Getting to the next level, so you can become a delegate, is the only thing that matters in caucus states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_Republican_caucuses,_2008#...

Yes, Ron was 5th with 11,841 and 10% of the vote. If there are 140,000 votes this time because the Dems have no caucus, Ron needs just 17,000 new votes to eclipse 20% of the final tally. That should assure top 3. He could do better of course, that's what to work for.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

So then

Are you saying fewer than 10% of Paul supporters will show up?

I did my own analysis. Yours

I did my own analysis. Yours projects votes for Ron would increase by almost 700%. Unrealistic.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

An adulterer and Morman leading in Iowa?

I mean I know we live in bizarro world but I don't believe this. I know with these clever and cunning propagandists they have to make their 'news' believable so they use made-up numbers to confirm their propaganda.

"Fairy tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
— G.K. Chesterton

Shame on you is right!

I am also a Mormon and a strong Ron Paul supporter. Please stop this.

The evangelicals I know

view Mormons with disdain, and claim that they are not Christian. (I don't know if you are aware of that or not. I just learned of this viewpoint recently.) So, it is a shocker that Romney would have any support from this particular sector. He certainly didn't in the last election.

I think

I think he means that it is unthinkable for the most part to assume that Evangelical Christians would vote for a Muslim guy. I can see it being an issue, but honestly that sounds a bit unfair to Evangelicals. I would hope they could look further than the name of a religion and onto commonly held values.

Don't think it was meant to offend.

Eric Hoffer

I find this as a bash to

I find this as a bash to Mormons. You lumped Adulterer and Mormon together. This would be like me saying, "come on! a rapist and a catholic?!? this poll has to be innaccurate" Adulterery and someones religion are two very different things. Why lump them together, because you think that all of Iowa is as ignorant as you?

If there is shame, it would be well placed upon you...

for this to be truly a 'bash' on Mormons you would have to know my intention and since you didn't ask and you assumed and jumped to conclusions then the shame is on you.

"We have the First Amendment not to talk about the weather but to talk about controversial things...." Ron Paul

Please give people the benefit of the doubt before exercising your preconceived opinions not based in reality.

"Fairy tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
— G.K. Chesterton

It's not bashing Mormons,

Iowa is known for it's evangelical base, so it doesn't make sense to me. Shame on you for thinking I was bashing Mormons, how can you deduce from my statement I was bashing Mormons?

Why do you think Romney and Huntsman didn't attend the TFF forum last week in a church?

"Fairy tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
— G.K. Chesterton

Shame on you!

How many times do I have to respond to posts like this on this site?! DO NOT BASH MORMONS! I am a Mormon. I support Ron Paul. Mormons are good Christians. Most of them support Romney because they feel that the church has been maligned and persecuted (they are right) and that having a Mormon president would be good for the CHURCH, not necessarily the country. If you want to break through this and reach them, DO NOT SAY BAD THINGS ABOUT THEM. Besides, it is highly offensive.

This is not bashing Mormons,

to deduce from my statement as an assault on Mormon's is truly reaching, it's a fact, Iowa has a large evangelical base, look at the news articles posted, if we can't discuss these things then we deceive ourselves.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/23/mitt-romney-morm...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/23/us-usa-campaign-ro...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-faces-resistan...

"Fairy tales are more than true; not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
— G.K. Chesterton

Poll numbers

They are really irrelevant in caucus states because so few people show up to caucus. I think in Iowa it's like 100k or 5% of the population. This is where Paul has a huge advantage because his base is committed and active. We will show up. Newt and Romney supporters, ah...not so much

The polls in IA were right in

The polls in IA were right in 2008 however.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

hmmm

It's a good point, last time they were pretty close, but last time there was a Democratic caucus as well. They were also casting themselves as the peace candidates back then. That means all of those on the left of the spectrum have no peace candidate aside from Dr. Paul this year.

I think it will be a boost above what most of these polls are predicting, because they don't take those voters into account.

Eric Hoffer

I've talked to democrats

They don't really comprehend crossing over to vote for the peace candidate! Seems foreign to them like they just can't grasp the concept. I am really disappointed in how ignorant people seem. Even most Republicans spout falsehoods when I ask them WHY they support their candidate! Amazing we aren't in worse shape already. At least 85% allow pundits to form their opinions for them. I admit I stay up on the latest world news much more than most, but many have no idea what's going on even in their local government. I feel like I am living in Idiocracy the movie.

Yeah but it's different tho....

Don't get me wrong, we need to run like we are 30 pnts behind, but honestly we are FAAAR better off than before! Our organization is top notch when last time in 07-08 we were rag tag amateurs. Last time nationally he was polling around 2-3% nationally last time. Also the reason why cell phones didn't matter with last times polling is because Obama just dominated the youth vote last time and this time Paul is all they got. Lastly, Paul didn't win as ,many straw votes last time and that's important because it shows organization to continually win them.

Respectfully,

Indra

Ron Paul 2012

Really?

Wait, so you're saying he was polling around 2-3% nationally last time so you're saying? Wait.

truth liberate