283 votes

Public Policy Polling - Iowa: Gingrich 22%, Paul 21%, Romney 16%


Gingrich 22%
Paul 21%
Romney 16%

There has been some major movement in the Republican Presidential race in Iowa over the last week, with what was a 9 point lead for Newt Gingrich now all the way down to a single point. Gingrich is at 22% to 21% for Paul with Mitt Romney at 16%, Michele Bachmann at 11%, Rick Perry at 9%, Rick Santorum at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 5%, and Gary Johnson at 1%.


Comment viewing options

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


The Ron Paul Daily Donation Tracker is now showing $53,566 with still an hour and 45 minutes left for Tuesday.

This figure is double the amount that is usually donated on-line during a weekday.

I think with Ron Paul surging now in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls the RP Grassroots can sense victory.

We must continue to work hard, Phone-from-Home, canvas, and donate especially this Friday!!!!

The Tea Party 11 Money Bomb must be HUGE to continue the Momentum we have all worked so hard to gain....

Give till your wallet screams on December 16th!!!!

How do I find this daily tracker...What is the link?

Appreciate the info..


I have looked all over the FOX NEWS website & I CAN NOT FIND THIS POLL RESULT ANYWHERE ON FOX!!!! Drudge & Daily Caller has it, BUT CAN NOT FIND IT ANYWHERE ON FOX!!!! TIME FOR AN EMAIL BOMB DP'S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They did show the Poll on Greta, "On The Record"

Iowa Poll

Gingrich 22%

Paul 21%

Romney 16%

** Ron Paul is breaking out tonight...21%

They are not happy campers on Fox Tonight...There is a panic and Rupert Murdock is not sleeping well tonight...believe me...Ha!

With the other a$$clowns

With the other a$$clowns tripping allover themselves and the baggage neocon Newt has.... just watch, bad hair Trump will run again. In the nick of to save the bankers.

Goldman / Sachs 2012
Ron Paul 2012!!!

Greta Van Sustern, "On The Record" Bret Hume, "Romney in

Trouble in Iowa...

Hume: "You can't rule our Ron Paul winning Iowa"

Hume : "Gingrich is sinking in Iowa...Down 5% in one week

Hume : "Gingrich must win Iowa.."

Hume : "Romney is sinking in New Hampshire"

Hume : "Ron Paul ads are hammering Gingrich in Iowa"


As a frustrated democrat, I have been leaning towards Ron Paul mainly due to his stance on foreign policy and civil liberties. However a few things have been bothering me. If the EPA is eliminated, who will prevent corporations from polluting like crazy? (I understand the EPA is not efficient, but come on, we cant just let huge corporations do whatever they want to our environment!)If the Dept of Education is eliminated, who will make sure science is taught at all in the more religious communities? Also, how does Paul feel about wall street regulation? banking regulations? I have not been able to find these answers on any of Paul's websites, I would appreciate it if someone could clear this up for me... Thanks!

Your State wil prtect you!!!

That is what I think as every state is a little different from each other.

Banking Regulations...

Hi Joe,
While others have answered a majority of your questions, I feel that the question about the banks and Wall Street is still left wanting. Contrary what one would initially believe or guess, Ron Paul in 1999 voted AGAINST the Repeal of Glass Steagall 1932. This repeal is what led to commercial banks becoming investment banks and investment banks becoming too big to fail and real estate becoming a massive bubble and the entire economy being destroyed etc. Ron explained his vote by saying (paraphrase): I am not for regulations of any kind, but because the market is not free market capitalism but rather crony capitalism, repealing this act would be very very dangerous. Of course Dr. Paul was right again. This fact and vote was very instrumental in leading me to fully support the good doctor...he thinks of EVERYTHING and makes decisions based on all of the facts. And of course, Dodd-Frank is not an adequate replacement for Glass Steagall.

Science and Religion

True faith and true science are always in agreement. Since God is the author of all sciences and he is the author of the Bible, it is impossible for the two to contradict each other. Ron Paul is a de facto scientist by being a doctor, but he also has faith. I am a biochemist and a physician and I delight in exploring scientific creationism.

The Dept of Education is the main reason why our education level is so poor by international standards. It has been proven over and over again that home schooling and private schools excel greatly over public schools, as when you take matters in your own hand, you are fully invested in your educational outcome. It is not fair for citizens who are not part of the public education system to be forced to pay tax to support public education. Ron Paul is in favor of giving tax credit to offset the private school or home school expenses if parents choose so.

Ron Paul on EPA

Ron Paul claims that environmental protection has failed due to lack of respect for private property and advocate the environment is better protected under private property rights ... We as property owners can't violate our neighbors' property. We can't pollute their air or their water. We can't dump our garbage on their property ... Too often, conservatives and liberals fall short on defending environmental concerns, and they resort to saying, "Well, let's turn it over to the EPA. The EPA will take care of us ... We can divvy up the permits that allow you to pollute." So I don't particularly like that method. He believes that environmental legislation, such as emissions standards, should be handled between the states or regions concerned.


The EPA's work is done. Most of their environmental protection crap has already been codified into valid laws.

The Department of Education not only hasn't educated anyone, but their policies have led to the dumbing down of the schools. Who will make sure science is taught? Maybe the parents who want their kids educated. Education is a local issue anyway.

And he wants to minimize the regulations, except for laws against fraud and that sort of thing.

Hope This Helps!

Freedom is my Worship Word!

Government should focus on protecting life and private property.

The beauty of liberty means that the governments functions get drastically reduced and it can focus on its two main purposes. Protecting life and private property. All of your concerns are addressed in this approach.

Take the EPA. You like the idea that the EPA keeps the environment clean. But in reality what it does is set an allowed amount of pollution that companies can emit onto your property. Without the EPA pollution would be regulated through courts where if a company was polluting the air or water on your property you would be able to sue for damages. Companies don't like that. They would rather have the EPA since they give them an allowed amount to pollute and cheap fines for violations. A jury might not be so kind.

The same with banking and wall street regulations. you may think of FDIC as protecting your bank account. But it's real purpose was to eliminate bank runs. As you study Austrian economics you will learn that the banking system we have today would never survive in a free market. It is a series of regulations and laws like legal tender laws, the Federal Reserve, and fractional banking that all allow the massive transfer of wealth you are seeing today. In a free market bad banks go out of business very quickly. The more free the faster it happens. But when banks are in collusion with governments they are able to get bailouts to stay in business and keep the theft going.

The main thing to remember is that liberty and free markets don't prevent business failures or create a perfect economy where nobody loses a job. What is does is make sure those bad businesses fail quickly so that the resources like tools and labor can be quickly reallocated to more productive uses.

To: joe101~~Mr. Democrat welcome!

First, we all want to welcome you to Daily Paul, a very, very busy blog for all Americans who are concerned about our country, our lives and futures.

Regarding your questions, Science would still be taught if the Dpt. of Education was gone, because local communities and children's families would have more sway and influence ONCE AGAIN to tell the teachers what they wanted them to teach their children. Remember the PTA's? Well, the full influence of the Parents would come back in spades. Competition would drive performance again in schools. The Dpt of Education was used primarily as a propaganda tool for pushing "agendas" to manipulate the minds of our youth. Youth need to be influenced by their parent's values, not the values of a bureaucrat. Their "excuse" was that THEY knew better than US to make moral decisions! It is time we take back our children and become the MAIN educational influence and force in their lives.

Regarding the elimination of the EPA, the free market system provides the necessary regulations on the environment, because neighbors and communities will put pressure on the corporations. If word were to get out that an oil company was polluting, they would be boycotted, or we would go to their competitor. Anyway, I do think Ron Paul could explain this better than me, but I'll look for some more detailed and better explanations.

And, welcome, once again! You won't regret this journey into the mind of freedom, because as it becomes more apparent you will realize just HOW MUCH our government has become more tyrannical.

Thank you for the welcome

Thank you for the welcome cepivon. Honestly the PTA is one of the things that im afraid of. I agree there is some indoctrination in public schools, but I think if you left it up to a lot of parents they would have a old fashion book burning, which really scares me...
Word IS out that oil companies are polluting, and there is no boycott. You cant honestly believe that a small community or individual property owner will have any impact over giant corporations, they bought the peoples "representative!" I think campaign finance reform could solve a whole lot of our problems...
Hopefully I can ask Ron Paul some of this stuff myself tomorrow night im going to see him in Derry, NH!

Every state has its own dept of education

So it's not like education will end, or that parents/PTA will automatically become dominant. I homeschool my son, and I have to file with the state of California every year. The states, and not the federal government, are in charge of education. I don't see that distinction made very often, but it's really important.

Welcome to DP, joep101!

re: regulations

A good question! I think this gets to a root issue: what is the purpose of the law in a free republic? Is it "carrots and sticks" to shape behavior? If it is, we are all livestock, certainly not free people.

Instead, the law as understood by the philosophy of liberty, exists to protect the rights of individuals. The only consistent way it can do this is if the laws apply equally to all individuals. Is everyone protected? With regulatory agencies, the law becomes the tool of special privilege, not equal protection.

Here's how it works. The law should protect property rights. If you pollute my land, you are encroaching on my right to use my property as I see fit without damage. If you pollute the air I breathe, you are encroaching on my body. Under equal property protection these issues are already covered in the law, but under government regulation I lose my power to seek redress for individual harm, and the law is written by or influenced by those very corporations or people; in many instances they have made themselves legally exempt from prosecution (see Glenn Greenwald, _With Justice For Some_).

Regulations, however, result in unintended consequences, because the powerful interests who influence the myriad of regulations can manipulate those to actually make the codes favor them -- read them and ask cui bono? (who benefits?) Regulatory agencies are a corporate polluter's best friend in the same way that the drug war is a gangster's best friend.

"For, remember, that law is force, and that consequently the domain of the law cannot lawfully extend beyond the domain of force. When law and force keep a man within the bounds of justice, they impose upon him nothing...they only oblige him to abstain from doing harm...But when the law, through the medium of its necessary agent -- force, imposes a form of labor, a method or a subject of instruction, a creed, a worship, it...substitutes the will of the legislator for their own will...[Men] cease to be men; they lose their personality, their liberty, their property." -Bastiat, "The Law"

Paul is clear on this, when he says that no one has a right to pollute another's private property. Most of us would agree. So how do "they" get away with it? Regulations and regulatory agencies, the law used to benefit some at the expense of others, *not* the law used to protect the rights of each individual (to choose how to learn science, or use their land, or invest their money, as long as they do not encroach on others and fulfill the contracts they make).

Enforce laws against breach of contract, force, and fraud. Enforce criminal codes against behavior that assaults and violates others. It's the most elegant and effective law.

Money will buy you a fine dog, but only love can make it wag its tail. -Friedman

I appreciate your response,

I appreciate your response, and philosophically you make a lot of excellent points. However the transition would be an ugly process. If (lets say) coal plant emision regulations ended tomorrow, my children, playing on my private property, would be breathing less clean air. Im supposed to take on the energy corporation myself? With their billions in assets? with no entity to set standards? Unless their is "equal property protection" already in place, I have no logistical recourse. I guess I agree with you, and I know that the EPA is loaded with special interests, but a lot of property owners might slip between the cracks if the transition is rushed or flawed.
Whats Ron Paul's position on Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commision?

Crickets man

That was great. I actually understood what was intended.

Hi joep101

Try here:


There is a vast amount of resources at your disposal covering every concievable subject (or at least pretty darn close).

"For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions, even on important subjects, which I once thought right but found to be otherwise." - Benjamin Franklin

Welcome Joep

I think we are all classic liberals around here for the most part (get gov't off of our backs, etc...). Air and water pollution should be handled mostly by property rights. I don't not have the right to pollute the air you breathe, or the water you drink. This should be worked out in the courts. The idea of the EPA may be well intentioned, but the outcome is a bureaucratic, politically motivated animal. The EPA is lobbied and influenced by special interest groups for their special legislation requests. This typically benefits big business, and chokes small business that can't afford to conform to regs.

Ron Paul is the champion of free markets, therefore banks are allowed to fail, and special interest legislation on behalf of banks will be vetoed. He wants to audit and severely restrict the best friend a big bank can have in the Federal Reserve. The Fed is made up of the biggest bank chiefs on the BOD past and present.

As far as the Dept. of Ed is concerned, it is a fairly new department. It handcuffs teachers in their ability to teach to the individual student's needs, and districts are financed (very complicated financing - that is theirs to begin with) in part by test scores that paint all kids with the same broad brush. As this department grows, the more regulations it spits out, the lower the quality of education in America.

I would imagine that these

I would imagine that these issues would better be left to the state. Since these departments are trying to regulate the entire country, they end up doing a very terrible job. Each state has different ideas and goals regarding these areas - therefore, let the voters become more involved by being able to vote on state measures. As you can see, this is more efficient cost-wise and will lead to better results since the people get to directly vote on what the regulations in their state should be!





That total is double the usual daily donations on the Internet....



Yes I am psyched!!! and I yes I know we have to work our tails off over the next three weeks, but isn't it just GREAT!!!!

HEY heads up!

Just got off the phone with my sister in Florida. Ron Paul just won another straw poll!

Blew them away too! Ron Paul got 171 and Newt came in second with 51.

Dade county gop straw poll! Gonna be news tomorrow!


Wouldn't Florida be a good place to air an "I will save your Social Security" type ad?

Freedom is my Worship Word!

Great news, but...

I highly doubt it'll "make news". It's just the way it's been with the MSM

Iowa = News Enough

A win in Iowa is like a commercial x 1000 .

I just hope we can withstand the backlash....hopefully we'll weave and dodge the baiting (beware Lauren Valle part deux). Just being an honest Ron Paul supporter...


From the link to dailycaller off of Drudge.. HOLY SHIT!!! and yes, so what I swore.... WOW!!!!!!!


look at the popular articles there

Most Popular

* In Iowa, Paul closes to within one point of front-runner Gingrich

* Ron Paul stands up for raw milk in New Hampshire

* Newt leads, but Paul wins in new Iowa poll

* Islamic governments angle for speech curbs in the US

* 10 women who are hotter than Jennifer Aniston


What is begun in anger, ends in shame.