Ron Paul: “I’m gonna come in, I think, first or second,” In Iowa

[samsung1]

Paul Sees Placing First or Second in Iowa While Wary of Supporting Rivals

U.S. Representative Ron Paul of Texas, who predicted he’d finish first or second in next week’s Iowa caucuses, said today he likely couldn’t support Newt Gingrich as the Republican presidential nominee while offering qualified praise for Mitt Romney.

“Oh, I’d probably have trouble,” Paul said to a question of supporting Gingrich’s candidacy, adding that he wouldn’t be able to support the nominee in general if the “policies of the Republican Party are the same as the Democrat Party.”

Paul said he anticipates a strong finish in the Jan. 3 party caucuses that start the 2012 nominating contests.

“I’m gonna come in, I think, first or second,” Paul said today in an interview airing this weekend on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt.” ``If I did come in fifth or sixth, that would be a real shocker.’’

Paul has risen in the polls in recent weeks, attracting voters seeking an alternative to Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who also sought the presidency four years ago. A NBC News-Marist poll of likely caucus-goers released today showed Romney leading the Republican field in Iowa with 23 percent, followed by Paul at 21 percent.

Paul offered limited approval for Romney in the interview, yet he wouldn’t commit to supporting him as the 2012 Republican candidate and refused to rule out a third-party run.

“I think he probably understands how the market works as a businessman a little bit better than a guy like Gingrich,” Paul said of Romney.
Paul’s Rise

Iowa Republicans, from Governor Terry Branstad on down, have called Paul’s organization in the state the most robust of any of the Republican presidential contenders. Even if few predict he will ultimately be his party’s 2012 nominee, his campaign apparatus has fueled expectations in Iowa.

Hoping to halt Paul’s rise, his rivals have worked to paint him as a fringe candidate who would be unable to beat President Barack Obama in the general election.

“Ron Paul’s not going to be our nominee,” Romney said yesterday of the Texas congressman in an interview aboard his campaign bus in Iowa with the RealClearPolitics website.

Paul, asked why he hasn’t criticized Romney more, said, “We’ve accused him of this vicious term that he flip-flops.”

In an interview with Bloomberg News yesterday, Gingrich also was critical of Paul, suggesting that a win for him in Iowa could weaken the future importance of the state’s caucuses in the nominating process. “It would be very good for the future of the Iowa caucuses for somebody other than Ron Paul to win,” Gingrich said.

“I put them all in the same category,” Paul said of his Republican rivals. “They’re part of the status quo.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-30/paul-sees-placing-first-or-second-in-iowa-while-wary-of-supporting-rivals.html

[coffeewithgames]

"Paul, asked why he hasn’t criticized Romney more, said, 'We’ve accused him of this vicious term that he flip-flops.'"

Only in one add though, and for like 3 seconds in it.

[QWDC]

Seriously hope he's just being modest here and his polling shows him ahead. Love Ron and will vote for him no matter what but his campaign is over with a second place spot.

[ItsTime]

If Ron is saying he thinks they will come in 1st or 2nd he is planning on running away with the thing.

[fearthereaperx]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

[samsung1]

If Ron is saying he thinks they will come in 1st or 2nd he is planning on running away with the thing.

i am praying this is the case. the fact he's taking time off to go to texas this week may also be a sign?

[Tax the Fed]

. . .

U.S. Representative Ron Paul of Texas, who predicted he’d finish first or second in next week’s Iowa caucuses,
said today he likely couldn’t support Newt Gingrich as the Republican presidential nominee while offering qualified praise for Mitt Romney.



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-30/paul-sees-placing-first-or-second-in-iowa-while-wary-of-supporting-rivals.html



Thanks samsung1.

I think he needs to answer the third party run question with a short list of his VP potential choices.

[ItsTime]

i am praying this is the case. the fact he's taking time off to go to texas this week may also be a sign?

And Romney spending the rest of the time in NH, yup, those look like signs to me. But I am on the outside looking in. Feeling here on the ground is Mitt is scared crapless that Ron wins Iowa then snowballs into NH and wins that too. Mitt is SOFT.

[Havax]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

Massive strategic failure by Ron in my opinion. The only way he has taken the right strategy is if he beats Romney comfortably on caucus night and knows something we don't.

[JohnGalt23g]

If Ron is saying he thinks they will come in 1st or 2nd he is planning on running away with the thing.

No. He is telling you that he thinks it is tied, and he could just as easily lose as win.

It is the two-minute warning. We have the ball on our own twenty-yard line, and the score is 7-7. We need to use our ground game to march down the field and get us in range to kick a field goal. Nothing spectacular, nothing flashy. Ground game, blocking, and NO FUMBLES!!

Get to calling, get your checkbook out, and do whatever you can to move that ball 3 yards forward at a time.

Al Pacino can tell you all about it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4tIrjBDkk

[Sola_Fide]

Seriously hope he's just being modest here and his polling shows him ahead. Love Ron and will vote for him no matter what but his campaign is over with a second place spot.

No, it is not. We could come in third and still have life down the stretch.

[samsung1]

No. He is telling you that he thinks it is tied, and he could just as easily lose as win.

It is the two-minute warning. We have the ball on our own twenty-yard line, and the score is 7-7. We need to use our ground game to march down the field and get us in range to kick a field goal. Nothing spectacular, nothing flashy. Ground game, blocking, and NO FUMBLES!!

Get to calling, get your checkbook out, and do whatever you can to move that ball 3 yards forward at a time.

Al Pacino can tell you all about it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4tIrjBDkk

excellent point. Just win!!

[KingNothing]

And Romney spending the rest of the time in NH, yup, those look like signs to me. But I am on the outside looking in. Feeling here on the ground is Mitt is scared crapless that Ron wins Iowa then snowballs into NH and wins that too. Mitt is SOFT.

I don't know why you think Mitt is soft. He's consistently pulled in a quarter of the electorate all over the nation. He is very formidable. He isn't Cain, Bachmann, Newt or Perry.

[Tax the Fed]

No, it is not. We could come in third and still have life down the stretch.

Romney and Paul are the two choices in Iowa . . .
and they have expressed some civility towards each other for the most part, imho.

Newt is done . . . O'Bachman loses her Iowa campaign director and besides,
Migraine Michelle would need a VP to take over most functiions for her.

A first or second for RP is him being modest.

[Agorism]

Is he still attending that Wallace interview this weekend?

I kinda hope not

[JoshLowry]

I prefer the RP version. ;)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQNIS3WfLUo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQNIS3WfLUo

[KingNothing]

Al Pacino loves screaming in movies.

....remember when he used to be a good actor, who played interesting characters?

[braane]

That's setting the bar pretty high. If he felt like his chances weren't good he would have said something like "I think we will perform well, top 3"... but to say "first or second"... he must be pretty confident they are taking this thing.

[ItsTime]

Keep calling, keep going door to door, we need a hard push.


I don't know why you think Mitt is soft. He's consistently pulled in a quarter of the electorate all over the nation. He is very formidable. He isn't Cain, Bachmann, Newt or Perry.

His support is soft. Of course he is formidable.

[69360]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

Ron or mittens is going to be the nominee. Neither gets the whitehouse if they burn each other's supporters this early. That's why. I also speculate Ron doesn't hate mittens personally the way he does grinch. Mittens also refuses the take the bait when offered the chance by the media to hit Ron over the newsletters.

Mittens and Ron are the real forces in the GOP. Everyone else is just fluff.

[opinionatedfool]

Massive strategic failure by Ron in my opinion. The only way he has taken the right strategy is if he beats Romney comfortably on caucus night and knows something we don't.

I think it makes perfect sense. Newt needs to be taken out, but the field still has to be diluted. He will have an easier time attacking him if he does well in Iowa. NH is where the attack ads need to start happening... at 9pm on the 3rd. Since they will be closer to the NH primary, they will resonate with the voters more. People in NH are know for waiting until the last minute to decide, so again, makes sense.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't attack him though. We should go all out on Romney.

[JoelYrick]

I think the campaign seemed pretty confident that they were going to win the Straw Poll, and we see how that turned out. I'm not saying they didn't try because of it, but we're talking about what tens of thousands of people are going to do a week from now.

[hueylong]

I wonder how many of these new, low-post members who are criticizing Dr. Paul and the campaign's strategic and tactical decisions have ever run a political campaign at any level?

[BLS]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

Because he's trying to limit the race to him and Romney. Once that's accomplished, bashing Romney is easy because he's so liberal.

[Sublyminal]

Can't wait till Jan 3rd, when they announce who wins. Ron Paul by a landslide and he coasts into NH and takes it like a boss.

[ItsTime]

Because he's trying to limit the race to him and Romney. Once that's accomplished, bashing Romney is easy because he's so liberal.

Exactly!

[Sublyminal]

Exactly!


Agreed, once he knocks the others out, taking our Romney is cake.

[Created4]

No, it is not. We could come in third and still have life down the stretch.

I don't know about third, but certainly a close second. It just needs to get down to a two horse race, with one of the two being Ron Paul. Then it is a fight for the supporters of the other candidates, and I think personally Romney is the one who is close to his ceiling, not Ron Paul. It proved that way in 2008 with Romney. Peaked early and then faded fast once the other candidates started exiting.

[Matthew Zak]

I'm going to be honest. I will be truly surprised if Ron Paul gets first.

I think he'll get second, but I think Santorum will be a closer third than we like.

Going into New Hampshire, the media will begin writing him off completely, talking only about Romney and/or Santorum.

I haven't given up by any means, but unless there is some information out there I haven't seen I will not be able to believe in a better scenario.

The only thing really on my mind at this point is if Ron Paul gets second in Iowa, and a distant second, or even third in New Hampshire, will that be enough to force him to drop out? And if he drops out will he endorse Gary Johnson?

I want him to be nominated. But to do that I think he absolutely needs first in Iowa, and at least a strong second in New Hampshire.

Let's get that Romney flip-flop video to go viral between now and the caucus. And let's call Iowans like crazy. Go!

[fearthereaperx]

Because he's trying to limit the race to him and Romney. Once that's accomplished, bashing Romney is easy because he's so liberal.

At the expense of losing 'all or nothing' Iowa?

[braane]

At the expense of losing 'all or nothing' Iowa?
Which is exactly the point, the campaign may have information in Iowa that we don't. They may think that 1) attacking Romney won't help their cause and 2)they don't need to attack Romney to win

[Sublyminal]

At the expense of losing 'all or nothing' Iowa?

You heard the media, Iowa is worthless now.

[seapilot]

And Romney spending the rest of the time in NH, yup, those look like signs to me. But I am on the outside looking in. Feeling here on the ground is Mitt is scared crapless that Ron wins Iowa then snowballs into NH and wins that too. Mitt is SOFT.

I agree there are a few NH people that have RP as a second choice, if he blows the competition out of the water in Iowa...well who knows?

[One Last Battle!]

Which is exactly the point, the campaign may have information in Iowa that we don't. They may think that 1) attacking Romney won't help their cause and 2)they don't need to attack Romney to win

We'll have to see.

If Paul ends up beaten by Romney, I'll never forgive the official campaign for letting him breeze to victory. If we lose Iowa, its over and thats it. All or nothing (though even if we win Iowa we'll have a long road ahead).

[ItsTime]

I agree there are a few NH people that have RP as a second choice, if he blows the competition out of the water in Iowa...well who knows?

A lot of Mitts support are voters looking to vote for "a winner". Ron Paul wins Iowa strongly we can do VERY well here.

[parocks]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

Newt is not already toast. Absolutely crushing Newt in Iowa and New Hampshire will help in South Carolina, where Newt is not, at this point, toast.

[parocks]

We'll have to see.

If Paul ends up beaten by Romney, I'll never forgive the official campaign for letting him breeze to victory. If we lose Iowa, its over and thats it. All or nothing (though even if we win Iowa we'll have a long road ahead).

You're wrong about that "if we lose Iowa it's over". McCain lost Iowa.

[eok321]

The only thing really on my mind at this point is if Ron Paul gets second in Iowa, and a distant second, or even third in New Hampshire, will that be enough to force him to drop out?
I

Not in a million years. Ron has been fighting for 30 years to get his message out. I really doubt he's gonna chuck in the towel before 95% of the population gets a chance to vote for him.

[Sublyminal]

You're wrong about that "if we lose Iowa it's over". McCain lost Iowa.


That's the bad thing about negativity.

[seapilot]

We'll have to see.

If Paul ends up beaten by Romney, I'll never forgive the official campaign for letting him breeze to victory. If we lose Iowa, its over and thats it. All or nothing (though even if we win Iowa we'll have a long road ahead).

You should read about the delegate process. This is like a baseball game and Iowa is the first inning. A home run will get the fans cheering but wont win the game. The only players that are serious and have the resources now to finish are Ron Paul and M Romney. Santorum in Third will get him no where but a fox news slot at 2 am.

[Forty Twice]

The first two states are friendlier turf for RP than Florida and SC. I think the priority is to eliminate all Christian Coalition-style neo-cons before we get to Florida and SC. I don't think RP minds coming in second to Romney in Iowa and NH so long as Newt, Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, and Perry are far behind. What's an even better bonus
is having Santorum, the weakest of the Tea-o-Cons, as the residual opponent. Santorum is the easiest to beat of all these in my opinion. He's having one good week
now and that's about all he'll get. He's drawing votes away from Newt, Bachmann, and Perry. We're getting the newsletters out of the way for this election cycle. It's all good.

That being said, I think Paul wins Iowa running away.

[Kords21]

Santorum in thrid place will just be Iowans thanking him for all the effort and time he's spent in Iowa. To a degree I think that effort should be commended and rewarded. Unfortunately for Santorum, there's no way he can duplicate that in other primaries/caucuses. If he comes in third, he'll have earned that gold star but it'll be pretty pointless in the big picture. It might knock Newt down in other states but the race will come down to Paul/Romney.

[ShaneEnochs]

Four days gentlemen. Let it not be said that we did nothing.

[One Last Battle!]

You're wrong about that "if we lose Iowa it's over". McCain lost Iowa.

McCain was in a strong position against a divided field to win Iowa (which, by the way, was won by a candidate incompatible with New Hampshire over a candidate who might have competed).

If we lose Iowa, the media will paint us as "dead" and our next chance at winning a state will be Nevada, at which point we'll probably be beaten already. Were we any other candidate we MIGHT be able to weather an Iowa loss, but we absolutely need it to get the momentum to skip past Romney.

[low preference guy]

I wonder how many of these new, low-post members who are criticizing Dr. Paul and the campaign's strategic and tactical decisions have ever run a political campaign at any level?

this is a forum on the internet. get over it.

[helmuth_hubener]

Massive strategic failure by Ron in my opinion. The only way he has taken the right strategy is if he beats Romney comfortably on caucus night and knows something we don't.I trust the campaign.

[Student Of Paulism]

Yea, and the difference was last time, McCain is a neo-con nut who wants to bomb everyone in the ME and support fear mongering laws and oppression on the american people, so yea, someone like him losing IA wont hurt him much since he is an 'establishment' poster boy.

[One Last Battle!]

Yea, and the difference was last time, McCain is a neo-con nut who wants to bomb everyone in the ME and support fear mongering laws and oppression on the american people, so yea, someone like him losing IA wont hurt him much since he is an 'establishment' poster boy.

Yeah, the fascists can lose repeatedly this early on and still recover with MSM backing, we only need to fail once and its over for us.

[daviddee]

...

[Jingles]

There is a reason that we aren't going after Mitt Romney right now. We are getting all the other candidates out of the way and setting ourselves up as the conservative choice for the nomination.

Now is not the time of the place to be taking on Romney. I think Romney also recognizes for the most part that this isn't the time of the place to attack Paul. This is going to be a long primary season and the goal at the moment is to get the candidates that don't have staying power/the ability to be in it for the long haul out of the way. We can't fire our guns prematurely. The primary just isn't Iowa and NH. We have a long road ahead.

On a more personal note (in respect to him and how the other candidates treat him) I think Romney and Huntsman are the more friendly, nice, respectful out of the bunch and I think Ron appreciates that a bit. Rick Perry is kind of like that guy at a party that just keeps coming up to you in the middle of a conversation and screaming like "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO", but he is such an idiot you can't get too angry at him. You just realize he is an idiot.

I think he really hates Newt Gingrich and knows his ill intent. Gingrich isn't an idiot, he has vile intent. I don't think he really likes Bachmann too much considering what she has become. I don't know how he feels about Rick Santorum, but probably not much positive.

[gosmo]

You're wrong about that "if we lose Iowa it's over". McCain lost Iowa.

McCain had much different circumstances. He didn't have the entire establishment against him. He WAS the establishment.

[fearthereaperx]

Which is exactly the point, the campaign may have information in Iowa that we don't. They may think that 1) attacking Romney won't help their cause and 2)they don't need to attack Romney to win


Which is exactly the point, the campaign may have information in Iowa that we don't. They may think that 1) attacking Romney won't help their cause and 2)they don't need to attack Romney to win


That sounds like wishful thinking more than anything. I really think they thought they had it in the bag until the onslaught of negative pieces rushed in and permeated the media. Now their numbers have stagnated/dropped and they're sticking with that same strategy they had when the campaign was successful in demolishing Newt. So, They're hoping they can 'squeak one by' without going after Romney..and if they don't.. Mitt takes down Iowa and New Hampshire.. and that'll be all she wrote.

Iowa is too important of a state to insist in having a neutral strategy in place and letting things play out on their own toward the tail end of the campaign.

[ItsTime]

That sounds like wishful thinking more than anything. I really think they thought they had it in the bag until the onslaught of negative pieces rushed in and permeated the media. Now their numbers have stagnated/dropped and they're sticking with that same strategy they had when the campaign was successful in demolishing Newt. So, They're hoping they can 'squeak one by' without going after Romney..and if they don't.. Mitt takes down Iowa and New Hampshire.. and that'll be all she wrote.

Iowa is too important of a state to insist in having a neutral strategy in place and letting things play out on their own toward the tail end of the campaign.

What poll did Ron go down in? Almost all polls he was up 2%+

[rich34]

I think the campaign is playing a strategy by not attacking Romney right now. Attacking him now would kinda use up if you will the stinging affect for the next state in line possibly? I'm just guessing of course, but maybe they'll roll out a serial hypocrisy type ad after they hopefully win Iowa and garner all the media attention the first one did with Newt. That could really multiply the affect in NH and possibly along with an Iowa win allow Ron to really tighten the gap in NH. I trust the campaign will attack him in due time when it's the most affective.

[affa]

Ron Paul is dominating this election so far in a way we never thought possible, and yet still people come out of the woodwork to criticize and second guess the campaign.

[centure7]

Calling Romney a 'flipflopper' does absolutely nothing. I don't understand why he's playing nice with Mitt and still going after Newt who is already toast.

Maybe Newt is too honest and open about being a liberal, whereas Mitt Romney has flip flopped into conservationism while seeking the GOP nomination. But no, its just like he says. He was fighting against Fannie and Freddie for years while Newt was working in their favor, and that genuinely pisses him off. Clearly he isn't being strategic about the attacks he is just saying who bothers him the most. Because you're right, he should be going after Romney at this point.

[fearthereaperx]

What poll did Ron go down in? Almost all polls he was up 2%+

There was one where he went down -7..ARG I think?

The point is.. Romney is gaining at a time--at our expense IMO-- when negative publicity hits at us at all angles and he gets to go in to the big show scott free and rising while we have to force ourselves to cross our fingers on Jan 3rd.

[pauliticalfan]

What poll did Ron go down in? Almost all polls he was up 2%+

Well, there's some weird stuff going on in the polls. He's up in Rassmussen (though not leading), up in NBC (though not leading), and up in PPP. He's down in some of these fringe polls like We Ask America and ARG. He's also down in the RCP average and thus Nate Silver's projections and Intrade. So it's a mixed bag.

The polls to watch this weekend though are the Des Moines Register poll and the PPP poll. If we're up in them, that's great news. If not, well...

[merrimac]

The way things are right now, I think Ron Paul is in good position to get a lot of 2nd place finishes at least. Here's hoping.

[Rocco]

Guys, we are going to win Iowa. Everything I have seen points to it, there's even been articles which cite 20,000 hard pledges ( http://swampland.time.com/2011/12/02/can-ron-paul-win-the-anti-romney-primary/?xid=gonewsedit ) and we've gained since that point! Though I havent seen them, there is no doubt based on the strategy that the internal numbers show that we will win and there WILL be a win on caucus night!

[liveandletlive]

A lot of people want attacks against Romney but there could have been some blowback. Would Romney have countered with the newsletters?

"Flip Flopper" worked with Kerry, but it was coupled with devastating Swiftboat smears in the midst of neocon brainwashing and war propoganda

It wont have the same effect on Romney, who can overcome it with his good looks, presentation and likeability. Kerry looked like Frankenstein's monster, while Romney is a slick talking, moderately handsome orange faced fellow with a million dollar smile.

[camp_steveo]

his campaign is over with a second place spot.

Not hardly.

[Omnica]

I wonder how many of these new, low-post members who are criticizing Dr. Paul and the campaign's strategic and tactical decisions have ever run a political campaign at any level?
Maybe for the status quo. ;) ignore the concern trolls.

[GunnyFreedom]

Massive strategic failure by Ron in my opinion. The only way he has taken the right strategy is if he beats Romney comfortably on caucus night and knows something we don't.

I respectfully disagree. If he attacks Romney before he can prove electability with an Iowa win, then Romney people go somewhere else. Paul will do better against Romney than most anybody, so he needs to be circumspect vs Romney until AFTER he demonstrates electability (with an Iowa win) so that the people fleeing Romney are more likely to go to Paul.

If I had to guess, I would guess the Romney hits will come after a strong finish in Iowa.

I still think the antiromney stuff is best left to RevPAC tho. RevPAC may have time to produce and field antiromney stuff for Florida and beyond, but we are probably too short for NH or SC unless RevPAC is already working it now.

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Not hardly.

No, it is. Many are doubting his electability (hence Romney's polling position) so an Iowa win is necessary to combat Paul's naysayers. The Paul campaign will lose momentum going into New Hampshire and the southern states if he doesn't take Iowa away from Romney.

[RickyJ]

“Ron Paul’s not going to be our nominee,” Romney said yesterday of the Texas congressman in an interview aboard his campaign bus in Iowa with the RealClearPolitics website.

He will be if the voters have anything to say about it. Where are your crowds Romney? What? They don't exist?

Romney can only win if the vote is fixed, and we will fight that every step of the way.

The big bank candidate should not win anything. It does bother me that Paul hasn't gone after him more. Hopefully there is a good reason for it.

Romney is the antithesis of Ron Paul.

[RickyJ]

I respectfully disagree. If he attacks Romney before he can prove electability with an Iowa win, then Romney people go somewhere else. Paul will do better against Romney than most anybody, so he needs to be circumspect vs Romney until AFTER he demonstrates electability (with an Iowa win) so that the people fleeing Romney are more likely to go to Paul.

If I had to guess, I would guess the Romney hits will come after a strong finish in Iowa.

I still think the antiromney stuff is best left to RevPAC tho. RevPAC may have time to produce and field antiromney stuff for Florida and beyond, but we are probably too short for NH or SC unless RevPAC is already working it now.

You might be right, I sure hope you are.