The problem with the poll is that it’s just not likely to be true, though. We have a benchmark for evaluating this poll: 2008 Iowa caucus entrance polls. The partisan alignment is all wrong: In 2008 the caucuses, being closed of course, included 86% self-identified Republicans, 13% self-identified Independents who presumably registered Republican to caucus, 1% Democrats, 1% “Other.” PPP’s poll drops the Republican proportion to 75%, raises Independents to 19%, and raises Democrats to 5%. Guess who’s helped by both of those shifts, which are far outside the Margin of Error and so predict genuine, large shifts in the partisan makeup of the closed Iowa caucuses. That’s right: Ron Paul, who wins 40% of Democrats, 34% of Independents, but only 19% of Republicans according to the poll.
There are three broad possibilities: The 2008 entrance polls are wrong. The 2012 Republican caucuses will find huge new turnout from independent voters showing up and registering Republican. The PPP poll has systemic issues and is not meaningful.
Other suspicious bits: Do we really believe that 36% of “Very liberal” Iowa caucusers went for Mike Huckabee and not Rudy Giuliani or John McCain? Do we believe the Republican Party’s makeup has shifted so that John McCain would have tied for second in Iowa in 2008? That’s what PPP says: Huckabee 26%, Romney and McCain 19%. Remember that the actual result was Huckabee 34, Romney 25, Fred Thompson 13, McCain 13.
There is no doubt that Paul was picking up some momentum in this race, but the PPP poll seems way too problematic for any conclusions about its current state.
Might want to wait for other polls before getting more excited. Of course that won't stop the media - whose analysis won't go beyond the headlines.
My guess. I suspect Newt's support has softened a bit. A multimillion dollar negative ad barrage waged simultaneously by 3 separate campaigns is taken a toll. It's a shame that stuff like that works.
I don't see Paul winning Iowa, unless that state has gone completely insane. Paul us serving a purpose for the establishment. He's aiding the effort to prevent the Not Romney coalescing. Once Paul has served his purpose in Iowa, the long knives will come out for him (re. Ron Paul Newsletter, (9/11 truther, etc.)
That turd wont drop out, and the turds supporting him will keep doing so. Damn few of them will vote Republican in Nov.
597 is not a valid sample..
Nothing surprises me anymore, but I’m not believing this. Ron Paul is not going to win Iowa.
My guess. I suspect Newt’s support has softened a bit. A multimillion dollar negative ad barrage waged simultaneously by 3 separate campaigns is taken a toll. It’s a shame that stuff like that works.
IF it results in Bachmann winning then I say it was worth every dime. If it results in Paul winning then it failed.
Polls like this seek to torpedo Newt but will only make a Gingrich win more empowering to his future primaries.
Polls like this seek to torpedo Newt but will only make a Gingrich win more empowering to his future primaries.
Well, according to Fred Barnes’ logic, who in 2008 said that coming in 4th in Iowa was good for McCain, this should be good for Gingrich.
Barnes, of course was pushing McCain and would say anything to help him (Fred Thompson, who came in 3rd, was given nary a mention).
you can’t accurately predict the results of a caucus with a poll.
first of all, a caucus is as stupid way to choose your presidential candidate. a caucus is a mob. and apparently, iowa is a stupid place to go first. if deranged individuals like dr. nutz resonate in iowa, then iowa should be sent to the middle of the pack, where they can’t do any damage.
He's also providing the mechanism to keep the small-governemnt TP people in line with the establishment candidates, leaving a Hobson's choice to anyone wanting genuine constitutional restoration.
If Paul’s support is really this deep, then we’re seeing clear evidence the Republican Party has resigned itself to its own disintegration. How anyone could support a nutcase whose foreign policy stances place himself to the left of even Obama is beyond me.
Further, I find hard to believe Iowa has so eschewed its addiction to federal ethanol subsidies that it’d fall in for the likes of Ron Paul.
Paul winning helps one person...Romney.
Repubs, even Tea Party conservatives, will be so horrified with the thought of this loon winning the nomination, that they will coalesce around Romney, while holding their noses.
Actually, he might -- a hard core of supporters who will turn out no matter what is a big advantage in a caucus.
The root cause is that other Republicans just won't get serious about rolling back Big Government, thus opening a niche for Paul despite his foreign-policy baggage.
No it isn't. As long as the facts are accurate, it's GREAT that "stuff like that works."
Believe Pretty Piss-poor Polling at your own risk.
If Ron Paul wins Iowa, all I can say is there are a lot of venal and/or stupid GOPers in Iowa. Of course his crazed minions will do everything they can to stack the deck. Meanwhile Bachmann is the only one in the field who has had the balls to really go after him. Good on her.
Let’s hope this spells the end of Newts Candidacy.
His comments on the courts over the weekend has really hurt him.
There is still time for a REAL conservative to take the lead. Time is running out but there are two still in the fight that can rise to the occasion.
Let’s say Ron Paul wins Iowa. Mitt Romney wins NH. Newt wins SC and Fla. Who is in the lead? Newt. Next up Nevada where Newt has been polling well. I still like Newt to win this thing. But unfortunately, negative ads rather than substance are winning out in Iowa and if that carries from state to state - then I really give up. If this poll is accurate, Iowans either don’t care enough to pay attention or like to be told who to vote for and are too lazy to think for themselves. RON PAUL LEFT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND SHOULD BE RUNNING AS THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY NOMINEE AND WOULD WAIT FOR IRAN TO GET A NUKE UNDER THE NAIVE NOTION THAT IT’S SIMPLY NOT OUR BUSINESS, YET HE’S LEADING THE POLL. YOU MUST BE KIDDING.
Good catch by Morrissey on the details. There was another a month or so ago where roughly 30% of “likely” voters said they would even caucus.
According to this, the poll is obviously flawed. It's no secret that the goal is to demoralize conservatives/Gingrich supporters. One has to wonder why the tweaking of the parties. My guess would be that according to the actual caucus numbers, Gingrich is leading, Paul is second and Romney is 3rd. The pollsters decided to play with the numbers to make Paul 1st, Romney 2nd and Newt 3rd in order to demoralize conservatives into panicking and voting for Romney with the assumption that Gingrich can't win, come election day. Just a theory.