The latest Rasmussen poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers has Newt Gingrich in first at 32 percent. He’s followed by Mitt Romney (19 percent) and Herman Cain (13 percent). Ron Paul is in fourth at 10 percent, trailed by Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, both at 6 percent.
Newt Gingrich. Out of office since the 90s.
Cain - no experience aside from a failed Senate run and has apparently never read a briefing notebook.
Bachmann - House member with no leadership post.
Now it's Newt's turn. What a strange year it's been. This will be an interesting next few months.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThese polls can't even keep up with the news cycle anymore. Things are happening so fast in the Republican primary race right now, any poll that was in the field more than two days ago is no longer reliable.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn a moment of disgust with President Obama, I can see myself supporting Romney. Or at least not voting for the office. But if it's Gingrich, I will go out of my way to vote for BHO. There's something about Gingrich I just can't stomach.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFaint praise for Romney, very faint.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBut Obama would be okay? Sad Dude.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFear,
A "moment" of disgust? I haven't had a moment 'withOUT' disgust for Obama.
And the only thing that matters in the Republican primaries is that someone comes out of them who will win in November 2012. Kicking Obama and his henchmen out of Washington is it - nothing else matters, for now.
So the two questions which seem relevant to me are:
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse1) Who is the best bet to beat Obama?
2) Why do the libs seem so anxious to have Romney be the nominee?
"I will go out of my way to vote for BHO AGAIN"
Fixed that for you.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wonder how much inside washington punditry is removed from the country? Gingrich killing it in Iowa? The Republican voters were willing to give Cain a pass if he didnt botch up everything since.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe good news--if Iowa caucus-goers actually go on to pick this pompous, ethically challenged, and disgraced former speaker--is that Iowa will seal its reputation as the most irrelevant and absurd GOP primary battleground in the nation. And maybe, just maybe, future GOP candidates will ignore the state altogether.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHmmm ...
Two polls, one by a local paper, the other by Rasmussen.
Presumably, the same subset of our population was polled.
And, two completely divergent results.
For my money, I'd rely on Rasmussen way more than a local jobby.
But, again, the Iowa Caucuses matter about as much as the Vermont Primary.
Basically, these caucuses are all corn and no oil.
The primary process starts in SC. Get over it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'd say most years, the primary ends in South Carolina.
If SC picks either the Iowa or NH winner as they usually do, it's over.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSince 1980, the year SC moved up its primary, no person has failed to win that primary and then gone onto win the nomination (Republican - I have no idea if that's true for Dems also).
However, I think (but am not positive without doing some research), that since 1980, the SC winner was also a person who won either the IA or NH primaries.
This could be the year when three different people win those three different primaries. I think in that instance, the we would see the primaries actual begin after the SC primary.
I guess it's debatable if that's a good thing, or a bad thing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI could see 3 different winners, but I don't see SC being the "decider" if that's the case.
A possible scenario where Perry decides Iowa is a lost cause and puts all his marbles in South Carolina, a candidate like Newt or Cain then winning IA, Romney then winning New Hampshire by 20 points, with enough momentum to garner at least a strong 2nd in South Carolina could happen.
Unless Perry gets a sudden new boomlet of support (he's fumbled about 12 times too many, and his fundraising has completely dried up), I don't see any other candidate having the stature or resources to battle a national primary over several states, especially since Romney can easily write himself a $20 million dollar check at the blink of an eye.
The advantage is overwhelmingly Romney if it goes into Super Tuesday.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA split field definitely favors Romney.
Why?
The early states' delegates are divided proportionally and those states are more conservative.
More of the moderate and liberal states are later in the cycle when the delegates are delivered winner-take-all. Romney's fundraising ability helps him, but this is a factor too.
It makes it all the stranger to watch those who think that Romney is too liberal for the nomination (not me necessarily). They are shooting themselves in the foot by keeping all of these unelectable candidates alive (i.e. Cain, Bachmann).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDidn't realize Iowans were such fans of Fannie/Freddie, the subprime crisis, unabashed lobbying, and amnesty for illegal aliens!
Can't wait for conservative media to start reporting anything about Gingrich's history and actual stances, which are absolutely abysmal for any conservative. (Good work on your reporting on Gingrich's dubious claims to being a conservative the other day, Katrina!)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBased on the cycle so far, and the impact of the debates on polling, there is an eternity left.
There are four debates until the Iowa Caucus
Two before New Hampshire
Another two before South Carolina
Another two before Florida
Another three before Super Tuesday
I can't imagine that Newt stays high for long.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne of the tactically smart things Newt's done in the debates is to compliment the other candidates. Repeatedly. Nobody's taken a shot at him because he's been too low in the polls to bother with. Will they start whacking him now, and how will he respond? If Newt actually wins something, or gets close, then maybe Romney will have to come out of hiding. I don't know if this will get us better government, but it would be better theater.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo one needs to thank Newt for the cordial atmosphere on the debate stage than Romney. It's been hands off Romney for a while.
Remember Perry's first debates? It was 6 vs. 1. After he was chopped down, now they want to play nice with one another?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAbsolutely fascinating, unbelievable, earth-shattering news that is completely contradicted by the Iowa State poll which shows Gingrich at 4.8 percent and Cain at 24.5 with most of the others in between. That poll can be found by scrolling down about three or four items right here on The Corner.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhich means -- NONE OF THESE HORSE RACE POLLS MEAN ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Polls are not news, no matter how many times FOX heralds the latest one as breaking news. Horse race polls are snapshots of moving events and nothing moves faster or is more volatile than a political campaign, particularly this far ahead of any vote. Polls, carefully taken and carefully read, can be useful in telling you what people think about certain issues or conditions and about how best to craft your message, but as electoral indicators they are virtually worthless more than three days ahead of the time voters actually go to the polls.
National polls mean less than nothing when it comes to what people in Iowa will do, and any poll taken in Iowa can only reflect the opinion held at that moment by the 25-percent or so of voters who actually claim to support a candidate. About three-quarters of all people surveyed continue to say they haven't made up their minds at all, and historically most Iowa voters do not decide who they will support until less than a week before the caucuses. Nor do these polls reflect the state of a candidate's organization or his intensity of support among sub-groups, both of which are more indicative of outcome in Iowa than any polls taken now. More importantly, these horse race polls tell you nothing about any candidates' level of experience, philosophical consistency, track record or potential general election strength; they are simply markers about which candidate at the moment is getting the most press coverage -- good or bad -- because the vast majority of people are still not paying much attention at all. That is because they have actual lives and more important things to think about than an election that doesn't begin until after New Year's.
Tea leaves and chicken bones belong in the garbage, not at the top of the news. Instead of trying to read the future, maybe it would be a good idea to concentrate on little things like Iranian nukes, runaway deficits, national credit ratings, the future of health care and all those other items that are too boring for television to cover.
I hope the Republicans of Iowa are preparing their letters of apology to Bill Clinton. It seems that he was right, after all: It was only about sex.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse