"Guy Who Can't Win" Tied Atop Latest Iowa Poll

[Mad Scientist]

Imagine if he were given equal time during the debates? How far ahead would he be?

Republican Party Candidates in Four-Way Dead Heat - Bloomberg
Cain = 20%
Paul = 19%
Romney = 18%
Gingrich = 17%

Don't let the Presstitutes chose your candidate boys and girls.

 

[Avorysuds]

Republican Party Candidates in Four-Way Dead Heat - Bloomberg

A Bloomberg News poll shows Cain at 20 percent, Paul at 19 percent, Romney at 18 percent and Gingrich at 17 percent among the likely attendees with the caucuses that start the nominating contests seven weeks away.

I hope the poll is true lolz.

merged

 

[del]

he's got as good a chance of getting elected as cain and gingrich, too.

 

[WillowTree]

ron paul will never be president.

 

[Avorysuds]

I wonder if Paul is in second by the next debate if he will get 15-20 min talk time and if Newt/Mitt will get 80-90 seconds of talk time... Oh how I bet anything all the Neocons on these boards support that as they do with Paul... Talk time is based on polling order right?

When Cain can't answer the questions he will have to defer them to Paul.

 

[Avorysuds]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

 

[WillowTree]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

wait and see. just wait and see. although I must tell you, if I'm forced to choose between Mr. Paul and that asswipe demoncrat.. I'll vote for Mr. Ron Paul. Now. there! but he won't get the nomination. Gingrich will.

 

[J.E.D]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

This poll does:

RCP Average 8/17 - 10/29 -- Obama 47.6 Paul 41.6

RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates

Look at the list. The only GOP candidate who comes close is Romney. Obama still beats him by 1.2 points (though that is a statistical tie). Granted, these polls don't mean much this far out from the election. But there you go.

 

[Avorysuds]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

wait and see. just wait and see. although I must tell you, if I'm forced to choose between Mr. Paul and that asswipe demoncrat.. I'll vote for Mr. Ron Paul. Now. there! but he won't get the nomination. Gingrich will.

I like most of what you just said... "wait and see." As I have always said, "We'll just have to see."

Mitt was the for sure winner. Perry was the for sure winner.... Cain was the for sure winner........ Now Newt is the for sure winner. Lol, we'll see...

You know the difference between Ron Paul being on top vs Cain/Newt/Mitt/Perry? It's irreversible. That's the difference between a Paul supporter and a just a Republicans voter, once you go Paul you’re in for the long haul.


Now take into context Paul got 89 seconds to talk in the last debate.... How things would be if he were even given something close to a fair chance in the media and I doubt the other candidates would stand a chance at all.

 

[WillowTree]

This poll does not agree with you.

wait and see. just wait and see. although I must tell you, if I'm forced to choose between Mr. Paul and that asswipe demoncrat.. I'll vote for Mr. Ron Paul. Now. there! but he won't get the nomination. Gingrich will.

I like most of what you just said... "wait and see." As I have always said, "We'll just have to see."

Mitt was the for sure winner. Perry was the for sure winner.... Cain was the for sure winner........ Now Newt is the for sure winner. Lol, we'll see...

You know the difference between Ron Paul being on top vs Cain/Newt/Mitt/Perry? It's irreversible. That's the difference between a Paul supporter and a just a Republicans voter, once you go Paul you’re in for the long haul.


Now take into context Paul got 89 seconds to talk in the last debate.... How things would be if he were even given something close to a fair chance in the media and I doubt the other candidates would stand a chance at all.

The thing I disagree with Mr. Paul on is his view of the military. I think he'd be happy to neuter us in that department. I don't think that's good.

 

[Avorysuds]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

This poll does:

RCP Average 8/17 - 10/29 -- Obama 47.6 Paul 41.6

RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates

Look at the list. The only GOP candidate who comes close is Romney. Obama still beats him by 1.2 points (though that is a statistical tie). Granted, these polls don't mean much this far out from the election. But there you go.

That poll is too far out... Even this poll is far out but at least it is relevant. The worst candidate for ANY politician to have polling alongside them (when in the top positions) is Paul. Once Paul is viewed as viable by the voters (not the media) it's over for everyone else. This might happen, however something tells me if another poll shows Paul in second we will see a wave sent out to destroy Paul, I smell the racist issue being brought back to life lol. None of it will be based on policy because that would attract more voters to Paul.

 

[Avorysuds]

wait and see. just wait and see. although I must tell you, if I'm forced to choose between Mr. Paul and that asswipe demoncrat.. I'll vote for Mr. Ron Paul. Now. there! but he won't get the nomination. Gingrich will.

I like most of what you just said... "wait and see." As I have always said, "We'll just have to see."

Mitt was the for sure winner. Perry was the for sure winner.... Cain was the for sure winner........ Now Newt is the for sure winner. Lol, we'll see...

You know the difference between Ron Paul being on top vs Cain/Newt/Mitt/Perry? It's irreversible. That's the difference between a Paul supporter and a just a Republicans voter, once you go Paul you’re in for the long haul.


Now take into context Paul got 89 seconds to talk in the last debate.... How things would be if he were even given something close to a fair chance in the media and I doubt the other candidates would stand a chance at all.

The thing I disagree with Mr. Paul on is his view of the military. I think he'd be happy to neuter us in that department. I don't think that's good.

Paul actually served in the military, during war time I believe.

Paul does not want to neuter the, military, our military is very weak atm because we are spread out so thin fighting to many fake wars all over the world. What would happen if a real war broke out? We run a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit every year. America would be fucked as we are unprepared. We wouldn’t have the troops to deal with a “real war” currently because our troops are tired after 10 years, our troops are spread out and the money has been wasted.

How anyone can’t see this is flat out amazing.

If a "real war" happened the first thing the US would cut is that "war on terror." Think about that.

 

[1ManRev]

wait and see. just wait and see. although I must tell you, if I'm forced to choose between Mr. Paul and that asswipe demoncrat.. I'll vote for Mr. Ron Paul. Now. there! but he won't get the nomination. Gingrich will.

I like most of what you just said... "wait and see." As I have always said, "We'll just have to see."

Mitt was the for sure winner. Perry was the for sure winner.... Cain was the for sure winner........ Now Newt is the for sure winner. Lol, we'll see...

You know the difference between Ron Paul being on top vs Cain/Newt/Mitt/Perry? It's irreversible. That's the difference between a Paul supporter and a just a Republicans voter, once you go Paul you’re in for the long haul.


Now take into context Paul got 89 seconds to talk in the last debate.... How things would be if he were even given something close to a fair chance in the media and I doubt the other candidates would stand a chance at all.

The thing I disagree with Mr. Paul on is his view of the military. I think he'd be happy to neuter us in that department. I don't think that's good.

Only neutering the useless/harmful aspects of it. Why do we need military bases in Germany and Japan? Or a collosal military budget that is inefficiently spent? Also, some people have this crazy idea that bombing and occupying other countries is creating more enemies for us and just doing the exact opposite of protecting America.

 

[WillowTree]

I like most of what you just said... "wait and see." As I have always said, "We'll just have to see."

Mitt was the for sure winner. Perry was the for sure winner.... Cain was the for sure winner........ Now Newt is the for sure winner. Lol, we'll see...

You know the difference between Ron Paul being on top vs Cain/Newt/Mitt/Perry? It's irreversible. That's the difference between a Paul supporter and a just a Republicans voter, once you go Paul you’re in for the long haul.


Now take into context Paul got 89 seconds to talk in the last debate.... How things would be if he were even given something close to a fair chance in the media and I doubt the other candidates would stand a chance at all.

The thing I disagree with Mr. Paul on is his view of the military. I think he'd be happy to neuter us in that department. I don't think that's good.

Paul actually served in the military, during war time I believe.

Paul does not want to neuter the, military, our military is very weak atm because we are spread out so thin fighting to many fake wars all over the world. What would happen if a real war broke out? We run a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit every year. America would be fucked as we are unprepared. We wouldn’t have the troops to deal with a “real war” currently because our troops are tired after 10 years, our troops are spread out and the money has been wasted.

How anyone can’t see this is flat out amazing.

If a "real war" happened the first thing the US would cut is that "war on terror." Think about that.

I don't need to think about it. I'm all for bringing the troops home. We have no business spread out all over the world. but,, the second half of the equation is he has absolutely no problem with Iran getting the nukes.. which will guarantee ww 3 in my opinion. He's a dove in a time when we need a hawk.

 

[J.E.D]

This poll does not agree with you.

This poll does:

RCP Average 8/17 - 10/29 -- Obama 47.6 Paul 41.6

RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates

Look at the list. The only GOP candidate who comes close is Romney. Obama still beats him by 1.2 points (though that is a statistical tie). Granted, these polls don't mean much this far out from the election. But there you go.

That poll is too far out... Even this poll is far out but at least it is relevant. The worst candidate for ANY politician to have polling alongside them (when in the top positions) is Paul. Once Paul is viewed as viable by the voters (not the media) it's over for everyone else. This might happen, however something tells me if another poll shows Paul in second we will see a wave sent out to destroy Paul, I smell the racist issue being brought back to life lol. None of it will be based on policy because that would attract more voters to Paul.

How is the poll that I posted not relevant, but yours is? You say Paul is electable, but your poll is comparing GOP candidates to each other. Maybe he wins the nomination, but that doesn't automatically guarantee he beats Obama. As the poll that I posted clearly shows, Obama easily beats Paul. Like I said, it's too soon to rely on any poll; but if we're going to compare polls here, the RCP "Obama vs. GOP candidates" average is far more relevant to the 2012 presidential election than a GOP primary poll.

 

[konradv]

ron paul will never be president.

This poll does not agree with you.

OK, OK, he's in the running for President of Iowa.

 

[Mad Scientist]

ron paul will never be president.

My TV told me so!

 

[Avorysuds]

The thing I disagree with Mr. Paul on is his view of the military. I think he'd be happy to neuter us in that department. I don't think that's good.

Paul actually served in the military, during war time I believe.

Paul does not want to neuter the, military, our military is very weak atm because we are spread out so thin fighting to many fake wars all over the world. What would happen if a real war broke out? We run a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit every year. America would be fucked as we are unprepared. We wouldn’t have the troops to deal with a “real war” currently because our troops are tired after 10 years, our troops are spread out and the money has been wasted.

How anyone can’t see this is flat out amazing.

If a "real war" happened the first thing the US would cut is that "war on terror." Think about that.

I don't need to think about it. I'm all for bringing the troops home. We have no business spread out all over the world. but,, the second half of the equation is he has absolutely no problem with Iran getting the nukes.. which will guarantee ww 3 in my opinion. He's a dove in a time when we need a hawk.

The issue is Iran will be dealt with by the countries in the area. If anything why would the US make an enemy of Iran when they are getting nukes?

What is weird is you agree we need the troops home yet Paul is the only one willing to do that, Democrat or Republican. So you do agree with him. The only issue you said you don't agree is on Iran....

Listen, Iran will get nukes with or without the US telling them if they are allowed. The only way to stop them is more war and that is all anyone else offers, more war. China, Israel, Russia and so on will take care of Iran, or do you really think they are all ok with Iran nuking people in the immediate area?

The US needs to play no role with Iran to fix the problem, actually if we do get in the way all the other countries will back off and let the US spend the money it has to borrow from China to make it happen... Or you know, we could just let China spend their own money and deal with the issue.

What will the US do to stop Iran? Give us how much money you think will need to be spent and troops used and possibly killed. Give us an idea of how many innocent civilians in Iran can die so we can accomplish the goal of not allowing Iran to get a nuke.

 

[Avorysuds]

This poll does:



Look at the list. The only GOP candidate who comes close is Romney. Obama still beats him by 1.2 points (though that is a statistical tie). Granted, these polls don't mean much this far out from the election. But there you go.

That poll is too far out... Even this poll is far out but at least it is relevant. The worst candidate for ANY politician to have polling alongside them (when in the top positions) is Paul. Once Paul is viewed as viable by the voters (not the media) it's over for everyone else. This might happen, however something tells me if another poll shows Paul in second we will see a wave sent out to destroy Paul, I smell the racist issue being brought back to life lol. None of it will be based on policy because that would attract more voters to Paul.

How is the poll that I posted not relevant, but yours is? You say Paul is electable, but your poll is comparing GOP candidates to each other. Maybe he wins the nomination, but that doesn't automatically guarantee he beats Obama. As the poll that I posted clearly shows, Obama easily beats Paul. Like I said, it's too soon to rely on any poll; but if we're going to compare polls here, the RCP "Obama vs. GOP candidates" average is far more relevant to the 2012 presidential election than a GOP primary poll.

Can we stop the stupidity now, please?

Obama 39%, Paul 38%

Obama 39%, Paul 38% - Rasmussen Reports™


For the record I clearly said "Even this poll is far out but at least it is relevant"

 

[konradv]

What is weird is you agree we need the troops home yet Paul is the only one willing to do that, Democrat or Republican.

Pardon me, but doesn't Obama have a timetable for getting the troops home? He gets no credit?