[rbg81]

Unfortunately, I think that’s true. I just can’t picture Gingrich winning (against anybody), but I can see Paul pulling an upset over Obama. Paul may be weird, but he’s probably genuine. You can debate whether that’s a good or bad thing, but a lot of people respect it.

[Pravious]

“Paul may be weird, but he’s probably genuine.”

You don’t get points for being a genuine lunatic.

[Bokababe]

Paul may be weird, but he’s probably genuine. You can debate whether that’s a good or bad thing, but a lot of people respect it.

And that's where it gets interesting. In another poll, 24% believe Ron Paul is the Most Principled of the Candidates, compared to Gingrich's 11%. And yet they still prefer Gingrich in greater numbers.

[Iggles Phan]

“Gingrich leads, but Paul most likely to beat Obama in latest Iowa poll”

I think it should read:

Paul is the ONLY candidate who can beat Obama.

Why?

Romney, Gingrich, et al, are all globalists, big government folks, have no spending reduction plan, and pander to the crowd on the issue-du-jeur. They are for NAFTA open borders, they love Nato, EU, Seato, and any other entangling alliance that weakens America and rips us off.

With those credentials, why not vote for Obama? (about 95% the same platform)

If you want four more years of Obama, then select Romney or Gringrich as your Republican candidate.

[stevio]

I will vote for Paul over Gingrich.

[John D]

Paul may be weird, but he’s probably genuine.

Genuine? Like when he says he is against earmarks, but puts as many as he can in as many bills as possible? He isn't called the earmark king for nothing.
Or when he says he is against abortion, but demands that an under age girl be allowed to cross state lines in order to get an abortion that is illegal in the state she lives?