Skip to comments.New poll finds Romney and Paul in neck-and-neck battle for Iowa (Gingrich 5th pace)
Posted on 12/30/2011 4:41:59 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are battling for the top spot in Iowa but the second tier of candidates is closing in, according to a NBC News-Marist poll released on Friday.
Romney leads the poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers at 23 percent, followed by Paul at 21 percent.
However, the second tier of candidates, led by Rick Santorum and Rick Perry, are suddenly within striking distance of the frontrunners.
Santorum came in third at 15 percent, followed by Perry at 14 percent.
Newt Gingrich has fallen to fifth place at 13 percent. The former House speaker led the same poll earlier this month at 28 percent, but has been battered by his rivals over his divorces and ties to Freddie Mac.
Michele Bachmann is at six percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Perry and Santorum may have a chance. We conservatives need to decide which one now.
When the Ralien (aka, Ron Paul, who has been the victim of at LEAST two Alien Abductions, in my book) has enough nutcases planted in the Iowa Caucus to get his goofiness to let him contend in the "race".
Nationwide, to get a REAL Candidate of the People's choice, ALL States should have their Primaries on the same date, period. Eliminate this B.S. of the State-Run-Media and Establishment spoon-feeding us the "choice" of their hand-picked minions. Let all Primaries be "Open Primaries", and let's get REAL quality Candidates out there and available to the Public.
... and COMPLETELY eliminate letting our enemies vote in our primaries and decide our candidate. THAT’S JUST INSANE.
I sympathize with your point of view, but this kind of primary would do nothing to change the problem. If non-Romney millionaire types dominate now, how will they dominate when smaller-money candidates have to run a fifty-state primary campaign all at once?
Hang in there, Rick.
(Perry, of course)
I sympathize with your point of view, but this kind of primary would do nothing to change the problem. If non-Romney non-millionaire types are struggling now, how will they fare when they have to run a fifty-state primary campaign all at once?
Sorry for the double-post, second one is the corrected one.
I laughed at the Ralien line. Lordy, he is a weirdo.
Gov. Perry (as a former Tx AG Commissioner, 10th Amendment advocate and a farmer) told the farmers NO subsidies for ethanol, or oil or gas, or wind. CUT regulations and let the market place decide If states want to invest, fine, but keep the feds out of it.
Newt Gingrich supports federal ethanol subsidies.
SO HERE ARE the grades given the candidates:
Iowa Farmer Today Decision time draws near - December 29, 2011:
....."The Iowa Corn Growers Association sent questionnaires to the Republicans involved in this years caucuses, then issued grades on how it judged those candidates as part of its Iowa Corn Caucus.
...........We call that our town-hall conference call, explains Mark Jackson, ISA president-elect. We want to give people the opportunity to hear the candidates talk about agricultural issues.
The first of those calls came in early December with former Georgia congressman Newt Gingrich. More than 3,000 people listened in.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry was the subject of another call.
The report cards issued by the corn growers spotlighted the differences between some of the candidates.
For example, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, earned a D from the group, and U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., earned a D+ while Gingrich earned an A and Rick Santorum earned an A-.
President Barack Obama earned a B as did former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Perry earned a C-. Herman Cain, who has since dropped out of the race, earned a D.
Oh, by the way, ethanol subsidies are dead. Details here and here: the short version is that the Senate back in June kicked off opposition to continued ethanol subsidies via a bipartisan amendment: it didnt pass, but Congress has just let both the ethanol subsidy and a restrictive foreign tariff (on Brazilian sugar-cane ethanol) lapse. Given that the Iowa caucuses will be finished by the time Congress reconvenes and given that the House of Representatives is currently chock-heavy with people who spit at the very phrase ethanol subsidy getting back either is going to be a problem for the domestic ethanol industry. Mind you, there are still mandates for using ethanol in place, but note again the ending of the tariff; Im not a businessman, but effectively lowering the price of Brazilian ethanol by 54 cents/gallon while simultaneously effectively raising the price of domestic ethanol by 45 cents/gallon sounds to me like it would at least raise some intriguing alternatives.
Iowa’s moronic conservatives have tossed this to Romney and Paul out of some myopic quest to find the most boring but ideologically pure guy.
Its not the rest of our jobs to take the crap sandwich from them.
Rick Santorum talks of taking on Democratic consultants Paul Begala and James Carville in his first Senate race 17 years ago. (Santorum lost bid for 3rd Senate term by largest margin in PA GOP history)
Rick Perry took on Obama consultant David Axerod (winning against a popular Texas democrat, John Sharp, A&M classmate and friend) 22 years ago becoming the first Republican Lt. Gov. since Reconstruction (Rick Perry is in his 3rd term as Governor by popular demand).
Romney...the clown that has won a total of ONE ELECTION over the course of his life...by 5% over the weakest Dem candidate Assachusetts has ever seen.
Any vote for Newt is a vote fir mitt.
Finally, we have conservative alternative to the two rinos.
It is Santorum or Romney.
ROMNEY (64) lawyer Bain Capital Massachusetts Governor [2003-07] 4 years public office, plus additional 6+ years running; 1994 U.S. Senator [MA] bid lost; U.S. Presidential bids [2008, 2012]; author
SANTORUM (53) lawyer [Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC. D.C. and Pittsburgh offices since 07] Fox News Contributor - 16 years public office, U.S. House of Representatives, Pennsylvania [1991-95] - U. S. Senator [1995-07] lost bid for 3rd term by largest margin in PA GOP history]; author
BACHMANN (55) lawyer Minnesota State Senate [2003-07]; U.S. House of Representatives [MN] [2007- _____] 8 years public office ; political activist; foster parent; 2011 autobiography
GINGRICH (68) U.S. House of Representatives [GA] - 20 years [Speaker 1995-99] Resigned from U.S. House of Rep after win - Fox News Contributor adviser - speaker author
PAUL (76) - U.S. House of Representatives [TX] - 20 years + 6-8 odd years running - Libertarian presidential bid  GOP presidential bids [2008-2012] -- U.S. Air Force flight surgeon [1963-65/Natl G. 1965-68] OBGYN; author
PERRY (61) - Texas Governor [2000 - ______] 26 years public office: TX Lt. Gov [1999-00]; TX Agriculture Commissioner [1991-99]; TX House of Rep [1985-91] ; Cotton Farmer [8 years]; Captain, U.S. Air Force pilot [1972- 77]; author
That will guarantee the rich candidates to win since they have the resources to campaign in all 57 states.
Let all Primaries be "Open Primaries", and let's get REAL quality Candidates out there and available to the Public.
For this, primaries for all parties need to be the same day as well. It means a voter can vote candidates of both parties in the same day. Or just one?
Want a REAL indicator...wait for South Carolina. The media loves Iowa because they can propel false positives and makes it easier for them to pick our candidates for us.
Simple; eliminate "bundled" Campaign Contributions, and ALL campaign contributions are limited to $2300, per individual, per PAC, per Union, etc.
Take the millions that are collected via bundlers, lobbyists, etc., and limit EACH 501 to a contribution equal to what an individual is limited to. ONLY single $2300 maximum contributions can be made, period.
Then, we have a Primary Election Day, nationwide, where all States select their candidates. Likewise, voter Registration for Party Identification purposes, is for a 2-year mandatory period. No Party switching to vote in opposing Party Primaries.
This will reduce Elitist Candidates, and force expenditures to be focused on each State's interest on local media.
I have a feeling the gloves will come off in the next debate... look for fireworks from Newt.
I know I'd hate to face him in the next debate.
People are hungry for a fighter and sick of mealy mouthed contenders that are too frightened to take the fight to the enemy. If Newt fires both barrels in the next debate the people will jump from their seats and cheer!
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.