You might want to re-read what I wrote. I definitely used the word "if". You might have heard of the word before.
And, to your comment about polling, it does not describe me for a well-defined poll with a limited number of outcomes. That describes most candidate preference polls.
Rasmussen, though, has adjusted his polls in the past. In the past, he has adjusted the way he re-evaluated party affinity.
Which raises a unique -- and better -- question in Iowa. How is he weighting these polls relative to liberal, moderate, and conservative republican caucus goers?
If he's not doing it at all in a state that clearly has a far higher percentage of Christian conservative voters, then his poll is politically naive.
It would be the same as sampling 800 democrats versus 200 republicans in a 1000 sample national poll.
In fact, that might just explain why Iowa polling is all over the map.
I'm not surprised the polls are up and down. Everyone wants obama out!
IA is not a strong conservative state. IA is more of a swing state, so the "moderates/independents" have a big voice. Gingrich is great to listen to if you're tuned in to politics and know the players. However, he can appear to be "too strident" to the person who is not tuned in. They seem to want the "uniter" type.
FWIW, I think Newt overcomes this negative if he gets the nomination. I think the country will want real leadership after looking at 4 failed years of "leading from the rear" by obama.