New PPP Iowa Poll coming Tom. + Interesting Tweets

[trey4sports]

http://i42.tinypic.com/651g6d.gif

[RDM]

If past experience with these tweets have a telling story, it appears possible Paul slipped back to second behind Romney. Of course you have to factor possible margin of error.

[opinionatedfool]

If past experience with these tweets have a telling story, it appears possible Paul slipped back to second behind Romney. Of course you have to factor possible margin of error.

Be optimistic! He's still in first! lol

[TheDrakeMan]

If past experience with these tweets have a telling story, it appears possible Paul slipped back to second behind Romney. Of course you have to factor possible margin of error.

What makes you say that?

[Student Of Paulism]

Eh...well you gotta look at it like this. Romney hasnt been IA much, and look where his support is. For someone who hasn't campaigned much there, he sure has a ton of support. And now that he is there for the last 3 weeks, he has been gaining ground a bit. It's like the GOP sent out their emergency memo to him, stating 'Shit, Ron is in 1st place there, Mitt, please take evasive action and get 1st place back, plsthxbye'. It really sucks that he barely has to do a damn thing to get support in a state where he hasnt been campaigning much, whereas Ron has spent 3/4s or more of his time in IA. That said, you would think Ron would be at 40% (where Romney is in NH, since that is where has spent most of his time). I mean, hell, look at Hunstman. Even he has 13% in NH, and though we all know he isnt going anywhere, he sure has a good chunk of support for dedicating his whole campaign to NH.

Fact is, Romney is so high in IA, for the most basic (and most retarded) reason: He's Mitt Romney :rolleyes:

[tsai3904]

What makes you say that?

When they are vague about the results, they usually list the names of the candidates in the order they are in the poll.

[Maximus]

When they are vague about the results, they usually list the names of the candidates in the order they are in the poll.

The last PPP poll didn't work out that way though... As long as we are right there, I'm not worried about it

[TheDrakeMan]

When they are vague about the results, they usually list the names of the candidates in the order they are in the poll.

That wasn't the case last time. Before the last poll was released, they said "Romney and Paul" yet Paul ended up being in first place.

[White Bear Lake]

That wasn't the case last time. Before the last poll was released, they said "Romney and Paul" yet Paul ended up being in first place.

Yea put PPP tweets their clues before they even finish polling. Their last results were based on three days of polling. PPP tweeted their clues on the second night so it is entirely possible Romney was ahead then but Paul surged on their third day of polling when they released the results.

The results PPP will release tomorrow night are based on a two day cycle of polling (today and tomorrow). Romney could be ahead after today's polling but they have all of tomorrow to poll before they release their data.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

When they are vague about the results, they usually list the names of the candidates in the order they are in the poll.

That's flawed.

Ron Paul will be in first.

[mosquitobite]

Fact is, Romney is so high in IA, for the most basic (and most retarded) reason: He's Mitt Romney :rolleyes:

Romney is high because the media tells us he's #1 and he has the best chance against Obama :rolleyes: (yes, that's my sarcasm voice)

[LeJimster]

I still believe if we are polling equal to Romney right now, we are ahead when it comes to real voting. Because our supporters are more dedicated and will turn up no matter what. There has been a concerted effort to practice stump speeches and this will help woo undecideds on caucus night. You only have to look at the politico poll to see Romneys support is weak, with only 10% of his voters fully committed to him.

I will be seriously surprised if come Caucus night Romney is within 5 points of Paul.

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but the hard work and effort put in by the campaign and grass roots has to pay off big time.

[Carole]

Romney's in Iowa tomorrow and making a "big" speech.

So he is popping in near the end to make a push to win. After being AWOL for so long, he now wants to assert his "power" and try to win it at the last minute.

I am beginning to think all the remaining polls are a setup for ensuring a Romney win.

[Forty Twice]

I believe Paul will win a landslide in Iowa. Then when Diebold manipulation kicks in, he won't do so well in the next few primary states. Between Iowa and the
Diebold-managed elections, the MSM has to bring severe dirt out on Paul to make the public believe Paul truly lost popularity.

And that's why the Establishment won't let Iowa ever be first again.

[Endthefednow]

I truly hope Ron Paul wins Iowa by a landslide

[PhineasFinn]

Outkast - Liberation

[Brett85]

Yea put PPP tweets their clues before they even finish polling. Their last results were based on three days of polling. PPP tweeted their clues on the second night so it is entirely possible Romney was ahead then but Paul surged on their third day of polling when they released the results.

I don't think so. Ron ended up with a 3% lead in that poll. The poll was conducted over a three day period, so if Ron was actually trailing Romney going into the 3rd day or even tied with him, he would've had to beat Romney by at least 9% the last day of polling. I highly doubt that was the case. The more likely scenario was that Ron was ahead after the second day. Maybe the order of the names doesn't actually mean anything.

[South Park Fan]

I wouldn't be too concerned (although that is not a blank check for complacency). Romney had a late surge in Iowa polls four years ago as well; although Huckabee still prevailed by 10 points.

[PastaRocket848]

The only polls that matter at this point are the caucuses. I'd have to guess that we won't see any major movement between now and then (in actual support, not poll results). Barring something cray happening, of course.

Excellent news is tht it appears as though the media's smear campaign has failed.

[WD-NY]

Romney's in Iowa tomorrow and making a "big" speech.

So he is popping in near the end to make a push to win..

Question: why doesn't Ron ever give "big" (formal) speeches?? Doing so would certainly appeal to all of the voters who don't necessarily appreciate his 'homespun'/unpolished/honest-to-a-fault/etc. persona. Its not like he isn't capable of writing/delivering a first rate speech (many of his formal speeches in congress = masterful)

[pauladin]

Hopefully he'll have a really polished speech prepared for the night of january 3rd. it will be heard nationwide.

[Steppenwolf6]

Eh...well you gotta look at it like this. Romney hasnt been IA much, and look where his support is. For someone who hasn't campaigned much there, he sure has a ton of support. And now that he is there for the last 3 weeks, he has been gaining ground a bit. It's like the GOP sent out their emergency memo to him, stating 'Shit, Ron is in 1st place there, Mitt, please take evasive action and get 1st place back, plsthxbye'. It really sucks that he barely has to do a damn thing to get support in a state where he hasnt been campaigning much, whereas Ron has spent 3/4s or more of his time in IA. That said, you would think Ron would be at 40% (where Romney is in NH, since that is where has spent most of his time). I mean, hell, look at Hunstman. Even he has 13% in NH, and though we all know he isnt going anywhere, he sure has a good chunk of support for dedicating his whole campaign to NH.

Fact is, Romney is so high in IA, for the most basic (and most retarded) reason: He's Mitt Romney :rolleyes:

Sorry but we need to get down and dirty now:
the nastiest,negativest ad ever, in both iowa and N.H,iowa for now
"I am a progressive"and all the detailed Massachussets extremely liberal rest and more.
we can take him down

[Peace&Freedom]

The recent polls put us in a sweet spot, either leading or tied for the lead in Iowa, but not by enough to make us complacent. It means the most organized and dedicated supporters will show up on caucus night and do what they need to do---and that's us. We need to have the confidence at this point to just say, "we got this."

[Blue]

More optimism, people!

[joshnorris14]

They use that kind of title to get people excited about the release of their poll.

[Keith and stuff]

Question: why doesn't Ron ever give "big" (formal) speeches?? Doing so would certainly appeal to all of the voters who don't necessarily appreciate his 'homespun'/unpolished/honest-to-a-fault/etc. persona. Its not like he isn't capable of writing/delivering a first rate speech (many of his formal speeches in congress = masterful)

What do you mean? His speeches are formal. He does speeches with 300-1000 people in the audience in NH and IA. I was at one in Nashua, NH in 2007 (maybe 600 people), another in Exeter, NH in 2011 (maybe 300-400) and another in Keene, NH in 2011 (maybe 300-400.)