TV is reality.
I’d like to see a poll that compared TV watching with support for a candidate.
Likely so. 10% of college graduates think Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court.
If this is all about name recognition, Jeb would be polling in the top three.
Isn't it great that we don't have to into the fever swamps anymore, to find out what the libs are thinking?
You can get it brought to you, here on FR.
Tuesday night is just a few hours away..
Higher negative numbers than Hillary?
We might have the answer in less than 2 days.
Trump has to win NH. If he can't win a Liberal state like NH, he is done.
Grasping at straws redux
Should be:
Prediction Postulated
I don’t think I’ve ever seen so much denial of concrete reality on the part of any Freeper. I can only hope you come out of this with your head on straight, and a clear eye toward the future.
You’re about to land hard. Real hard.
Nonsense. The RCP average had Trump and Cruz in a statistical tie before the Iowa caucus.
The polls were accurate.
The late deciders broke for Cruz and Rubio because Trump did not attend the debate.
This may be true, but there has only be one vote so far, and Cruz, who has been campaigning in Iowa since early 2013 (a few months after he was Senator), won. One would think Cruz would have done better in Iowa.
"...Most of those who didn't stay for the entire speech appeared to be college students. Some told DailyMail.com that they were not Trump supporters and were assigned to attend the rally by a political science professor.
Trump's presentation was largely the recycled stuff of stump speeches. By the 45-minute mark, some of the younger crowd began streaming out.
Fifteen minutes later, large empty spaces were visible where rally-goers had stood cheek-to-jowl.
'We figured, "We've been here as long as our class would last, so - you know, we're outta here",' said a student named Tyler who sported a Plymouth hoodie. 'I wouldn't listen to a professor for more than 45 minutes, right?'.....
We’ll find out Tuesday
>> The term “low-information voter” may be too harsh, but I suspect that many Trump supporters feel the increased problems weighing them down but they can’t exactly identify the cause nor the origin of their problems.
Behold the complimentary psychoanalysis that explains our misguided support for Trump.
Hmmmm....you would think in that case, Huckabee and Santorum would have had a better showing than they did, seeing as they were the winners in 2008 and 2012.
Big difference between a fan and a person who is committed enough to get out and vote on primary day. We’ll get a good idea Tuesday and will know the extent of the effect after South Carolina.
Name recognition is why candidates spend a fortune in print ads and yard signs. Every candidate lives and breathes name recognition, IMO.
Huckabee had a successful TV show, everyone knows the Bush name .....name recognition isn’t working for them.
So many haters are acting like Trump came in last in Iowa. Why do they continually think they can brainwash us into believing their fabricated story lines?
Except they never say this about Cankles. We’ll see after tomorrow.
However, they can’t explain why Cruz’s poll numbers have stagnated since Carsongate.
I’d agree, except that Trump’s Republican poll numbers were TERRIBLE before he announced and just when he announced...why weren’t his numbers ‘inflated’ then, everyone already knew who he was BEFORE he ran.
And then he mentioned the wall and they started going up, and up, and up...
So New Hampshire will be the REAL TEST. If Trump makes it to 35%, then his numbers CLEARLY are real. If 30-35, then maybe, if lower, then maybe some merit here.
Iowa didn’t mean jack, given how they vote versus how they poll. Until pollsters start including the ‘evangelical factor’ in polling, which basically means adjusting the candidate’s apparent level of support either up or down up to 5 points, depending on their ‘religious creds’, they will never get it right. Had they done this the past 3 rounds, they would have predicted the winner.