Posted on 01/13/2012 11:40:02 AM PST by traviskicks
Mitt Romney leads the South Carolina Republican presidential primary with 29%. Newt Gingrich is in second place with 25% and Ron Paul is in third place with 20%.
Paul has gained the most and Rick Santorum has lost the most since the last American Research Group survey on January 4-5. In that survey, Paul was at 9% and Santorum was at 24%.
Gingrich and Romney are tied among self-identified Republicans with 29% each, followed by Paul with 18%. Paul leads among independents and Democrats with 29%, followed by Romney with 27%, Gingrich with 12%, and Rick Perry with 11%.
Gingrich leads among those likely primary voters saying they are supporters of the Tea Party with 28%, followed by Romney with 24%, Paul with 20%, and Santorum with 11%. Romney leads with 33% among those saying they are not supporters of the Tea Party or are undecided about the Tea Party, followed by Gingrich with 23%, and Paul with 21%.
Gingrich leads among evangelical Christians with 40%, followed by Perry with 15%, Romney with 13%, Santorum with 12%, and Paul with 10%. Among likely voters saying they are not evangelical Christians, Romney leads with 48% and followed by Paul with 33%.
Gingrich leads among men with 29%, followed by Paul with 23%, Romney at 18%, and Santorum with 14%. Among women, Romney leads with 38%, followed Gingrich with 22%, and Paul with 18%.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanresearchgroup.com ...
Paul is good at drawing out his devout followers...but he is no good at converts.
Yes he is going to have to show he can break his ceiling of 20%ish, very true
Well, it’s not so much about anti-government (they care less about that- these are the same folks who voted for Obama) but his isolationist and peacenik policies.
Maybe if you spent your time actually supporting a candidate, you wouldn’t have this problem.
Let me rephrase: It can’t hurt worse than Obama.
I confess I was being a bit tongue in cheek with my comment. I see Paul as the Republican equivalent of Obama in some ways. Obviously he has more track record and experience, but that track record is exactly why he can’t win. I do agree on legalizing drugs, even though I have not touched the stuff (and then only marijuana) since 1977. And I’d love to see it taxed like alcohol. Mind you, I’m talking about thins that can be grown easily in the US.
I’m in Kentucky now. Did you know that we were the main supplier of hemp to the military during WWII? But it’s illegal because hemp is a cousin of Marijuana and has the same heat signature under infrared sighting, which would make it difficult for the DEA choppers around here to spot “real” marijuana from the air. But they are trying to make it legal here because it would be a great cash crop replacing Tobacco.
Meanwhile they are trying to force people to get a prescription to get Pseudophed because of the meth lab problem. I really hate it when the acts of a few cause the government to hinder the day-to-day activities of the rest of us.
But I digress. No, I am not really a fan of Paul, though he does have the unique opportunity to at least cause some people to think about what they believe about government and why they believe it.
I think we’re headed for a world of hurt no matter who becomes our president in 2012, so I watch the election in the same spirit many will be watching the superbowl. I bought my farm in Kentucky two weeks before Obama was elected and moved here in August from my four decade home of Seattle. A major part of my reasoning was caused by my being what is now called a “prepper”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.